Casey D Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 As emotionally gratifying as it might be to can MM now, it makes little sense. If everyone with intimate knowledge of the team is canned, i.e., Donahoe and MM, then the whole new management team comes in knowing just about nothing about the team's strengths and weaknesses. People like Levy, and others he will bring with him, need Mularkey to get them up to speed, to identify strengths and weaknesses. The learning curve for the new GM and others will be vastly shorter with MM there, than without him. To be sure, if by the end of next season MM is viewed as fatally flawed, he will go. But at least by then the new team will have had a year to learn, and reach their own judgments. And, it may turn out that the real MM is more the 2004 version than 2005, who knows. You should see how ga-ga the media is here in Washington over Gregg Williams. The team can't be changed on a dime. Keeping MM for now, while not satifying to us frustrated fans, will long term make rehabilitation come faster... CD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schulman16 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 As emotionally gratifying as it might be to can MM now, it makes little sense. If everyone with intimate knowledge of the team is canned, i.e., Donahoe and MM, then the whole new management team comes in knowing just about nothing about the team's strengths and weaknesses. People like Levy, and others he will bring with him, need Mularkey to get them up to speed, to identify strengths and weaknesses. The learning curve for the new GM and others will be vastly shorter with MM there, than without him. To be sure, if by the end of next season MM is viewed as fatally flawed, he will go. But at least by then the new team will have had a year to learn, and reach their own judgments. And, it may turn out that the real MM is more the 2004 version than 2005, who knows. You should see how ga-ga the media is here in Washington over Gregg Williams. The team can't be changed on a dime. Keeping MM for now, while not satifying to us frustrated fans, will long term make rehabilitation come faster... CD 555253[/snapback] You can't expect to see any improvements out of Losman if a new coach comes in and brings in a brand new system. We'd be 5-11 again for another year. The odds of making the playoffs next year are much better with having stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 The only plausible reason IMO for keeping MM is if TD was the total puppet master & MM was merely the puppet... I bet that was a huge part of MM's defense in trying to keep his job with Ralph. We'll see what he does this year now that TD and the other 2 OC/DC scapegoats are gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 The only plausible reason IMO for keeping MM is if TD was the total puppet master & MM was merely the puppet... I bet that was a huge part of MM's defense in trying to keep his job with Ralph. We'll see what he does this year now that TD and the other 2 OC/DC scapegoats are gone. 555277[/snapback] I recall being a puppetmaster was the reason Pittsburgh canned him in favor of Bill Cowher. Now only if things turn out as well for us as they did for Pittsburgh after TD's departure ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey D Posted January 5, 2006 Author Share Posted January 5, 2006 I recall being a puppetmaster was the reason Pittsburgh canned him in favor of Bill Cowher. Now only if things turn out as well for us as they did for Pittsburgh after TD's departure ... 555337[/snapback] Indeed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPR4444 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 As emotionally gratifying as it might be to can MM now, it makes little sense. If everyone with intimate knowledge of the team is canned, i.e., Donahoe and MM, then the whole new management team comes in knowing just about nothing about the team's strengths and weaknesses. 555253[/snapback] ok, we can fire MM after he tells MV everything he knows about the strengths and weaknesses of this team. judging by his playcalling, that should take about an hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackur Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 it could have been TOM D making MM play Kelly H because he wanted to win and save his job..... hm......not a bad idea........just think about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 You can't expect to see any improvements out of Losman if a new coach comes in and brings in a brand new system. We'd be 5-11 again for another year. The odds of making the playoffs next year are much better with having stability. 555259[/snapback] We are not going to see improvement in Losman if we continue to keep pulliong him out and keeping him away from games.....If MM will not commit to Losman no matter how the results turn out, we will be 5-11 again and with no respite in sight.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 People like Levy, and others he will bring with him, need Mularkey to get them up to speed, to identify strengths and weaknesses. The learning curve for the new GM and others will be vastly shorter with MM there, than without him. 555253[/snapback] That is exactly what I don't want to hear from MM.....Based on what MM did in the later half of the season (Adams benching, Moulds suspension, Losman benching), he is exactlhy not the person to get recommendations from regarding players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVJ Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Its a huge mistake not firing him now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 That is exactly what I don't want to hear from MM.....Based on what MMdid in the later half of the season (Adams benching, Moulds suspension, Losman benching), he is exactlhy not the person to get recommendations from regarding players. 555451[/snapback] I honestly think that the Moulds and Adams situations have the scent of TD all over them. Both guys are set to make a ton of money next year. TD seemed to be very thin skinned to criticism. He always seem to have an eye on "next years" salary cap. He seemed to have a need to discredit every player that was cut, or not re-signed. Shaud Williams gets more playing time than he deserves, because McGahee is likely going to demand more money off-season... TD, I think, was telling the coach to get the younger guys some playing time, so there wouldn't be a huge fallout in the offseason, when guys like Moulds and Adams were released. He had to sell Mularkey on Losman, convince him that cutting Bledsoe was the way to go. I don't mean to imply that, eventually, Losman wouldn't be a better choice, but what head coach is going to pick an unproven player, with 0 NFL experience, over a vetran? I don't understand why it is so unfathamobil to so many that TD had a very loud say in who played, and who sat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan III Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 but what head coach is going to pick an unproven player, with 0 NFL experience, over a vetran? 555512[/snapback] Marvin Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 THe best reason, I think, to keep Mularkey is that there really isn't an abundance of coaching talent out there this offseason. JIm Fassel, Haslett...this is scraping pretty low. Wade Phillips is considered a hot prospect, and ex-bust Gregg Williams was the holy grail. Next year, you can get a little more seasoning into some of the outer coaching prospects, and not have to deal with such a mad rush for a few guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 it could have been TOM D making MM play Kelly H because he wanted to win and save his job..... hm......not a bad idea........just think about it 555417[/snapback] just the spineless fool we want as a HC going forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 THe best reason, I think, to keep Mularkey is that there really isn't an abundance of coaching talent out there this offseason. JIm Fassel, Haslett...this is scraping pretty low. Wade Phillips is considered a hot prospect, and ex-bust Gregg Williams was the holy grail. Next year, you can get a little more seasoning into some of the outer coaching prospects, and not have to deal with such a mad rush for a few guys. 555533[/snapback] that's crap Kirk Ferentz will do for the Bills what Nick Saban has done for the Dolphins. Jeff Fischer may be available from the Titans One positive, however, is that the Bills can bring in some top flight coordinators under the lame duck Mullarkey such as Dom Capers, Norv Turner RAlph is returning to his el-cheapo ways in not being williong to spend teh money necessary to get top coaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPR4444 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 QUOTE(buftex @ Jan 5 2006, 01:26 PM) but what head coach is going to pick an unproven player, with 0 NFL experience, over a vetran? >>>>>>>> Marvin Lewis >>>>>> or tom coughlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts