BeastMode54 Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 In order for a team to succeed in the NFL, they need a coach that they believe in and will follow (drink the coolaid so to speak). Changing coaches and coordinators every year or two does not help a team develop into a winner. Jauron might not be the guy, but Coughlin wasn't the guy for the Giants for the first 3 years. They finally fell in line behind him and started winning games. Pats too. New coach next year = 7-9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Little Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Please don't compare Jauron to Coughlin, who consistently won in Jacksonville before arriving in New York. Jauron has had one anomalous winning season and a bunch of 7-9 years otherwise. His sample size is huge; he can't succeed as a head coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 In order for a team to succeed in the NFL, they need a coach that they believe in and will follow (drink the coolaid so to speak). Changing coaches and coordinators every year or two does not help a team develop into a winner. Jauron might not be the guy, but Coughlin wasn't the guy for the Giants for the first 3 years. They finally fell in line behind him and started winning games. Pats too. New coach next year = 7-9. Ah, yes, the inevitable "Compare Jauron to SB winning coaches" thread. Some of you people are so desperate to find something, ANYTHING to be positive about the Bills that you'll resort to out-an-out lunacy. Get this right: JAURON IS NOT BILL BELICHICK. HE IS NOT TOM COUGHLIN. HE IS DICK JAURON, A NICE GUY AND A TERRIBLE HEAD COACH. </rant> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 In order for a team to succeed in the NFL, they need a coach that they believe in and will follow (drink the coolaid so to speak). Changing coaches and coordinators every year or two does not help a team develop into a winner. Jauron might not be the guy, but Coughlin wasn't the guy for the Giants for the first 3 years. They finally fell in line behind him and started winning games. Pats too. New coach next year = 7-9. I don't mean to compare him to Coughlin, but I'm not sure it helps a team to switch coaches every few years. Especially with young players trying to learn the system. Maybe Turk is more to blame here than Jauron. If Jauron was calling the plays, knowing how conservative he is, he most likely would have run on both 2nd and 2 and 3rd and 2 outside the endzone. Heck, Fairchild would have done it. They were trying to get too cute in the redzone instead of sticking with the run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I don't mean to compare him to Coughlin, but I'm not sure it helps a team to switch coaches every few years. Especially with young players trying to learn the system. Maybe Turk is more to blame here than Jauron. If Jauron was calling the plays, knowing how conservative he is, he most likely would have run on both 2nd and 2 and 3rd and 2 outside the endzone. Heck, Fairchild would have done it. They were trying to get too cute in the redzone instead of sticking with the run Who promoted Schonert? I'm sorry, but I think you're just trying to trick yourself into thinking things could get better. But Jauron is looking like a poor man's Dave Wannstedt to me, and I don't see the sense in sticking with stability to get to 7-9 every year. There's always the chance that the next guy will be a disaster, but Jauron has shown the apex of his coaching ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Little Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I don't mean to compare him to Coughlin, but I'm not sure it helps a team to switch coaches every few years. Especially with young players trying to learn the system. Maybe Turk is more to blame here than Jauron. If Jauron was calling the plays, knowing how conservative he is, he most likely would have run on both 2nd and 2 and 3rd and 2 outside the endzone. Heck, Fairchild would have done it. They were trying to get too cute in the redzone instead of sticking with the run Jauron is 56-73 as a head coach. He's 43-70 when you take one fortunate season where everything went his way. I'm not a Schonert fan, but all that can be blamed on him? Sooner or later, it's the head coach's fault when all he can seem to do consistently over a long period of time is lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 Jauron is 56-73 as a head coach. He's 43-70 when you take one fortunate season where everything went his way. I'm not a Schonert fan, but all that can be blamed on him? Sooner or later, it's the head coach's fault when all he can seem to do consistently over a long period of time is lose. I understand, but isn't Turk the one calling the plays on offense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omar Little Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I understand, but isn't Turk the one calling the plays on offense? Isn't Jauron the one whose clock management is poor and whose decisions on when to kick field goals and when not to kick them has hurt this team in the past? Schonert sucks, but Jauron is much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I don't mean to compare him to Coughlin, but I'm not sure it helps a team to switch coaches every few years. It will help this Team plenty IF they hire the RIGHT Coach...Granted if The Bills hire another HC who should never be considered for the Job You're 7-9 prediction is probably close to correct...But if they hire the right guy The Bills will be in the Playoffs next Year...At least that's what I think... Now...I have no idea who that Coach is...But one thing I know beyond a shadow of a doubt...It's not Dead Dick... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGimp Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 u r crazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I understand, but isn't Turk the one calling the plays on offense? He sure is. And it's the quarterback who's not executing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 It will help this Team plenty IF they hire the RIGHT Coach...Granted if The Bills hire another HC who should never be considered for the Job You're 7-9 prediction is probably close to correct...But if they hire the right guy The Bills will be in the Playoffs next Year...At least that's what I think... Now...I have no idea who that Coach is...But one thing I know beyond a shadow of a doubt...It's not Dead Dick... This team is not only poorly coached, it has little to no talent. The WRs are small, there's no TE to speak of, the OL is mediocre, the DEs are nonexistent, the LBs are over-rated. About the only position on this team that's a strength is the one they've consistently drafted: DB. Not a winning recipe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 This team is not only poorly coached, it has little to no talent. The WRs are small, there's no TE to speak of, the OL is mediocre, the DEs are nonexistent, the LBs are over-rated. About the only position on this team that's a strength is the one they've consistently drafted: DB. Not a winning recipe. I don't agree with that at all. Edwards, in my opinion, will be a very good NFL QB. Evans, Marshawn, Roscoe, McGee, Whitner, Peters, Dockery, McKelvin, Hardy (in time), Poz, Mitchell, Reed. These are all solid, if not very good NFL players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 This team is not only poorly coached, it has little to no talent. The WRs are small, there's no TE to speak of, the OL is mediocre, the DEs are nonexistent, the LBs are over-rated. About the only position on this team that's a strength is the one they've consistently drafted: DB. Not a winning recipe. grab an umbrella, because you're about to encounter a "the coach picks the roster" hail storm. Nevermind the fact that said roster was basically whiped completely clean and rebuilt THREE YEARS AGO. Not counting the kicker and the punter ELEVEN players are left over from the Donahoe era. Of those 11 are finger in the dyke players: Denney, Kelsay, Losman, Preston and the marginal (at best) Roscoe Parish. The other SIX contributing players are: Evans, Reed, McGee, Greer, Peters, and the now injured Schobel. That leaves five non-kickers that have played and contributed greatly this year who were not brought in by Jauron. Rome wasn't built in a day, folks. Have some fuggin patience. We all knew that reset button was slammed down in 2006, now let it play out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 This ALL starts at the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guffalo Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Ah, yes, the inevitable "Compare Jauron to SB winning coaches" thread. Some of you people are so desperate to find something, ANYTHING to be positive about the Bills that you'll resort to out-an-out lunacy. Get this right: JAURON IS NOT BILL BELICHICK. HE IS NOT TOM COUGHLIN. HE IS DICK JAURON, A NICE GUY AND A TERRIBLE HEAD COACH. </rant> Belichick was a horrible coach in Cleveland, uninspiring, dry, and with a losing record, are you calling him "animated". Does a coach need to scream and get in players faces? Most that do only last a few years before the players shrug it off. Over the last decade we have witnessed several head coaching changes, many more offensive and defensive coordinator changes (and philosophy changes). The only consistency we have had is change itself. Losman has had 3 coordinators since being drafted. Just changing for changes sake is disrupting as well. At what point do we as fans on a message board actually know more than the coaches? I am sure this comment will be met with the typical " WELL I PLAYED HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL AND I TRIED OUT FOR DIVISION II TEAM< SO I AM QUALIFIED TO SCREAM AT MY KEYBOARD AT THE IDIOTS WHO DARE DISAGREE WITH ME!!" , but in the end, be a fan, not and ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cale Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 In order for a team to succeed in the NFL, they need a coach that they believe in and will follow (drink the coolaid so to speak). Changing coaches and coordinators every year or two does not help a team develop into a winner. Jauron might not be the guy, but Coughlin wasn't the guy for the Giants for the first 3 years. They finally fell in line behind him and started winning games. Pats too. New coach next year = 7-9. I'm not gonna totally discount everything Jauron has done here. I believe he was the right man at the right time at OBD. If you recall morale was low and the football side of things was chaotic. So we did need a calming influence. I believe Jauron filled that role admirably. But now, it's time to move on with someone who can light a fire under these guys and inspire them to greatness. Jauron is like a nice father figure. But you don't want him leading people into battle. We need a guy with a certain confidence about him, because he has been there and done that. He *knows* a certain methodology will work because he has seen it work. Jauron is not that guy. FWIW, I think Coughlin with his track record would have been a lousy hire at the time. I don't think the team at that time would have taken to him very well. And I almost guarantee he would have PO'd Ralph. Then it would have been more team turmoil. Just because a coach has been successful elsewhere, does not guarantee the same thing would have been the case here. C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I understand, but isn't Turk the one calling the plays on offense? You can logically blame EVERYTHING wrong with the offense on Turk Schonert and STILL have to, HAVE TO, blame the Head Coach for ALLOWING the atrocity to continue. For promoting a guy who didn't even know that the Press Box was a good place to view the field, for allowing the plays to be called the way they are, for checking off on the game plan every Sunday morning........it all falls on the Coach........on most teams. But hey, when your Head Coach can bench the starting QB, and to save FACE, because just a week prior he vehemently stated that Trent would be his starter forever and ever, he had Trent FAKE a groin injury, so-as to let HIMSELF, Dick Jauron, Head Coach and Commander in Chief, off the hook for making a decision that might lend to CRITICISM......well, when your Head Coach can do THAT, expect anything. So, expect Turk Schonert to be thrown under the bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 This team is not only poorly coached, it has little to no talent. The WRs are small, there's no TE to speak of, the OL is mediocre, the DEs are nonexistent, the LBs are over-rated. About the only position on this team that's a strength is the one they've consistently drafted: DB. Not a winning recipe. I'm having a problem reconciling this one. I'd think a bad team with a bad coach would probably go like 2-10 or 2-9 or something, not 6-6. Either the players have to be good to overcome bad coaching or the coaching has to be good to overcome poor talent. I think it's a combination. Dick is not totally inept. He managed 7 wins with all of the injuries and a rookie QB. The team is ready and plays hard. I just think Dick makes bad game day decisions and is insistent on keeping the game close and winning it at the end no matter what. If Dick would have an awakening and decided that if he has a team with a good offense and can score 25-30 points a game with a decent defense, he wouldn't have to wait til the end of the game to try to win it. Then, he'd be a good coach. Dick is a good coach with a stupid philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Dick makes bad game day decisions and is insistent on keeping the game close and winning it at the end no matter what. This is the stupidest assertion one could POSSIBLY make about a coach at ANY level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts