Short Term vs. Long Term Thinking - Explains Many Of These Threads

[Night Train]

We SUCK ! We lost to the lowly Lions. We'll only win 4-5 games ! No Playoffs ! The Pats will kill us ! No respect from the national media !

or

I'm disappointed in the poor start, especially the Detroit loss. But I knew this year was going to be a sloppy/ rebuilding year, with 5-7 wins at best. A first year Coach must find out who his players are and adjust accordingly this coming off-season. New schemes on Offense and Defense.
Everyone is being graded out and is not guaranteed a starting spot or roster spot next season. More roster turnover is on the horizon. Just get this going in the right direction and concentrate on getting some big bodies on the OL,DL, and a MLB this off-season. That seems like our biggest priorities, among many.


Eyes wide open. I prefer the long term thinking myself, since more poor performances will occur over the next 2 1/2 months. I'm looking at players on our roster I can mark down for the long term. This last draft gave us several and several more are needed. Plus we could use a signing of a dynamic veteran leader who can rally a team. Is their a Talley or Speilman out there ? We'll see.

*****ing accomplishes nothing, so it's time to think long term. I expect Marv and Modrak to ID some big bodies this off-season and add them to our roster, via FA or the Draft.

Meanwhile, I still enjoy pro and college football. Plus the Sabres are keeping me very happy.

It's all about a realistic outlook.

Currently, we're not that good. Thanks for pointing that out in 1,872 repetitive threads. We had no idea unless you shared that wisdom every hour. :blah: . Post more long term ideas and less wailing. :wail:

[kernowboy]

Good post

I think that there are very few teams that will always play at an extremely high level over many seasons. Eventually that has come to an end.

All teams at some stage have to rebuild. People will see we've had 5 years of that but the issue is occasionally rebuilds go wrong from the top down. Somehow Donahoe and Williams/Mularky thought we were very close but in many ways we weren't. And because of this we hadn't handled the basics.

If we add to this, a new regime with first year coordinators looking to implement a new system on both sides, then I was happy if this season saw (in no particular order)

Losman moving forward if not completely stepping up
Evans proving to be a number 1 WR
McGahee actually running like one of the top5 RBs in the league
The rookie DBs doing well
Crowell continuing to play well
Schobel continuing his stuff
Kelsay or Denney moving forward

I think we have seen the above. Plus had the bonuses of Kyle Williams and Ellison. And hanging on to the potential that Butler and McCargo have.

Anything more than 5 wins would be a step forward this year. As you say you can see all you like in camp and preseason but can really only make real judgements at the end of the season.

The OL looked bad on paper before the season and have played to that level. While our draft was excellent, our FA attempts were poor. I am sure we will have an equally good draft in 2007 with maybe 4 starters and I think Marv will do much better in Free Agency.

And then I can see 9 or 10 wins next season because I do think we have the brains trust upstairs to move forward.

And I also see Levy as a guy who will build a team capable of sustainable success like the Pats

[shelby]

How dare y'all be so rational??????

:D

Great posts, thanks.
:gobills:

[Dr. Lecter]

Fantastic post. People need to realize that it is evident thatMarv and Jauron have a clear long term plan with this team, something we never saw from TD.

[jmb1099]

We SUCK ! We lost to the lowly Lions. We'll only win 4-5 games ! No Playoffs ! The Pats will kill us ! No respect from the national media !

or

I'm disappointed in the poor start, especially the Detroit loss. But I knew this year was going to be a sloppy/ rebuilding year, with 5-7 wins at best. A first year Coach must find out who his players are and adjust accordingly this coming off-season. New schemes on Offense and Defense.
Everyone is being graded out and is not guaranteed a starting spot or roster spot next season. More roster turnover is on the horizon. Just get this going in the right direction and concentrate on getting some big bodies on the OL,DL, and a MLB this off-season. That seems like our biggest priorities, among many.


Eyes wide open. I prefer the long term thinking myself, since more poor performances will occur over the next 2 1/2 months. I'm looking at players on our roster I can mark down for the long term. This last draft gave us several and several more are needed. Plus we could use a signing of a dynamic veteran leader who can rally a team. Is their a Talley or Speilman out there ? We'll see.

*****ing accomplishes nothing, so it's time to think long term. I expect Marv and Modrak to ID some big bodies this off-season and add them to our roster, via FA or the Draft.

Meanwhile, I still enjoy pro and college football. Plus the Sabres are keeping me very happy.

It's all about a realistic outlook.

Currently, we're not that good. Thanks for pointing that out in 1,872 repetitive threads. We had no idea unless you shared that wisdom every hour. :blah: . Post more long term ideas and less wailing. :wail:
Exactly. Well said.

[Typ0]

Fantastic post. People need to realize that it is evident thatMarv and Jauron have a clear long term plan with this team, something we never saw from TD.


how is it clear to you? Maybe you can explain it for us.

[kernowboy]

how is it clear to you? Maybe you can explain it for us.

Well at least it lasted 5 posts before the negative squad turned up

[Typ0]

Well at least it lasted 5 posts before the negative squad turned up


who said it was negative? He said they have a "clear" long-term plan amongst all of this "reality" talk. I know nothing of this plan so have no idea how clear it can be. Please, share some insight into the clarity of this long term plan.

[kernowboy]

He realised that not everything could be fixed on Day1

He decided that it was the defence that need to be looked at especially players fit for the Tampa2

Despite everyone screaming he drafted Whitner, earned lots of mockery at the time, and now all admit that Whitner was a canny pick. Yes we could have gone another way, but we only had one R1 pick. He tried to sign players in FA who fit the Tampa2 system like Tripplett. Ok, it hasn't worked but it demonstrates more brains than the old team who just went for Marquee names in both the draft and free agency.

Despite not being their draft choice, they decided of the 3 QBs that Losman is the one who is most likely to show potential. Holcomb is a backward step. Nall, well I think he's likely to be a never will be. And they are sticking to their decision unlike Mularky/Donahoe who panicked and tried to save their own skins, thankfully unsuccessfully.

Based on the evidence so far, I think Marv will draft astutely again and will patch up more of the holes, possibly gaining 4 starters and improving the OL with new blood. The DL will automatically be better from one year in the system though a new name here would help the rotation.

And he won't get fleeced again in FA

With Donahoe, my first question after some of his decisions was 'Why?'

[Dr. Lecter]

He realised that not everything could be fixed on Day1

He decided that it was the defence that need to be looked at especially players fit for the Tampa2

Despite everyone screaming he drafted Whitner, earned lots of mockery at the time, and now all admit that Whitner was a canny pick. Yes we could have gone another way, but we only had one R1 pick. He tried to sign players in FA who fit the Tampa2 system like Tripplett. Ok, it hasn't worked but it demonstrates more brains than the old team who just went for Marquee names in both the draft and free agency.

Despite not being their draft choice, they decided of the 3 QBs that Losman is the one who is most likely to show potential. Holcomb is a backward step. Nall, well I think he's likely to be a never will be. And they are sticking to their decision unlike Mularky/Donahoe who panicked and tried to save their own skins, thankfully unsuccessfully.

Based on the evidence so far, I think Marv will draft astutely again and will patch up more of the holes, possibly gaining 4 starters and improving the OL with new blood. The DL will automatically be better from one year in the system though a new name here would help the rotation.

And he won't get fleeced again in FA

With Donahoe, my first question after some of his decisions was 'Why?'

Perfect! Those are basically my feelings.

Marv is building the team for the long haul. He is not applying band-aids to gaping wounds. It takes time for the large wounds to actually heal, but he is doing more than just covering them up.

[Philagape]

This season is all about development. Not just for JP, but also building a defense. And we still don't have a cohesive O-line or a legit No. 2 WR.

Think of it like a movie ... This season is just the first of a two-parter or even a trilogy.

[kernowboy]

Movie 1 The Fellowship of the Ring 2006

Marv gets his team in and they start to work out who can play and who can't

Movie 2 The Two Towers 2007

We work further on the Two Towers of OL and DL

Movie 3 The Return of the king 2008

with a bit of luck, Marv the king gets us back to the SuperBowl

[Philagape]

:up:

The Fellowship of the Marv
The Two Lines
The Return of the Ring

[raphael120]

wow..thats a pretty geeky analogy there...lets just hope its true. back to the nerdery, now.

[mybills]

Currently, we're not that good. Thanks for pointing that out in 1,872 repetitive threads. We had no idea unless you shared that wisdom every hour. :blah: .
:spit: :bf1:

[Typ0]

He realised that not everything could be fixed on Day1

He decided that it was the defence that need to be looked at especially players fit for the Tampa2

Despite everyone screaming he drafted Whitner, earned lots of mockery at the time, and now all admit that Whitner was a canny pick. Yes we could have gone another way, but we only had one R1 pick. He tried to sign players in FA who fit the Tampa2 system like Tripplett. Ok, it hasn't worked but it demonstrates more brains than the old team who just went for Marquee names in both the draft and free agency.

Despite not being their draft choice, they decided of the 3 QBs that Losman is the one who is most likely to show potential. Holcomb is a backward step. Nall, well I think he's likely to be a never will be. And they are sticking to their decision unlike Mularky/Donahoe who panicked and tried to save their own skins, thankfully unsuccessfully.

Based on the evidence so far, I think Marv will draft astutely again and will patch up more of the holes, possibly gaining 4 starters and improving the OL with new blood. The DL will automatically be better from one year in the system though a new name here would help the rotation.

And he won't get fleeced again in FA

With Donahoe, my first question after some of his decisions was 'Why?'


what decisions did you ask "why" about with TD? I think I know what's coming...why didn't he address the OLine. Well from where I stand this OLine this year is the worst we've seen it (I attribute a good portion of their poor play to the QB play but I'm sure you are one of those "fix the OLine and the QB gets better" people so I'll just use that arguement) so why aren't you asking the same question about ML? TD brought in Takeo Spikes and Sam Adams. He drafted Clements and others. ML used a top pick to bring in a safety (I don't think "everyone" is saying that pick was canny either) and signed Larry Tripplet who has yet to record a tackle behind the LOS. Why aren't you asking "why" about these things?

It really speaks to the long-term vision of huge chuncks of fans. It's like the catholic church telling people there were bad guys out there and sending entire populations on the crusades to steal all the gold on earth. It's rediculous blind faith. I give the people who fell for the churches drivel a lot more credit. They couldn't read nor did they have CNN. But you guys who are "positive just for the sake of being positive" are rediculous. There are huge holes on this football team. The QB play has been absolutely attrocious for years but it's all because of the OLine. Well pick your poison but the only thing ML has going for him right now that TD didn't is he's the incumbent and there are plenty of fans out there who will think positively about the team no matter how bad it is. Me, I'd be more likely to show my support by going to a game with a paper bag over my head.

[Ron Burgundy]

what decisions did you ask "why" about with TD? I think I know what's coming...why didn't he address the OLine. Well from where I stand this OLine this year is the worst we've seen it (I attribute a good portion of their poor play to the QB play but I'm sure you are one of those "fix the OLine and the QB gets better" people so I'll just use that arguement) so why aren't you asking the same question about ML? TD brought in Takeo Spikes and Sam Adams. He drafted Clements and others. ML used a top pick to bring in a safety (I don't think "everyone" is saying that pick was canny either) and signed Larry Tripplet who has yet to record a tackle behind the LOS. Why aren't you asking "why" about these things?

It really speaks to the long-term vision of huge chuncks of fans. It's like the catholic church telling people there were bad guys out there and sending entire populations on the crusades to steal all the gold on earth. It's rediculous blind faith. I give the people who fell for the churches drivel a lot more credit. They couldn't read nor did they have CNN. But you guys who are "positive just for the sake of being positive" are rediculous. There are huge holes on this football team. The QB play has been absolutely attrocious for years but it's all because of the OLine. Well pick your poison but the only thing ML has going for him right now that TD didn't is he's the incumbent and there are plenty of fans out there who will think positively about the team no matter how bad it is. Me, I'd be more likely to show my support by going to a game with a paper bag over my head.

I like it. :D

[kernowboy]

what decisions did you ask "why" about with TD? I think I know what's coming...why didn't he address the OLine. Well from where I stand this OLine this year is the worst we've seen it (I attribute a good portion of their poor play to the QB play but I'm sure you are one of those "fix the OLine and the QB gets better" people so I'll just use that arguement) so why aren't you asking the same question about ML? TD brought in Takeo Spikes and Sam Adams. He drafted Clements and others. ML used a top pick to bring in a safety (I don't think "everyone" is saying that pick was canny either) and signed Larry Tripplet who has yet to record a tackle behind the LOS. Why aren't you asking "why" about these things?

It really speaks to the long-term vision of huge chuncks of fans. It's like the catholic church telling people there were bad guys out there and sending entire populations on the crusades to steal all the gold on earth. It's rediculous blind faith. I give the people who fell for the churches drivel a lot more credit. They couldn't read nor did they have CNN. But you guys who are "positive just for the sake of being positive" are rediculous. There are huge holes on this football team. The QB play has been absolutely attrocious for years but it's all because of the OLine. Well pick your poison but the only thing ML has going for him right now that TD didn't is he's the incumbent and there are plenty of fans out there who will think positively about the team no matter how bad it is. Me, I'd be more likely to show my support by going to a game with a paper bag over my head.

I think if you'd actually bothered to read my post you would have seen I said that he brought in Triplett and that hasn't work. I also pointed out that Pickett hasn't done too well at GB either. And that I would cut Marv so slack it being the first time he worked in FA. Committing such a howler after 3 years experience would be unforgiveable

TD also got rid of Ruben Brown and Pat Williams.WHY? He gave us McGahee missing out on a pass catching TE like Witten we desperately need when we had a perfectly serviceable Henry.WHY? TD also gave us Milloy and Posey and let Winfield go WHY?. He wasn't all good but he wasn't all bad either

Whitner will be close to defensive rookie of the year and considering the safeties this year, his selection is fine with me. It was initially shocking but I think it is a good start to building a teams foundations

OL has been the responsibility of all managements. Levy went defense last year unlike the Jets who went offense. We'd better go offense line this year.

And if we consider the great QBs in the league at present, I am struggling to think of one who doesn't play behind a line with at least 1 x Round 1 OL pick either drafted by them or signed in FA. Even Leinhart has Leonard Davis. Hell, Big Ben has 3.

I do agree a good QB makes a line look better, a poor one makes a line look worse. But a team makes a QB look poorer if they only provide one valid receiving option behind a terrible line. And the only benefit Leinhart would have here is at least he'd see every DE who runs past Gandy. No QB could make the OL we have look better than the current shambles.

I would be happy to draft a QB this year in R1 or R2. However we must use the other choice on his new best friend, a starting calibre LT. We must also look to upgrade the height of our receiving corps.

and on a final note, I'm a History degree graduate who specialised in the Crusades of the 11th and 13th centuries learning from one of the Worlds foremost experts on the subject, I would be very careful about using examples which are false and inaccurate !!!!! Each of the 4 principle crusades had different motivations. The 1st crusade was launched because pilgrims visiting the holy Christian shrines were being attacked under the auspices of the caliph of Egypt, generally now considered to be a couple of waves short of shipwreck between the ears (mad). Principal though not exclusive membership of the crusade were 2nd or 3rd sons who would nornally go into the church but having found it easy to reclaim Jerusalem decided to stay. This did not include Robert Duke of Normandy who went but was heir to the English throne ..... it wasn't directly about wealth it was about status, ego, family honour and in many cases being able to return home after 10 years and marry above rank.

Would you like me to continue your History lesson?

[Typ0]

status, ego, family honor, moving up strata? Sounds like wealth to me. The only thing that isn't directly wealth is moving up strata because money doesn't usually get that done. However, being rich is a way to marry (like you said) into the next level and suddenly it is about wealth. The catholic church had their people go after those things...but in the end it was about bringing home the bacon to be used to rid the earth of heathens. I'm not talking about rhetoric...I'm talking about actions.

[kernowboy]

status, ego, family honor, moving up strata? Sounds like wealth to me. The only thing that isn't directly wealth is moving up strata because money doesn't usually get that done. However, being rich is a way to marry (like you said) into the next level and suddenly it is about wealth. The catholic church had their people go after those things...but in the end it was about bringing home the bacon to be used to rid the earth of heathens. I'm not talking about rhetoric...I'm talking about actions.

In medieval times that was the way to move up. The catholic church weren't into acquiring wealth at that time in the manner you suggest as if so they would have wanted 1st sons running off with them, because if they died then the church would inherit the land. Stealing gold or encouraging Crusaders to steal gold or wealth from other pious Christians was a big No No. The idea was they'd find a place in Heaven by returning it to its rightful owners

Alot of those who went were bonded knights. Initially they would go because if they survived they would be rewarded by their kings or those in whose name they were fighting. But religous motivation in those days are far different from today. As with the Muslims who undertake the Haj in medieval times, Christians were expected to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. It is difficult to comprehend the offence this would have caused in a society which often thought, King, Church, Family to have pilgrim caravans attacked by the Heathen

It essense it was a religous war not one fought over wealth but the right to freedom of worship in the Holy Lands