Dan Gross Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Pretty much the way I expected they would, but they do answer some pretty harsh questions.... Tom Donahoe: ask him yourself Mike Mularkey: ask him yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Mike Mularkey- MM: One of the sacks of the seven in the Oakland game was the direct responsibility of the offensive line. The word 'sack' is typically equated to the O-line and, in this case, it's not. They are playing pretty solid football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Pretty much the way I expected they would, but they do answer some pretty harsh questions.... Tom Donahoe: ask him yourself Mike Mularkey: ask him yourself 47300[/snapback] I love it. The "took" the tough questions, but didnt really answer any of them... Mularkey responding to criticism of the offensive line: One of the sacks of the seven in the Oakland game was the direct responsibility of the offensive line. Ok, so 6 of the 7 sacks weren't the olines fault? Who does that leave? Couldn't be Bledsoe, because here he says: I still believe that Drew gives us the best opportunity to win. Wow... its GW all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 I love it. The "took" the tough questions, but didnt really answer any of them... Mularkey responding to criticism of the offensive line:One of the sacks of the seven in the Oakland game was the direct responsibility of the offensive line. Ok, so 6 of the 7 sacks weren't the olines fault? Who does that leave? Couldn't be Bledsoe, because here he says: I still believe that Drew gives us the best opportunity to win. Wow... its GW all over again. 47314[/snapback] It's pretty clear to me that he's pointing his finger at the HB and FB position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 It's pretty clear to me that he's pointing his finger at the HB and FB position. 47319[/snapback] then we are in deeper stevestojan that i even thought!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted September 27, 2004 Author Share Posted September 27, 2004 I love it. The "took" the tough questions, but didnt really answer any of them... Mularkey responding to criticism of the offensive line:One of the sacks of the seven in the Oakland game was the direct responsibility of the offensive line. Ok, so 6 of the 7 sacks weren't the olines fault? Who does that leave? Couldn't be Bledsoe, because here he says: I still believe that Drew gives us the best opportunity to win. Wow... its GW all over again. 47314[/snapback] a.) There are 5 other players on offense besides the O-line and the QB. Maybe it's because the RB didn't pick up the blitzer? Maybe the receivers didn't make the correct "sight adjustment." And, yes, he left room for Drew to be responsible. You quote the direct answer where he says that Drew had a bad game. How about reading the sentence before the "best opportunity to win" sentence: "I think a one-game performance is way too early to start thinking about when will I pull him or when will I not pull him. " That says to me that Mularkey thinks that Drew had a bad game. b.) What did you expect? "Yeah, just between you and me I know that Drew has nothing left in the tank, but the boss says he has to play, so he plays." Or "Yeah, we know he sucks, but do you really think we're going to put in Shane Matthews?" At least those questions are up there, as opposed to the "Mr. Mularky, I have the feeling you will be the best Bills coach ever. How do you expect to celebrate after we win the Super Bowl this year?" type questions that everybody on the Wall figured were going to be the questions "randomly selected." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 a.) There are 5 other players on offense besides the O-line and the QB. Maybe it's because the RB didn't pick up the blitzer? Maybe the receivers didn't make the correct "sight adjustment." And, yes, he left room for Drew to be responsible. You quote the direct answer where he says that Drew had a bad game. How about reading the sentence before the "best opportunity to win" sentence: "I think a one-game performance is way too early to start thinking about when will I pull him or when will I not pull him. " That says to me that Mularkey thinks that Drew had a bad game. b.) What did you expect? "Yeah, just between you and me I know that Drew has nothing left in the tank, but the boss says he has to play, so he plays." Or "Yeah, we know he sucks, but do you really think we're going to put in Shane Matthews?" At least those questions are up there, as opposed to the "Mr. Mularky, I have the feeling you will be the best Bills coach ever. How do you expect to celebrate after we win the Super Bowl this year?" type questions that everybody on the Wall figured were going to be the questions "randomly selected." 47325[/snapback] very good points. I am too glad that they were indeed random. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 It could just be more years of answering questions, but, TD appears to at least give credible answers. MM is spewing mumbo jumbo. Besides the O-line there's this one: Why isn't McGahee being given more reps in the game? Most specifically, why isn't he being used on short yardage and short and goal situations when he has proven to be a better short distance, hardnosed runner than Henry? MM: Travis has also proven that he can run down there in goal line situations. They are very similar backs near the goal line. When you've got a flow going into a game and the drive has already gone already down there you just don't want to change to a backup especially for one play. You don't want to change to a backup especially for one play? So, we don't have any special packages? Say short yardage or goal line? No jumbo package? Seems we failed two weeks in a row at shrot yardage. Perhaps a personnel adjustment is called for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Craig Feinberg (Buffalo, NY): Mr. Donahoe, how do you justify your performance as GM when you have spent two first-round picks in 4 years on a QB, already misfired on one coaching staff, misjudged a No. 4 overall draft choice. Selected only 1-Pro Bowler in 4 years, and have a 17-33 record as the Bills GM? Mr. Donahoe: Uh...Thank You?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack D. Ripper Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 Yeah, they took the tough questions.... MM is NOT going to start getting after his players on a chat board. You are going to get nothing but 'coach speak' from him. In fact, he'd be a fool to do anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 "My record may stink, but I've done a good job with the cap". Great - go fill out an application for a Financial Analyst position instead of being a football GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 I read these transcripts and all I think of is these are nothing but EXCUSES. Neither one will place the blame at the feet of any of the players, they find excuse to explain all the mistakes the team makes. I'd appreciate some real truth, now that would be orginal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckner's Glove Posted September 27, 2004 Share Posted September 27, 2004 What a bunch of whiney little bitches you all are! They answer the tough questions and now you're complaining that they didn't bash themselves enough in answering!?!? WTF! I've seen many get much more bent out of shape when somebody attacks one of your lame posts. All Bills fans want to do is complain. I think these guys showed a lot of balls in tackling these questions. Don't forget, we're 8 points away from a 2-0 record with a 1st year head coach in a new offenseive system. Fire away idiots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 What a bunch of whiney little bitches you all are! They answer the tough questions and now you're complaining that they didn't bash themselves enough in answering!?!? WTF! I've seen many get much more bent out of shape when somebody attacks one of your lame posts. All Bills fans want to do is complain. I think these guys showed a lot of balls in tackling these questions. Don't forget, we're 8 points away from a 2-0 record with a 1st year head coach in a new offenseive system. Fire away idiots! 47441[/snapback] My whole complaint is this. This is my example of the excuses I hear instead of trying to provide answers: Why is the O-line struggling, giving up 7 sacks vs Oakland? Rather than say, hey were just not getting it done. Maybe the right line calls aren't being made, or maybe were failing to read the blitzes correctly, but no matter what, we're not getting it done. Instead they say, well sacks aren't all about the O-line. There are other factors. The real answer sounds loike a pure excuse. Just say it the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I love it. The "took" the tough questions, but didnt really answer any of them... Mularkey responding to criticism of the offensive line:One of the sacks of the seven in the Oakland game was the direct responsibility of the offensive line. Ok, so 6 of the 7 sacks weren't the olines fault? Who does that leave? Couldn't be Bledsoe, because here he says: I still believe that Drew gives us the best opportunity to win. Wow... its GW all over again. 47314[/snapback] Footbal=Politics? Maybe? Give the masses a soundbite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 It could just be more years of answering questions, but, TD appears to at least give credible answers. MM is spewing mumbo jumbo. Besides the O-line there's this one: Why isn't McGahee being given more reps in the game? Most specifically, why isn't he being used on short yardage and short and goal situations when he has proven to be a better short distance, hardnosed runner than Henry? MM: Travis has also proven that he can run down there in goal line situations. They are very similar backs near the goal line. When you've got a flow going into a game and the drive has already gone already down there you just don't want to change to a backup especially for one play. You don't want to change to a backup especially for one play? So, we don't have any special packages? Say short yardage or goal line? No jumbo package? Seems we failed two weeks in a row at shrot yardage. Perhaps a personnel adjustment is called for? 47344[/snapback] Why don't the Bills bring in a big ellible fat guy and forget the tight end? Like after last year they are going to throw on a 1 and goal? Yes, do it-but only when you have established that you aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 My whole complaint is this. This is my example of the excuses I hear instead of trying to provide answers: Why is the O-line struggling, giving up 7 sacks vs Oakland? Rather than say, hey were just not getting it done. Maybe the right line calls aren't being made, or maybe were failing to read the blitzes correctly, but no matter what, we're not getting it done. Instead they say, well sacks aren't all about the O-line. There are other factors. The real answer sounds loike a pure excuse. Just say it the way it is. 47542[/snapback] Because that IS the way it IS. When the opposition sends 6 rushers and there are only 5 offensive linemen, it's not the offensive line's fault that the QB gets sacked. It could be the TE or FB, who didn't read the presnap properly and went into a pattern instead of picking up their correct key (ARE YOU LISTENING, Mr. Shelton?). It could be the QB, who didn't check off. It could be one of the receivers, who didn't adjust to the hot route because of which player blitzed. It's simply not fair to blame ONE single entity for EVERY negative play on offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I read these transcripts and all I think of is these are nothing but EXCUSES. Neither one will place the blame at the feet of any of the players, they find excuse to explain all the mistakes the team makes. I'd appreciate some real truth, now that would be orginal. 47437[/snapback] Last time a Buffalo coach blamed the players' execution, he was ripped by the media and by the team's pinhead fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts