"Culture of losing"

[OpIv37]

I thought Gailey and Nix were cleaning house. I thought they were getting rid of the guys who were from the old "culture of losing" and trying to establish their own identity. I thought it was at least a partial consideration in why guys like Whitner, Parrish, Maybin, Lynch, Evans, Poz, Mitchell etc aren't here anymore.

Well, guess what? In 3 of the last 4 games, this team rolled over and died. They got crushed by the Jets right from the beginning. They were whooping Cleveland before Spiller got hurt- if we were playing a better team, we probably would have squandered a 14 point lead and lost. Then, of course, there was the debacle in NE of giving up FIVE unanswered touchdowns and 52 points total.

And it wasn't just the old guard that Nix and Gailey haven't replaced yet. Their draft picks and FA's were as much a part of the problem as everyone else. The only guys who actually looked like they gave a damn out there were Gilmore and Chandler.

When do our guys start to care about winning as much as the fans do, or at least as much as our opponents do? When do we get some confidence/swagger/attitude like the Ravens or or Steelers or Patriots or Packers or even the 49ers?

I realize that no team is going to win every game, but these pathetic efforts are getting really, really exhausting.

[HAMMER]

Re: "Culture of losing"

They didn't roll over a die in Cleveland, they rose up and won in spite of losing their biggest weapon. But you spin it however you would like Omniscient One.

[BuffaloWingEater]

Re: "Culture of losing"

they are 2-2 and tied for first place. i think the bills can win almost every sunday. i haven't thought that in a long time. most teams in the nfl are .500 right now.

[OpIv37]

Re: "Culture of losing"

They didn't roll over a die in Cleveland, they rose up and won in spite of losing their biggest weapon. But you spin it however you would like Omniscient One.

They were absolutely demolishing Cleveland before Spiller went out. They cut our 14 point lead down to 3 before we finally put it out of reach. With Spiller, it was utter domination. Without him, it was a war. The Bills' level of play declined significantly without Spiller. And Choice actually had pretty good stats for the game, so it wasn't due to the loss of Spiller alone.

It's not spin. It's exactly what happened.

[OpIv37]

Re: "Culture of losing"

they are 2-2 and tied for first place. i think the bills can win almost every sunday. i haven't thought that in a long time. most teams in the nfl are .500 right now.

They are NOT tied for first place. The Pats and Jets each have head-to-head and division record tiebreakers over us. Translation: somehow we have to finish at least one game ahead of them in the standings in order to beat them. So, in actuality, we are not tied.

[Mr. Pink]

Re: "Culture of losing"

They were absolutely demolishing Cleveland before Spiller went out. They cut our 14 point lead down to 3 before we finally put it out of reach. With Spiller, it was utter domination. Without him, it was a war. The Bills' level of play declined significantly without Spiller. And Choice actually had pretty good stats for the game, so it wasn't due to the loss of Spiller alone.

It's not spin. It's exactly what happened.

A real team with wide receivers that could actually catch the ball likely beats Buffalo on that day.

After the Fitz fumble they disappeared for basically a full quarter. Unacceptable.

[OpIv37]

Re: "Culture of losing"

they are 2-2 and tied for first place. i think the bills can win almost every sunday. i haven't thought that in a long time. most teams in the nfl are .500 right now.

And Jesus Christ, what the **** is this bull**** anyway?

This is exactly what I mean when I say Bills fans have accepted mediocrity. We gave up 97 points in two division games and are 0-2 in the division. That is not good enough. That is not acceptable. But you have to come in and defend them with "well they are (technically) tied for first place."

And why the hell would you think a team that gives up that many points can win every Sunday? That's illogical, especially when you consider the quality of the teams that beat us vs the quality of the teams we beat.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Re: "Culture of losing"

The culture of losing comes from players who have no fire. We have a bunch of nice guys who are very sportsman-like and congratulate the opponents when they kick our asses.

I want bad-asses with bad-ass attitudes. I want guys with fire, guys who show emotions, who not only walk the walk but talk the talk as well. I want verbal leaders, not a bunch of quiet guys who go thank you sir may I have another when they get beaten up. Look what Fitz does when he has a bad game. He has the stupid constipated look on his face. When we win, he has the same old constipated ***** look.

At this point I'd be happier with a guy like Cutler than Fitz. I want a big arm guy who will yell at his players, and be pissed as hell when he sucks ass, and be talking trash in opponents' faces when we cream them.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Re: "Culture of losing"

While we're at it, bring in Gruden. I want all the bad boys on this team.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

Re: "Culture of losing"

Well, that's what you get when you have a team in this city. Losers beget losing.

[BLeonard]

Re: "Culture of losing"

I thought Gailey and Nix were cleaning house. I thought they were getting rid of the guys who were from the old "culture of losing" and trying to establish their own identity.

Well, there are certain things Nix and Gailey can't get rid of: Ralph Wilson, Jeff Littman and Russ Brandon are three prime examples. The "Culture of Losing" was here long before Nix and Gailey got here.

As for Nix and Gailey "cleaning house," keep in mind, there are a LOT of players from previous eras still here. Hell, Fitz was Trent Edwards' backup... Stevie, Fred Jackson, Kelsay, Wood, Levitre, Lindell, McKelvin, Byrd, Moorman (until recently) among others were all here when Nix and Gailey waled in the door.

How much have they really "cleaned house?"

Sadly, I really think the problem starts at the top. Wilson's (or perhaps now it is more Littman and Brandon) reluctance to spend money on a top-flight front office and coaching staff is a big part of the problem. We've tried the "hot coordinator" route (Gregg Williams/Mike Mularkey) and we've tried the "retread" route (Dick Jauron/Chan Gailey).

The problem is, those guys were all, IMO, one level above their pay grade. Williams and Jauron are good DC's... Mularkey and Gailey are good OC's... But, none of them are good head coaches.

The same holds true for Nix. He's a good scout/talent evaluator... But, there's a reason he was never hired for a GM job before he hit age 70...

But, again, it ultimately all leads right back to the top of the totem pole. Wilson just isn't that good of a football owner and, quite frankly, never has been... Hell, even Bill Polian and John Butler were internal hires... Polian was promoted after Terry Bledsoe had a heart attack and Butler was promoted when Wilson ran Polian out of town (over, you guessed it, money).

It's pretty sad to sit down and realize that the best years of Buffalo Bills history were only possible because the GM at the time had a heart attack...

-Bill

[Jeff1220]

Re: "Culture of losing"

I'd have to agree with Op here. This isn't just some guy being a realist/pessimist or whatever. This is reality. To use "we're tied for first" after the way this team has played against division opponents is like someone only seeing a nice beach at the opening of "Saving Private Ryan." The Bills are in a 2 game hole for the division and hasn't looked like a team that will win a single division game this season, much less the next 4.

[OpIv37]

Re: "Culture of losing"

Well, there are certain things Nix and Gailey can't get rid of: Ralph Wilson, Jeff Littman and Russ Brandon are three prime examples. The "Culture of Losing" was here long before Nix and Gailey got here.

As for Nix and Gailey "cleaning house," keep in mind, there are a LOT of players from previous eras still here. Hell, Fitz was Trent Edwards' backup... Stevie, Fred Jackson, Kelsay, Wood, Levitre, Lindell, McKelvin, Byrd, Moorman (until recently) among others were all here when Nix and Gailey waled in the door.

How much have they really "cleaned house?"

Sadly, I really think the problem starts at the top. Wilson's (or perhaps now it is more Littman and Brandon) reluctance to spend money on a top-flight front office and coaching staff is a big part of the problem. We've tried the "hot coordinator" route (Gregg Williams/Mike Mularkey) and we've tried the "retread" route (Dick Jauron/Chan Gailey).

The problem is, those guys were all, IMO, one level above their pay grade. Williams and Jauron are good DC's... Mularkey and Gailey are good OC's... But, none of them are good head coaches.

The same holds true for Nix. He's a good scout/talent evaluator... But, there's a reason he was never hired for a GM job before he hit age 70...

But, again, it ultimately all leads right back to the top of the totem pole. Wilson just isn't that good of a football owner and, quite frankly, never has been... Hell, even Bill Polian and John Butler were internal hires... Polian was promoted after Terry Bledsoe had a heart attack and Butler was promoted when Wilson ran Polian out of town (over, you guessed it, money).

It's pretty sad to sit down and realize that the best years of Buffalo Bills history were only possible because the GM at the time had a heart attack...

-Bill

I think the amount of turnover that has happened since Nix got here is about as much as can realistically be expected. Now, whether or not they made the right choices on who to cut and who to bring in.... that's a different discussion.

But I agree that it starts at the top. Ralph is terrible at running a football team. Brandon has his hands all over the culture of losing, but he's great at marketing and keeps the bucks coming in, and he's great at taking shortcuts to save a buck (this is what you said about having everyone one level above their pay grade: they'll take less money for the opportunity). So, Ralph looks the other way.

It's just so frustrating to see that, after all this time, we're still not headed in the right direction.

[BLeonard]

Re: "Culture of losing"

I think the amount of turnover that has happened since Nix got here is about as much as can realistically be expected. Now, whether or not they made the right choices on who to cut and who to bring in.... that's a different discussion.

But I agree that it starts at the top. Ralph is terrible at running a football team. Brandon has his hands all over the culture of losing, but he's great at marketing and keeps the bucks coming in, and he's great at taking shortcuts to save a buck (this is what you said about having everyone one level above their pay grade: they'll take less money for the opportunity). So, Ralph looks the other way.

It's just so frustrating to see that, after all this time, we're still not headed in the right direction.

If you're a fan, yes, it is frustrating... But, if you're in the front office, I think you have a different idea of "right direction."

This article is over a year old, yet, IMO, it still applies to the Bills: http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/...ap-paying-wins

In the NFL structure, a cheap team that loses might have more profits than an expensive team that wins. Victory is nice, to be sure, but losing cheap can be remunerative. As all NFL teams save the Packers are privately held, and of those all save the Raiders are family businesses, money that is not spent on players goes into the pockets of the owner and his relatives.

Of course, some will argue with Mario's contract, which apparently "proves" this to be false... I present exhibit B:

There is a way most NFL teams could enhance the bottom line while also spending freely on players: reduce front-office costs. But some teams are loath to do that, as the front office is populated by family members and cronies with senior titles, hefty salaries and few if any duties.

Kinda like how we kept Ralph's daughter as a scout and got rid of Bill Polian, because he hurt her feelings.

Notice how often the Bills are singled out in this article and look at the cartoon at the top, particularly the helmet:

Think the colors used are coincidence?

-Bill

[BuffaloWingEater]

Re: "Culture of losing"

They are NOT tied for first place. The Pats and Jets each have head-to-head and division record tiebreakers over us. Translation: somehow we have to finish at least one game ahead of them in the standings in order to beat them. So, in actuality, we are not tied.

correct. however, there are 12 games to go and the situation will sort itself out. plus the whole nfl is basically .500 right now and that is where the bills are.