72 replies to this topic

[HOUSE]

I purposely picked two no-nonsense head coaches that won Superbowls. Neither head coach will resort to excuses, its win or see ya!

Here are the questions,

#1 Can we trace the lack of TEAM confidence back to Ryan Fitzpatrick? How does 7 interceptions in two key games effect any NFL teams confidence?
Would either head coach stick by their guy after last weeks game considering the embarrassing loss to the NY Jets? At some point you have to ask yourself, is this working??

#2 Can the Buffalo Bills win with a limited short pass offense through the playoffs? Belichick & Parcells want to win playoff games, not just get there.
I believe both head coaches would have built the offense around Vince Young rather then force a complicated offense on a guy that can't handle it.
Learn the offense over time, not a few preseason games.

#3 Is Ryan Fitzpatrick a true team leader for the Buffalo Bills or just the guy playing Quarterback ? Benching a poor quarterback can help a team re focus and eliminate the main cause of turnovers. Every expert says the same thing about the Bills, turnovers are killing them. Can we really afford to do nothing?

#4 If not Fitzpatrick, then who?  I seriously doubt either head coach would back themselves into a corner with no real options..Tavaris Jackson would certainly move up by now. Its called planning ahead with a solid plan B.

So, what would both head coaches do with Ryan Fitzpatrick while addressing team confidence problems?  The best coaches move on quickly with a solid plan. The average head coach just holds the course till he is eventually  fired.

Thanks guys, I am really looking forward to the 49ers game. Hopefully things will improve.


GO BILLS!!

Edited by HOUSE, 03 October 2012 - 08:31 AM.

[peterpan]

What would Bill Belichick or Bill Parcells do with Ryan Fitzpatrick?

Cut him and find a new quarterback ASAP.  I think that means using T Jax for the rest of the season and being a run oriented, PA pass offense.  Then obviously drafting one or two QBs in April.  Real coaches don't accept turnovers.

[HOUSE]

peterpan, on 03 October 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

What would Bill Belichick or Bill Parcells do with Ryan Fitzpatrick?

Cut him and find a new quarterback ASAP.  I think that means using T Jax for the rest of the season and being a run oriented, PA pass offense.  Then obviously drafting one or two QBs in April.  Real coaches don't accept turnovers.

Have to agree, look at options and move on.....

[CodeMonkey]

peterpan, on 03 October 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

What would Bill Belichick or Bill Parcells do with Ryan Fitzpatrick?

Cut him and find a new quarterback ASAP.  I think that means using T Jax for the rest of the season and being a run oriented, PA pass offense.  Then obviously drafting one or two QBs in April.  Real coaches don't accept turnovers.

Have to disagree.  Fitz is a very capable backup and mentor.  I believe they would keep Fitz as the backup and get a starter,

[HOUSE]

CodeMonkey, on 03 October 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

Have to disagree.  Fitz is a very capable backup and mentor.  I believe they would keep Fitz as the backup and get a starter,

I like Fitz as a backup but the contract would need to be adjusted

HOUSE, on 03 October 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

I purposely picked two no-nonsense head coaches that won Superbowls. Neither head coach will resort to excuses, its win or see ya!

Here are the questions,

#1 Can we trace the lack of TEAM confidence back to Ryan Fitzpatrick? How does 7 interceptions in two key games effect any NFL teams confidence?
Would either head coach stick by their guy after last weeks game considering the embarrassing loss to the NY Jets?

#2 Can the Buffalo Bills win with a limited short pass offense through the playoffs? Bill Belichick & Parcells want to win playoff games, not just get there.
I believe both head coaches would have built the offense around Vince Young rather then force a complicated offense on a guy that can't handle it.
Learn the offense over time, not a few preseason games.

#3 Is Ryan Fitzpatrick a true team leader for the Buffalo Bills or just the guy playing Quarterback ? Benching a poor quarterback can help a team re focus if he is hurting the team.

#4 If not Fitzpatrick, then who?  I seriously doubt either head coach would back themselves into a corner with no real options..Tavaris Jackson would certainly move up by now. Its called planning ahead with a solid plan B.

So, what would both head coaches do with Ryan Fitzpatrick while addressing team confidence problems? Its important to fix problems quickly rather then deal with the same old problems forever. The best coaches move on quickly with a solid plan.
GO BILLS!!

Edited by HOUSE, 03 October 2012 - 07:34 AM.

[CodeMonkey]

HOUSE, on 03 October 2012 - 07:33 AM, said:

I like Fitz as a backup but the contract would need to be adjusted

Clearly.

[PatsFanNH]

Ok,

#1 BB would have reemed the OC for the play calling as  he would have dummed down the game to make it ALL about the RB's with short safe passes. I know this because BB did that with Tom Brady in 2001. He build an offense around Fitz strengths if that didnt work they cut bait after the year and either sign trade for a QB, sign a FA or draft one. All dpends on which was the best option for the team.

BB biggest issue would be with your DEFENSE. Their performance would have gotten someone cut and also someone benched. He is a DEFENSIVE Guru and the effort in the 4th qrtr of the Pats game would NOT have been tolerated. (BB would have LOST it on the sidelines and heads on D would have rolled.)

[Hopeful]

HOUSE, on 03 October 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

I purposely picked two no-nonsense head coaches that won Superbowls. Neither head coach will resort to excuses, its win or see ya!

Here are the questions,

#1 Can we trace the lack of TEAM confidence back to Ryan Fitzpatrick? How does 7 interceptions in two key games effect any NFL teams confidence?
Would either head coach stick by their guy after last weeks game considering the embarrassing loss to the NY Jets?

This is a great question and very interesting choice of coaches.
I think both of them would manage Ryan Fitzpatrick very much the same way that Harbaugh has managed Alex Smith.  They would put him in a "game manager" role where the run powers the offense and he is asked to make only high-percentage, low-risk throws and take the sack if he can't guarantee that.  Smith is NOT expected to make things happen.  When he was, it was bad, bad, bad -inaccurate, low completion percentage.

Parcells won a superbowl with Phil Simms (21 TD, 22 INTs) and Jeff Hostetler (a guy who sported a completion percentage of 54% the year he won the Superbowl).
During the 2004 superbowl season, the Pats were a different team - they ran almost as much as they passed, and pretty much ran to set up the deep ball.  And Brady was a different QB.  He was not rockin' that 65% completion percentage in those days - barely over 60% in 2004, a bit better but fewer passes in 2001.

I don't think either would give Ryan Fitzpatrick the hook in favor of Vince Young or Tarvaris Jackson.  They would game plan to his strengths, and not put him in a position to throw 3-4 INTs a game.
And they would win with him.

Aside: one puzzle to me is that people dis on "garbage time" statistics, stats after the game is considered already hopelessly lost.  But then they rag on INTs in the same time.
If it's garbage time for good stats, shouldn't it be garbage time for bad stats?

Edited by Hopeful, 03 October 2012 - 08:09 AM.

[jumbalaya]

Both Belichick and Parcells would have had a strong defense and a power run game that would mask Fitzpatrick's shortcomings.  They would pound it out on the ground and stop the other teams offense.

[stevestojan]

Same thing the Bungles did with him. Make him do forearm curls so he wouldn't drop the clipboard.

[C.Biscuit97]

Well, Belichick would have to re-up with the devil like he did before he got Brady and was about to be fired by his 2nd team.

[PatsFanNH]

Hopeful, on 03 October 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:

Aside: one puzzle to me is that people dis on "garbage time" statistics, stats after the game is considered already hopelessly lost.  But then they rag on INTs in the same time.
If it's garbage time for good stats, shouldn't it be garbage time for bad stats?

I agree both should be considered useless stats... a TD when down by 21 with 6 minutes to go is garbage as is the INT with 3 minutes to go down by the same margin again. Fitz last  2 INT were when the game was pretty much over IMO.

[jboyst62]

PatsFanNH, on 03 October 2012 - 07:41 AM, said:

Ok,

#1 BB would have reemed the OC for the play calling as  he would have dummed down the game to make it ALL about the RB's with short safe passes. I know this because BB did that with Tom Brady in 2001. He build an offense around Fitz strengths if that didnt work they cut bait after the year and either sign trade for a QB, sign a FA or draft one. All dpends on which was the best option for the team.

BB biggest issue would be with your DEFENSE. Their performance would have gotten someone cut and also someone benched. He is a DEFENSIVE Guru and the effort in the 4th qrtr of the Pats game would NOT have been tolerated. (BB would have LOST it on the sidelines and heads on D would have rolled.)

Keep posting here...even though you are a crossdressing guy who likes a sissy football team.  (meant as a rib, not at all serious).

Edited by jboyst62, 03 October 2012 - 02:44 PM.

[Mr. WEO]

Everyone who says these HC's would cut or bench Fitz is wrong.  Everyone who says we would have a much better defense (and a new OC) is right.

That was a very winnable game Sunday.  As many have pointed out, Fitz's first 2 ints resulted in no points for the pats.  And we had a 2 TD lead in the 3rd Q.  His last int was meaningless.  This was a complete defensive collapse, plain and simple.  This D is soft.  Wannshdat is clueless--everyone should have known this as he did nothing to help out George Edwards last year.

[TDO'Kearney]

Hopeful, on 03 October 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:

This is a great question and very interesting choice of coaches.
I think both of them would manage Ryan Fitzpatrick very much the same way that Harbaugh has managed Alex Smith.  They would put him in a "game manager" role where the run powers the offense and he is asked to make only high-percentage, low-risk throws and take the sack if he can't guarantee that.  Smith is NOT expected to make things happen.  When he was, it was bad, bad, bad -inaccurate, low completion percentage.

Parcells won a superbowl with Phil Simms (21 TD, 22 INTs) and Jeff Hostetler (a guy who sported a completion percentage of 54% the year he won the Superbowl).
During the 2004 superbowl season, the Pats were a different team - they ran almost as much as they passed, and pretty much ran to set up the deep ball.  And Brady was a different QB.  He was not rockin' that 65% completion percentage in those days - barely over 60% in 2004, a bit better but fewer passes in 2001.

I don't think either would give Ryan Fitzpatrick the hook in favor of Vince Young or Tarvaris Jackson.  They would game plan to his strengths, and not put him in a position to throw 3-4 INTs a game.
And they would win with him.

Aside: one puzzle to me is that people dis on "garbage time" statistics, stats after the game is considered already hopelessly lost.  But then they rag on INTs in the same time.
If it's garbage time for good stats, shouldn't it be garbage time for bad stats?

Well, the good stats came against reduced pressure and often second string competition.  So when the bad stats come against the same, it is cause for concern.

[PatsFanNH]

C.Biscuit97, on 03 October 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

Well, Belichick would have to re-up with the devil like he did before he got Brady and was about to be fired by his 2nd team.

Interesting fact BB was in year 2 when he won the SB with a no name QB called Tom Brady at the time.  Been a winner ever since, he was not close to being fired at all.

[C.Biscuit97]

PatsFanNH, on 03 October 2012 - 07:41 AM, said:

Ok,

#1 BB would have reemed the OC for the play calling as  he would have dummed down the game to make it ALL about the RB's with short safe passes. I know this because BB did that with Tom Brady in 2001. He build an offense around Fitz strengths if that didnt work they cut bait after the year and either sign trade for a QB, sign a FA or draft one. All dpends on which was the best option for the team.

BB biggest issue would be with your DEFENSE. Their performance would have gotten someone cut and also someone benched. He is a DEFENSIVE Guru and the effort in the 4th qrtr of the Pats game would NOT have been tolerated. (BB would have LOST it on the sidelines and heads on D would have rolled.)

In fairness, he was in charge of the 2nd worst defense in the NFL last year.  But your point is well taken.

Mr. WEO, on 03 October 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:

Everyone who says these HC's would cut or bench Fitz is wrong.  Everyone who says we would have a much better defense (and a new OC) is right.

That was a very winnable game Sunday.  As many have pointed out, Fitz's first 2 ints resulted in no points for the pats.  And we had a 2 TD lead in the 3rd Q.  His last int was meaningless.  This was a complete defensive collapse, plain and simple.  This D is soft.  Wannshdat is clueless--everyone should have known this as he did nothing to help out George Edwards last year.

Yup, though I'm not going to say Wanny is clueless.  Any blaming this loss on Fitz is wrong.  You spend $100 million and a 1st round draft pick to improve your defense, you shouldn't blow a 2 td lead.

[PatsFanNH]

jboyst62, on 03 October 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

Keep posting here...even though you are a crossdressing guy who likes a sissy football team.

Wow, on most boards that give you at least a stern warning for attacking a poster for no reason, if not a time out from posting.

C.Biscuit97

I was not talking about the RESULTS from the game but the EFFORT the D seemed to be given in the 4th quarter. No matter how bad the game was for the Pats last yr the D always kept playing hard there is IMO no excuse for guys getting paid so well not to give 100% till the very end especially at HOME! shocked the Bills fans were not booing the crap out of them for their effort.

[eball]

Parcells would put Fitz's head in the toilet, and Belichick would flush...

[HOUSE]

Hopeful, on 03 October 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:

This is a great question and very interesting choice of coaches.
I think both of them would manage Ryan Fitzpatrick very much the same way that Harbaugh has managed Alex Smith.  They would put him in a "game manager" role where the run powers the offense and he is asked to make only high-percentage, low-risk throws and take the sack if he can't guarantee that.  Smith is NOT expected to make things happen.  When he was, it was bad, bad, bad -inaccurate, low completion percentage.

Parcells won a superbowl with Phil Simms (21 TD, 22 INTs) and Jeff Hostetler (a guy who sported a completion percentage of 54% the year he won the Superbowl).
During the 2004 superbowl season, the Pats were a different team - they ran almost as much as they passed, and pretty much ran to set up the deep ball.  And Brady was a different QB.  He was not rockin' that 65% completion percentage in those days - barely over 60% in 2004, a bit better but fewer passes in 2001.

I don't think either would give Ryan Fitzpatrick the hook in favor of Vince Young or Tarvaris Jackson.  They would game plan to his strengths, and not put him in a position to throw 3-4 INTs a game.
And they would win with him.

Aside: one puzzle to me is that people dis on "garbage time" statistics, stats after the game is considered already hopelessly lost.  But then they rag on INTs in the same time.
If it's garbage time for good stats, shouldn't it be garbage time for bad stats?

You may be right ...