PDA

View Full Version : Tom Donahoes comment on hiring a head coach with experience...


Tatonka
01-15-2004, 07:34 PM
he said..

"if we would have hired one of the head coaches available with experience, you would have criticized us for hiring a guy who had been fired."

so true.. so true.
Mr. Cynical
01-15-2004, 07:37 PM
Typical double-talk from a lame duck GM.
The Spaz
01-15-2004, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by kal123
Typical double-talk from a lame duck GM.

Is he really a lame duck he just signed a coach to a 5 year deal!
Tatonka
01-15-2004, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by kal123
Typical double-talk from a lame duck GM.


kal, give it a rest man.. i am starting to think your a fish fan.. a wolf in sheeps clothing.
Novacane
01-15-2004, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by Tatonka
he said..

"if we would have hired one of the head coaches available with experience, you would have criticized us for hiring a guy who had been fired."

so true.. so true.


I don't think he likes the media:lol!:
HenryRules
01-15-2004, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by Tatonka
he said..

"if we would have hired one of the head coaches available with experience, you would have criticized us for hiring a guy who had been fired."

so true.. so true.

That's true ... but he's still avoiding the question.

Would it have been that hard to just say, "I said at the start that we didn't have any set criteria. Mularkey's philosophies seemed to be the best fit for our team. I think a year from now, you guys will be pleased with the choice."

This combined with the lashout at the GW press conference ... I'm starting to think it might be a better idea to get someone else to do our press conferences.
HAMMER
01-15-2004, 07:55 PM
He is right on with that comment. Why hire a coach that just got axed? There are plenty of people in this world that can and want to do the job, they need an opportunity. How the hell will you ever know if someone is the next Lombardi, Billycheck, or Parcells if you don't give them a shot?

If we couldn't have Coughlin then I don't want any of the other guys with previous HC experience. Fresh blood is a good thing, I have a good feeling about Mularkey.
Tatonka
01-15-2004, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by HenryRules
That's true ... but he's still avoiding the question.

Would it have been that hard to just say, "I said at the start that we didn't have any set criteria. Mularkey's philosophies seemed to be the best fit for our team. I think a year from now, you guys will be pleased with the choice."



actually.. he did say that.. just after the comment i posted.. rofl.
helmetguy
01-15-2004, 07:58 PM
I think he did address the "criteria' in his comments during the GW's Done press conference. One was that nobody was bigger than the organization. Another was something to the effect that, while past HC experience might be an asset, it wasn't going to be a primary requirement.

Read anything you want into TD's response. Just about everyone has had a preference as to who the new guy should be. Some just have a hard-on against TD so, no matter what he does, somebody's gonna find fault with it.
JJamezz
01-15-2004, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by HenryRules
That's true ... but he's still avoiding the question.

Would it have been that hard to just say, "I said at the start that we didn't have any set criteria. Mularkey's philosophies seemed to be the best fit for our team. I think a year from now, you guys will be pleased with the choice."

This combined with the lashout at the GW press conference ... I'm starting to think it might be a better idea to get someone else to do our press conferences.

He ultimately did say all of that. This little 'jab' at the media got a laugh from the crowd and was a lot more tongue-in-cheek than the stuff in the GW press conference.
HenryRules
01-15-2004, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by JJamezz


He ultimately did say all of that. This little 'jab' at the media got a laugh from the crowd and was a lot more tongue-in-cheek than the stuff in the GW press conference.

That's cool then ... my bad.
Billsouth
01-15-2004, 08:20 PM
would any of us been happy with any of the retreads out there like dick jauron or jim fassel? fassel was not a good coach and jauron sucked
Tatonka
01-15-2004, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by Billsouth
would any of us been happy with any of the retreads out there like dick jauron or jim fassel? fassel was not a good coach and jauron sucked

no, i dont think so..

i am happy with MM, even though CW was my first choice.. but all i really care about is winning..
justasportsfan
01-15-2004, 09:17 PM
Seriously, I preffered one with experience @ HC . Then I realized Gilbride had experience. :snicker:

Who knows, we could've hired the next Gilbride. A former HC who's brain deteriorated. Experience or not, every coach is a gamble. I'm sure TD had thought about the pro and cons.

Having McNally is already a positive.
doug45
01-16-2004, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by kal123
Typical double-talk from a lame duck GM. :up:
doug45
01-16-2004, 08:17 AM
Funny he didn't say that when he fired GW. He said he was going to look for a Head Coach with experience. This guy never keeps his word for more than 24 hours.
TedMock
01-16-2004, 08:31 AM
He also added right after that it wasn't going to be the top criteria used and that he'd be looking at coordinators as well.
Tatonka
01-16-2004, 08:36 AM
Originally posted by TedMock
He also added right after that it wasn't going to be the top criteria used and that he'd be looking at coordinators as well.
correct.. he said he wanted a guy with experience but wasnt going to limit himself to that completely.. the bottom line is he wanted the right guy for the job.. and he obviously felt like he got him, as he gave him a 5 year deal @ 1.5 mill a year, which is the most that any HC has ever made for the bills.