Bills Fan Base Polarized over Jauron

by Brian Galliford on Jan 4, 2008 3:15 PM EST in Opinion Comment 18 comments

Opinion is largely split about Buffalo's coach (BuffaloBills.com)

Less than a week after the Buffalo Bills ended their 2007 season, the team is once again attempting to answer difficult questions. At this point, candidate searches at General Manager and Offensive Coordinator are the hot topic. But from amongst those stories - especially the GM story - new questions have surfaced. They center around head coach Dick Jauron, his status with the Bills, and whether or not his presence on the team will effect the hirings at GM and OC, or vice versa.

Let's get this out of the way immediately: if you look at the support Jauron has from owner Ralph Wilson, former GM Marv Levy and his players, there's no question that most within the Bills organization feel that Jauron is the right man to lead this franchise into the future. Seriously - you can't debate that; no argument contrary to that evidence is logical. Yet still, popular opinion of the fan base and media coverage indicates that Jauron isn't so popular outside the walls of One Bills Drive. The team's 14-18 record and extremely low offensive and defensive rankings indicate that this sentiment shouldn't be surprising; there is more to Jauron's tenure, however, that resonates louder than statistics.

Anti-Jauron Sentiment Prevalent

Looking for leaders of the bandwagon pulling for Jauron's tenure to end in Buffalo? Look no further than Connor Byrne. The head Bills poobah at RealFootball365.com, no less than four times this week alone, threw Jauron under the bus. How many times can one man write the same article?

From the first article, "Bills should venture outward for new GM":

If owner Ralph Wilson -- whose search for the new G.M. will begin next week -- makes the wrong decision and puts his stamp of approval on mediocrity by hiring someone from inside the organization, expect the Bills' eight-year playoff drought to live on for a while longer with dull head coach Dick Jauron at the helm.

From the second article, "Levy's short stint restored goodwill between Bills, fans":

While Levy's two years atop the team produced only 14 wins in 32 regular-season games, a middling-at-best head coaching hire in Dick Jauron and a fairly uninspiring roster...

From the third article, "Bills should follow rival Miami's lead":

Clearly, the mild-mannered Dick Jauron is in over his head, and his 50-67 career record as a head coach proves as much.

Of course, Jauron is still employed by the Bills, and there isn't exactly a guarantee he'll be out of Buffalo in time for the 2008 season. After all, Levy -- who hired Jauron in '06 -- is going to be helping the Bills in their search for his successor, which leads some to think the team will promote from within to find its new G.M. If that happens, it would probably mean the retainment of Jauron.

No kidding, Connor. Don't expect that to change even if the club hires from a different organization. And finally, from the fourth article, "Despite Levy's best efforts, Bills still far from contention" (if you're real interested, the entire article is essentially a bash session of Jauron):

Although Levy and Jauron made for a likable duo, the Bills still didn't progress nearly enough during the last two years.

Assuming Jauron, whose career record is a morbid 50-67, stays aboard, the future also doesn't seem that bright for Buffalo.

Byrne isn't alone - he's not even close - but he's certainly been the most vocal (and repetitive) voice of this group of fans. The opinion isn't necessarily wrong - the Bills' best interests are at the center of any opinion, whether you or I agree with it or not - but in the end, are these dissenting opinions going to matter at all? Probably not - even though Wilson says that Jauron's fate rests with the new GM, the likelihood of Jauron not being with the Bills next season is remote. (And furthermore, what was Wilson supposed to say? "Oh, sure, we'll hire a GM as long as he doesn't come in here with opinions." There is the possibility, folks, that the Bills will hire a GM from outside the organization who they feel will mesh with Jauron. A very good possibility, at that.)

Here's What We Know
The other side of the coin - of which I'd like to nominate myself as a candidate for one ringleader position - is that Jauron is going to be the face of this franchise for the immediate future, and that's not a bad thing. Byrne made the point in his article (let's face it, they're all about the same thing) this week that the Bills, at 14-18 under Jauron, are no better than they were under the 14-18 Mike Mularkey as head coach. That's ludicrous.

There is little debate that the 2007 version of the Bills roster was the least talented one they've had in a long time - and that was before 17 players were placed on IR. The roster was, in fact, far less talented than the ones Mularkey directed in 2004 and 2005. Even with that lack of talent, Jauron - and Levy is included here as well - were able to bring two things to the franchise: stability and consistency. There's a program in place in Orchard Park, folks - that hasn't happened since Levy himself coached this team. There is, finally, a place to build - rather than haphazardly throwing together what looks like a talented roster, the Bills have done things correctly for the last two years; namely, they've built a foundation based on character, found a team identity, and can add talent - not names - from there.

Case in point: the duo of Tom Donahoe and Mike Mularkey orchestrated a 14-18 record from teams that finished 2004 ranked #25 and #2 (offense and defense, respectively) and #28 and #29 in 2005 (offense and defense, respectively). Those Bills teams were in a constant state of flux - especially at quarterback, where Mularkey was just as likely to switch quarterbacks mid-game as he was to relieve his bladder afterwards - and marred by inconsistency. Jauron's club, however, has eked out successive 7-9 records (mediocre, but consistent) despite 2006 rankings of #30 and #18 (O and D, respectively) and #30 and #31 (O and D, respectively). Even with, by all accounts, really crappy teams, Jauron has stuck to his guns at QB, built a program and a character-laden team, and found consistency. It's mediocre now, but what's to stop that consistency from becoming winning consistency in the near future?

The Bottom Line
Dick Jauron isn't going anywhere. He's already shown a willingness to make significant offensive changes - a must-do, since the Bills haven't had a good offense since 2002 - and the new GM, wherever he comes from, will improve the roster. (How can he not? The Bills have roughly $30 million in spending money and 10 draft picks this season.) He's already committed to a quarterback (Trent Edwards), and committed to the franchise. There is no reason to think that Jauron can't coach the Bills to a playoff berth in 2008, and even less reason to think that he'll be gone when a new GM is brought in. Even so, 2008 is shaping up to be a make-or-break season for Jauron. Without significant improvement next season, the court of public opinion may swing too far for the Bills to stand pat further.

0 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

+1

"The Bills have roughly $30 million in spending money and 10 draft picks this season."

We should easily be able to acquire all our needs this offseason. 30 mil should get us help on both sides of the field and 10 picks should net us what we cant get via free agency. Honestly, I don't follow the free agent market but I would think that for us to acquire a TE and WR its gonna be through the draft. Could be wrong. So what do we improve through free agency? Pass rusher, run blocker, linebacker? Who do you like Brian? What position do you think free agency will upgrade and who intrigues you?

Do you BILLieve?

by NYTXFAN on Jan 4, 2008 6:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Depends...

I think the Colts will almost certainly stick a franchise tag on Dallas Clark, so he's out. Unless, of course, they use one on a guard (both are UFAs). After that, the TE list is fairly short, so I'd agree that the draft might be a better way to go.
Wide reciever is a bit better - excluding Randy Moss, there's still Bryant Johnson, Devery Henderson, and Bernard Berrian. That seems likely to me, along with DL.
There are a number of good DL that should be available this year; though some will probably command too high of a price tag (Haynesworth, Suggs, Allen), the Bills might be able to sneak a signing in during bidding wars for the top three.

by Krenn on Jan 4, 2008 7:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a log shot but

Chris Cooley could become available. The skins are way over the cap, and he's due a big bonus.

who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 4, 2008 8:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm gonna wait to answer that, B3J

I've got to go through the roster this off-season - getting input from all y'all faithful readers - before I make any judgments on how I think the Bills should approach free agency. I will say, however, that if I were building this team, off the top of my head, I would clearly favor the offense this off-season. If you score points, you win games - and with all of our defensive downfalls, the Tampa-2 still has been successful in limiting the score. I'd surround Edwards with as much big, athletic talent as possible, make a tweak or two to the defense (i.e. pass rusher), and let the young guys play fun football next season.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 5, 2008 11:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Corrections

1. Overall lack of talent.

While a coach's job is to get the most out of the players, which Dick Jauron has done, Jauron is also partially responsible for the overall lack of talent on the team. Ralph Wilson, Marv Levy, John Guy, Tom Modrak, and Jauron all should be held accountable. Boy scouts that can't play or troubled talents? Find a balance. High character and effort is a great thing. High character and effort and talent is a better thing. While the Bills were not playing well even when they were winning, I hope that their record convinces the Brain Trust that they need better players.

2. Jauron has stuck to his guns at QB.

Jauron has been anything but decisive regarding this team's starting quarterback. It is my opinion that if Jauron had supported Losman 100% as the starting quarterback when healthy and had Losman played in every game after the bye week, the offense would have been more productive than it was with Losman/Edwards. I do not believe that Jauron stuck to his guns at QB. Although unrelated to this post, I find it comical that Edwards gets credit for winning the second Jets game just because he "started" the game. However, despite playing in 90% of the first Patriots game, he doesn't get credit for the loss because he didn't "start" the game. Incredible.

3. The Bills haven't had a good offense since 2003.

Make that the first half of the 2002 season. Recall just how bad the offense was in 2003 under Kevin Gilbride, particulary the second half of the season. Remember the steep dropoff from 2002 to 2003? In 2003 on offense, third down was synonymous with punting. Touchdown passes were so rare that I forgot what they were. In 2004, as long as Bledsoe did not turn the ball over, he got a game ball. That's how low the expectations at QB became. The 2003 and 2004 seasons (great defenses, horrible offenses) made me realize that you need much more than just a great defense to win a championship.

4. The Bills are headed in the right direction.

I am concerned about the direction that the team is headed; I am not so sure that the direction is up. From a talent standpoint, has this team really progressed under Levy and Jauron? I recall after minicamp Jauron said something to the effect of "we are bigger, faster, stronger, and better" than the 2006 roster. Now we are complaining about the lack of talent? Bad Kool-Aid. In addition, while their 2007 record was the same as 2006, their play was not even close. Not even close. I think there was a dropoff in play from 2006 to 2007. I remember touchdowns and big, explosive plays in 2006, particularly in the second half of the season versus good opponents such as the Chargers and Titans. I think a lot of it has to do with Losman vs. Edwards. Many Bills fans think this issue is buried and that Edwards is a franchise QB, but I don't. Everyone says that Losman regressed this season. I say that Losman did not show significant progress. The difference is that Losman can still make the same good decisions, reads, throws, and plays now as he did in 2006 (in this regard, I do not believe that Losman has regressed). Honestly, I view Edwards as an easy bronze medal and Losman as a possible gold medal. It makes me sick to think that the Bills will choose the easy way out when they could possibly have something much better. I am sticking with Losman because I believe in him (no, I am not his friend or relative). I hope that Losman is included in an open competition in Buffalo this offseason. The right decision needs to be made on the starting quarterback, and once that decision is made, stick to it. I am not an impatient fan. I don't care how long it takes to decide, just get it right. In general, I am frustrated by the lack of patience, stability, and loyalty among front offices, coaches, players, and fans. I think it sucks. While I don't like everything about Jauron, 2008 shouldn't be a make-or-break season for him. Despite the long playoff drought, I really could care less if the Bills make the playoffs in 2008. I want the Lombardi Trophy. Again, I don't care how long it takes, just get it right.

On a separate note, I do not understand why many Bills fans seem to believe that the team is actually close to being a serious contender or that $30 million and 10 draft picks will fill all their needs and suddenly turn the Bills roster into a Pro Bowl roster. It's not like this team is "a player or two away". It's not going to "happen overnight", let alone one offseason. In general, just be realistic, be patient, and hope that the Bills get it right. Go Bills!

by Fort Worth on Jan 4, 2008 9:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, Fort Worth

I'll respond in kind:

Boy scouts that can't play or troubled talents? Find a balance. High character and effort is a great thing. High character and effort and talent is a better thing.

That's part of the point I'm trying to make. The first two years of Levy/Jauron were spent putting together a program, a character base; now that that program/base has been established, the Bills can start taking calculated gambles on guys who may not have been perfect in college, but who are talented and can buy into a team philosophy. Think Randy Moss in New England.

After re-reading my post (again), I'd like to clarify what I meant by "stuck to his guns" - I meant that purely in the sense of a game-to-game basis. While Mularkey would swap quarterbacks in the middle of a game, Jauron has never done that in Buffalo, injuries aside. Looking back on 2007, I believe he played the QB situation the only way he knew how - he was trying to maintain continuity. It wasn't fair to Losman, nor do I believe it was the right decision, but he stuck to his guns. You can't fault the man for that.

Make that the first half of the 2002 season. Recall just how bad the offense was in 2003 under Kevin Gilbride, particulary the second half of the season. Remember the steep dropoff from 2002 to 2003?

That I do. Buffalo was ranked #30 offensively in 2003; #11 in '02. That was merely a typo. My bad.

As far as your fourth concern goes, I'm not going to make a stink - especially in regards to the quarterback. You know I stood behind Losman all season. Your last tidbit, however, about "a player or two away", I believe is false. If this team was 7-9 with a lack of talent - regardless of whose fault it is - why can't even marginal offensive improvement (say, up to #19-24 in each category) get them above .500? Why can't a couple of game-breakers on offense, and a situational dominant pass rusher, give the Bills a playmaking boost on both sides of the ball to (finally) mask some of their deficiencies? This team isn't a player or two away from dominating, but they've already contended. They're close.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 4, 2008 9:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Reply

Brian,

Thanks for the comments. Much appreciated. I completely agree. The Bills could be "a player or two away" from getting in the playoffs in 2008, but certainly not dominating.

by Fort Worth on Jan 4, 2008 10:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't understand the anti-edwards sentiment.

JP Losman was comical in his first post-injury year. He was comical to begin his second year. The offense was scaled back and he played effectively enough to not lose games. His relatively (to him) explosive plays came against bad opponents, like in the Houston and Tennessee games.

Edwards has been an average nfl quarterback this season. And he's a rookie. In fact, he's shown the ability to do what i don't think any quarterback has done in a bills uniform for quite some time - sense pressure, and get the ball out of his hands. When the kid is on, he makes accurate throws. Don't make the mistake of confusing accuracy with completion percentage. He's had trouble throwing in bad conditions, i'll admit, and he's made some bad, bad throws when he's pressing to win a game - but what qb, let alone rookie qb doesn't. At comparable stages in their career, trent edwards has shown far more upside than jp losman.

Losman suffers from attributes that will make any team a losing team, he cannot consistently throw from the pocket, because he does not show the ability to feel pressure and just shift rather than bolt. He puts the ball on the ground. And, his short to medium range throws are consistently off the mark, though many times they'll be completed. And he has the uncanny knack for throwing critical interceptions.

and again, fort worth, i'll defend the bigger, faster, stronger comment. We're faster at LB and Safety, we're Bigger and Stronger at OL.

In fact Brian, I completely disagree with your talent bashing. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that this Bills team has one of the BEST offensive lines in football. It is certainly a good starting point from which to build a successful offensive team.

by sri on Jan 5, 2008 9:20 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Re: "Talent bashing"

Of course, sri, I didn't mean that the Bills had no talent. I, too, really like the offensive line - and I'll add running back and safety to that list as well. But can you honestly say that we couldn't use an upgrade - whether as a starter or in depth terms - at any other position? We need a vet QB now that Losman wants out; we need help at WR and TE, a pass rusher, a run-stuffer, a possible replacement for Ellison and depth at linebacker, depth and a possible starter at corner. That is the overall lack of talent I refer to - but yes, there are some obvious building blocks.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 5, 2008 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i was only talking about your mularkey-jauron

comparison. it looked like you said that this team has nowhere near the talent that mularkey floundered with.

i don't know. our safeties back then were slow and old, our offensive line was some sort of wet paper product, drew bledsoe is somewhere still holding onto a football for too long, moulds was on the downside of his career, and peerless was a product of having a decent moulds across from him.

i really think that the talent level is comparable. this will be a quality team, and it does need some serious upgrades, and healthy, we are "one player away" from fielding an excellent linebacking corps, i also want a playmaking big-receiver/TE, a vet qb, another stud on the DL and depth all over (though, arguably, this season improves that situation.)

i still don't understand the philosophy of a no-fullback system. what if marshawn had tony richardson or lorenzo neal? or even sam gash??

i definitely didn't mean to imply that our overall talent level is superior, but as opposed to fort worth, i think pieces are there to give us a solid core to add playmakers to.

by sri on Jan 5, 2008 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gotcha

I should clarify - I think that Mularkey's defensive talent was clearly superior. They did finish #2 in the league in '04, Mularkey's rookie season, after all. Most of those players are gone now, but that '04 defense was very solid. Jauron hasn't had that yet in Buffalo.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 5, 2008 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

RE: I don't understand the anti-edwards sentiment.

sri,

Thanks for the comments. To me, Losman's poor performance in 2005 is not "comical" because nobody tried to mask the truth of his performance. However, comparing Losman's record vs. Edwards' record as starting quarterbacks this season is "comical" to me because it decieves the truth. While Edwards may have a better record than Losman this season, that statistic is padded in Edwards' favor because he gets credit for winning the second Jets game, but no credit for losing the first Patriots game (the opposite for Losman). Just a funny little stat, nothing more, nothing less.

In addition, my concern at quarterback is not about the 2007 Edwards vs. the 2005 Losman. It's about Edwards now vs. Losman now. Right now, many fans say that Edwards has several "advantages" over Losman: pocket presence, progression reads, more consistent short/intermediate accuracy, quick release, ball security, and poise. How important is pocket presence? If Losman's pocket presence is not good enough, can it be improved? The difference in their progression reads may simply be that Edwards is more disiplined and Losman is pressing, trying to make a play (sticking on his first or second read too long, by the time he gets to his third read it's too late, etc.). Losman's inconsistent short/intermediate accuracy may be due to mechanical flaws (footwork, keeping his shoulders square to the line of scrimmage, etc.), which are correctable. Yes, Edwards does have a quicker release than Losman, but not by a significant margin. Ball security and poise are a wash. Again, Edwards now vs. Losman now. I do not view Losman's fiery, competitive demeanor as a negative or that he lacks poise. I think that most of Edwards' advertised "advantages" over Losman are inflated.

On the other hand, my primary concern with Edwards is his upside. Edwards obviously has a very high floor, but how high is his ceiling? Whether or not he can ascend is directly tied to his talent. Talent is something you are born with; you have it or you don't. Quite frankly, I question his arm strength. A lot of fans think that arm strength is only about throwing the deep ball, which is incorrect. Edwards can not consistently hit the deep out, throw from the opposite hashmark, or into tight windows 15 yards downfield. For example, I do not believe that Edwards could have made that winning throw to Peerless in the Houston game or the sideline throw to Roscoe in the Jacksonville game, as Losman did last season. Will Marshawhn Lynch ever see the end of eight defenders in the box? I am not sure that Edwards can make defenses pay for stacking the box. I am not sure that Edwards can force defenses to defend every area of the field. Do not fear; be feared. You must want to win, to win. Smell blood like a shark; go for the throat. Additionally, I also question Edwards' durability and performance in bad weather.

Also, Losman's multiple big, explosive plays last season were not relative to Losman; they were relative to the entire league.

Again, am I Losman's friend or relative? No. Am I Losman's enabler or in denial? Possibly. Am I a sucker for elite talent, toughness, and competitiveness? Absolutely. Whether you favor Edwards, Losman, or acquiring a new quarterback, I will reiterate my statement from my initial post: It makes me sick to think that the Bills will choose the easy way out when they could possibly have something much better.

In general, if significant changes are in order on offense, we will see what happens. Go Bills!

by Fort Worth on Jan 5, 2008 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

well,

at this point i think the edwards-now v. losman-now argument is sort of like beating a dead horse.

i don't think pocket awareness and ability to digest your reads are acquired traits. i also think the knock on edwards' arm-strength is overblown. he hits players 15 yards downfield with zip, and in stride. in...stride.

yeah, i'll concede, he's thrown some pathetic balls on deep outs - one from last weekends game against the eagles still haunts me.

but unlike the attributes that you've listed as being attributable to edwards and lacking in losman, i think that consistent practice on that route, in all types of weather conditions will improve his ability to make that play.

in fact i remember seeing brady in the beginning, and i (with lots of bias) and lots of people without any bias severely questioned his arm strength. called him a system quarterback. as he's slowly progressed through his system, and mastered it, he's a guy now that makes all the throws.

i sincerely believe we'll see that from trent. and where our disagreement lies, i believe, is what is an innate and what is a learned characteristic in qb's. i don't think jp can ever be taught the intangible characteristics trent has. i do think that repetition will go a far way to mask whatever talent disparity many seem to believe there is between trent and jp.

obviously, you feel the precise opposite way.

by sri on Jan 5, 2008 2:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

also

sign lee evans long term. he's the type of solid character guy to build a team around. he personifies the core of our team. with a threat on the other side of the field, evans will be an exceptional player.

i really don't want to see this team lurch around in the hopes of striking gold. i don't think that's how this league works. there are several, very conservative coaches who, when they were given a long rope have experienced success. see Joe Gibbs in the 80s. nothing Gibbs does is in the least bit flashy or ballsy. he's a guy that was given the opportunity.

we have to stick with jauron. we have to stick with our general scheme of talent evaluation.

but the offensive coordinator, on the other hand...

by sri on Jan 5, 2008 9:29 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

and another thing

i HATE connor byrne.

in fact he drove me straight to your blog. i think i'd rather play that game where you spread out your fingers on a board and go up and down with a knife across your hand trying not to hit your fingers, except slam the knife down on on each one of my fingers right at the finger nail than read one of his columns again.

run-on sentence.

i'm sorry, but he's too much of a negative nelly for me.

by sri on Jan 5, 2008 2:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Re: Byrne

His stuff has gone from great to awful in a pretty quick span. I really enjoyed his writing over the summer, but it seems like he's merely writing popular opinion a lot - and the repetition, especially in this case, is awful. I'm glad you're here because of him, but to be honest, he was one of the people I looked up to when I first started this gig. :)

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 5, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is negativity...

For a different perspective, check this out:

http://www.billszone.com/mtlog/archives/2008/01/03/afc_east_report_bills_wrap.php

Comments, anyone?

by Fort Worth on Jan 6, 2008 12:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

Weiler is Jerry Sullivan lite. Not a fan of his stuff. Seriously, these articles that are so prevalent leave me saying "... yeah, no kidding" most of the time. We know we suck. Instead of talking about it all the time - like Byrne and Weiler and Sullivan and pretty much everybody else out there like to do - why not talk about something that doesn't invoke masochism? I'll never get it. Ever.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 6, 2008 8:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs