C.Biscuit97 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Personally, I believe a coach needs 3 years to be fairly judged. The 1st year is a pass because he might not have all his players. The 2nd year there should be an improvement and the 3rd year you can have a clear indictation of whether they can coach or not. With MM, I really like the wayhe rallied the team last year. However, the dropoff this year is startling. Add to the fact the Moulds and Adams situation, I think he should be gone. And the fact that he admits he is calling the plays, only reaffirms he should be fired. If he didn't, then perhaps Clements could have be the scapegoat. Anyhow, is there anyone who think MM should be back? I would like to hear you opinion. Plus, can someone explain to me why you give a coach a 5 year deal who has never coached before (another bad move). You give him 3 tops. Where they really that worried about him leaving? Man, losing is frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Personally, I believe a coach needs 3 years to be fairly judged. The 1st year is a pass because he might not have all his players. The 2nd year there should be an improvement and the 3rd year you can have a clear indictation of whether they can coach or not. With MM, I really like the wayhe rallied the team last year. However, the dropoff this year is startling. Add to the fact the Moulds and Adams situation, I think he should be gone. And the fact that he admits he is calling the plays, only reaffirms he should be fired. If he didn't, then perhaps Clements could have be the scapegoat. Anyhow, is there anyone who think MM should be back? I would like to hear you opinion. Plus, can someone explain to me why you give a coach a 5 year deal who has never coached before (another bad move). You give him 3 tops. Where they really that worried about him leaving? Man, losing is frustrating. 530111[/snapback] Bye, Bye MM...Don't let the door hit you in the... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Personally, I believe a coach needs 3 years to be fairly judged. The 1st year is a pass because he might not have all his players. The 2nd year there should be an improvement and the 3rd year you can have a clear indictation of whether they can coach or not. With MM, I really like the wayhe rallied the team last year. However, the dropoff this year is startling. Add to the fact the Moulds and Adams situation, I think he should be gone. And the fact that he admits he is calling the plays, only reaffirms he should be fired. If he didn't, then perhaps Clements could have be the scapegoat. Anyhow, is there anyone who think MM should be back? I would like to hear you opinion. Plus, can someone explain to me why you give a coach a 5 year deal who has never coached before (another bad move). You give him 3 tops. Where they really that worried about him leaving? Man, losing is frustrating. 530111[/snapback] Marv came in mid-season '86 to right a listing ship and finished 2-5, then went 7-8 in '87, then 12-4 in '88 (and one Ronnie Harmon dropped pass of a Superbowl bid). The ship is listing again - bring back Marv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I still can not understand how he let it all get away from him so fast. However, once you lose your veterans the game is over. He has to go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Marv came in mid-season '86 to right a listing ship and finished 2-5, then went 7-8 in '87, then 12-4 in '88 (and one Ronnie Harmon dropped pass of a Superbowl bid). The ship is listing again - bring back Marv. 530143[/snapback] The Ronnie Harnon drop was in a wildcard game and it is doubtful in 1989 (when the Bills were 9-7) that we would have gone to the SuperBowl that year. Denver was 12-4 and why would anyone have wanted to play the 49ers that year is beyond me. I doubt the Bills would have much better than Denver's 56-10 loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Personally, I believe a coach needs 3 years to be fairly judged. The 1st year is a pass because he might not have all his players. The 2nd year there should be an improvement and the 3rd year you can have a clear indictation of whether they can coach or not. With MM, I really like the wayhe rallied the team last year. However, the dropoff this year is startling. Add to the fact the Moulds and Adams situation, I think he should be gone. And the fact that he admits he is calling the plays, only reaffirms he should be fired. If he didn't, then perhaps Clements could have be the scapegoat. Anyhow, is there anyone who think MM should be back? I would like to hear you opinion. Plus, can someone explain to me why you give a coach a 5 year deal who has never coached before (another bad move). You give him 3 tops. Where they really that worried about him leaving? Man, losing is frustrating. 530111[/snapback] I vote in favor of keeping him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Personally, I believe a coach needs 3 years to be fairly judged. The 1st year is a pass because he might not have all his players. The 2nd year there should be an improvement and the 3rd year you can have a clear indictation of whether they can coach or not. With MM, I really like the wayhe rallied the team last year. However, the dropoff this year is startling. Add to the fact the Moulds and Adams situation, I think he should be gone. And the fact that he admits he is calling the plays, only reaffirms he should be fired. If he didn't, then perhaps Clements could have be the scapegoat. Anyhow, is there anyone who think MM should be back? I would like to hear you opinion. Plus, can someone explain to me why you give a coach a 5 year deal who has never coached before (another bad move). You give him 3 tops. Where they really that worried about him leaving? Man, losing is frustrating. 530111[/snapback] Don't need 3 years to know you have the wrong coach when the wheels have come off like this season. MM basically has made all the wrong moves. Granted, he's restricted by the idiot he's working for. For my money, the long term contract was collusion between the GM and Mularkey and inappropriate to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I say give MM one more year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 The 3 year rule applies to coaches who at least show some progress each year. Mike Mullarkey set off a 50 megaton clusterf**k this season! I can't see how he can recover from this mess. He has to go. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 gone gone gone gone gone gone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albany,n.y. Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I say give MM one more year. 530218[/snapback] Only if he serves it in Attica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts