Under Chan, the Bills have only had ONE with against a playoff team. That win came against the Pats last season. Simply put, the only games the Bills have won in the past 3years were vs teams on their level or worst.
Under Chan, the Bills have only had ONE with against a playoff team. That win came against the Pats last season. Simply put, the only games the Bills have won in the past 3years were vs teams on their level or worst.
Please Make Sense
Mike, please don't tell us you are only coming to this conclusion now?
The last buffalo fan (12-18-2012)
He's Jauron with less hair on the top of his head & more hair on his chin.
gebobs (12-18-2012)
kim kardashian is a better socialite than paris hilton....does it matter?
gebobs (12-18-2012),The last buffalo fan (12-18-2012)
I hate to say it as well, but I think I agree.
Jauron always seemed contemplative. None of his ideas worked, but he looked like was always thinking, always trying to figure out where to go next.
Gailey just looks dumbfounded. His ideas don't work, and then he just stands there with this look on his face like Bush when the aide told him about 9/11 for the rest of the game.
gebobs (12-18-2012),Michael82 (12-18-2012),Oaf (12-18-2012),The last buffalo fan (12-18-2012),trapezeus (12-18-2012)
That is what bothers me most about Chans teams. You would think that after 3 full seasons you would have a handful of big "statement" victories if you were improving. 3 years in you should be good enough to scare most every team. I don't think too many of the NFL elite are afraid of the Bills.
On the other side, how many times have they been completely blown out? I honestly lost count. At least 4 this season.
In the beginning I had high hopes for Chan. By as the talent seems to get better, the team gets worse.
gebobs (12-18-2012)
chan is just a bad game time coach. he has a lot more talent on the team, and he has cut back on OL penalties and got them good.
Jauron was just a nice guy who wanted to believe in lollypops and fairy tales. Routinely taking flyers on guys he'd like to see succeed and then passing on the better talent. He'd let teams take penalties without issue.
I think Chan is best at coaching some aspect of offense if the personel favors it. if not, he isn't adaptive. which is exactly jauron's issue.
What a choice.
Juron's games we so boring. I could not stand to watch them. Chans O is much more watchable to me. It can be frustrating at times. But i can at least see the possibilities if they had a good qb.
Dicks D was usually better. Both were not very good game day coaches. Very poor at making adjustments on the fly.
Both get a D in my book.
OpIv37 (12-18-2012),The last buffalo fan (12-18-2012),trapezeus (12-18-2012)
I don't think you should be asking "how good", you should be asking "how bad".
The last buffalo fan (12-18-2012)
coastal (12-19-2012)
If they lost to every team that is going to the playoffs but beat everyone else they would be 10-6 and going to the playoffs themselves.
It isn't just losing to the good teams that is the issue, it is the losses to the Tennessees and St. Louis's of the world as well.
Its the blowouts more than anything that have me on the get a new coach bandwagon. I can't remember ever having seen more than one team hang 50 on us in a season. Seems like we're either in it to the end or getting totally shellacked, with people just giving up. To me that says something significant about Chan's inspirational ability, discipline, man management, whatever you want to call it. I still think he's a decent x's and o's coach (on offense at least), but he can't seem to produce any kind of consistency. And that's a problem.
Wake up, brush your teeth, and get ready for a day of hating the Dolphins. Or the Pats? How to choose?
gebobs (12-18-2012)
It comes down to one being an offensive coach and one being a defensive. Defensive coaches look to keep games close and hope that they're offense will do enough to win, see what the Jets game last night. Whereas offensive coaches tend to look to outscore you etc (see Mike Martz). One HC that saw might be on the chopping block that would be interesting is Luvie Smith.
This mentality is maddening. Gailey is worse in close games, has lost more games in the 4th quarter, has gotten blown out more, has a worse (much worse) record in the division, etc. yet you think he's more "watchable".
Boy, you don't know what watchable football is. Gailey is every bit as boring. Go back to your coma.
Lehner's history. He just doesn't know it yet.
Losing isn't watchable.