SouthGeorgiaBillsFan

Nice original thought but I have to disagree. The whole reason you want to control TOP is so that you fatigue the other team's defense while yours rests - and I'm not just talking about cardio-respiratory endurance either. The violent nature of the game exacts a toll on the body over the course of the game, and by running the ball consistently, you ensure that the other team is getting beat on consistently. Passing is much more about skill and finesse, and doesn't not exact nearly the same cost in terms of physical punishment on defenders' bodies. This is why, especially in the case of power runners, running games tend to open up in the second halves of games, and also why TOP is highly valuable.

It wasn't like we were a better team, or even a good team, either.

I like the idea but I don't believe it will happen. I still propose we just use two right tackles and roll out every play.

Bull sh--. You have that causality backwards. If he was a legitimate #2 WR we wouldn't have problems being locked down by one defensive scheme. If he was a legitimate #2 WR he would be able to at least *occasionally* exploit single coverage, rather than being completely locked down in man to man. He catches passes over the middle because the only time he is ever open is when he is running underneath a zone. He can't beat the single coverage because he isn't #2 WR material, and Trent's production suffers because his only legitimate weapon has been in constant double coverage. Since they can man up on Reed, they can push a safety up into the box to support the run, thus negating the running game. Josh Reed has been THE weakness on this team (on the offensive side anyway). As a #3 WR he is a legitimate weapon on most teams. But few teams in the NFL could improve by adding him as a #2, and certainly no team that has had a more prolific offense than the Bills would be interested in doing such a thing. Don't talk about people not understanding football when every post you submit screams with unequivocal ignorance.

And why should anybody want him to? If he is a better quarterback than some options teams have (say the Jets and Vikings for instance) then who is any fan to decide he should retire?

You think Brett Favre would be any team's backup? lolz @ that. He's still better than half the starters in the league.

I don't understand the animosity towards Favre. It doesn't affect you or your team in any way so why should you have anything to say about it?

The decision didn't fail there. The kicker did. Had the FG been made, it would be moot. Hence this enforces my point that the onus should be more on the players. Also - you are in FG range now but have 1st down and time to move the ball closer. You can't run it because that would eat up time and not stop the clock. So you are forced to throw toward the sidelines. Therefore the defense knows that a) it will be a pass, and b) it will be toward the sidelines. Considering how much trouble the Bills offense had when the D *didn't* know what was coming, how is it bad to not risk an interception when they do? You're entire argument is based on the fact that we lost - not on the fact that we were in position to win if the player(s) had executed...i.e. made the field goal. Your logic = fail. I am glad that the Bills FO seems more in line with my logic, because if the team was run by the posters on this forum we would really lose a lot of games. Touche.

I don't foresee the Bills converting Nelson to WR. We need a good pass catching TE and are loaded at receiver so I feel like they drafted him to play TE.

Is there any team in the NFL who doesn't aspire to get to the playoffs and then beyond? I mean what do you expect him to say in a press conference? "Well football is a difficult game, and it is hard to win in the NFL. But that issue is compounded exponentially by the fact that our entire football team sucks, so the playoffs are an unrealistic expectation for this season." Yea I can see that going over well. Yea. 5-1 before teams realized that the lack of depth and talent on the Bills roster could be exploited by bracketing Lee Evans and stacking 8 guys in the box. Once teams started doing that, we started losing. Why? Because we lacked the talent to exploit that defensive scheme. Not to mention that other than the Chargers game, those teams we beat were bad teams and already depleted by injuries...Did you really think after 5-1 that we were going to win the east or topple the Colts/Steelers?

And you don't think the Bills were also in that category? How many other teams (besides the Lions, obviously, and we really don't want to use them for comparative purposes here do we?) went win-less in their divisions? You can't do that by accident and by a few questionable calls at the end of a blown open half. It requires a supremely underwhelming roster of players to be that consistently bad, and knowing the Bills roster, I don't blame anyone for a conservative game plan. I mean I can easily counter the logic that "we should have beat the bad teams" by saying "we should have never had to come from behind at the end of the game against the bad teams *unless* we also were bad..." Look we all like to think Belichick is the phenomenal genius mastermind...but he used to coach the Browns, and guess what, they were BAD. The point being that even the greatest coach of our time couldn't be successful without talented players, so why should we expect that from DJ? This is the first year he has had even a decent amount of talent to work with. Let's at least give him the benefit of the doubt - especially considering the move to acquire T.O. and implementation of the no-huddle seem to signal a change in the mentality of the staff, and it stands to reason that it will signal a change in the basic philosophy we see week in and week out as the coaching staff becomes more and more confident with their players' abilities.

Swagger is OK. Flagrant arrogance is bad, and that is where Sharpies and popcorn fall categorically. That being said, the Bills could probably use a dose of flagrant arrogance anyway. In every regard I think the Bills signing T.O. has been brilliant, followed by implementing the no-huddle (I think they were going to do this anyway which is why the decided to get T.O.), which will be wonderful for T.O. and T.E. as it will keep the huddle banter to a minimum.

Every game *could* have been wins. At what point does the onus of responsibility fall on the players? That is my point. If we had made more plays, the game wouldn't have been in the hands of the "inept coaching staff" to begin with. Perhaps they don't air it out at the end of a half because they didn't have any weapons to air it out too...I mean seriously double coverage vs Lee Evans = shut down every time, and half-assed single coverage on everyone else = shut down every time...so where did these unreasonable expectations for aggressive play calling come from? The logic here doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, until you can be up by 2-3 scores late in the game, it makes perfect sense to play to win on a last second FG. Can someone justify the reasoning behind the continuing complaints with any argument that has more substance than "we should have won game X"?

Yea because Vick was difficult to negotiate with considering his current leverage and the demand for aging ex-convict quarterbacks who don't fit the pocket passer mold...

I've hinted at this in several threads previously but I decided it deserved its own thread. The question is in respect to the continuing criticism of the coaching staff - so what exactly made you guys expect to win more than seven games in each of the previous seasons? To my sensibilities, 7-9 seemed like overachieving when I looked at the teams on paper, and thus I have no complaints with our current coaching situation. Personally I could care less what someone's coaching style is as long as the results speak for themselves, and in regards to the DJ situation it just seems like given the personnel he has to work with, he has far exceeded reasonable expectations. So I ask again - did I miss the boat on why the Bills *should* have won 9 or 10 games in any of those season, or even 7? Because I certainly didn't see any awe inspiring levels of talent on those teams.

I'm not sure when you all decided it was a bad thing to play for a FG win at the end of a game. Sure it would be nice to just run the score up every week like the Pats, but until you have a Pats-like roster, going for it on 4th and 3 is a decision that is going to backfire more often than not. You guys heap entirely too much criticism on DJ. He is not coaching Madden 2010 here and certainly shouldn't be second guessed by a bunch of forum poster who mistakenly believe themselves to be Vince Lombardi, and who mistakenly believe that the Bills fantastic team has been undermined by inferior coaching. When you looked at the Bills roster the past 4 seasons, what exactly was it that you saw that made you think "hey this is a football team that should win at least 8 games"? Because personally I expected to see 4-5 wins at most during each of the last few seasons, thus my expectations, considering our level of talent as perceived by me, were exceeded, which is why I don't have any problem with how DJ runs the team. This is the first year that on paper we look like a team that could easily win 8 or more games, and so this will be the first year I would be less than pleasantly surprised by a 7-9 season.

Who cares about that? We are thin at starting offensive tackle...

Scott Norwood.

Sure it is...

I know what you are trying to imply. 7-9 is not the worst record in the league, therefore you implication has little credence.

Loolz.

I think it is rather absurd to suggest they don't expect him to contribute this season, considering they spent the #11 pick and could have had other players that fill just as important holes that would be expected to contribute with that pick. I think it is also rather absurd to think the Bills won't low ball him as well, given their history of signing players. I don't think that Maybin will accept a low offer, but I certainly don't expect the Bills to have started negotiations with a "fair" (and I use this term only in respect to the other draft picks) offer.

Did you think he was going to start?

Shawn Springs covered TO as well as anyone can in man to man. Doesn't mean TO won't break loose on him, especially with Lee Evans lined up opposite of TO - a luxury TO has never enjoyed since his days with Jerry Rice when he was the #2 guy. And anyone who thinks Lee Evans (as much as I like him) is a greater threat than TO is just plain kidding themselves.

Because the rest of the league acknowledges that T.O. is better and more of a threat than Lee Evans.