Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 59
  1. #31

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???



    **AHEM!!**

    I'll take the time to step away from you cats bickering like a bunch of old hags at Bingo Night in South Baltimore and get back to the actual (gasp!) TOPIC of this thread.

    I don't think Billick will step back into the shark tank as anything less than a HC and not unless the situation fits his specific parameters <--(Billick-speak).

    Also, I feel it's too soon for him to do so and that he'll need a couple of years to lick his wounds and collect his money, all while raising the IQ of whichever NFL program he decides to let employ him...

    I know I'll be watching attentively with pen and pad whenever he's on...

    UNLEASH THE BEASTS!!!!




  2. #32

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    If the Ravens had drafted Leftwich and he didn't pan out, as he hasn't panned out, then I bet our "fans" would be saying that Leftwich was Billick's boy but Ozzie wanted Boller.




  3. #33

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by Losac View Post
    Who needs him when you have a green rookie who can throw the ball through the goal posts from his knees!
    Losac, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you play NFL football with the team you have, not the team you want.

    I really hadn't pegged you for one of the ones who thought Redman should have been starting, and was evilly ruined by Brian Billick. It's not like Redman *ever* did anything to make me wonder, but perhaps the fact that Redman was once again on an NFL team this year is justification in your mind for second guessing that decision made six years ago.

    Color me wrong, I guess.

    If you *are* one of those folks then I don't care to discuss it anymore, no offense.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,504

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by highwater View Post
    Then why did the Ravens try to trade up with the Vikings to draft Leftwich? If the Vikings answer the phone and get things done in a timely manner, Boller doesn't even get drafted by the Ravens.

    Of course Billick had some input into some of these decisions, but stop turning him into the personnel guy. He wasn't.
    No team focuses on ONE player. They didnt target Leftwich and nobody else. Billick has a long track record with pac-10 schools. Boller had is eye.

    When did I say he is the personnel guy??? Just because he doesnt make the final decision doesnt mean his input ranks low. He was the chef (as is Harbaugh now) and has the biggest say on what ingrediants he wants.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  5. #35

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    No team focuses on ONE player. They didnt target Leftwich and nobody else. Billick has a long track record with pac-10 schools. Boller had is eye.

    When did I say he is the personnel guy??? Just because he doesnt make the final decision doesnt mean his input ranks low. He was the chef (as is Harbaugh now) and has the biggest say on what ingrediants he wants.
    No.

    No no no no no no.

    No.

    Houston stating things as fact does not make them so.

    Sorry.

    Billick did *not* have responsibility for drafting when he was here as head coach.

    Nevermind that we were literally desperate for a quarterback, because of the early departure of Grbac, and we needed somebody who could take snaps. We got someone at pick 19 who is still in the league, five years later. Other teams have done worse at qb with better picks.

    Boller was *Ozzie's* pick. However much Billick may have liked him or disliked him, he was Ozzie's pick. It is not the Vice President who signs a bill into law.

    :brickwall:
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,504

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    No.

    No no no no no no.

    No.

    Houston stating things as fact does not make them so.

    Sorry.

    Billick did *not* have responsibility for drafting when he was here as head coach.
    Uhh ... I never said he did.

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Nevermind that we were literally desperate for a quarterback, because of the early departure of Grbac, and we needed somebody who could take snaps. We got someone at pick 19 who is still in the league, five years later. Other teams have done worse at qb with better picks.

    Boller was *Ozzie's* pick. However much Billick may have liked him or disliked him, he was Ozzie's pick. It is not the Vice President who signs a bill into law.

    :brickwall:
    I agree. Arent we saying the same thing? Yes, of course, its not Billick alone. I've said that and will always say it. But his input is much larger then you give him credit for. Teams do not become succesful with GM's who are in the coaches way -- see down 95 with the Maryland Redskins.

    Are you saying that Billick simply got players handed to him and was told to make due with what he got?

    That's not very realistic and if Next Man Up is accurate, that's not a realistic assumption on your part.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  7. #37

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Houston you are saying Ozzie was gm, and Billick had some responsibility for the selection of Kyle Boller because of Billick's influence over the decision making process.

    What I am saying is, Ozzie was gm, and Ozzie took the input of coaches at all levels, including position coaches, and of course the recommendations of his own staff, before he and he alone took responsibility for making draft selections. Brian's voice was one of many in Ozzie's ear.

    Houston don't wave Next Man Up at me. I read it. Did you?
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,504

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Houston you are saying Ozzie was gm, and Billick had some responsibility for the selection of Kyle Boller because of Billick's influence over the decision making process.
    Of course not. I do say he (and now Harbaugh) has strong input. If he or Harbaugh go to Ozzie and says they want Joe Schmo, Ozzie will do what he can to make it happen. Why else was every head coach at the senior games this past weekend?

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    What I am saying is, Ozzie was gm, and Ozzie took the input of coaches at all levels, including position coaches, and of course the recommendations of his own staff, before he and he alone took responsibility for making draft selections. Brian's voice was one of many in Ozzie's ear.

    Houston don't wave Next Man Up at me. I read it. Did you?
    Yeah. Read it twice. And it's quite detailed how beholdened Billick was to Boller. I dont doubt Ozzie liked him too. Yes, Billick was one of many voices. But I think it's clear, based on local and national media combined with inside reports like Next Man Up, that Billick had more then just a one-voice say in who we drafted.

    Yes, Ozzie has final say. That's the job of the GM. But he doesnt ship people to the coach that the coach doesnt want either.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  9. #39

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven
    He was the chef (as is Harbaugh now) and has the biggest say on what ingrediants he wants.
    Wrong again -- of course Billick had some input, as any HC should, but he did not have the "biggest say." That would belong to Ozzie.

    And yes, I read "Next Man Up" too. We seem to be interpreting it differently.




  10. #40

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Of course not. I do say he (and now Harbaugh) has strong input. If he or Harbaugh go to Ozzie and says they want Joe Schmo, Ozzie will do what he can to make it happen. Why else was every head coach at the senior games this past weekend?
    You keep making it sound like Ozzie is some kind of waiter taking orders from his coaches.

    That's just wrong. Coaches can voice their opinions just as my kids can voice their opinions at family dinner, and the Vice President can voice his opinion about whether a bill becomes a law.

    If you were right, why would the scouts not work for the coaching staff, instead of for the gm?

    Number of times read Next Man Up =/= Number of times understood Next Man Up

    You remain obstinately wrong on a simple point, and I no longer am interested in persuading you.

    Cheers!
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  11. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,504

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    You keep making it sound like Ozzie is some kind of waiter taking orders from his coaches.
    No. I didnt even suggest that. It's not an either / or proposition. Yes, Billick is the coach and has input. Yes, Ozzzie has the final say. ALL NFL teams rely on a coaches input on selecting people -- Im not saying nothing more or nothing less.

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    That's just wrong. Coaches can voice their opinions just as my kids can voice their opinions at family dinner, and the Vice President can voice his opinion about whether a bill becomes a law.

    If you were right, why would the scouts not work for the coaching staff, instead of for the gm?

    Number of times read Next Man Up =/= Number of times understood Next Man Up

    You remain obstinately wrong on a simple point, and I no longer am interested in persuading you.

    Cheers!
    And to quote you, just because you state it as fact, doesnt make it so. Slam the book, the media, me, etc all you want but every NFL uses their coaches input on making personnel desicisons. These player picks do not happen in a vacuum.

    I never said scouts work for the coach. Not sure why you keep reading into my posts on this. Scouts work for the GM. (???)
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  12. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,504

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by highwater View Post
    Wrong again -- of course Billick had some input, as any HC should, but he did not have the "biggest say." That would belong to Ozzie.

    And yes, I read "Next Man Up" too. We seem to be interpreting it differently.
    I guess we're defining "biggest say" differently.

    If Harbaugh walked into Ozzie's office tomorrow and said he wanted ... oh, I dont know .... Colt McCoy really badly, Ozzie would find a way to make it happen. (Before anyone else says it, I know he isnt coming out. Im using his name as an example since he's on my TV right now).

    Now, because of that, I do not for one second suggest that Ozzie doesnt have a say, make the final decision, etc.

    What I am saying is that the process, like almsot everything in coaching is a partnership.

    Yes, there are players that Ozzies wants and Ozzie gets, more times then we probably know. But if Harbaugh says a certain player gives them the best chance to win, Ozzie is smart enough to not get in the way (unless he thinks the guy is not good for the team).

    But I do not agree, based on a huge amount of reports, major parts of a book, local sports reporters, etc, that tell me the coach gets far more say in the decisions than some here give him credit for.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Perry Hall
    Posts
    2,888

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Losac, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you play NFL football with the team you have, not the team you want.

    I really hadn't pegged you for one of the ones who thought Redman should have been starting, and was evilly ruined by Brian Billick. It's not like Redman *ever* did anything to make me wonder, but perhaps the fact that Redman was once again on an NFL team this year is justification in your mind for second guessing that decision made six years ago.

    Color me wrong, I guess.

    If you *are* one of those folks then I don't care to discuss it anymore, no offense.
    If you draft a QB and plan to develop him as your franchise QB, it's never a good decision to start him right away as a rookie. Sure, it works once in awhile (Worthlessberger), but usually it hurts the development more than it helps. In the long term, it was more "prudent" (if you like Billick speak) to let Boller sit for at least a year to let the game sink in.

    Redman should have been cut, but I do seem to remember going to the playoffs that year behind Anthony Wright.

    I think most people universally admit one of Billick's main mistakes was to start Boller right out of the gate, but apparently there are a few who think it was a good decision.




  14. #44

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Losac we can agree starting Boller as a rookie was terrible for Boller, for sure. But somebody has to start, for the team. That conversation is water under the bridge, as far as I'm concerned.

    Houston you have successfully backed off your point, so I don't think we disagree anymore. Billick has input, like all coaches do. GM's do the drafting, which is why the scouts work for *them*. The coaches can request things of the gms just as anyone supervised can request something of the supervisor.

    Sounds good to me!
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  15. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,504

    Re: Brian Billick employed again ???

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Houston you have successfully backed off your point, so I don't think we disagree anymore. Billick has input, like all coaches do. GM's do the drafting, which is why the scouts work for *them*. The coaches can request things of the gms just as anyone supervised can request something of the supervisor.
    I didnt back off of anything. Go back and re-read my posts since getting to these boards and I have said the same thing.

    Three straight responses and you've succesfully read into all three.

    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland