Why did the Bills hire Jauron?

[thewildrabbit]

Jauron does know defense to some degree, but does he hire offensive coaches that are more clueless then he is about the offense because of job security ?

[BringMetheHeadofLeonLett]

On Levy: He was brought in to settle a shaken franchise and fan-base. He did his job, very well. I don't get the beef with Levy. We were on the verge of mutiny when Donahoe was in charge. Hate Marv for bringing some stability to what was a franchise in a hard spiral? I like sub-mediocrity as much as anyone else, but we were all at this organization's throat.

 

Plus, who'll ever forget Nall-ball?

[Ramius]

I think he did very well his first 2 years here. And made some terrible calls that cost us games last year. This is the year where I think we will really know how good of a coach he is. Plain and simple.

 

dick jauron has had a losing record in 7 or 8 years he's been a head coach. Why will year 9 all of a sudden be the turning point?

[DrFishfinder]

Right now, I'm just talking about the guy not getting credit when he does win, because thats what Tipster is asking about...the perception of Jauron among Bills fans IF he were to start winning more games this year. It really has nothing to do with his track record, or whether we actually expect him to do it.

 

Its just this "we won in spite of him!" garbage I read about after every win, its enough to drive a guy up the wall. When the team wins, the coach got the job done.

Jauron does not win. No Head Coach "wins". It is a team effort comprised of the players playing and the coaches coaching. In most cases, both parties need to be running on all cylinders. However, there are times when a win (or loss) comes in spite of either coaching or playing. Trick play called by the coach or superhuman effort by a player, for example.

 

Fans are fed up with year after year of sub mediocrity and they're taking it out on what they consider to be the most responsible cause: DJ.

[Bill from NYC]

No Head Coach "wins".

 

 

I respectfully disagree.

Once, Parcells went for a TD late in the game when he was with NE rather than kick a FG to tie. We made the stop (I think it was Holocek, not sure) and the game was over. The Bills won. Jauron would be more prone to lose a game by kicking a 55 yard field goal into the wind, rather than have the balls to take a chance.

 

I am not saying that coaches always win or lose games, but it does happen.

[1billsfan]

Jauron does not win. No Head Coach "wins". It is a team effort comprised of the players playing and the coaches coaching. In most cases, both parties need to be running on all cylinders. However, there are times when a win (or loss) comes in spite of either coaching or playing. Trick play called by the coach or superhuman effort by a player, for example.

 

Fans are fed up with year after year of sub mediocrity and they're taking it out on what they consider to be the most responsible cause: DJ.

 

He is the most responsible. That's the problem with the Bills, no one's held accountable. Even the guy in charge who's the owner of 7 out of 8 losing seasons. The man who refuses to take his players to task and is ever so willing to give the cover just because he has the need to be liked. Seriously, you don't see this? It's why his teams always suck. Just take a good look at what a real coach did with that 1-15 Miami team. I bet you that he couldn't give a sh-- what his players thought of him. How much playing time did their new FA receiver Ernest Wilford get? Here's a hint...

 

http://www.nfl.com/players/ernestwilford/g...gs?id=WIL057148

 

It's about playing the guys who want to play, and benching those who aren't pulling their weight (see Chris Kelsay).

[DrFishfinder]

I respectfully disagree.

Once, Parcells went for a TD late in the game when he was with NE rather than kick a FG to tie. We made the stop (I think it was Holocek, not sure) and the game was over. The Bills won. Jauron would be more prone to lose a game by kicking a 55 yard field goal into the wind, rather than have the balls to take a chance.

 

I am not saying that coaches always win or lose games, but it does happen.

Then Holocek was more responsible for the Bills win, no?

[DrFishfinder]

He is the most responsible. That's the problem with the Bills, no one's held accountable. Even the guy in charge who's the owner of 7 out of 8 losing seasons. The man who refuses to take his players to task and is ever so willing to give the cover just because he has the need to be liked. Seriously, you don't see this? It's why his teams always suck. Just take a good look at what a real coach did with that 1-15 Miami team. I bet you that he couldn't give a sh-- what his players thought of him. How much playing time did their new FA receiver Ernest Wilford get? Here's a hint...

 

http://www.nfl.com/players/ernestwilford/g...gs?id=WIL057148

 

It's about playing the guys who want to play, and benching those who aren't pulling their weight (see Chris Kelsay).

I've always had a serious issue with DJ's motivational and decision making abilities.

 

Bum Phillips once said about Tom Landry, "He can take his'n & beat your's, then take your'n & beat his'n". That is a coach who can get more out of his players than anyone else can. We haven't had that since Levy. I'm not sure DJ could coach water to go down a drain.

[CFLstyle]

It is unfair we were sadled with this guy in the first place. Didn't we intervew a winning coach, the guy from Green Bay, also? Mike Sherman?

 

Marv sadly was personal friends with Jauron and therefore, we were stuck with him. As soon as I heard they wre bringing him in, I know it was inevitable we would hire him despite better candidates being avail. That is the story of the Buffalo Bills.

I was all for Sherman at the time. He really liked JP and probably would have made a big difference in the guy's development, he was more of an offensive coach, I believe. Having worked with Brett Favre, Sherman would help Losman a lot, considering they're the same in a lot of ways. Losman is basically a poor man's Brett Favre, put him in the right system and develop him properly and he's on his way to stardom.

[Bill from NYC]

Then Holocek was more responsible for the Bills win, no?

 

The point is that if Jauron messes up wrt the clock, replays, going for it on 4th downs, etc., he (as with any coach) can be primarily responsible for losing a given game.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Yes, coaches do "win" and "lose." Coach W/L records and winning percentage are both official NFL statistics. The coach is not on the field throwing, catching, kicking, running, blocking, covering or tackling...but he's even more important than any single player...he spends a whole week preparing 52 players and a dozen underling coaches to go win a game on Sunday.

 

This is what people don't seem to understand. Things like timeouts, playcalling, challenges, 4th down decisions-- things classified as "gameday management"-- are a miniscule part of a head coach's job. Again, if a team wins a football game, it is in part because the coach got them prepared to play that particular opponent well enough for the players to be in a position to succeed.

 

 

Additionally, if you're right and a coach doesn't "win", he can't "lose" either...because even if he did a poor job, its all up to the players, anyway.

[DrFishfinder]

The point is that if Jauron messes up wrt the clock, replays, going for it on 4th downs, etc., he (as with any coach) can be primarily responsible for losing a given game.

Agreed 110%, as was so painfully obvious last season.

[Ramius]

The point is that if Jauron messes up wrt the clock, replays, going for it on 4th downs, etc., he (as with any coach) can be primarily responsible for losing a given game.

 

Aside from the frequent sideline foul-ups by dickie, i have 1 big problem with him:

 

1. dick jauron does not put his players in a position to win/succeed or do their very best. dick plays safe, and plays not to lose. this is why he'll forever be mired at around 7-9 each season. He's not willing to risk it enough to fall to 4-12, and dick is just good enough as a coach to beep the bottom from dropping out. But he does not have what it takes to push a team over the top (or over the .500 mark for that matter). His continuing refusal to use rookies/young players in tight situations not only delays their development, but sets the team back in the long run. Take freddie jackson and jabari greer. Both players should have been out on the field early on. But dickie was so afraid of making mistakes that he'd rather put a long term ceiling on the team's success in order to prevent short term failure. He'd much rather go 7-9 3 straight years instead of taking some risks, developing some young players and going 4-12, then 7-9, then 10-6.

 

Dick would make a great high school coach when it comes to teaching players the game and giving them basic instruction. But in the nfl, he's a mere boy amongst men in the coaching ranks.

[DrFishfinder]

Yes, coaches do "win" and "lose." Coach W/L records and winning percentage are both official NFL statistics. The coach is not on the field throwing, catching, kicking, running, blocking, covering or tackling...but he's even more important than any single player...he spends a whole week preparing 52 players and a dozen underling coaches to go win a game on Sunday.

 

This is what people don't seem to understand. Things like timeouts, playcalling, challenges, 4th down decisions-- things classified as "gameday management"-- are a miniscule part of a head coach's job. Again, if a team wins a football game, it is in part because the coach got them prepared to play that particular opponent well enough for the players to be in a position to succeed.

 

 

Additionally, if you're right and a coach doesn't "win", he can't "lose" either...because even if he did a poor job, its all up to the players, anyway.

You have a point in your last sentence.

 

However, I disagree regarding gameday management being a minuscule part. Screw that up and the chances of winning a game go down dramatically. Those things may be a smaller part numerically, but are of utmost importance during "showtime".

[Bill from NYC]

Aside from the frequent sideline foul-ups by dickie, i have 1 big problem with him:

 

1. dick jauron does not put his players in a position to win/succeed or do their very best. dick plays safe, and plays not to lose. this is why he'll forever be mired at around 7-9 each season. He's not willing to risk it enough to fall to 4-12, and dick is just good enough as a coach to beep the bottom from dropping out. But he does not have what it takes to push a team over the top (or over the .500 mark for that matter). His continuing refusal to use rookies/young players in tight situations not only delays their development, but sets the team back in the long run. Take freddie jackson and jabari greer. Both players should have been out on the field early on. But dickie was so afraid of making mistakes that he'd rather put a long term ceiling on the team's success in order to prevent short term failure. He'd much rather go 7-9 3 straight years instead of taking some risks, developing some young players and going 4-12, then 7-9, then 10-6.

 

Dick would make a great high school coach when it comes to teaching players the game and giving them basic instruction. But in the nfl, he's a mere boy amongst men in the coaching ranks.

 

You would never know it from my posts, but I really like the man. That stuff about changing flat tires for his elderly neighbor mean something to me. I want him to win games. He deserves it, but his timid style doesn't lend itself to wins in the league.

And the cover-2 is garbage imo.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

You have a point in your last sentence.

 

However, I disagree regarding gameday management being a minuscule part. Screw that up and the chances of winning a game go down dramatically. Those things may be a smaller part numerically, but are of utmost importance during "showtime".

Fair enough.

[Ramius]

You would never know it from my posts, but I really like the man. That stuff about changing flat tires for his elderly neighbor mean something to me. I want him to win games. He deserves it, but his timid style doesn't lend itself to wins in the league.

And the cover-2 is garbage imo.

 

I have nothing but the utmost respect for Jauron himself. However, i don't want him coaching my football team.

[ColdBlueNorth]

There isn't any lunacy here. What we've got is a head coach who has had one (1) winning season in 8 years, had an average of 7-9 over his 5 year career in Chicago and continued to produce 3 more consecutive 7-9 clunkers in Buffalo. Feel free to correct me if any of these facts are wrong. Let's call his record consistently sub-mediocre.

 

The "won in spite of him" is an opinion shared by many. Agree or not as you so choose.

 

Watching the last 8 games of the season was mostly a painful and frustrating experience. Coaches coached badly and players played badly. Hard to watch. Hard to explain. Hard to justify.

 

When Mr. Jauron coaches this team into the playoffs, I reserve the right to reassess my opinion of him. Not until.

I like Jauron.

 

That being said, if a coach loses more than he wins he is a loser.

 

Them's the facts.

 

Folks can make up any number of excuses about QBs and such, but watching NE dismantle us with a reserve high school QB shows you how far behind the learning curve our Jauron (and our staff) is.

 

Hope springs eternal, and I can only hope that this experiment somehow becomes a winning combination this year. If it does I don't care if my ex-wife is coaching the team.