what was it like during the 84 and 85 season before kelly arrived?

[NOT THE DUDE...]

interested in your thoughts for some of the older fans, im only 26 so i cant remember that far... could we be headed for a 2-14 season?

[capitolneal]

just like it is now but with kelly coming in there was hope

[NOT THE DUDE...]

but kelly didnt arrive until 86... so is this team similar to the 85 team?

[Dr. Lecter]

This could be a 3-13 team.

Their are major differences though.

Those teams were very bad. I would say worse than now. The coaches, Stephenson and Bullough, make Gailey look like Lombardi. The QBs (Dufek, Ferragamo, Mathison) make Trent look like Montana or Brady. But the defense in those years was decent. Guys like Fred Smerlas and Eugene Marve made the defense more than respectable.

And those teams were before the major rebuilding started - they were on the downward spiral.

I would say that now the team is trying to do the right thing, although it might be too late.

The only similarity was how bad the teams were and that the records should be about the same.

[Ebenezer]

This could be a 3-13 team.

Their are major differences though.

There

[Ebenezer]

I refuse to open that sealed vault of my memory...

I will say that there were PLENTY of weeks where the game (which were radio only) were turned off at halftime...or earlier.

[Coach Sal]

Lecter made some great and true points.

Also, the 84-85 teams had no direction at all. They were made up of vets who shouldn't have been on the team anymore, or were on their last legs, as well as really young guys who were no where near ready to play in the NFL on a consistent basis.

They didn't have those solid 4-5 year guys who were entering their prime and also had that veteran presence. At least no one good enough. GM Terry Bledsoe didn't do much to change that.

Polian is the one who changed everything. As much as getting Kelly was of course a major part of the process, Polian gave the team direction. He had a plan and stuck to it.

This team has better players overall than the 84/85 teams. It now has a better head coach....and the FO is at least starting to become more of what is needed, but it's nothing like the Polian/Butler levels post 2-14 seasons.

Kelly did bring excitement and swagger, though. Something we haven't seen out of our QBs since, except for maybe Flutie, but he was no where near the player Kelly was.

I don't think we're headed for 2-14 because I think there's more talent here and a better staff overall.....and that should be good enough to squeeze out a couple wins the 84/85 group never would have had.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

You see and this is where the problem seems almost, because we are simply mediocre and we are not bottoming out we cant get a top 3 pick and therefore we cant get guys like jim kelly or bruce smith... we will probably go 5-11 or 6-10 again and miss out on getting a top qb...

[Dr. Lecter]

You see and this is where the problem seems almost, because we are simply mediocre and we are not bottoming out we cant get a top 3 pick and therefore we cant get guys like jim kelly or bruce smith... we will probably go 5-11 or 6-10 again and miss out on getting a top qb...


Jim Kelly was drafted in the 20s, not top 3.

[Coach Sal]

Jim Kelly was drafted in the 20s, not top 3.

EXACTLY!

When it comes to players, it has nothing to do with where you draft and everything to do with who you draft, who you sign, and who you develop.

I'm so sick of everyone wanting to "bottom out" because it's supposedly some sort of cure-all recipe for failing to make the playoffs.

Tell that to the Lions, Rams, and Browns.

[Cntrygal]

Another difference is the media... Back then, we didn't have 24 hour sports coverage - (tv/internet). IMO, it was much easier to let the disappointing loss of the previous week fade a bit and get excited about the next game.

[YardRat]

I'll have to disagree with the "This team has better players overall than the 84/85 teams" comment, but it's easy to do that in hindsight.

84-85 had a solid, veteran offensive line; young future HOFers; and some other vets sprinkled on the roster that had already proven they could play/succeed at the NFL level.

The biggest difference is the team was 'old' in spots back then, and ripe for a youth movement. Currently we just have a lot of young guys that we really don't know what they've got.

[YardRat]

Jim Kelly was drafted in the 20s, not top 3.

He was #14, two spots behind Hunter.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

EXACTLY!

When it comes to players, it has nothing to do with where you draft and everything to do with who you draft, who you sign, and who you develop.

I'm so sick of everyone wanting to "bottom out" because it's supposedly some sort of cure-all recipe for failing to make the playoffs.

Tell that to the Lions, Rams, and Browns.

the lions and rams have franchise qbs now..... we dont...

[Dr. Lecter]

the lions and rams have franchise qbs now..... we dont...
The Rams have a franchise QB? Really?

And who is that?

[Dr. Lecter]

He was #14, two spots behind Hunter.
I was going to look it up, but was too lazy.

Point is, he was not top 3

[YardRat]

The Rams have a franchise QB? Really?

And who is that?

Bradford, but only because his net worth is higher than the team's.

[Dr. Lecter]

I'll have to disagree with the "This team has better players overall than the 84/85 teams" comment, but it's easy to do that in hindsight.

84-85 had a solid, veteran offensive line; young future HOFers; and some other vets sprinkled on the roster that had already proven they could play/succeed at the NFL level.

The biggest difference is the team was 'old' in spots back then, and ripe for a youth movement. Currently we just have a lot of young guys that we really don't know what they've got.


The future of HoF is easy to say in hindsight. Right now, Byrd, Wood and Spiller *could* be future of HoFs. They have the same shot Reed and Smith did at the same time in their careers.

[YardRat]

I was going to look it up, but was too lazy.

Point is, he was not top 3

Look it up? You should know this **** off of the top of your head. How embarrassing.

[YardRat]

The future of HoF is easy to say in hindsight. Right now, Byrd, Wood and Spiller *could* be future of HoFs. They have the same shot Reed and Smith did at the same time in their careers.

I agree...that's why I said "but it's easy to do that in hindsight".

[Night Train]

I refuse to open that sealed vault of my memory...

I will say that there were PLENTY of weeks where the game (which were radio only) were turned off at halftime...or earlier.

Not for me. From 1965 on, I was there in the stands to suffer through infinite purgatory.

The 1968-1972 & 1984-86 era's were far worse. We won 4 games in 1986 with Talley, Bruce Smith, Kelly and plenty more. So it takes a TEAM to win and not a few big names. I sat in many games with less than 20,000 in the stands.

This is starting to look like those days, since we lack depth and don't have a QB to speak of at present. We'll see.

I've seen worse and must be a 45-46 year glutton for punishment.

[Night Train]

My problem is that we won it all the first year I attended games (1965 when I was little). I thought it it be the norm after that.

HAHAHAHA..

[Philagape]

Two words: Rock bottom

In a way, they were lovable losers. Bagheads out in full force. I remember a sullen, depressed feeling, but not the outrage that's so deserved today. We hadn't had a true championship era since the 60s, so maybe fans were a little less spoiled than those of us who lived through the Super Bowls.
It was a different era, when teams went through a more traditional cycle. The moderate success of the early 80s was over, and that was the darkest before the dawn, so to speak.
Like Sal said, Polian saved the team. They scored on the high and low draft picks.

[Ebenezer]

Lecter made some great and true points.

Also, the 84-85 teams had no direction at all. They were made up of vets who shouldn't have been on the team anymore, or were on their last legs, as well as really young guys who were no where near ready to play in the NFL on a consistent basis.

They didn't have those solid 4-5 year guys who were entering their prime and also had that veteran presence. At least no one good enough. GM Terry Bledsoe didn't do much to change that.

Polian is the one who changed everything. As much as getting Kelly was of course a major part of the process, Polian gave the team direction. He had a plan and stuck to it.

Sal, let's be fair. Bledsoe barely got the chair warmed when he went down with a heart problem. RW did what he always does - he promoted the next guy up. That happened to be Polian. I don't knock Bledsoe at all. This team was blindsided when Knox left. It became an absolute shambles.

[Coach Sal]

the lions and rams have franchise qbs now..... we dont...

Said by many people just a few years ago: "The 49ers and Raiders have franchise QBs now.....we don't."

Also said not too long ago: "The Texans (David Carr #1 overall) and the Lions (Joey Harrington #3 overall) have franchise QBs now.....we don't.

Under what rationale could you possibly say Stafford and Bradford are NFL "franchise QBs?"

One QBd a team that finished 2-14
The other has never taken a snap in the NFL.

If those are the qualifications for being "franchise QBs," the Bills have actually had 5 or 6 of them over the past decade.

[Coach Sal]

Sal, let's be fair. Bledsoe barely got the chair warmed when he went down with a heart problem. RW did what he always does - he promoted the next guy up. That happened to be Polian. I don't knock Bledsoe at all. This team was blindsided when Knox left. It became an absolute shambles.

OK, fair enough.

But Polian pulled the plug on Bullough and hired Levy.

And I'd feel safe in assuming the team would have never been the 4-time AFC champions they were had Bledsoe been in charge instead of Polian.

[Ebenezer]

OK, fair enough.

But Polian pulled the plug on Bullough and hired Levy.

And I'd feel safe in assuming the team would have never been the 4-time AFC champions they were had Bledsoe been in charge instead of Polian.
Don't know about that...and we can never say. Bledsoe is the one who hired Polian. He and Levy still knew the guys in the USFL and it is conceivable that Polian would have had as much say in drafting and acquiring players under Bledsoe as he did while in charge. The scouting staff was basically set. All that was removed was Bledsoe. One could argue that the team could have gotten better with Bledsoe at the top - we'll never know.

[Dr. Lecter]

Don't know about that...and we can never say. Bledsoe is the one who hired Polian. He and Levy still knew the guys in the USFL and it is conceivable that Polian would have had as much say in drafting and acquiring players under Bledsoe as he did while in charge. The scouting staff was basically set. All that was removed was Bledsoe. One could argue that the team could have gotten better with Bledsoe at the top - we'll never know.
I don't think they sign Kelly without Polian and with Bledsoe leading the negotiations.

[Ebenezer]

I don't think they sign Kelly without Polian and with Bledsoe leading the negotiations.
That might be true. We will never know, early on, how much more influence BP had on RW than TB would have had.

[Cntrygal]

Somewhere, in an alternate reality.....

I believe that the Bills have won a bakers dozen of SB's and have been in the PO's every season........................


:insane::boozer:

[SABURZFAN]

interested in your thoughts for some of the older fans, im only 26 so i cant remember that far... could we be headed for a 2-14 season?


- a lot of 35+ points scored by the opponents
- one year our QBs combined for 9 TDs and 33 INTs (something close to those numbers)
- the Bengals buried the Bills with 52 points to end the 1984 season
- the Bills go to San Diego and get drubbed. (something like 40-7)
- walking out of Rich Stadium, after the Jets beat the Bills, and thinking that 2-14 will happen again
- a lot of empty seats
- wishing we had Joe Ferguson
- wishing we had drafted Marino instead of Kelly

yes. it's possible this team could go 2-14

[BillyT92679]

The 1984 team DID have Monte Kiffin as the Linebackers coach and Pete Carroll as the Defensive Backs coach, for what it's worth.

I started being an NFL fan in 1985 at age 6 and a Bills fan in 1986. Obviously the only terrible team I remember is 2001, but to me the 1997 team was pretty awful.

The 01 team had a ton of heart and absolutely no talent.

[warsawbassman]

You think the offense we have now is bad, the 84 and 85 were far far worse. The QB situation of 85 makes this years group look like the class of 83. As for some of the cornerstones of the 90's teams that were there or showed up in 85? Talley wasn't even a full time starter, and some thought he should have been released, Andre Reed?????? Who????. And any one who said Bruce Smith was a future HOF'er was on crack, the Bruce of 1985 is not even the same species as the Bruce of 1990.

[Ebenezer]

You think the offense we have now is bad, the 84 and 85 were far far worse. The QB situation of 85 makes this years group look like the class of 83. As for some of the cornerstones of the 90's teams that were there or showed up in 85? Talley wasn't even a full time starter, and some thought he should have been released, Andre Reed?????? Who????. And any one who said Bruce Smith was a future HOF'er was on crack, the Bruce of 1985 is not even the same species as the Bruce of 1990.
Wasn't there a play, during the Bullough years, where Bruce played RB (I know he played FB for a play or two) and he got the ball and basically leaned into the tackler and didn't even try to power him? People were ready to send him packing.

[Novacane]

This could be a 3-13 team.

Their are major differences though.

Those teams were very bad. I would say worse than now. The coaches, Stephenson and Bullough, make Gailey look like Lombardi. The QBs (Dufek, Ferragamo, Mathison) make Trent look like Montana or Brady.


I agree we are better off at coaching. Bullough and Stephenson were jokes. I don't think we are much better off at QB though.

[Novacane]

One positive I remember is you could always get really good seats :lol:

[Mr. Pink]

This team now is just as bad, if not worse than the 85 Bills.

QBs? Worse....Ferragamo had success elsewhere in the NFL, none of our QBs have had any success anywhere.

RBs? About the same...Greg Bell and Joe Cribbs were the same basically as Lynch/Jackson...middle of the road average get it done NFL RBs. Spiller could vault this year over 85.

WRs? Reed Butler Burkett vs Evans and some scrubs...easily edge to 85

TE? Metzelaars vs who cares...easily edge to 85

OL? About the same...but the 85 team had a Vet who had skill on it in Ritcher.

DL? Fred Smerlas and Bruce Smith vs Dwan Edwards and who cares? 85 wins again.

LB? Talley, Marve, Haslett vs Poz, Davis basically....I'll be nice and call this a push.

CB? Romes and Burroughs vs McGee and Florence....Edge 85 again. Romes had 7 picks in 85, neither of our corners will do that and Burroughs was developing.

S? Freeman and Bayless vs Byrd...HEY the 2010 Bills have an edge!

ST? Edge again to 2010 Bills.

So do you really think that we're much better than that team? At least on paper.

[Novacane]

Looked up the old stats on NFL.com. Our current offense is not much better. They are better atscoring FG's. That's about it. 85 team scored 200 points. 23TD's and 13 FG's. 2009 team scored 25 TD's and and 28FG's. 85 actually outgained last years team 4595 yds to 4382yds. The only real differance was Mathison threw a lot more INT's than Edwards.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

but kelly didnt arrive until 86... so is this team similar to the 85 team?
He was drafted in 1983. As for the hope part, there was no guarantee that the USFL was going to fold... Kelly would've been battling with Flutie for the starting job in New Jersey in '86 had the league survived... so could the hope have been that good? If anything, maybe this is me looking back in the books and not remembering the era (I, too, am too young to know what happened firsthand), it would seem that the Bills would've been on the brink of contraction had the USFL survived a few more years.

[Ebenezer]

He was drafted in 1983. As for the hope part, there was no guarantee that the USFL was going to fold... Kelly would've been battling with Flutie for the starting job in New Jersey in '86 had the league survived... so could the hope have been that good? If anything, maybe this is me looking back in the books and not remembering the era (I, too, am too young to know what happened firsthand), it would seem that the Bills would've been on the brink of contraction had the USFL survived a few more years.
you are not far off...Kelly was an afterthought...people did not sit here just waiting for him to show up. Folks were skeptical even after the USFL folded. Until that motorcade went down the thruway did people finally believe...and even then it was still depressing until mid-87 and the strike ended...the stadium was more than half empty. I still remember video of two fans doing the wave in a downpour rain...there was nobody around them for sections...There were games where I literally didn't listen. 1971, 1977, 1984, 1985, 2001 were the worst years I can remember (and I was only 6 in '71)...

[Dr. Lecter]

This team now is just as bad, if not worse than the 85 Bills.

QBs? Worse....Ferragamo had success elsewhere in the NFL, none of our QBs have had any success anywhere.

.

Ferragamo was terrible when he was here. What did in the past was irrelevant.

[BillyT92679]

1977 seemed like it would be terrible
an aging and hurt OJ who would be gone after season's end
a well liked coach in Ringo who was clearly in over his head
3-11 after going 0-9 the year before
good thing the stadium was still relatively new

[Mr. Pink]

Ferragamo was terrible when he was here. What did in the past was irrelevant.


And all our QBs that are here now are terrible.

[Dr. Lecter]

And all our QBs that are here now are terrible.


Go and look at Vince's numbers and compare them to the guys last year and tell me what you see.

Vince makes Trent look like Brady.

[Luisito23]

Vince makes Trent look like Brady.



What a stupid statement.

[Dr. Lecter]

What a stupid statement.


Really?

Did you see Ferragamo play here?

[Dr. Lecter]

Here are his stats with the Bills:

149 comp
287 att
51.9% comp
1,677 yards
5 TDs
17 Ints
19 Sacks


Yes, he threw more than 3X interceptions than TDs.

Still think that is stupid Luisito?

Did you see him play?

[Luisito23]

Still think that is stupid Luisito?

Did you see him play?



No, it is not stupid, sorry...I got players confused, you're completely right.

[Dr. Lecter]

I'm not saying Trent is good - far from it. But he can at least be a #2 guy in the NFL.

When he got Vince was past horrible.

[BillyT92679]

I don't know if this year's team is 1985 or 84
85 was terrible but you had Polian, Reich,Burroughs, BRUUUUCE, and Andre to go along with Talley and Smerlas
84 you had Preston Dennard, Brian Carpenter, Rod Kush, (I know virtually nothing about any of these guys)

the 85 team was rather talented in a lot of areas, just extremely young with terrible QB play
84 had Fergy but he seemed past his prime as well as a lot of aging guys like Ben Williams

[Bmax]

Oh my ....those were the days of dreadful football....84 was very bad....85 was down right awful... Some of the names.....

Rodney Bellinger, Speedy neal...Joe Dufek-Yikes.... Came in for Fergy ...Bruce Mathison started a 7 games after Ferragamo was yanked or injuried.......Rod Hill was a db.. along with Don wilson.. He use to wear these black leather pants all the time LOL.....It was the 80's....


Bmax....

[cookie G]

The 84 and 85 teams weren't preceded by 10 years of futility like this year's team.

You can only talk about rebuilding for so long.

[Mr. Pink]

Go and look at Vince's numbers and compare them to the guys last year and tell me what you see.

Vince makes Trent look like Brady.


Ferragamo and Mathison were terrible yes, Mathison is probably the worst QB in franchise history, but just because those guys were so utterly bad doesn't mean the guys we have now are NFL caliber players.

The only reason I gave the 85 QBs a nod is because Ferragamo at one time was a very good QB.

None of our QBs today will ever be very good QBs.

It's an argument of which crap is worse, in the end they're both crap and both set the team back.

[Extremebillsfan247]

the lions and rams have franchise qbs now..... we dont...lol Have you seen Bradford play yet? I would wait on that franchise tag just a bit. Peyton Manning could look bad on the Rams right now. That team needs a lot of help. As far as Detroit goes, I'm more sold on Sanchize being a franchise than I am on Stafford and that's saying a lot. This is just my opinion though.

[SABURZFAN]

Go and look at Vince's numbers and compare them to the guys last year and tell me what you see.

Vince makes Trent look like Brady.


the younger Bills fans have every reason to laugh at this but Lecter is telling the truth. what's even funnier is that Bruce Mathison didn't fare any better and makes Fitzpatrick look like Peyton Manning. :ill:

[SABURZFAN]

Ferragamo and Mathison were terrible yes, Mathison is probably the worst QB in franchise history, but just because those guys were so utterly bad doesn't mean the guys we have now are NFL caliber players.

The only reason I gave the 85 QBs a nod is because Ferragamo at one time was a very good QB.

None of our QBs today will ever be very good QBs.

It's an argument of which crap is worse, in the end they're both crap and both set the team back.

nobody is claiming that our QBs today are NFL caliber. you need to go back and watch the 1985 season again and realize that Ferragamo was a shell of his former self. as for giving the 85 QBs the nod, that is laughable when Fitzpatrick had just as many TDs thrown, if not more, than the 85 season QBs combined.

[trapezeus]

I was around 5-6 years old then. I remember mathison's shotgun snap that hit him in the head when he wasn't looking. that defined how awful he was.

The main difference between 84/85 and now was that fans weren't waiting 10 years to make the playoffs.

[Historian]

The USFL took the core of our team, beccause Wilson was simply not going to compete by bidding for players the way he did in the 1960's.

Think about the skill positions:

QB
K
C

Without them, you have no team.

[Coach Sal]

Well thought out. I'll give some thoughts on what you wrote:


This team now is just as bad, if not worse than the 85 Bills.

QBs? Worse....Ferragamo had success elsewhere in the NFL, none of our QBs have had any success anywhere.

We've already gone into the QBs on this one. Like Lecter said, "success elsewhere" means nothing. Willie Mays had a lot of success elsewhere, but when he went to the Mets, he was embarrassing as a baseball player.


RBs? About the same...Greg Bell and Joe Cribbs were the same basically as Lynch/Jackson...middle of the road average get it done NFL RBs. Spiller could vault this year over 85.

Fair assessment. But Spiller BETTER vault this year's team above them, or something is terribly wrong.


WRs? Reed Butler Burkett vs Evans and some scrubs...easily edge to 85

Agreed. But not for the reasons you state. Jerry Butler was the #1 guy and he was good. Reed and Burkett were both rookies. Burkett didn't do much until Kelly came in '86. Less than 400 yards and not even a TD.


TE? Metzelaars vs who cares...easily edge to 85

Totally wrong if you want to base it on Metzelaars. Metz was nothing in 85 and he was already in year four in the NFL: 12 REC; 80 Yards; 1 TD Compare that to Shawn Nelson in his rookie year: 17 REC; 156; 1 TD. Eason Ramson was the Bills #1 TE in 85. Sure, Pete would go on to a nice career and overall it's easy to say, "well we had him......" but he wasn't better in those years than what the Bills have right now. So there's no way anyone can say Nelson can't be even better than him judging by those numbers.


OL? About the same...but the 85 team had a Vet who had skill on it in Ritcher.

Agreed it's pretty even. But this OL has a couple young bucks that could wind up being really good.


DL? Fred Smerlas and Bruce Smith vs Dwan Edwards and who cares? 85 wins again.

No doubt.


LB? Talley, Marve, Haslett vs Poz, Davis basically....I'll be nice and call this a push.

OK. Tough to judge the LBs. They're being asked to do different things now against different types of offenses.


CB? Romes and Burroughs vs McGee and Florence....Edge 85 again. Romes had 7 picks in 85, neither of our corners will do that and Burroughs was developing.

Why edge 85? Why is it "Burroughs was developing" but McKelvin isn't? What's the difference between Burrough's 2 picks his rookie year and McKelvin's 2 picks his rookie year? Leodis even scored a TD on one of his! And Burroughs didn't do much in his career, other than take a stupid penalty in the 88 AFC Championship game that cost us big time. He doesn't do anything to push that group up.

Romes was good, even late in his career, but we have more depth and total skill at the position now than that team did.


S? Freeman and Bayless vs Byrd...HEY the 2010 Bills have an edge!

Yes they do.


ST? Edge again to 2010 Bills.

By a long shot.


The 85 team had some interesting parts, but the biggest difference between the two wasn't on the field and/or talent. That's a good debate when you look at the whole picture.

Like I said on page 1, the mid 80s teams just seemed to have no direction, no plan until 85 and 86. But 85 still had a lot of dead weight and didn't allow them to turn the corner. The best players were too young to make a difference or too old to matter anymore.

We tried having a direction in the early 2000s, but it was the WRONG direction (Donahoe), then went through the same thing with Jauron.

I'm being optimistic in saying/hoping that this FO finally has a plan and direction, which will be the biggest difference moving forward.