metzelaars_lives

?? I'm saying it wasn't cut and dry. In order for someone to claim it was a forward lateral, it would have to have been thrown clearly forward. Cut and dry. It wasn't. Tie goes to the runner. If it looks like it was thrown laterally, then it's a good play. If someone comes on here and says that the aerial footage clearly shows (cut and dry) that it was a forward lateral, then I will show you a unicorn.

Based on the aerial replay, you saw that ball travel forward and not laterally? And the evidence was overwhelming enough for you that you believe the refs should have overturned the (no) call they made on the field? This is a classic example of Bills fan delusion. You are aware that you can throw a ball laterally and it's the same as if it traveled backward, correct? Just want to make sure we're on the same page.

IT WAS NOT A FORWARD LATERAL. On the other hand, that season in the NHL, they had been unbelievably consistent calling in the crease on every single play where a player was even remotely touching the crease with a tiny fraction of their skate. And they would use video replay every time it was in question- even in the most meaningless middle-of-the-season games. And then the game-winning goal of the Stanley Cup finals is scored by a player whose entire skate is blatantly in the crease and they don't review it? It's really one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard of in sports. It's the reason the NHL is the NHL and the NFL is the NFL. Unfortunately for Bills fans, the refs got that one 100% right. It was a totally lateral/sideways throw, which, according to the rules, constitutes a legal lateral. Get over it. It's 2013.

I agree with most of what you say, but: a) I don't care what Carrington was drafted to play, he broke out last year as a 4-3 DT and it clearly looked like his natural position. But I think you'd probably agree that football players are football players (successful teams like the Ravens and Steelers roll this way) and if Carrington's a football player then he will continue to progress no matter where he plays. b) Also, people love to forget that Kyle Williams' best season was as a straight up NT in 2010. That season was when he was rated like the best defensive player on PFF, made his first pro bowl and was really the season that made him thought of as the player he is today. Does anyone remember just how dominant he was in that game against the Steelers?!?!? The Stevie drop game? It was literally- and I'm not being hyperbolic- the best single game performance I've ever seen by a Bills defensive player in my life. And I go back awhile. But alas, I think he's lost a step due to injuries. I just think that, again, you're overthinking the positional aspect of it.

See that's where I'd disagree with you. Spiller is a pretty quick back but let's not get carried away, I mean he's no Dennis Pitta.

Nice! Only 4 weeks away!

The problem is that if the Rams move to LA, then St. Louis is at the top of the list of cities to get a team. Bottom line, yes I would be happy if the Jaguars, Raiders, Chargers or Rams move to LA but all that really does is buy us a little bit extra time. It would not change the fact that they need a new stadium at some point. And also you meant "prospective." But that's OK.

Don't really feel like reading through all these, but toughness/grit/leadership: Ryan Fitzpatrick. Gonna miss that dude. Just wish he was a little better.

He averaged 27.6 per return. That's pretty good. Especially since they moved the kickoffs up to the 35. But yeah, I don't think he's worth $4 million per. I just don't like when people jump all over him and say he's completely useless

OK, couple things: Number one, I don't really care if they cut Brad Smith. In fact, I think if he doesn't agree to some sort of re-structure, then they should cut him. He's not worth $4 million. My contention is that he's a decent football player and does not suck. Number two, you say why not line up Spiller or Jackson on 3rd and 2? Because Brad Smith has shown- again particularly at the beginning of 2011- that he is more capable of getting those 2 yards from the wildcat with a stacked box than Spiller or Jackson are from a conventional formation. How often does it work that we run Jackson right up the middle on 3rd and 2 when the whole stadium knows he's getting the football? Thought so. I'll even say this: I think Tim Tebow is not a top 100 qb in football. In other words, I don't think he's worthy of being a 3rd stringer on an NFL roster. Quite frankly, I don't think he would be very good in a league like the CFL. All that being said, I think when he lines up under center on a 3rd and 2, I don't think there's many qb's in football that give you a better shot at a first down in that particular situation. And that's why I like Brad Smith. He can get yards when everyone in the stadium knows he's running because there's always that "what are they up to?" factor. I think the bottom line is that I think the wildcat has more value than you do.

Your hatred for Brad Smith is truly a waste of hate. Sounds to me like you just hate the wildcat, period. It's like a friend in college who hated Home Improvement and Mrs. Doubtfire. Why? They're not hurting anyone and neither is Brad Smith. Look at his numbers from the last two years on the Bills: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SmitBr01.htm In 2011, when they were off to that hot start, they would line him up on 3rd and 2, the whole stadium knew he was running and he would always patiently make his way for a 3 yard gain. It was actually really working. Then they inexplicably abandoned it. Despite that fact, he ended up with 4.4 yards/carry when the whole stadium knew he was running every time he stepped on the field. And then last year, he averaged 8.7 yards a carry! Not to mention he was great as a kick returner last year. He's a gadget player and probably overpaid. Not sure what you were expecting from him. And to be honest, he's been surprisingly pretty sure-handed as a receiver as well. So yeah, I'd have to go ahead and sort of disagree with you on that one...

I'll play along, not much else going on so why not. I think 4 spots are 100% locks: SJ, Graham, Woods and Goodwin. I think after that you got: Easley, Smith, Rogers, Kaufmann, Elliott, Hogan, et al. I think they will end up keeping 7 this year to be perfectly honest (Easley, Smith and Rogers). I think the organization wants Easley to take a step forward. They've been so patient with him, why would they wait until he's finally healthy and ready to go and then cut him. Doesn't make a lot of sense. In fact, I kind of think if Easley can stay healthy, he's in the conversation for the #3 receiver spot after SJ and Woods. I think Nix wants it to unfold that way on account of his speed and size. I agree with you that Smith is too valuable as a special teamer to let go. I think Rogers just has to show he can stay out of trouble. I really can't see who they cut at this point. For all I know they keep Kaufmann too as a hybrid WR/TE. I guess we'll find out.

I think any veteran poster definitely thought that the title of this thread referred to the poster named meathead. Which would've been a much more interesting and noteworthy thread as far as I'm concerned. I'm as big a Bills fan as there is and I'm not sure I've ever heard Mike Mularkey referred to as "meathead." Was he like a dumb guy or something?

If you're going to use those adjectives to describe Nelson's game, I would also add "sure-handed, clutch, good blocking, consistent and reliable." It's not always about who's the fastest guy with the most upside. For instance, I would venture to predict that Nelson has already shown more in his two full years with the Bills than either Graham or Goodwin will ever show. I guess time will tell. But allow me to go on record as saying that you could not ask any more out of a #3 wide receiver than David Nelson gives you.

Fluffhead, I'm usually with ya- especially considering I'll be seeing my 50th phish show this summer- but if you're going to tell me that you're cool with the Oregon uniform charade vs. the nice traditional uniforms they used to wear when Tony Graziani took them to the Rose Bowl, or when you watch a game between two traditional teams and one of them is wearing black (when their colors have nothing to with black) and the logo on one side of the helmet is three times the size of the logo on the other side and it's all glittery- if you're cool with that, then we'll have to agree to disagree. The Jaguars are the first team to go in that direction with their new multi-colored helmet that changes color depending on the sun or some s***. Call me crazy but I like the Green Bay Packers uniforms. Or the Chiefs. Or the Steelers. Or the Colts. I'm on that side of the fence and I wish the Bills would try and stay on that side of the fence as well.

Cue the "I don't care if the Bills wear pink as long as they win" post...

Aaron Williams was literally a top 5 worst Bill last season, so not sure about the love he's getting. If you strictly base it on where they stand heading into this season (not potential) relative to other guys at their position throughout the league, my list goes: 1. Spiller 2. Byrd 3. Mario Williams 4. Stevie Johnson 5. Wood * Levitre would have been 3rd or 4th Kyle Williams now or 2010?

I can sense your sarcasm, so I'll give you an example. Let's say the St, Louis Cardinals were about to host a 10-game homestand against the Astros, the Marlins and the Cubs. They may be favored in each game individually. So in a sense, they are "favored to win in 10 games." But that doesn't mean the over/under on their win total is 10 for the homestand. While they may be favored to win each night, odds are that they won't win every single game over the course of the 10. I really hope that makes more sense for you.

Of course it is. What the original poster does not understand is that Buffalo is only favored in 3 games. The over/under on their win total is 6 or 6.5 depending on what website you use. So if San Francisco is favored to win in 14 of their games, that doesn't mean the over/under on their win total would be 14. It's a pretty simple concept. And I'm so sick of people saying "Vegas." There is no one Vegas consensus odds. There are thousands of sportsbooks all with odds of their own, in Vegas and otherwise.

How sweet is the Donruss Rated Rookie shirt that Manuel is sporting? That's before his time, there's no way he knows about 80's baseball cards... Ryan Turnley looks like a giant lesbian.

This is not a well thought-out argument because, while I agree that Buffalo isn't Miami or San Diego, THOSE PLACES ALREADY HAVE TEAMS. There aren't these giant markets with beautiful palm trees and rabid football fans just sitting there. Who are possible football markets in North America? Toronto? This Bills-Toronto thing has been a godsend if nothing else because it has exposed Toronto as not being an NFL market. No one's moving a team there at this point. Oklahoma City? San Antonio? Sorry, neither are bigger enough than Buffalo for a new owner to roll the dice on either of them being a good football market. The difference in market sizes between them and Buffalo is too small for someone to justify moving a team like the Bills with such a rich football tradition. That leaves LA. LA is the only market that anyone should worry about. That is why we have to hope that San Diego, Oakland or Jacksonville move there first because, despite the recent hiccup, I can assure you that LA gets a team at some point. But please stop pretending that there are all these big "nice weather" markets just sitting there waiting for a team to fall into their laps.

I'll give you that. I think relative to their positions, they're probably pretty close right now. I do think Chandler's ceiling is a little higher though. I think in the right offense he could be a top 5-10 tight end in the league. I've been pretty bullish on Chandler for awhile now.

I'm gonna go with Chandler. The guy catches pretty much everything thrown in his direction and by the end of last year, he had really transformed himself from a reliable red zone target into a guy who could make plays in the open field. I think given the right situation he could be one of the better tight ends in the league. Either a) you don't follow the team very closely because the guy is useless or b) this is a feeble attempt at humor. Not sure what you're going for on that one.

"Bills fans" encompasses a great deal of human beings. Yeah, if you go to Lambeau and the Bills are playing the Packers, the Bills fans you meet there are going to be great people. If you go to any Bills Backers bar across the country and meet Buffalo ex-pats, they're going to be great people. If you go to a game at Rich Stadium earlier in the season when tickets aren't close to free and park in one of the lots further from the stadium, you're going to meet some of the best fans in the league. Like literally top 5 fans in the league. If however, you go to a Bills game in December and the Bills are already out of it and you walk through the main lot about a half hour before kickoff, you are going to see one of the saddest, most pathetic displays of 'fandom' in professional sports. And for anyone who insists that all stadiums have a contigent of 'fans' like the Bills do, you simply have not been to other stadiums like I have. I'm talking about the early 20's guys who have never even heard of one Pete Metzelaars, who have a McGahee jersey that they've taped over the nameplate with "McDrunk," are usually going to have a chinstrap beard, are blaring horrendous R&B music (not 70's R&B), are funneling beers, puking, looking to start a fight with anyone that looks at them wrong and most likely got their ticket for $5 but won't even make it til halftime without getting kicked out.

Just think if he was drafted third. Imagine how disappointed you'd be in him then.