Martz fired. Should we hire him? [Archive] - BillsZone.com

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 12:48 PM

Well we ran Gilbride out of town and he is doing pretty well with the Giants. When was the last time we put up 35 on the Pats?

Gilbride runs a balanced offense and he has the weapons to do it. In fact he is a perfect example of why we should cut Jauron and Fairchild some slack. When you dont have the players on offense it doesnt matter what plays are called.
now it's the lack of talent?

Are you kidding me? Cut Fairchild some slack? MIami doesn't have the talent we have offensively and yet they can score more than just fg's. Do you even watch the games? Fairchild blows.

I would rahter bring back Moolarkey than cut Fairchild some slack.

Jauron gets 1 more year. Fairchild has no business being an OC

Jaybird

01-02-2008, 12:48 PM

NO NO NO

worst coach i have ever senn.. wasnt fairchild his OC in st louis???

HHURRICANE

01-02-2008, 12:49 PM

I thought about the negative of him being "pass happy" but don't you think he would help balance the ultra conservative Jauron?

Plus, I think our running game would become alot more dangerous.

mysticsoto

01-02-2008, 01:05 PM

I thought about the negative of him being "pass happy" but don't you think he would help balance the ultra conservative Jauron?

Plus, I think our running game would become alot more dangerous.

Why? Martz doesn't rely heavily on the running game, and right now, that is our forte. Seems like we should be looking for ways to make it better and not ways to ignore it. Martz as OC won't work out well when the cold climate comes in and affects a game. Right now, we are kind of a schizophrenic team. We need to develop a great run game with Lynch being such a great back and Fred Jackson backing him up. But instead, we have an Oline designed to help against the pass rush. As a result, our RBs don't get much support and for days like we had in Cleveland this year, our defense that is predicated on speed will be totally ineffective. What Jauron has so far installed is not conducive to the environment the Bills need to be able to operate on. Unfortunately, we are now committed. So it's either continue the schemes implemented, or start over yet again and take a step backward...

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 01:09 PM

If we hire Martz, get ready for another qb controversy. Martz would salivate over JP's deep throws and cringe over Trents dinks and dunks.

madness

01-02-2008, 01:42 PM

Link?

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080102/SPORTS01/80102027/0/BLOG01

Say no to Martz. Our RB core would be worthless with him here. It's no coincidence that Steven Jackson's breakout season came after the dismissal of Martz. Also if people question Jauron's game management, Martz would definitely be considered a downgrade.

Criticism
Martz has been heavily criticized about clock mis-management and play-calling. During his tenure as the Rams' head coach he challenged many plays that were overturned at the beginnings of games wasting time outs, and calling unnecessary time-outs at the beginnings of games. Secondly, he is still heavily criticized for his heavy reliance on his passing attack. In is two years as Offensive Coordinator of the Detroit Lions Jon Kitna has been the most sacked quarterback in the NFL. As head coach of the Rams in 2005 he called 56 passes in a game against the San Francisco 49ers where the Rams possessed the ball for 40 minutes.

Dont drink the water

01-02-2008, 01:49 PM

He has shown in Baltimore he does not know how to create an offense - pass.

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 01:50 PM

now it's the lack of talent?

Are you kidding me? Cut Fairchild some slack? MIami doesn't have the talent we have offensively and yet they can score more than just fg's. Do you even watch the games? Fairchild blows.

I would rahter bring back Moolarkey than cut Fairchild some slack.

Jauron gets 1 more year. Fairchild has no business being an OC
When is this that Miami scores? Miami scored 2 more TDs than we did this year... we both suck.

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 01:54 PM

When is this that Miami scores? Miami scored 2 more TDs than we did this year... we both suck.

You just made my point. We both suck but they have worse talent then we do offensively. The have outranked us offensively except in rushing but that because they lost Brown .

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 02:00 PM

You just made my point. We both suck but they have worse talent then we do offensively. The have outranked us offensively except in rushing but that because they lost Brown .
How did I make yer point... if anything you made mine.... yer comparing 2 very bad offenses personnel wise and saying "hey look, they suck and so do we" All that proves is that you dont win in the NFL with weak personnel which is what I have been saying.

Forward_Lateral

01-02-2008, 02:02 PM

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 02:05 PM

You just made my point. We both suck but they have worse talent then we do offensively. The have outranked us offensively except in rushing but that because they lost Brown .
A real comparison is looking at a OC that we fired and ran out of town who is doing well now with another team. Supposedly when he was here, he was Kevin Killdrive and had no clue about football. So what happened over the last few years? He suddenly is an offensive guru?

NO... what happened is that he went to a team that has weapons that can be used. ie. 2 solid WRs (one of which has great size and can be used frequently in the redzone) a receiving TE who is also a redzone threat. A good OL and a solid RB. Its not complicated stuff here.... we dont have good players... period.

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 02:05 PM

How did I make yer point... if anything you made mine.... yer comparing 2 very bad offenses personnel wise and saying "hey look, they suck and so do we" All that proves is that you dont win in the NFL with weak personnel which is what I have been saying.
Nope. We have better talent than Miami and yet because of Fairchild they are better offensively. SO my point is , coaching was our problem more than lack of talent.

The only reason why we are 7-9 is because of our D. Our D carried this team inspite of all the injuries.

When a 1-15 team is better than you are offensively with less talent to work with, that should tell you Fairchild blows.

I am not saying our talent is all that but what I am telling you is that with a different OC our O would've been better.

Moolarkey has a better O than Fairchild had. There's no reason why the fins scored more points than we have offensively .

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 02:09 PM

Nope. We have better talent than Miami and yet because of Fairchild they are better offensively. SO my point is , coaching was our problem more than lack of talent.

The only reason why we are 7-9 is because of our D. Our D carried this team inspite of all the injuries.

When a 1-15 team is better than you are offensively with less talent to work with, that should tell you Fairchild blows.

I am not saying our talent is all that but what I am telling you is that with a different OC our O would've been better.

Moolarkey has a better O than Fairchild had. There's no reason why the fins scored more points than we have offensively .
Ok again they only had 15 points more than we had all year... That is a marginal difference. It means absolutley nothing.

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 02:14 PM

Ok again they only had 15 points more than we had all year... That is a marginal difference. It means absolutley nothing.

It means a lot when you have better talent and yet they are better offensively. I don't acre by how much, point is they are better.

NO matter how you slice and dice it, Fairchild made our talent worse than they were. If JP supposedly blows then Trent should made our O better. It wasn't . No matter who the qb was we sucked and it's because of Fairchild. If you can't see that, nothing I can do. But to say we should cut him some slack is hilarious.

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 02:18 PM

A real comparison is looking at a OC that we fired and ran out of town who is doing well now with another team. Supposedly when he was here, he was Kevin Killdrive and had no clue about football. So what happened over the last few years? He suddenly is an offensive guru?

.

His team plays in the NFC. Gilbride would suck in the AFC. He still blows but not as bad as Fairchild. Fairchild was the worst OC we've had.

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 02:21 PM

His team plays in the NFC. Gilbride would suck in the AFC. He still blows but not as bad as Fairchild. Fairchild was the worst OC we've had.
I believe his offense just finished putting up 35 on the best team in the AFC and the 4th ranked defense in the NFL in points allowed. Its a fact, Gilbride has been running a great offense in NY for years. The NFC argument is weak.

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 02:23 PM

It means a lot when you have better talent and yet they are better offensively. I don't acre by how much, point is they are better.

NO matter how you slice and dice it, Fairchild made our talent worse than they were. If JP supposedly blows then Trent should made our O better. It wasn't . No matter who the qb was we sucked and it's because of Fairchild. If you can't see that, nothing I can do. But to say we should cut him some slack is hilarious.
Whats hilarious to me is your expectations.... Rookie QB, no #2 WR, NO TE... yet you still blame the coaching......

Can you please name one OC who has been successful with comparable talent to ours?

Voltron

01-02-2008, 02:26 PM

He has shown in Baltimore he does not know how to create an offense - pass.
Martz was in Detroit and St. Lois. Never in Baltimore. :huh:

yordad

01-02-2008, 02:36 PM

I think Martz would be awesome. He would actually consider starting our best QB. As opposed to the QB that fits an aweful system best.

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 02:42 PM

I think Martz would be awesome. He would actually consider starting our best QB. As opposed to the QB that fits an aweful system best.
Martz led offenses dont succeed outdoors.... we have a great #1 RB and a solid #2... with Martz we would be lucky if Lynch got the ball 20 times a game and Jackson wouldnt even suit up.

Historian

01-02-2008, 02:45 PM

No thanks.

I've had enough Ram Rejects...

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 02:48 PM

Whats hilarious to me is your expectations.... Rookie QB, no #2 WR, NO TE... yet you still blame the coaching......

Can you please name one OC who has been successful with comparable talent to ours?

Jp (JP/Holcomb) first year as a starter with a worse OL was better than this years O (JP/Trent) . You're running out of excuses.

I've already shown you an example. The fins have crappier talent and although they stink, they don't stink as badly as we have.

Even Mualarkeys O was better than Fairchilds last year. Who the hell was his no. 1 wr. last year .Chambers?

Sorry, you can't blame our talent and then cut Fairchild some slack. That's just dumb opinion.

justasportsfan

01-02-2008, 02:53 PM

I believe his offense just finished putting up 35 on the best team in the AFC and the 4th ranked defense in the NFL in points allowed. Its a fact, Gilbride has been running a great offense in NY for years. The NFC argument is weak.

Are you even informed? Gilbride has only been the giants OC for 1 1/2 years. The giants have had great ofenses over the years? They were ranked 14 last year and ranked 16 this year. How is that GREAT? I guess thats great comapred to Fairchilds O but not by NFL standards. :shakeno:

Now I know I'm wasting my time.

Fairchild sucks. The stats are there. The comaprisons are there. Even Mularkey was better with less talent.

yordad

01-02-2008, 03:11 PM

Martz led offenses dont succeed outdoors.... we have a great #1 RB and a solid #2... with Martz we would be lucky if Lynch got the ball 20 times a game and Jackson wouldnt even suit up.We have speed at WR. We have a QB that can throw down field with the best of them. We have versitile RBs (Faulk like). We must be planning to do some up grading also. WR and TE are a top priority.

I think you are trying to say a passing offense cannot work here. Tell Jim Kelly that. Or, Bledsoe during his first year here.

We hired Fairchild because we thought we had downfield options, and we thought he could use them properly. Appearently he couldn't. He couldn't in fair weather, and he couldn't in bad weather. He couldn't with either QB.

Does that mean it can't be done? I think not. I vote Martz. I think we could have the greatest show on snow.

Night Train

01-02-2008, 04:12 PM

Never

Mahdi

01-02-2008, 05:42 PM

We have speed at WR. We have a QB that can throw down field with the best of them. We have versitile RBs (Faulk like). We must be planning to do some up grading also. WR and TE are a top priority.

I think you are trying to say a passing offense cannot work here. Tell Jim Kelly that. Or, Bledsoe during his first year here.

We hired Fairchild because we thought we had downfield options, and we thought he could use them properly. Appearently he couldn't. He couldn't in fair weather, and he couldn't in bad weather. He couldn't with either QB.

Does that mean it can't be done? I think not. I vote Martz. I think we could have the greatest show on snow.
Tell Thurman Thomas that,,,,, Kelly had a good passing game but a great run game went along with it,,,,, You cant rely on the pass only in Buffalo.

colin

01-02-2008, 10:01 PM

I believe his offense just finished putting up 35 on the best team in the AFC and the 4th ranked defense in the NFL in points allowed. Its a fact, Gilbride has been running a great offense in NY for years. The NFC argument is weak.

i don't know which post to thank or quote, so i just did this one.

i agree -- you need play makers

i would take martz as OC, they guy has lit up the nfl before, and showed flashes w detroit.

if we get a couple play makers on O (and there are guys out there if we wanna take a shot at them) then he could make our team much better.

i think jauran would reign him in some like coughlin has done with gilbride (jax and nyg).

i'm not saying martz or bust, but if we signed him on friday, i wouldn't jump off a bridge.

The Jokeman

01-02-2008, 10:08 PM

If we hire Martz, get ready for another qb controversy. Martz would salivate over JP's deep throws and cringe over Trents dinks and dunks.
Let's then hope he gets to a dome team like Atlanta and we can then trade JP to them for their 3rd or maybe if lucky their 2nd Round pick.

yordad

01-02-2008, 10:11 PM

Ok again they only had 15 points more than we had all year... That is a marginal difference. It means absolutley nothing.2 more Vs Dallas. 2 more Vs. Denver. 9 more Vs Skins. Thats 13. And, we have more talent, not equal talent. And, I don't even think it is debatable.

You can debate well. But, I think you are just playing devils advocate in your defense of Fairchild. No way can you believe he wasn't a major contributing factor in the offensive woes.

When you looked at this team's offensive lineup before the year started, did you think they would be close to last, or last, in nearly every offensive catagory?

I don't think they are the most talented, but I think they way underperformed their talent level. Are you faulting their effort? Either way, that would be a coaching issue too.

Fairchild just finished one of the worst offensive coaching stints I've ever witnessed or noticed.

yordad

01-02-2008, 10:17 PM

As for Martz, I think it comes down to which QB you want to see start next year.

I'm surprised you don't want Steve Mariucci.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 07:42 AM

Are you even informed? Gilbride has only been the giants OC for 1 1/2 years. The giants have had great ofenses over the years? They were ranked 14 last year and ranked 16 this year. How is that GREAT? I guess thats great comapred to Fairchilds O but not by NFL standards. :shakeno:

Now I know I'm wasting my time.

Fairchild sucks. The stats are there. The comaprisons are there. Even Mularkey was better with less talent.
Gilbride joined the Giants in 2004 bud,,,, I think you need to check your sources first.

Again... if you want to compare 2 offenses that lack talent and say that one did marginally better than the other and thats your argument then it makes no sense.

As for our offense being better when Mularkey was here, again you are comparing 2 bad offenses to eachother and even if we were better offensively with Mularkey, Mularkey had the benefit of having a legitimate WR group with Moulds, Evans and Reed. Having a second threat on the other side makes a huge difference for an offense.

The guage of a good OC isnt to give him garbage and ask him to make things happen... its to give him weapons to work with and ask him to design an offense that will make his team successful.

My question to you was to name me a SUCCESSFUL offense/OC that operated with comparable talent to ours now,,,, not name an offense that sucked and didnt make the playoffs and were only marginally better. Naming a previous Bills team that went 7-9 and may have scored 20 more points in that year doesnt mean anything.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 07:54 AM

2 more Vs Dallas. 2 more Vs. Denver. 9 more Vs Skins. Thats 13. And, we have more talent, not equal talent. And, I don't even think it is debatable.

You can debate well. But, I think you are just playing devils advocate in your defense of Fairchild. No way can you believe he wasn't a major contributing factor in the offensive woes.

When you looked at this team's offensive lineup before the year started, did you think they would be close to last, or last, in nearly every offensive catagory?

I don't think they are the most talented, but I think they way underperformed their talent level. Are you faulting their effort? Either way, that would be a coaching issue too.

Fairchild just finished one of the worst offensive coaching stints I've ever witnessed or noticed.
Look.... Yordad....

At the beginning of the year I didnt expect things to be this bad,,, no,,,,

However I was mostly just hopeful and didnt really see the team for what it was... I just dont feel that its fair to judge an OC who is literally dealing with one of the worst offenses personnel wise in the league.... and honestly if in all my years watching the NFL I witnessed an offense with comparable talent to ours actually succeed I would be the first to kick Fairchild out of town,,,, but in reality that doesn't exist and never has.... So I give Fairchild the benefit of the doubt that he would have succeeded had he been given some decent NFL caliber weapons,,,, I think thats fair. And like i said to Justa,, if you dont think thats a fair comment,,,,

Name an offense or OC that has succeeded with talent comparable to ours... and succeeded doesnt mean they were 6-10, didn't make the playoffs but they scored a touchdown + a FG more than us that year.

mysticsoto

01-03-2008, 08:01 AM

Look.... Yordad....

At the beginning of the year I didnt expect things to be this bad,,, no,,,,

However I was mostly just hopeful and didnt really see the team for what it was... I just dont feel that its fair to judge an OC who is literally dealing with one of the worst offenses personnel wise in the league.... and honestly if in all my years watching the NFL I witnessed an offense with comparable talent to ours actually succeed I would be the first to kick Fairchild out of town,,,, but in reality that doesn't exist and never has.... So I give Fairchild the benefit of the doubt that he would have succeeded had he been given some decent NFL caliber weapons,,,, I think thats fair. And like i said to Justa,, if you dont think thats a fair comment,,,,

Name an offense or OC that has succeeded with talent comparable to ours... and succeeded doesnt mean they were 6-10, didn't make the playoffs but they scored a touchdown + a FG more than us that year.
Mahdi, you and I are usually on the same side on many issues...but here we are not. We are missing a good #2 WR and a good TE, but the play calling was also horrendous. Case in point, look at the Cleveland game where it was magnified how bad the offense was. We were completely ineffective in the routes that were run (you can't make cuts in 3-4 inches of snow) and there was no adapting. But more importantly, when Fairchild called that reverse with Parrish (I think?) - what kind of sense did that make? So...the Bills WRs and virtually everyone is having trouble running on such conditions and the OC makes a call that involves speed (which is nullified in the snow) and involves running all the way across the field sideways rather than forward??? That was one of the most bone headed assinine calls I have ever seen an OC do.

I personally breathed a sigh of relief when I heard Fairchild was leaving and now look forward to someone who actually knows what they are doing...

Philagape

01-03-2008, 08:05 AM

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 08:35 AM

Mahdi, you aren I are usually on the same side on many issues...but here we are not. We are missing a good #2 WR and a good TE, but the play calling was also horrendous. Case in point, look at the Cleveland game where it was magnified how bad the offense was. We were completely ineffective in the routes that were run (you can't make cuts in 3-4 inches of snow) and there was no adapting. But more importantly, when Fairchild called that reverse with Parrish (I think?) - what kind of sense did that make? So...the Bills WRs and virtually everyone is having trouble running on such conditions and the OC makes a call that involves speed (which is nullified in the snow) and involves running all the way across the field sideways rather than forward??? That was one of the most bone headed assinine calls I have ever seen an OC do.

I personally breathed a sigh of relief when I heard Fairchild was leaving and now look forward to someone who actually knows what they are doing...
The Cleveland game was bad for any offense but that type of weather magnifies our weaknesses dramatically.... (and even without bad weather our offense is still easy to defend)

Evans, Reed, Parrish are all built for speed and quickness. Take that away and what are you left with to call plays for?? Short guys who cant outmuscle or outjump anyone. Add in the fact that we have no TEs to make stick throws to and all that is left of our offense is the run game. Also Trent was having major difficulties throwing in those conditions and many passes were not even near the target. What can an OC possibly do with that Mystic?

On the other side you have a team like Cleveland who have big fast targets to make plays with... Braylon, WInslow, Jurevicious so we couldnt always stack against the run. Thats the difference between an OC who has weapons and one who doesnt.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 08:41 AM

What "talent" does the offense have? Two QBs who played like rookies ... Only one WR and no TEs who have any business starting in this league ... glaring holes in the interior O-line. Of the 11 starters, there were four or five I would refer to as "talent" this season. When you can't pass or run block effectively, you're dead in the water.

And again, why must there be one reason why the offense failed? Cannot the "talent" and coaching suck equally? :peace:
The reason I dont believe that talent and coaching can be blamed simultaneously is that one depends on the other.......

For example,,, Lets say I needed a house built and you agreed to build it for me as long as I provide the wood.

I give you the wood and lots of it is water-damaged wood of weak quality. You build the house anyways. In the end my house is weak, has leaks, and is falling apart.....

Who is to blame in that situation.... The wood or the builder?

mysticsoto

01-03-2008, 09:07 AM

The Cleveland game was bad for any offense but that type of weather magnifies our weaknesses dramatically.... (and even without bad weather our offense is still easy to defend)

Evans, Reed, Parrish are all built for speed and quickness. Take that away and what are you left with to call plays for?? Short guys who cant outmuscle or outjump anyone. Add in the fact that we have no TEs to make stick throws to and all that is left of our offense is the run game. Also Trent was having major difficulties throwing in those conditions and many passes were not even near the target. What can an OC possibly do with that Mystic?

On the other side you have a team like Cleveland who have big fast targets to make plays with... Braylon, WInslow, Jurevicious so we couldnt always stack against the run. Thats the difference between an OC who has weapons and one who doesnt.

None of what you've said above changes the fact that a "reverse" call on a field that is full of snow was a completely idiotic idea and shows how little our OC is in touch with making good vs bad calls. Additionally, our WRs seem ill prepared on what to do vs their WRs. Perhaps you can attribute that piece to the WRs coach, maybe??? But regardless, Fairchild has been making bad calls like that consistently in the games. I understand that the offense has a ways to go and am not given them a free pass by any means. But Fairchild leaving will help the offense be better next year!!!

Voltron

01-03-2008, 09:09 AM

None of what you've said above changes the fact that a "reverse" call on a field that is full of snow was a completely idiotic idea and shows how little our OC is in touch with making good vs bad calls. Additionally, our WRs seem ill prepared on what to do vs their WRs. Perhaps you can attribute that piece to the WRs coach, maybe??? But regardless, Fairchild has been making bad calls like that consistently in the games. I understand that the offense has a ways to go and am not given them a free pass by any means. But Fairchild leaving will help the offense be better next year!!!
That play call was the worst play call in any situation ever! I also am getting sick and tired of watching us throw 3 yards behind the First Down marker on 3rd down. Let them get the First and then try to make YAC! How hard is that!

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 09:25 AM

That play call was the worst play call in any situation ever! I also am getting sick and tired of watching us throw 3 yards behind the First Down marker on 3rd down. Let them get the First and then try to make YAC! How hard is that!
Ill tell you exactly why we throw in front of the first down marker on 3rd down instead of beyond it... On 3rd down defenses of course are aware of where we need to get to so they heavily defened that area.... Now normally if you have a good WR corps and an experienced QB you can still find a crease to fit the ball into and depend on your receiver to make a big catch in traffic and hold on for a first down. When all you have other than Evans is Parrish, Reed and an OL that we call a TE in Royal then yer best bet is to throw to a less heavily defended area ahead of the sticks and hope your Wrs can make a play for the first down.

Once we have a TE and a reliable #2 all that will change. Coverage on our #1 receiver will loosen, the middle of the field will be given more respect with a big receiving TE and the other side of the field will get attention.... Now you can make all those 3rd downs that were hard to come by, and now you can find more separation in the redzone.

justasportsfan

01-03-2008, 09:35 AM

Gilbride joined the Giants in 2004 bud,,,, I think you need to check your sources first. .
Sorry bud. MY sources say he was hired as the qb coach and not the OC. MY sources are right , yours is uninformed. http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=5

He produced nothing but a 14th ranked O and a 16 ranked O since he was uprgraded to OC. Nothing great about that , just MEDIOCRE. Again, it's a great O COMPARED TO FAIRCHILDS.

He produces offenses that can't win a sb. Do you even remember the greatest comeback. Guess who's O choked because he kept throwing with a huge lead? Guess who got punched by Buddy Ryan for doing so? Yes, Gilbride.

Again... if you want to compare 2 offenses that lack talent and say that one did marginally better than the other and thats your argument then it makes no sense.

As for our offense being better when Mularkey was here, again you are comparing 2 bad offenses to eachother and even if we were better offensively with Mularkey, Mularkey had the benefit of having a legitimate WR group with Moulds, Evans and Reed. Having a second threat on the other side makes a huge difference for an offense.

The guage of a good OC isnt to give him garbage and ask him to make things happen... its to give him weapons to work with and ask him to design an offense that will make his team successful.. MUlarkey had a better O than Fairchild WITH NO OL. HIs OL was neglected by TD. MUlarkey sucked but since he produced a better ranked O, that doesn't say a lot about your boy Fairchild with practically the same weapons with no OL.

My question to you was to name me a SUCCESSFUL offense/OC that operated with comparable talent to ours now,,,, not name an offense that sucked and didnt make the playoffs and were only marginally better. Naming a previous Bills team that went 7-9 and may have scored 20 more points in that year doesnt mean anything.I'll name you an O with a very young talent that went to the sb and won it. The Pats first sb win. You can ignore that example all you want. Brady was othing more than a 2nd year player . They also won that sb with Antoine Smith. I know you'll ignore that again.

Willis is playing his best football . He's all of a sudden catching TDs not just rushing. It's the scheme, it's coaching.

yordad

01-03-2008, 09:41 AM

The reverse was worst then you think. It was to Reed.

Did anyone watch the Dallas game?

Philagape

01-03-2008, 10:28 AM

The reason I dont believe that talent and coaching can be blamed simultaneously is that one depends on the other.......

They don't entirely depend on each other.
On any given play, something can go wrong because a receiver didn't get open or the QB threw a bad pass. That's on the players.
On another play, say a third and long, the play can fail because the play call is low percentage for the yardage needed and the defense is ready for it because our offense is easy to break down and predict. That's on the coaching.
When there are 50 to 70 offensive plays a game, which each play having many variables, there is no one overall culprit. We saw lots of both of the above examples.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 10:38 AM

Sorry bud. MY sources say he was hired as the qb coach and not the OC. MY sources are right , yours is uninformed. http://www.giants.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=5

He produced nothing but a 14th ranked O and a 16 ranked O since he was uprgraded to OC. Nothing great about that , just MEDIOCRE. Again, it's a great O COMPARED TO FAIRCHILDS.

He produces offenses that can't win a sb. Do you even remember the greatest comeback. Guess who's O choked because he kept throwing with a huge lead? Guess who got punched by Buddy Ryan for doing so? Yes, Gilbride.

MUlarkey had a better O than Fairchild WITH NO OL. HIs OL was neglected by TD. MUlarkey sucked but since he produced a better ranked O, that doesn't say a lot about your boy Fairchild with practically the same weapons with no OL.

I'll name you an O with a very young talent that went to the sb and won it. The Pats first sb win. You can ignore that example all you want. Brady was othing more than a 2nd year player . They also won that sb with Antoine Smith. I know you'll ignore that again.

Willis is playing his best football . He's all of a sudden catching TDs not just rushing. It's the scheme, it's coaching.
Im not ignoring that example at all actually,,,,

Brady is a special QB, does it matter if it was his second year or not? He was still one of the best QBs in the NFL.

Antowain Smith was like I said a good/serviceable RB, nothing special but he was a tough runner and provided enough for defenses to worry about.

Brady also had 2 good WRs, Troy Brown in his prime and David Patten.

You keep bringing up the Pats and thats all you got.... and you dont even have that because I think we can all agree that the Pats have been a dynasty and continue to put quality football players on the field that fit their system. Also the Pats team of 2001 that you are referring to was led by their dominant defense that only allowed 272 points that year.... even better than this year's Pats D.

Name a team other than the dynasty of our era that has been successful with comparable talent....

Voltron

01-03-2008, 10:57 AM

Ill tell you exactly why we throw in front of the first down marker on 3rd down instead of beyond it... On 3rd down defenses of course are aware of where we need to get to so they heavily defened that area.... Now normally if you have a good WR corps and an experienced QB you can still find a crease to fit the ball into and depend on your receiver to make a big catch in traffic and hold on for a first down. When all you have other than Evans is Parrish, Reed and an OL that we call a TE in Royal then yer best bet is to throw to a less heavily defended area ahead of the sticks and hope your Wrs can make a play for the first down.

Once we have a TE and a reliable #2 all that will change. Coverage on our #1 receiver will loosen, the middle of the field will be given more respect with a big receiving TE and the other side of the field will get attention.... Now you can make all those 3rd downs that were hard to come by, and now you can find more separation in the redzone.
Ohh I totally understand why it happens. But while our WR are not the tallest they are very good route runners. Like the last 5 to 7 years the total lack of utilizing the strengths of the players baffles me. How many times do we need to watch the way Belichick plans his D and O to utilize the strengths of his team while minimizing the weaknesses before coaches understand this? I guess Belichick makes it look much easier than it is and has better talent evaluators that can find more of the "Diamonds in the rough"

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 11:18 AM

Ohh I totally understand why it happens. But while our WR are not the tallest they are very good route runners. Like the last 5 to 7 years the total lack of utilizing the strengths of the players baffles me. How many times do we need to watch the way Belichick plans his D and O to utilize the strengths of his team while minimizing the weaknesses before coaches understand this? I guess Belichick makes it look much easier than it is and has better talent evaluators that can find more of the "Diamonds in the rough"
I think thats exactly it,,, Bellichick has more talent to use ,,,, but im not even worried about that,,,, this is a team that has been on the right track for the last 2 years adding talent through the draft and a bit in FA. This year should allow us to complete our offense and defense and provide whoever the OC is with legitimate options.

justasportsfan

01-03-2008, 11:35 AM

Im not ignoring that example at all actually,,,,

Brady is a special QB, does it matter if it was his second year or not? He was still one of the best QBs in the NFL.

Antowain Smith was like I said a good/serviceable RB, nothing special but he was a tough runner and provided enough for defenses to worry about.

Brady also had 2 good WRs, Troy Brown in his prime and David Patten.

You keep bringing up the Pats and thats all you got.... and you dont even have that because I think we can all agree that the Pats have been a dynasty and continue to put quality football players on the field that fit their system. Also the Pats team of 2001 that you are referring to was led by their dominant defense that only allowed 272 points that year.... even better than this year's Pats D.

Name a team other than the dynasty of our era that has been successful with comparable talent....

the reason why I keep bringng the Pats is because they are a perfect example of coaching bringing out the best in their players. Moss was nothing and Welker was mediocre until they both got great coaching.

I'll give you another example thats close to home. Our D this year. Inspite of all the injuries they played way beyond anyone expected.

Our D unit is well coached inspite of all the lack of talent. Do you dare say the same about the O?

Again, I'm not sayng our talent on O is all that but a better OC would've made them play better . Fairchild blows.

I guess we can put the Gilbride part to rest. He blows.

madness

01-03-2008, 11:38 AM

justasportsfan

01-03-2008, 11:40 AM

I wasn't aware that Tom Brady was their WR coach.
you missed the point completey.

losman420

01-03-2008, 11:45 AM

Well we ran Gilbride out of town and he is doing pretty well with the Giants. When was the last time we put up 35 on the Pats?

Gilbride runs a balanced offense and he has the weapons to do it. In fact he is a perfect example of why we should cut Jauron and Fairchild some slack. When you dont have the players on offense it doesnt matter what plays are called. I agree with you on cutting jauron some slack, because everything considered her did a hell of a job this year imo. But fairchild doesn't deserve it, he sucks.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 12:24 PM

the reason why I keep bringng the Pats is because they are a perfect example of coaching bringing out the best in their players. Moss was nothing and Welker was mediocre until they both got great coaching.

I'll give you another example thats close to home. Our D this year. Inspite of all the injuries they played way beyond anyone expected.

Our D unit is well coached inspite of all the lack of talent. Do you dare say the same about the O?

Again, I'm not sayng our talent on O is all that but a better OC would've made them play better . Fairchild blows.

I guess we can put the Gilbride part to rest. He blows.
Moss was nothing??? Just because he tanked with quite possibly the worst QB/OL combination in recent memory it doesnt mean Moss was suddenly nothing... He came to Oakland as arguably the best WR in the NFL, he was certainly not "nothing" and Welker in Miami was exaclty what he is now, a v good slot receiver that finds holes in zones and is great after the catch. The reason he has so many receptions is because teams have no choice but to allow him to run free. You have to worry about Moss and Stallworth on the outside and if thats not enough you have to worry about Ben Watson running up the middle of your D. O and by the way they can run the ball as well as anyone in the league if they want.

justasportsfan

01-03-2008, 12:25 PM

Moss was nothing??? Just because he tanked with quite possibly the worst QB/OL combination in recent memory it doesnt mean Moss was suddenly nothing... He came to Oakland as arguably the best WR in the NFL, he was certainly not "nothing" and Welker in Miami was exaclty what he is now, a v good slot receiver that finds holes in zones and is great after the catch. The reason he has so many receptions is because teams have no choice but to allow him to run free. You have to worry about Moss and Stallworth on the outside and if thats not enough you have to worry about Ben Watson running up the middle of your D. O and by the way they can run the ball as well as anyone in the league if they want.

He was nothing in Oakland is what I meant. He didn't have the right caoching to put him in the situation to succeed. He didn't have th coach who put him in his place. That isn't the case in NE is it? why? Coaching.

Then there's Welker. His coach knows how to put him in the rigfht situation.

A real OC would know how to use Parrish, Lee and reed. An OC with a brain would know how to use Lynch in the passing game.

Billick although nothing great used Willis in the passing game. Who the hell knew that the guy could catch TDs. Well, decent offensive brain was able to.

madness

01-03-2008, 12:28 PM

you missed the point completey.

Wasn't really looking for one. :D

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 12:34 PM

He was nothing in Oakland is what I meant. He didn't have the right caoching to put him in the situation to succeed. He didn't have th coach who put him in his place. That isn't the case in NE is it? why? Coaching.

Then there's Welker. His coach knows how to put him in the rigfht situation.

A real OC would know how to use Parrish, Lee and reed. An OC with a brain would know how to use Lynch in the passing game.

Billick although nothing great used Willis in the passing game. Who the hell knew that the guy could catch TDs. Well, decent offensive brain was able to.
Coaching was not the problem in Oakland,,,, the problem was they had the worst OL ever... no run game, and a rookie QB. What could Moss do... he was getting half way through his route only to find Andrew Walter on his back most of the time. Oakland had a personnel problem just like we do.

There is no OC that will succeed with Evans, Reed, Parrish, no TE and a run game that is not quite there yet. That is so easy to defend. Reed and Parrish are both slot players trying their best to play on the outside but they simply dont have what it takes which makes things easy for a defense. Crowd the the area near the LOS and double Lee Evans. That pretty much solves our offense.

And once again you cant name an OC who has performed this miracle in a similar situation.

justasportsfan

01-03-2008, 12:42 PM

Coaching was not the problem in Oakland,,,, the problem was they had the worst OL ever... no run game, and a rookie QB. What could Moss do... he was getting half way through his route only to find Andrew Walter on his back most of the time. Oakland had a personnel problem just like we do.

There is no OC that will succeed with Evans, Reed, Parrish, no TE and a run game that is not quite there yet. That is so easy to defend. Reed and Parrish are both slot players trying their best to play on the outside but they simply dont have what it takes which makes things easy for a defense. Crowd the the area near the LOS and double Lee Evans. That pretty much solves our offense.

And once again you cant name an OC who has performed this miracle in a similar situation.

I already named an OC. If you want to be technical about it, Tom Clemens did better with arguably the same level of talent but worse OL.

I also pointed out our D. The most injured unit on this team carried Fairchilds unit inspite having injuries. Wilson a converted wr made the most out of the time he was on the field. Thats what coaching can do.

I gave you enough examples, you just ignore them because they make Fairchild look like the idiot that he is.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 12:52 PM

I already named an OC. If you want to be technical about it, Tom Clemens did better with arguably the same level of talent but worse OL.

I also pointed out our D. The most injured unit on this team carried Fairchilds unit inspite having injuries. Wilson a converted wr made the most out of the time he was on the field. Thats what coaching can do.

I gave you enough examples, you just ignore them because they make Fairchild look like the idiot that he is.
See thats all you got.... Comparing one crappy Bills team to another,,,,

I asked for a SUCCESSFUL TEAM!!!.. One that WINS... gets to the playoffs....that sorta thing..... not another team that didnt have enough talent, not to mention the fact that supposedly Tom Clements didnt know what he was doing either and was let go which made everyone happy... just like Gilbride.

Ppl like to blame coaches because its easy, and they are an easy target rather than actually analyzing football and what it takes to win in the NFL.

Simply, I dont care if you bring Bellichick to our team.... our offense sucks,,, and not matter who is coaching it,, with this personnel group it will always suck.

All you have to do is take a look at the playoff teams and you will see that Buffalo is way behind in terms of talent level. Its that simple. And if that isnt enough for you compare our team to any team that made the playoffs in the last 10 years and you will find that Buffalo is way behind them in terms of talent as well.

justasportsfan

01-03-2008, 12:57 PM

See thats all you got.... Comparing one crappy Bills team to another,,,,

I asked for a SUCCESSFUL TEAM!!!.. One that WINS... gets to the playoffs....that sorta thing..... not another team that didnt have enough talent, not to mention the fact that supposedly Tom Clements didnt know what he was doing either and was let go which made everyone happy... just like Gilbride.

Ppl like to blame coaches because its easy, and they are an easy target rather than actually analyzing football and what it takes to win in the NFL.

Simply, I dont care if you bring Bellichick to our team.... our offense sucks,,, and not matter who is coaching it,, with this personnel group it will always suck.

All you have to do is take a look at the playoff teams and you will see that Buffalo is way behind in terms of talent level. Its that simple. And if that isnt enough for you compare our team to any team that made the playoffs in the last 10 years and you will find that Buffalo is way behind them in terms of talent as well.

MY whole argument is that you insist Fairchild should get some slack. You keep insisting we are where we are offensively because of the lack of talent. I say no, we could've been better than where we are if we had an oc with a brain.

I do not disagree that that we need better talent, but our talent is not as bad as you make it out to be. It's Fairchild who made our talent look worse. I've given you enough examples to prove that other people with brains can do better with less.

We have enough talent offensively to at least make playoffs. If our O was even ranked twenty which is still below average, IMO we could've made playoffs.

Reed has been a good soldier for the longest time. It had to take a lot to make him speak out against his OC. That speaks volumes. Fairchild blows.

Even Parrish spoke out against Fairchild alrhough I couldn't understand a word he said even if he was quoted.

mysticsoto

01-03-2008, 01:53 PM

See thats all you got.... Comparing one crappy Bills team to another,,,,

I asked for a SUCCESSFUL TEAM!!!.. One that WINS... gets to the playoffs....that sorta thing..... not another team that didnt have enough talent, not to mention the fact that supposedly Tom Clements didnt know what he was doing either and was let go which made everyone happy... just like Gilbride.

Ppl like to blame coaches because its easy, and they are an easy target rather than actually analyzing football and what it takes to win in the NFL.

Simply, I dont care if you bring Bellichick to our team.... our offense sucks,,, and not matter who is coaching it,, with this personnel group it will always suck.

All you have to do is take a look at the playoff teams and you will see that Buffalo is way behind in terms of talent level. Its that simple. And if that isnt enough for you compare our team to any team that made the playoffs in the last 10 years and you will find that Buffalo is way behind them in terms of talent as well.

In all fairness, people have heaped alot of blame on Fairchild, but you haven't heard much blame on Fewell. While there are plenty of people here that hate the cover 2 - they hate it's style and not necessarily Fewell's implementation of it. In fact, as the season progressed, Fewell has come up with some decent game plans - and that with some serious injuries to his units!!! Whether you like the cover 2 or not, Fewell has come up with the best he could despite the losses. And considering that the Bills held most teams to scoring UNDER their avg, I think he did a pretty decent job with what he had.

Fairchild, on the other hand, did nothing. I can't find anything to commend him much on...

I Hate Aqua Green

01-03-2008, 01:56 PM

mysticsoto

01-03-2008, 02:00 PM

I think we should hire Cam Cameron as OC...He stunk it up as a head coach in Miami...But he was a heck of an OC in San Diego...I don't like Martz...Especially seeing as how Fairchild came out of that same Rams system.

While I don't hate Cameron, I think alot of people are too quick to heap praise on him. Let's remember that Cameron had LT and even when LT was out, Turner was awesome in his own right. That, coupled with a good Oline, was what made SD successful. I'm not sure I've seen anything from him that might make me think he would be a successful OC for us. Remember that this is a guy that was enthusiastic about drafting Ted Ginn Jr at #9!!!

I Hate Aqua Green

01-03-2008, 02:06 PM

Of course you need players...but I think we have a solid nucleus of young players at the skill positions (Lynch, Evans) although I think it is imperative to upgrade the TE position and aquire another playmaker at WR via the draft or FA...Also, for the first time in what seems like forever...the OL looks functional (at least in pass protection)...I'm still not sure about Edwards or Losman...And I still think Cameron would be a solid hire.

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 02:27 PM

mysticsoto

01-03-2008, 02:38 PM

I definitely agree that Fewell got a lot out of a D full of no names but Defense is an entirely different element, especially the cover 2.

The whole beauty of the c2 is that you can fill otherwise crucial positions with mediocre players and still get the same results and the reason is responsibility.

In our D players are not responsible for other team's players and winning 1v1 match-ups. The whole defense is designed around simplicity and taking care of an area on the field wether its in run D or pass D.

For example... McGee is not responsible for covering randy moss, his responsibility is to defend the first 15 yards off the LOS after that he releases and the 2 safeties play deep to ensure nothing gets behind them. Point is... our D doesnt call on Champ Bailey to cover Moss up and down the field which requires a talented player like Bailey.

Same with our run D.... we dont ask our DL and LBs to take blockers on 1v1 and win the battles... its about avoiding the blocks and penetrating the gaps. When we do it well its great and when we dont its horrible, but overall it has been effective, although losing Poz was huge IMO and that is one position that is crucial to the C2.

My point is,,, Fewell coaches a system where the emphasis is on scheme and not talent... you cant do that on offense because its not the same dynamic. In order to score points your RB has to break tackles, your WR has to create separation, make catches in traffic, and win the battles in the endzone, your TE needs to draw coverage to free up the rest of the field and make plays down the field etc. You cant avoid not having enough talent on offense.

We have talent at RB with Lynch breaking tackles and both he and Jackson having soft hands - that was not taken advantage of. We have a great #1 WR who had very few catches. We had an Oline who was great at pass blocking. Sure we had holes, but no team is perfect. Yet, there was no real scheme that stood out for the offense to follow and develop. JP would throw the long bomb or get sacked b'cse that was his style and Edwards dumped off b'cse that was his style. But Fairchild did nothing to tailor the game calling to who or what we had. For JP, a Gilbride like offense would have been great to implement, for Edwards...IDK, maybe a West Coast style of offense. But the point is, he has to fit something to what he has and he really didn't. What stands out for you or anyone about this offense? For me, really nothing. I give credit to Lynch for being hard to bring down, but that's personal credit. I can't give overall credit to the offense for anything b'cse there just wasn't anything there!!!

Mahdi

01-03-2008, 05:32 PM

We have talent at RB with Lynch breaking tackles and both he and Jackson having soft hands - that was not taken advantage of. We have a great #1 WR who had very few catches. We had an Oline who was great at pass blocking. Sure we had holes, but no team is perfect. Yet, there was no real scheme that stood out for the offense to follow and develop. JP would throw the long bomb or get sacked b'cse that was his style and Edwards dumped off b'cse that was his style. But Fairchild did nothing to tailor the game calling to who or what we had. For JP, a Gilbride like offense would have been great to implement, for Edwards...IDK, maybe a West Coast style of offense. But the point is, he has to fit something to what he has and he really didn't. What stands out for you or anyone about this offense? For me, really nothing. I give credit to Lynch for being hard to bring down, but that's personal credit. I can't give overall credit to the offense for anything b'cse there just wasn't anything there!!!
I agree that you have to find a way to use your weapons...but when you have so few weapons defenses wont have any trouble scheming to take the few that you have away..... Evans and Lynch are the only weapons we have.... Parrish and Reed are not weapons.

As it is for our offense we have one deep threat and a decent run game,,, at this point we cant even say its a great run game.... and thats where it ends.... for a defense to defend that its way too easy.... As a DC i wouldn't pay any attention to Reed, Parrish and Royal... I would worry about one thing only,,, stop the run and force the QB to throw to our #2 and #3 WRs who are weak. And if you want to throw to those WRs go ahead but most of our defense will be up at the LOS and if they catch it short they wont go far.

mysticsoto

01-04-2008, 08:52 AM

I agree that you have to find a way to use your weapons...but when you have so few weapons defenses wont have any trouble scheming to take the few that you have away..... Evans and Lynch are the only weapons we have.... Parrish and Reed are not weapons.

As it is for our offense we have one deep threat and a decent run game,,, at this point we cant even say its a great run game.... and thats where it ends.... for a defense to defend that its way too easy.... As a DC i wouldn't pay any attention to Reed, Parrish and Royal... I would worry about one thing only,,, stop the run and force the QB to throw to our #2 and #3 WRs who are weak. And if you want to throw to those WRs go ahead but most of our defense will be up at the LOS and if they catch it short they wont go far.

I think you are being hard on Josh Reed and Parrish. This was Reed's 2nd most productive year: 51 receptions 578 yds, and Parrish's best year with 35 receptions and 352 yds and #1 in punt returns. I don't think they are the problem. They do well for slot receivers, but they aren't #2 WRs. I cannot fault them for that. The FO concentrated on the Oline but didn't do much to fill that #2 WR gap. Perhaps they thought Price would last one more year. But when he went out they seem to think either Reed or Parrish could fill it, but that was a bad assumption. I also kind of think they expected atleast one of the NFL Europe guys to be able to come in, in a pinch if need be - since they seem to be developing well (like Fred Jackson developed). But when they BOTH got hurt...we were left with a gaping hole that we just couldn't fill.

Mahdi

01-04-2008, 08:58 AM

I think you are being hard on Josh Reed and Parrish. This was Reed's 2nd most productive year: 51 receptions 578 yds, and Parrish's best year with 35 receptions and 352 yds and #1 in punt returns. I don't think they are the problem. They do well for slot receivers, but they aren't #2 WRs. I cannot fault them for that. The FO concentrated on the Oline but didn't do much to fill that #2 WR gap. Perhaps they thought Price would last one more year. But when he went out they seem to think either Reed or Parrish could fill it, but that was a bad assumption. I also kind of think they expected atleast one of the NFL Europe guys to be able to come in, in a pinch if need be - since they seem to be developing well (like Fred Jackson developed). But when they BOTH got hurt...we were left with a gaping hole that we just couldn't fill.
I completely agree and that is exactly what I have been saying all this time,,,, Reed and Parrish are horrible for the #2 WR position. However they are very good slot receivers and I have mentionned before that if we had a v good #2 opposite Evans, and add a TE that can threaten the middle of the field then Reed could provide us with similar production that Welker has provided that Pats....

All im saying is that it is unrealistic to expect our O to be productive and successful considering all the holes we have. Sure not every team has a pro-bowler at every position on O... but successful teams dont have this many holes and history proves that.

When we get a real #2 and a TE Reed and Parrish will flourish....