bobobonators

Spiderweb: Not really meant towards you, but I'm not sure why Hairston gets so much grief around here. I've seen many people comment on Hairston as if he's lazy and chose not to play this season and he's really not injured/or really does not have an illness. I'm sure word of that would've gotten out, and it still may get out...who knows. If he did have an illness, he's not required to disclose it specifically. So I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until I hear otherwise and hope he gets healthy. I'm counting on him being healthy in 2014..he's young and has the upside we may need either to play at RT or at G down the line. At a minimum, he can be solid depth.

CKLAPKA: just so I follow. Under your scenario, in NFC, GB, SF, Hawks, & Eagles would be guaranteed a playoff spot this year. Got that. And then Saints/SF would make the "wild card"/or whatever we'd call it hereafter. Got that. So under your scenario, Hawks would be #1; Panthers #2; SF #3 (tiebreaker would have to go to Panthers since they won H2H); Saints #4; Eagles #5; and GB #6. So SF woulda played GB (in SF) and Saints woulda played Eagles (in NO). But what I don't follow is the logic of this on a whole. Because on one side you're saying, who cares about the division when ranking the playoff games (SF>GB despite SF not winning their division) but on other hand you're also saying we do care about division b/c we're excluding other teams from playoffs despite having a better record than a division winner (GB > Cardinals despite not having a better record than the Cardinals) That, in my opinion, would be not much different than the current system. It would still be flawed. Your scenario would be fine by me, but if we removed divisions and just had 2 conferences. The entire point of winning your division is obviously to get into the playoffs, but to also have at least 1 home game. Your scenario may take away from some divisional races towards the end of the season b/c you're removing any incentive to win the division other than the obvious: making the playoffs. Because there may be a scenario where there are 2 elite teams in a division and by Week 16 they may already know that regardless of W/L, they're going to have a better record than a 7-8 team who may only win their division at 8-8 and they'll get that home game over that 8-8 team.

CKLAPKA: Teams don't have exact schedules. If you're going to do what you state, you will then have to take into account strength of schedule if you really do care about "fairness". What would the point be to winnng a division? Might as well do away with them..which might not be a bad thing.

I'm not big on Pears for the very fact that he's average at best, and turning 32 this summer. He is what he is, and that arrow is pointing down. Whether it's Hairston or a FA like Saffold, that position needs to be upgraded (along with LG obviously).

Rubes: I don't necessarily disagree with you. Yes, we have holes, but how many holes do we actually have? Fact is, better play from the QB position this season (regardless of player - just production from the position) and one can argue that we're possibly in the playoffs. Of all the holes we have, lack of quality QB play still remains at the top of the list. Much the same way I can sit here and say we need to sign an O-lineman or draft a Guard, there are a bunch of young players on our roster that are still "unproven" and could end up filling a need on the OL. Of course we don't know what we have in EJ. Even more reason to make sure we have a viable replacement in place. Drafting a QB rd 1 this year won't prevent EJ from starting. EJ playing poorly will prevent EJ from starting. And if that's the case, we'll be ahead of the curve with his replacement. Again, not saying that we must take a QB; just saying that if a no-brainer is there at 9 (Manziel), it would be foolish not to take him b/c we "need" a LB.

At the end of the day, it's impossible to have a perfect system. Most reasonable thing to do is that division winner gets home game, regardless of record (SF @ GB for example). There are countless factors that go into a team's W/L record over the season and sometimes one could argue that the 9-7 team that won their division had a much tougher strength of schedule than the team that finished 10-6 and second place in their division. Not saying that was the case this year, but that scenario could occur and then would that really be "fair" to give the 10-6 team a home game over the division winner at 9-7? Not sure. At least this way, it's easily known: win your division and get a home game.

What really gets me about people who argue against drafting a QB in the 1st round again is the following: That group of people assume that by drafting another QB, we're automatically giving up on EJ. That's not the case. We're simply adding talent to a position (which just so happens to be the most important position in the NFL) where we currently lack QUALITY depth. The beauty is, the new rookie wage scale allows us to draft another QB early without crippling our cap numbers...something that wasn't feasible in the past. To me, the idea of not drafting QB's early in back to back years is an antiquated one. I'm not saying we have to draft another QB early, but if we did, I certainly wouldn't go nuts.

Jester: how are the playoffs "watered down"? That GB game was a fabulous game and came down to the wire. Looking at standings, GB should have lost by 20 against SF - that's what makes the NFL different than other leagues. Much the same way an "inferior" SD went to Cincy and clobbered them over the head and stole their lunch money.

26Corner: I'm already salivating at the thought. This makes too much sense not to do. And like someone else mentioned, reduce the preseason games from 4 to 2 and we're set! CAN'T WAIT.

and also how great would Weeks 16 and 17 be when you have one more wild card spot? Literally every game would have playoff implications.

This year, either Pitt or Ravens would've made it for AFC and the Cardinals for the NFC. I like it

I think I like it. Reason: Aside from 2-3 teams, there is so much parity in the NFL that there is very little difference between 7-9 and 8-8 teams and those that usually make the playoffs at 9-7 or 10-6. We'd see a lot of upsets, I'm sure. Which is entertaining.

The Wiz: though I agree a ten yd penalty for offensive holding sucks, I think the last thing this league needs is less penalty yards for the offensive side. It's hard enough to play defense in this league as is.

People love to complain about the NFL and that it's not what it used to be. The NFL is the most entertaining professional league in this country, hands down.

San Jose: completely agree. I suppose one possible positive in this respect is that if anyone should know something about the O-line, it should be Marrone. Hopefully he'll be able to find a couple of diamonds in the rough and turn that group around.

My question is what do we possibly have in Mark Asper, McClain, Unga, and Hairston. And can any of those 4 be an answer to at least ONE starting spot on the O-line. O-line players always fascinate me in that there are countless examples across the league of unheralded players in college becoming legit starters in the NFL. I'm certainly no expert on O-lineman - they're a mystery to me. My one complaint about the Bills' O-line for the last few years has been the same: they are soft. Our O-line, when push comes to shove, gets shoved around. Countless times we have been unable to convert on short yardage. This O-line needs a player or two to give it a bit of a mean streak; to give it some attitude.

I personally dont think injury concern should be a worry (though injuries are impossible to predict) Theres something to be said about certain players being elusive. Manziel is elusive and smart. Much like russel wilson. I didnt see him taking too many horrible hits in college. Hes also not flutie-like in size. Unlike vick, hes a pass-first QB and scrambles when necessary. Id take Manziel in a HEARTBEAT. He dominated alabama 2x's, he didnt just pad his stats vs the Troy's of college football. The guy has all the physical tools and grit - something that cant be taught.

The Colts are but 1 of 31 teams that have made the playoffs and have been more competitive than the bills over the last 14 years. Yes, every single other team in the NFL has had more success, at a given point in time, than the bills have over the last 14 years. It has absolutely nothing to do with luck and everything to do with poor scouting, poor coaching and poor managing.

Sure you can. The poignant difference being that no other team has a 14 yr playoff drought.

Lmao! Spilt milk? 14 years of not sniffing the playoffs and u make that remark? You must have low standards in life. Its ok, son, so you got an F in 3 classes. No use in crying over spilt milk. Shoot for that C next time.

And we took the DUD. Unreal.

This has been Boyd in college his entire career. Just mind-numbing throws

Lmfao. I saw that in a commercial the other day and just shook my head. City folks just dont understand. Lmao

Im not famous and ive never done this. So it always amazes me when famous people send pics of their junk out. http://deadspin.com/geno-smith-undergoes-jets-rite-of-passage-a-rooster-shot-1493055000

Lol. What do you propose they do instead??? Not sign cutler and go with who at QB in 2014 2015 2016, etc? Mark Sanchez?