What you guys don't understand

[Schulman16]

You say, "I want a new coach!"

 

Some of you don't seem to understand that bringing in a brand new coach with an entirely new system and therefore an entirely new staff would do nothing but decrease our chances of getting to the playoffs next year. Keeping Mularkey for at least one more season allows us to see an actual progression with J.P Losman. Otherwise you can't expect the kid to learn a brand new offense and do any better than he did this past season.

 

You say, "but mularkey was a terrible playcaller!"

 

Yes, the playcalling was consistently questionable. But if you ask anyone who knows anything about football they will tell you that the coach should not be the one calling the plays during the game. Should he oversee it? Yes. Should he design the offensive gameplan during the week? Yes. Should he call the plays during the game when he needs to be focusing on all the other things a head coach needs to focus on during the game? No. That's why you have offensive coordinators. Coaches need a freaking coordinator who can be up in the booth, noticing tendencies in the defense that can be exploited and call plays accordingly. The fact that Mularkey took over playcalling duties shows me that Clements really wasn't doing a good job--and mularkey lost all trust in him. Granted, Clements was Mularkey's guy. But firing him was the right move and at least Mularkey recognized.

 

You say, "but this team went from 9-7 to 5-11!"

 

Any why do you think that is? Maybe it had something to do with inferior personell on the field? An offensive line that features Mike Gandy and Bennie Anderson? Are you kidding me? Don't forget the Greg Jerman and Mike Williams backup duo. A defensive line that features Tim Anderson and Justin Bannan plugging the middle (more on sam adams later)? Losing your best player to a season ending injury? An aging Troy Vincent and Lawyer Milloy who, by the 4th quarter, decide not to tackle well? And you wonder why the defense struggles. Also, I dont know what happened to Nate Clements, but for some reason he got beat by every receiever this year where he was pretty much a shut down corner last year. But that's Mularkey's fault, not his.

 

Also, going with a rookie quarterback and expecting him to be anything more than he was this year was a bit unrealistic. I'm not blaming anyone for thinking he could lead us to the playoffs. You expected him to manage a game and therefore win. But this was contingent on the defense being #2 in the league again, Willis to run for 1500 yards (see Mike Gandy/Bennie Anderson comment above), and for the defense and special teams to score 10 TD's like it did the year before. Instead, none of that happened, and Losman looked like, well--like a QB starting for the first time. He looked like crap. Maybe if we had a veteran in there who could put the team on his shoulders we could make a run at it. That's a legitimite point. Meanwhile, dumping Bledsoe and going with Losman may or may not have been Mularkey's decision in the first place--and even if it was--was it that terrible a decision?

 

You say, "but Mularkey cant even decide on a freaking QB!"

When we were 1-3, after having 0 consistency from the QB position, the decision gets made to start Kelly Holcomb--see maybe if we can turn this thing around and possibly make a run at things and at the same time get Losman a chance to catch his breath and regroup. Sure enough, we got a couple of wins against divisional opponents keeping us alive. That decision looked a little smart. "Maybe we got something here", we wonder. People start thinking, "hmm, maybe Holcomb should have started the season instead of JP". Again, you guys get fooled into thinking we have anything more than inferior personell. Holcomb leads the bills to losses against oakland and New England, and looked to be doing the same against KC until he got hurt. "Oooh! Losman looks like the guy we thought we were going to get when we started the season" Yes, Losman did a great job against KC, but we had a great defensive effort--forcing turnovers, and solid special teams stopping dante hall. Then Losman starts again and we get killed by San Diego. Josh Reed drops a touchdown pass here, a first down there. The defense with inferior personell surrenders 48 points. Willis, behind that line anchored by those studs that might not start on any other team in the league with the exception of Chris Villarial and Trey Teague (although they have started to decline with age as well) begins his 2nd half slide. We compete against Carolina, but the D folds again at the end and the offense, led by essentially a rookie QB cant put up more than 9 points against a solid defense. No help from the running game.

 

"But", you say, "Mularkey didn't give us a chance with the running game".

Well, the Carolina game he got 21 carries and had a solid 2.5AVG! (53 yards for you math majors out there) The miami game which we blew (thanks to a bad throw by JP, terrible pass coverage epitomized by the inability to stop Sage freakin' rosenfels), he got 27 carries with a whopping 3.0 AVG (81 yards). And when you are down by as many as the bills were against New England and can't convert 3rd downs, your running back isnt going to get the ball very often. And even on his 8 carries, willis only got 3 yards anyway.

 

You think, "With Mularkey we can't score any points"

 

Well when you can't run the ball in the redzone that's what happens. Sometimes its a case of not actually running which the coach should be faulted for. But then I remember the Cincinatti game when we cant got 1 FREAKING YARD on 5 plays at the goaline. Willis scored like 13 times last year, only 5 this year. I think that indicates something. Eventually, the third time in the game that we were down at their 1, holcomb BARELY got in on a sneak behind this pathetic line. I think last year we put up a lot of points becasue our stout defense, and veteran/potential future HOF quarterback masked a lot of our problems.

 

Again it all boils down to the players that are on this team. They are bad! Yes theres some talent at the skill positions. We've got good speed on the perimeter, for example. But you can't freakin assemble a team like you would on madden 2006. You need guys who block well, guys who tackle well, guys who arent complainers. Screw Sam Adams--he's got no credibility despite how 'good' you think he is. Every team he goes to he alienates people. Moulds, I love him, but he's been mad that theres been no consistency at the QB position--and lashed out against the coach. He was suspended by Mularkey--big deal. It happens. Moulds got into a fight with the WR coach, not MM anyway. And given the fact that he met with Ralph Wilson and still got suspended, tells me that it probably was the right move anyway. I dont think MM lost control of this team. They fought hard against Cincy when a team like the raiders would have folded. Guys like London Fletcher have said pubicly that they like Mularkey and want him here. If you want to blame anyone for the Bills failures, blame the man who got fired today. Everyone around the league is saying Gregg Williams is going to be a great coach. He did sh*t with the players that were given to him. The fact that Mularkey is also struggling tells me that theres something wrong at the GM position before we can even guage how good the coach is. To prove my point even further. the Bills shot themselves in the foot against the Jets--not so much from bad coaching, but bad QB play. You want to blame Mularkey for these constant passes to Shelton, but just remember that there are other receivers running routes on every play, and Holcomb loves throwing to the guy closest to him--just like he did on 4th and 8 against New England. Great players we have on this team, don't we?

[jester43]

my problem with mularkey is that he pulled some of our best players off the field way too often to suit his "system." i am talking about moulds, adams and mcgahee. yes, everyone of them was a pain in the ass this year, but i think i probably would have been to, under the circumstances. and you can't blame it on clements because he basically fired clements at mid-season so he could call theplays himself. that said, i've always believed people are capable of learning from their mistakes...let's hope marv points them out to him.

[Schulman16]

my problem with mularkey is that he pulled some of our best players off the field way too often to suit his "system."  i am talking about moulds, adams and mcgahee.  yes, everyone of them was a pain in the ass this year, but i think i probably would have been to, under the circumstances.  and you can't blame it on clements because he basically fired clements at mid-season so he could call theplays himself.  that said, i've always believed people are capable of learning from their mistakes...let's hope marv points them out to him.

553996[/snapback]

 

Im saying, the fact that MM had a crappy o-coordinator and therefore had to take control of playcalling and therefore take him away from head coaching responsibilties allows us to blame tom clements for being crappy.

[jester43]

that's a stretch, imo. swing passes to daimon shelton and shaud williams on 3rd down are not clements' fault if mularkey is calling the plays.

[JAMIEBUF12]

didnt clements call the plays last season? where i am going with this is last year the play calling was very good.maybe the talent is the problem...as much as i want to run willis almost every down if he is only averaging 1.5 yards a carry .you cant just keep running him into a wall....well i wanted mike out,but if he is our coach i have to support him. and maybe marv teaches him a little and maybe he grows into his position a little better.hell parcells was 4-12 his 1st season

[Johnny Coli]

that's a stretch, imo.  swing passes to daimon shelton and shaud williams on 3rd down are not clements' fault if mularkey is calling the plays.

554012[/snapback]

Who's the top-rated pass-catching FB in the draft this year? They're going to need a stud.

[Buftex]

my problem with mularkey is that he pulled some of our best players off the field way too often to suit his "system."  i am talking about moulds, adams and mcgahee.  yes, everyone of them was a pain in the ass this year, but i think i probably would have been to, under the circumstances.  and you can't blame it on clements because he basically fired clements at mid-season so he could call theplays himself.  that said, i've always believed people are capable of learning from their mistakes...let's hope marv points them out to him.

553996[/snapback]

 

 

I hate to say it, but I think that TD had some say in who played, and who sat. Mularkey felt pressured to go with what TD said. I know for a fact, Mularkey was never completely on board with dumping Bledsoe, and hitching his coaching reputation on JP Losman. TD was the one who gave him his shot though, so he had to sell himself on it, and put up the facde that he was sold on it, to the fans.

 

A lot of the "problem" players were vetran guys who happened to be getting close to the "big year" of their contracts. I find it hard to believe that Mularkey, who did a good job his first year, became so incredibly stupid over one off-season. A lot of these moves were financially motivated. Just as in Pittsburgh, TD seemed unable to let "good players" walk, he had to create the illusion (in some cases) that the players were past their prime, or that somebody he drafted had much more to offer...as many things that I liked about TD, one thing I never liked, was his sort of smug comments about ex-players....

[thisiskeith12]

Hey Tom!

 

You say, "I want a new coach!"

 

Some of you don't seem to understand that bringing in a brand new coach with an entirely new system and therefore an entirely new staff would do nothing but decrease our chances of getting to the playoffs next year.  Keeping Mularkey for at least one more season allows us to see an actual progression with J.P Losman.  Otherwise you can't expect the kid to learn a brand new offense and do any better than he did this past season. 

 

You say, "but mularkey was a terrible playcaller!"

 

Yes, the playcalling was consistently questionable.  But if you ask anyone who knows anything about football they will tell you that the coach should not be the one calling the plays during the game.  Should he oversee it? Yes.  Should he design the offensive gameplan during the week? Yes.  Should he call the plays during the game when he needs to be focusing on all the other things a head coach needs to focus on during the game? No.  That's why you have offensive coordinators.  Coaches need a freaking coordinator who can be up in the booth, noticing tendencies in the defense that can be exploited and call plays accordingly.  The fact that Mularkey took over playcalling duties shows me that Clements really wasn't doing a good job--and mularkey lost all trust in him.  Granted, Clements was Mularkey's guy.  But firing him was the right move and at least Mularkey recognized.

 

You say, "but this team went from 9-7 to 5-11!"

 

Any why do you think that is?  Maybe it had something to do with inferior personell on the field?  An offensive line that features Mike Gandy and Bennie Anderson?  Are you kidding me? Don't forget the Greg Jerman and Mike Williams backup duo. A defensive line that features Tim Anderson and Justin Bannan plugging the middle (more on sam adams later)?  Losing your best player to a season ending injury?  An aging Troy Vincent and Lawyer Milloy who, by the 4th quarter, decide not to tackle well?  And you wonder why the defense struggles.  Also, I dont know what happened to Nate Clements, but for some reason he got beat by every receiever this year where he was pretty much a shut down corner last year.  But that's Mularkey's fault, not his. 

 

Also, going with a rookie quarterback and expecting him to be anything more than he was this year was a bit unrealistic.  I'm not blaming anyone for thinking he could lead us to the playoffs.  You expected him to manage a game and therefore win.  But this was contingent on the defense being #2 in the league again, Willis to run for 1500 yards (see Mike Gandy/Bennie Anderson comment above), and for the defense and special teams to score 10 TD's like it did the year before.  Instead, none of that happened, and Losman looked like, well--like a QB starting for the first time.  He looked like crap.  Maybe if we had a veteran in there who could put the team on his shoulders we could make a run at it.  That's a legitimite point.  Meanwhile, dumping Bledsoe and going with Losman may or may not have been Mularkey's decision in the first place--and even if it was--was it that terrible a decision? 

 

You say, "but Mularkey cant even decide on a freaking QB!"

When we were 1-3, after having 0 consistency from the QB position, the decision gets made to start Kelly Holcomb--see maybe if we can turn this thing around and possibly make a run at things and at the same time get Losman a chance to catch his breath and regroup.  Sure enough, we got a couple of wins against divisional opponents keeping us alive.  That decision looked a little smart.  "Maybe we got something here", we wonder.  People start thinking, "hmm, maybe Holcomb should have started the season instead of JP".  Again, you guys get fooled into thinking we have anything more than inferior personell.  Holcomb leads the bills to losses against oakland and New England, and looked to be doing the same against KC until he got hurt.  "Oooh! Losman looks like the guy we thought we were going to get when we started the season"  Yes, Losman did a great job against KC, but we had a great defensive effort--forcing turnovers, and solid special teams stopping dante hall.  Then Losman starts again and we get killed by San Diego.  Josh Reed drops a touchdown pass here, a first down there.  The defense with inferior personell surrenders 48 points. Willis, behind that line anchored by those studs that might not start on any other team in the league with the exception of Chris Villarial and Trey Teague (although they have started to decline with age as well) begins his 2nd half slide.    We compete against Carolina, but the D folds again at the end and the offense, led by essentially a rookie QB cant put up more than 9 points against a solid defense.  No help from the running game.

 

"But", you say, "Mularkey didn't give us a chance with the running game".

Well, the Carolina game he got 21 carries and had a solid 2.5AVG! (53 yards for you math majors out there)  The miami game which we blew (thanks to a bad throw by JP, terrible pass coverage epitomized by the inability to stop Sage freakin' rosenfels), he got 27 carries with a whopping 3.0 AVG (81 yards).  And when you are down by as many as the bills were against New England and can't convert 3rd downs, your running back isnt going to get the ball very often.  And even on his 8 carries, willis only got 3 yards anyway. 

 

You think, "With Mularkey we can't score any points"

 

Well when you can't run the ball in the redzone that's what happens.  Sometimes its a case of not actually running which the coach should be faulted for.  But then I remember the Cincinatti game when we cant got 1 FREAKING YARD on 5 plays at the goaline.  Willis scored like 13 times last year, only 5 this year.  I think that indicates something.  Eventually, the third time in the game that we were down at their 1, holcomb BARELY got in on a sneak behind this pathetic line.  I think last year we put up a lot of points becasue our stout defense, and veteran/potential future HOF quarterback masked a lot of our problems.

 

Again it all boils down to the players that are on this team.  They are bad!  Yes theres some talent at the skill positions.  We've got good speed on the perimeter, for example.  But you can't    freakin assemble a team like you would on madden 2006. You need guys who block well, guys who tackle well, guys who arent complainers.  Screw Sam Adams--he's got no credibility despite how 'good' you think he is.  Every team he goes to he alienates people.  Moulds, I love him, but he's been mad that theres been no consistency at the QB position--and lashed out against the coach.  He was suspended by Mularkey--big deal.  It happens.  Moulds got into a fight with the WR coach, not MM anyway.  And given the fact that he met with Ralph Wilson and still got suspended, tells me that it probably was the right move anyway.  I dont think MM lost control of this team.  They fought hard against Cincy when a team like the raiders would have folded.  Guys like London Fletcher have said pubicly that they like Mularkey and want him here.  If you want to blame anyone for the Bills failures, blame the man who got fired today.  Everyone around the league is saying Gregg Williams is going to be a great coach.  He did sh*t with the players that were given to him.  The fact that Mularkey is also struggling tells me that theres something wrong at the GM position before we can even guage how good the coach is.  To prove my point even further. the Bills shot  themselves in the foot against the Jets--not so much from bad coaching, but bad QB play.  You want to blame Mularkey for these constant passes to Shelton, but just remember that there are other receivers running routes on every play, and Holcomb loves throwing to the guy closest to him--just like he did on 4th and 8 against New England.  Great players we have on this team, don't we?

553971[/snapback]

[Alaska Darin]

Im saying, the fact that MM had a crappy o-coordinator and therefore had to take control of playcalling and therefore take him away from head coaching responsibilties allows us to blame tom clements for being crappy.

554003[/snapback]

Who hired Clements? Oh yeah, Mularkey.

[jester43]

I hate to say it, but I think that TD had some say in who played, and who sat.  Mularkey felt pressured to go with what TD said. I know for a fact, Mularkey was never completely on board with dumping Bledsoe, and hitching his coaching reputation on JP Losman.  TD was the one who gave him his shot though, so he had to sell himself on it, and put up the facde that he was sold on it, to the fans.

 

A lot of the "problem" players were vetran guys who happened to be getting close to the "big year" of their contracts.  I find it hard to believe that Mularkey, who did a good job his first year, became so incredibly stupid over one off-season.  A lot of these moves were financially motivated.  Just as in Pittsburgh, TD seemed unable to let "good players" walk, he had to create the illusion (in some cases) that the players were past their prime, or that somebody he drafted had much more to offer...as many things that I liked about TD, one thing I never liked, was his sort of smug comments about ex-players....

554018[/snapback]

i will say that the bit in ralph's press conference about the new boss not "micromanaging" mularkey caught my attention. the first thing i thought when i read that was that he was sort of blaming TD for some of the dumb decisions mularkey appeared to have made.

 

but some of the stuff that happened in the heat of battle this year concerned me. unless donohoe was upstairs pulling strings like a puppeteer during the games, i don't know how mularkey gets off the hook for that.

 

like i said before, i do think people can learn form their mistakes. i am crossing my fingers...

[Rico]

Who hired Clements?  Oh yeah, Mularkey. 

554029[/snapback]

I thought he wanted Whisenhut (sp?) but TD made him take Clements.

Doesn't really matter now...

[Alaska Darin]

I thought he wanted Whisenhut (sp?) but TD made him take Clements.

Doesn't really matter now...

554036[/snapback]

Mularkey himself admitted to telling Clements to start thinking like an OC when both were still in Pitt. Regardless, Mularkey is an offensive guy and I find it hard to believe that he wasn't behind virtually every decision made on that side of the football.

 

Besides, did the bad playcalling and horrible timeout use change when ol' MM took over? Nope.