PBF81 Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 7 hours ago, GunnerBill said: And even though I do think Bill Belichick has been an exceptional coach the main reason for those Superbowls was Tom Brady. The no time out and "play goalline" decision vs Seattle was pretty significant in winning one but otherwise the rest I pretty much have as players' wins. Interesting that you bring him up. Agree with you that it was more Brady than BB for their sustained success and Championships. Belichick is a shrewd in-game tactician to be sure, something that I and many don't see with McD. Both are defensively oriented, BB better, but their similarity is that neither has the same ingenuity or skillset when it comes to offense, McD even less so. In a league that's driven by offense these days, that's a huge impediment. That's what the core complaint about McD seems to be. 7 hours ago, GunnerBill said: What the best coaches do is develop players (the Bills do that well), create a winning culture (McDermott has done that) and then on gameday they generally have sensible gameplans that allow the players to execute. The Bills have had that, for the most part. Of course, and I have agreed with you on this from the start, the Bills largely go as Josh Allen goes. Welcome to the NFL. The Quarterback is the most important position. Generally our playoff record is we win when Josh plays well, we lose when he doesn't. The exception is Kansas City 2021. I don't think that is "covering up for coaching" or indeed "covering up" for talent acquisition failures. I just think it is the reality of NFL football. If we start losing playoff games to teams we are clearly better than where Josh outplays his counterpart and we still lose then I'd be looking at changing the Head Coach. But Watson, Mahomes and Burrow have outplayed Josh in 3 playoff losses. When Burrow outplayed Mahomes in 2021 in the AFCCG the Chiefs lost. The AFC is a Quarterback gauntlet. The one exception for us again is @Kansas City in 2021... and I think everyone is clear that a repeat of that would and indeed should result in coaching changes. Here's my issue with that, not that I disagree, but you don't go far enough there. Sure, Josh didn't play well vs. Cincy, but neither did the D, horrifically in fact, and that has nothing to do with Allen directly. We can argue about how Allen's play impacts it indirectly, but that's relatively moot here. Where I will disagree is that it was coaching that had our defensive players, repeatedly, set so far back on 3rd-and-relatively-short plays, as to all but hand them the 1st-down yardage in that Cincy game, shades of "13 Seconds" even. That's 100% coaching and cannot be put onto the players, and apparently a lesson not learned, which is a huge issue here. As to gameplans, he may have pieced one or two good ones together, but it was a commonly repeated issue right here last season, about how the gameplans sucked or were not obvious, etc. McD doesn't help himself in that way in pressers by explaining them. Again, we've beaten this to death. It will be interesting this fall, we can have an intelligent review following games to track what the issues were and the like, and see how the fall unfolds. We're on the same sheet insofar as McD creating a winning culture. Obviously you know that I'm not in the camp that believes that he's the one to finish the job and take us all the way. There's nothing wrong with that as long as someone realizes it and makes the appropriate [business] moves there. I view him as a sort of middle-reliever in baseball. I will say, one thing that has always bothered me about fans, is that when a coach is fired or let go, the fans generally get on the bandwagon that he sucked or the like. There is the possibility that a former coach had his strengths, they played out, but then the team entered a different phase for which he was not particularly suited to "taking it from there." Obviously IMO that's McD. But the point is that simply because a coach is "fired," does not mean that they didn't serve an important role up to that point. Often it does, but it doesn't always, which is the case here per my viewpoint. But this is what you sign up for when you hire a first-time head-coach, no? I don't recall when we hired him that many were saying he'll do what he's done. There was a whole lot of "let's wait and see" here. He's definitely had some luck in generating his narrative: Cincy beating the Ravens on that last play to put us in the playoffs in 2017 in a season where we all but entirely beat a list of nobodies and only one team that won a playoff game and that being only a wild-card game, and drafting Allen. But it's entirely possible and as I see it, more than likely based upon the established patterns/trends, that he's reached a plateau. Fans tend to send coaches off in shame, but there shouldn't be any shame here. At the same time, if the team wants to take the next step, then they have a tough decision to make. Having said that, as Clint Eastwood said in Magnum Force, a man's got to know his limitations. This season will reveal much, now with Frasier gone and Dorsey in his second season, and with zero excuses in the receiving dept. or at RB and OL now. It's been interesting, every season we as a collective say, we finally have a set of good receivers, but then when the season ends, all of a sudden our receivers suck. If we still finish DFL in rushing apart from Allen's rushing, if we still abandon the run in games where we're averaging well above average YPC, if the defense falls to mediocre in the rankings, etc., then I don't think that McD weathers that well. It'll be fun reviewing games with you in the fall. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.