I don't understand why everyone is so pissed off.

[THATHURMANATOR]

I will admit that I am not overly excited about him but I wasn't overly excited about any of the choices. It seems like he is putting together a good staff. Get off the guys back and let him make a mistake first before chastising him. Yes so TD and MM worked together....Who cares? Do you think TD is going to risk his job to hire a friend? NO it means he has at least seen him in action and feels he can get the job done.

[justasportsfan]

It would've been nice if he at least interviewed Coughlin. No sense in crying over spilled milk.

Get Mcnally here ASAP and start studying the FA'cy and get us some OL.

[Ingtar33]

Coughlin was scheduled to speak with us right after the Giants... he never left NY.

How is that TD's fault?

[justasportsfan]

Originally posted by Ingtar33
Coughlin was scheduled to speak with us right after the Giants... he never left NY.

How is that TD's fault? Didn't know that. Oh well.

[Earthquake Enyart]

I'll be ok as long as he doesn't have that queer Pittsburgh accent

[justasportsfan]

His Bio says he was born in Ft. Ladida. Hopefully he can count.

[Jeff1220]

I don't really think Coughlin is all that special. Any time I've seen the guy speak, I find it amazing at how deficient he is in the personality dept.

[OpIv37]

Everyone's pissed because anything short of the ghost of Vince Lombardi would be disappointing. People here *****- that's why this board exists and why it's so popular. If the Bills win the Super Bowl 31-0 next year, the fans (myself included) will be on this board *****ing that we had to kick a field goal at one point during the game.

[Halbert]

I wanted Marv but I'm ok with this hire.

The staff we've heard talked about being brought in sounds very solid, with the exception of the OC who would be manned by a former QB coach. But that potential weakness should be covered by Malarkey's involvement - plus if any assistant can run the offense it would be a QB coach.

The only thing that concerns me is the extremely rare occurance of a rookie HC winning the SB. The talent level on the team is strong right now and with the expected additions to fill the few remaining holes the Bills should be able to field strong units everywhere, personnel wise. I'm hoping the strength of the front office (TD & TM), and LeBeau's experience will overcome that but it's no certainty. Fassel might have been a safer choice in that regard.

[samhain1961]

Originally posted by OpIv37
Everyone's pissed because anything short of the ghost of Vince Lombardi would be disappointing. People here *****- that's why this board exists and why it's so popular. If the Bills win the Super Bowl 31-0 next year, the fans (myself included) will be on this board *****ing that we had to kick a field goal at one point during the game.

Oh, absolutely.
There's just no possible way to please everybody. Hell, TD would be lucky if he could manage to please practically ANYBODY with his choice!
It seems like every fan has his or her own pick for who they want for the HC position & consider every other choice an incompetant failure.
The level of hate aimed toward some of the choices here is just amazing!

Now, with the Mularkey hire apparently a done deal, I can understand those who had other men in mind for the job being disappointed. But , what's with all this wailing & knashing of teeth?!!

For cryin' out loud, if it IS Mularkey , give the guy a chance!
The haters here & over at BB.com are already calling for his head on a platter & he hasn't even been officially hired yet! They're crying out cronyism & pointing fingers at TD as if Mularkey was never on any other teams radar & was considered unworthy of the HC position everywhere else BUT Buffalo.
And, as we all know , that's very far from being the truth.
He was a HC candidate with 4 or 5 other teams the past couple of years & was impressive enough to be chosen by the Bengals AHEAD of Marvin Lewis, but he turned THEM down.
So, was cronyism & nepatism responcible for those other interviews & offers as well?

I say give the guy a chance.
I, for one , have a good feeling about him.

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Earthquake Enyart
I'll be ok as long as he doesn't have that queer Pittsburgh accent

or a southern accent...no rednecks need apply


Originally posted by OpIv37
Everyone's pissed because anything short of the ghost of Vince Lombardi would be disappointing. People here *****- that's why this board exists and why it's so popular. If the Bills win the Super Bowl 31-0 next year, the fans (myself included) will be on this board *****ing that we had to kick a field goal at one point during the game.

exactly, people hated Marv when he was hired too...they were calling for his head until we made the SB and even after 3 or 4 trips many never gave him credit because the Bills did not win the big one...Buffalonains have an inferiority complex the size of NYC and believe they need the best of everything (which they cannot often afford without charging it on credit) to justify their lives, sorry, just my $0.03.

[samhain1961]

Originally posted by Halbert
I wanted Marv but I'm ok with this hire.

The staff we've heard talked about being brought in sounds very solid, with the exception of the OC who would be manned by a former QB coach. But that potential weakness should be covered by Malarkey's involvement - plus if any assistant can run the offense it would be a QB coach.

The only thing that concerns me is the extremely rare occurance of a rookie HC winning the SB. The talent level on the team is strong right now and with the expected additions to fill the few remaining holes the Bills should be able to field strong units everywhere, personnel wise. I'm hoping the strength of the front office (TD & TM), and LeBeau's experience will overcome that but it's no certainty. Fassel might have been a safer choice in that regard.

True, but "safer" in this instance just wasn't the way to go apparently.

Think about it.
There has to be a reason that Fassel went from being THE guy when it came to all the coaching vacancies to his current status of lingering at the back of the unemployment line.
Obviously TD wasn't the only GM who saw something he didn't like.
Maybe there's a reason his team quit on him in the final half of the season. Perhaps he's just "burned out" & he doesn't even know it.
If that's the case, then it's obviously a damned good thing that we didn't hire him. Know what I mean?

[THATHURMANATOR]

Originally posted by Ebenezer


or a southern accent...no rednecks need apply



exactly, people hated Marv when he was hired too...they were calling for his head until we made the SB and even after 3 or 4 trips many never gave him credit because the Bills did not win the big one...Buffalonains have an inferiority complex the size of NYC and believe they need the best of everything (which they cannot often afford without charging it on credit) to justify their lives, sorry, just my $0.03.

You are right on with that one EB!

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by justasportsfan
It would've been nice if he at least interviewed Coughlin. No sense in crying over spilled milk.

If TD had been honest with GW in week 15 and told GW he wouldn't be back after the season, TD could have started interviewing earlier.

The Giants were the first team to contact Coughlin and thus the first team he had an interview with.

TD taking too long to start his search is what cost us a chance to talk to Coughlin.

That said ... I didn't want us to hire Coughlin and I think Mularkey was the best of the candidates that we chose to talk to.

[Mr. Cynical]

Woohoo!!!!! Here's to getting a high draft pick in '05.

[Dozerdog]

Coughlin and the Giants were a done deal. Even if we could have interviewed Coughlin in September- he still would have gone back to his NFL "Alma Mater"- the Giants.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Whats with these people??? We never had a chance at coughlin(who I am not even that high on anyways) I see no reason why Mularkey should not be an upgrade over Williams(especially since he seems to already be putting together a solid staff)

[baalworship]

I had Mularkey as the second best option out of all the candidates the Bills interviewed with only Weis higher. The disappointing thing for me is the idea that we didn't hire Weis (IMO, the Weis resume was more impressive) because we wanted a guy to fix Bledsoe. I don't understand why Bledsoe is this dead weight we can't get rid of.

Now if Mularkey actually BELIEVES he can "fix" Bledsoe and can get him to perform as well as, I don't know, Jake Delhomme, then I will be much happier. I like the upside with this hire and did not want Jauron or Fassel under any circumstances. The idea that TD forced Drew Bledsoe on Mularkey has kept me from getting excited about 2004.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by Dozerdog
Coughlin and the Giants were a done deal. Even if we could have interviewed Coughlin in September- he still would have gone back to his NFL "Alma Mater"- the Giants.

Then why did he schedule an interview?

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by OpIv37
Everyone's pissed because anything short of the ghost of Vince Lombardi would be disappointing. People here *****- that's why this board exists and why it's so popular. If the Bills win the Super Bowl 31-0 next year, the fans (myself included) will be on this board *****ing that we had to kick a field goal at one point during the game.

rofl.. that is so true.

[Mr. Cynical]

Originally posted by baalworship
I had Mularkey as the second best option out of all the candidates the Bills interviewed with only Weis higher. The disappointing thing for me is the idea that we didn't hire Weis (IMO, the Weis resume was more impressive) because we wanted a guy to fix Bledsoe. I don't understand why Bledsoe is this dead weight we can't get rid of.

Now if Mularkey actually BELIEVES he can "fix" Bledsoe and can get him to perform as well as, I don't know, Jake Delhomme, then I will be much happier. I like the upside with this hire and did not want Jauron or Fassel under any circumstances. The idea that TD forced Drew Bledsoe on Mularkey has kept me from getting excited about 2004.

Agreed, excpept for the part about Mularkey being 2nd on my list. He wasn't even on my list.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Originally posted by kal123


Agreed, excpept for the part about Mularkey being 2nd on my list. He wasn't even on my list.

who was on your list?

[Jeff1220]

I really don't foresee Coughlin doing anything special with the Gmen. He's overrated and has the personality of a dog's armpit. Like Fassel, there's a reason he was unemployed.

[HenryRules]

My point is not that we should have hired Coughlin ... as I said, I don't think he's a great candidate in today's era of Free Agency.

However, I think we should have interviewed him in order to see if he has changed. (If he's become slightly more player-friendly I think he could do wonders). And if we had started our search in week 15, we would have been able to interview him ... and as soon as you get someone to sit down with you, you then have a chance at hiring him.

The reason Coughlin was without a job is because he had his run with Jax. He took them far, but they hit the cap wall and decided to rebuild under someone else. He wouldn't be the GM here, so his cap-handling should not be an issue.

[Dozerdog]

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
Whats with these people??? We never had a chance at coughlin(who I am not even that high on anyways) I see no reason why Mularkey should not be an upgrade over Williams(especially since he seems to already be putting together a solid staff)


Many folks are more interested as painting TD as some power hungry, threatened, el-cheapo who hires nobody but ex- confidants.

"If he was honest with GW...."
"If he was honest with the assistants....."


Like he's out to screw everyone. :rolleyes: They get Wys disease- once they don't like a guy they will pull all sorts of fact and fiction out of the air to make their arguments- no matter how true or false.

[Jeff1220]

True dat Dozer.


Also,
Jacksonville began to suck under Coughlin before their cap hit was a major factor.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by Dozerdog



Many folks are more interested as painting TD as some power hungry, threatened, el-cheapo who hires nobody but ex- confidants.

"If he was honest with GW...."
"If he was honest with the assistants....."


I assume you mean I'm like Wys because two of your quotes are along the lines of discussions we've had recently.

I don't paint TD out to be power hungry - I don't think he is.

I don't paint TD out to feel threatened about his job - I don't think he is.

I don't paint TD out to be cheap - not once have I suggested that he makes his hirings based on money.

I don't make TD out to hire ex-confidants - I don't think that's the reason.

I did not say he was dishonest with his assistants. I said that their request for clarity was not unreasonable and that posters on this board should not be jumping on them. I did say that for TD to not respond to that request would be unreasonable.

I do think he was dishonest with GW and I think that cost us a shot to interview Coughlin.

But as I have been saying all along, the only fair way to judge the head of an organization is by the performance of that organziation. 17-31 in 3 seasons doesn't cut it for me.

[helmetguy]

Originally posted by HenryRules

I do think he was dishonest with GW and I think that cost us a shot to interview Coughlin.

But as I have been saying all along, the only fair way to judge the head of an organization is by the performance of that organziation. 17-31 in 3 seasons doesn't cut it for me.

That's a total crock. What would dispatching GW at week 15 accomplished for this organization? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Remember, GW rolled the dice on his future here by telling TD he'd wait and see what the season held before he would discuss a contract extension. How was TD unfair or dishonest about that?

17-31 doesn't cut it for me, either. Neither did 2-14 two consecutive years, either. Coming into this past season, GW's teams went from 3-13 to 8-8. That's called improvement. More was expected and not delivered, even though more talent was added to the team. Who was in charge of overseeing the gameplans? TD? NO!!! That's what HC's are for. TD already admitted he had to do a better job at hiring a new HC. You're going to crucify him BEFORE Mularkey has even been introduced? Are you so astute that you can already ensure continued failure with Mularkey at the helm? Ub-be-lieve-able!

[Halbert]

Originally posted by samhain1961
There has to be a reason that Fassel went from being THE guy when it came to all the coaching vacancies to his current status of lingering at the back of the unemployment line.
Obviously TD wasn't the only GM who saw something he didn't like.
Maybe there's a reason his team quit on him in the final half of the season. Perhaps he's just "burned out" & he doesn't even know it.
If that's the case, then it's obviously a damned good thing that we didn't hire him. Know what I mean?
Potentially a good point. But guys like Green and Coughlin didn't get hired their first year of being available either and I think both those guys are good coaches.

Bottom line is I gotta believe that TD is much more qualified in making that judgment than I am so you're right that he had to see something that made him look elsewhere. So far the staff MM is assembling looks dynamite so right now it's all good.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by helmetguy


That's a total crock. What would dispatching GW at week 15 accomplished for this organization? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

It would have allowed us to interview Coughlin - we ended up late on his schedule because we approached him after we fired GW - two weeks later than we could have. If we had approached him during week 16, we would have been able to talk to him.

As to the rest.

You have to realize, TD is not just the GM. TD is the <i>president</i> of the franchise. As such, more than just player personnel fall into his job description.

First, if the team doesn't sell out, that's his responsibility (he's done a great job at this).
Second, if the team doesn't sell its advertising, that's his responsibility (no clue on how he's done on this).
Third, if the football organization, that is his responsibility. It doesn't matter which of his subordinates fail - it's still his responsibility.

Now, as to the rest of your post ... what posts of mine have you been reading where I criticized the Mularkey hiring??


Mularkey is really starting to grow on me.
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?s=&postid=466944#post466944


I like the Mularkey signing so far - from the little that I know about the process, he seemed to have the highest upside of the candidates (IMO).
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?s=&postid=469890#post469890

The only bad thing I've said is that I don't think it'd be wise for him to hire Clements. That hasn't happened yet, but even still, I hardly consider my comments about Mularkey being crucifying in nature.

[socalfan]

Well my choices were Levy, Weiss, Crennel and then Mularkey. But, I think any of them (yes even Levy) would have been fine for 2004.

There really wasn't that much of a choice.

And I don't think TD is power hungry nor cheap. I do think he is overly sympathetic to the Irish and Scots.....Mularkey, McNally, and even MacGahee .... oops..sorry about that. :D

[THATHURMANATOR]

Originally posted by HenryRules


It would have allowed us to interview Coughlin - we ended up late on his schedule because we approached him after we fired GW - two weeks later than we could have. If we had approached him during week 16, we would have been able to talk to him.



I really don't get your infatuation with Coughlin. He had a decent year or 2 with JAX and thats it. I am willing to bet the Bills have a better year under Mularkey than the Gmen will have under Coughlin. Besides it seems like he was set on the Giants anyways.

[helmetguy]

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
I really don't get your infatuation with Coughlin. He had a decent year or 2 with JAX and thats it. I am willing to bet the Bills have a better year under Mularkey than the Gmen will have under Coughlin. Besides it seems like he was set on the Giants anyways.

Not only that, Thurm, but Coughlin built that early Jax team, starting with ZERO bucks against the cap, then was able to pick and choose from whom all the other franchises couldn't (or wouldn't) protect. He built to win for the moment, paying little or no heed to the future ramifications. Had he interviewed for the Bills' job, he probably wouldn't have been hired, simply because he HAS to be bigger than the franchise, or thinks he is.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by HenryRules
That said ... I didn't want us to hire Coughlin and I think Mularkey was the best of the candidates that we chose to talk to.

Is this considered an infatuation?