SouthGeorgiaBillsFan

I thought it was unwise on his part, but I had no problem whatsoever with the play from a sportsmanship standpoint. Another poster commented that if anything, Jeff Fischer did us a favor, and I feel inclined to agree with that. Better that fake punt than say....a field crossing lateral on a kick return in the waning seconds of a playoff game...

Actually, he was a decent passer. It never fails to amaze me how few people recognize or acknowledge that. But the neat thing about Mike Vick is that he makes your rushing game formidable almost single-handedly. It is hard to defend against the run, the pass, and the scramble on the same play, and as a result, teams end up overcompensating and getting run all over. Just check the Atlanta Falcons numbers from when Vick was there - they lead the league in rushing easily. When Vick left, so did that tremendous success. It was not coincidence. Also, I don't give 2 ***** either about you people who want to act sanctimonious. Two years in prison was more than just punishment for his convictions, and who the hell are you to continue passing judgment? Scream boycott all you want, but we will be just as well off without your dumb asses in the stands anyway. The Bills will be so much more dangerous with this guy on the roster. If you want the Bills to stay in Buffalo, then how can you question the Bills acquisition of a player who brings so much to the table? I guess it comes down to what is more important - winning, and thus having a team to root for, or some dogs you've never seen who were bred to fight and would have never even lived to begin with if not for that? Not to mention, considering the porous state of our O-line, it might not be a bad idea to obtain a QB who is quick on his feet. Just a thought.

That's noble of you, DrFishFinder. I, on the other hand, shall return frequently to bask in my I-told-you-so-ness.

I never suggested Tebow would be playing at the QB position. I don't see that. But he is a unique athlete in his ability to take hits and run well with the football, and he has a solid arm to boot. A much better throwing arm than any other "wildcat" type back, with the ability to run well. He therefore is much more valuable than either Colt McCoy or Sam Bradford. None of them will excel at the NFL IMO at QB - Tebow simply has the ability to make contributions elsewhere. If you think that the Tebow love is just the result of biased journalism, then I can conclude with virtual certainty that you have never seen him play. Your ignorance is mind-boggling. Just a side note: I am a Georgia Bulldogs fan, and thus if it would only make sense for me to be biased against Tim Tebow. But I've seen him play many games and I know what he is about.

What you fail to realize, due to your limited reading comprehension abilities, is that I'm not stating Tebow is unique due to the offense he ran or the conference he plays in. His skill set is unique, in that he has a fantastic arm, but the size and durability to be a hard-nosed ball carrier as well. He has the stature to run the football in the NFL and still take hits, plus the ability to throw the ball effectively. I never suggested he would revolutionize the game playing the QB position, in fact, I think it was implied that I was referring to a wild-cat type of position. I also stated that Sam Bradford was grossly overrated due to playing in a weak defensive conference, which inflates his stats. It has nothing to do with running a spread offense. I said he will be another spread offense QB that will fail in the NFL, as would Tebow, if he was a pure QB. I think Tebow could be an effective back-up, but I don't see him ever being a legit starter without and entirely new offensive system designed around his skill set. I said to draft him ahead of Bradford because he has more value, which he does, due to his versatility and unusual size and passing ability. Learn how to read and then comprehend before making posts, please. Also, last year, what you saw was a system mired by inadequate talent. It is unfair and inaccurate to speculate as to how effective the scheme is when you have inferior personal versus virtually every defense that you played. To win 7 games simply indicates that SOMETHING allowed the Bills to perform beyond their level of talent...you call it what you want, I call it good coaching. And for the record, I don't really care about your invalidated opinions regarding how long it takes to implement a system.

That's because teams could load 8 in the box and double cover Lee. That is no longer a viable option. No, it is better to use T.O. to open up the offense, and to do that you have to send him deep frequently. If you don't, it becomes way too easy to sit on a slant route or out route or a hook and pick it off. The reason T.O. is effective on those short possession routes is because teams have to guard against him running deep. Any idiot corner back in the league can sit on a slant route and stop it if that was all he had to worry about.

I would expect you to post nonsense like this because you clearly are a Pats fans. I wouldn't want to see the Bills running no-huddle either if I was you. To state we don't have the talent to run it is just wishful thinking on your part - our offense has its weaknesses but they will be mitigated to the greatest extent possible *by* running the no huddle. As far as talent and weaponry goes, it is going to be hard for any defense to match up against us. Teams will have to rely on physical prowess to slow us down at the line of scrimmage, and running the no huddle makes it harder to do that, because defenses don't have time to breath or substitute players, much less call intricate plays before the snap. So I'll take your post as a good omen that you have legitimate reason to fear our no huddle. See you in week 1, !@#$.

Actually, I want his athleticism and strong arm, personally. He would be a nice compliment to TE in that each man's weakness is the other man's strength. If they way to play soft coverage, you have Trent to pick them apart underneath. If they want to man up and take away the high percentage passes, you have Vick who can burn them deep or scramble while their secondary is flying down field. They are a perfect compliment to each other. I couldn't care two ***** about his image or negative publicity. He would make the Bills MUCH better.

It's not like MV was fighting with your family dog for Christ's sake. I mean those dogs were bred to fight, so it can be said that if not for MV and his enterprise, they never would have lived. Personally, I'd rather live and fight every day than never have lived at all but hey maybe that is just me. Also I am so sick and tired of people humanizing animals. You cannot make an animal do anything that is not already in his nature, so I really don't understand what the big !@#$ing deal is. You are like "it's cruel to the animals", but both dogs in the fights are the ones actually hurting each other, so WTF? I'm sick and tired of this whiny-baby, don't hurt the vicious animals mentality. Life is survival of the fittest, so if MV isn't messing with your Rover, then why do you give two ***** anyway?

While I haven't heard or read anything that leads me to believe the Bills would like to sign Vick, I consider that: a) no team is going to advertise their interest in the guy, even if they fully intend to sign him, because they don't want to have to compete for him, and b) I can see no lucid reason why the Bills *shouldn't* be interested in Vick. What an upgrade at backup he would make if Trent goes down or for some reason can't hack it (I doubt that would be the case, but insurance never hurts), and also what a dynamic player he would be in that runner/passer player type that has been popularized by the wildcat. He seems like he would suit that type of position better than any player who has ever played the game, Tim Tebow included, imo. c) Trent Edwards is a professional quarterback, and if he doesn't have the psychological capacity to handle a little competition then do we really want him calling signals for us? I mean if he can lose his mojo by the Bills acquiring more talent, then he probably doesn't have the demeanor to be successful anyway. I would be ecstatic if the Bills signed Vick.

I say we move Langston Walker and Demetrius Bell to RT (have 2 RTs that is), play with no LT, and have Trent roll out to the strong side every time. Sigh.

Don't you feel kind of silly investing your time into that analysis of a preseason game where the starters on both teams saw less than two series?

LOL @ people who think Sam Bradford is going to be any good. People thought Ryan Leaf and Matt Leinart and Alex Smith were going to be good too...if we are going to draft any QB I just don't understand why you don't take the obvious best player in the draft in Tim Tebow. I don't think Tebow is going to rewrite Tom Brady's record books in the NFL, but he is a huge character guy with a set of skills that could revolutionize the game, and is so much more valuable than another spoon fed spread offense passer that is sickly overrated because he runs the score up in a conference that doesn't know how to spell defense. That being said it is kind of absurd to presume that either Bradford or Tebow will be available to the Bills. We certainly won't be bad enough this year to land ourselves a top 10 pick, and both of those guys will likely be gone inside of 10. Dick Jauron will be the head coach in 2010, which to be perfectly honest, is fine by me. It is pretty absurd to expect a team to win that switches coaches every 3 to 4 years. It typically takes 4 years for a head coach to fully implement his system, so you can't expect to see success when you keep changing coaches before the players have fully adapted to their philosophy. If you want to continue to lose, by all means, change coaches again. But most philosophies in the NFL are legit and can be successful once the players buy into them, and I don't see any reason to think DJ's philosophy should be any different.

I turn to page 86.

Is there a point or punchline or anything worth reading in this thread?

Last year we beat the Steelers in the preseason. Just proves how much these exhibition games mean, you !@#$ing dunces. Perhaps we would not like to unveil our entire new offensive scheme...Perhaps we would not like to play our projected starters for any meaningful amount of time in a game that is worthless. Perhaps too many people on this board should sodomize themselves with a rusty crowbar...etc.

What makes you feel that his selection to the pro-bowl by people *actually* involved in the NFL is less valid than your ridiculous opinion that he didn't deserve it? What makes you feel that Peters in the only player in the NFL who is not susceptible to the dynamics of football and that he alone should never allow sacks, even when there are no options to throw to on the field and TE gets sacked merely because he held the ball too long? Out of those 11.5 sacks (which is unofficial), how many times did TE have at least 3 seconds or more to throw the ball before being sacked? Seriously don't sit here and spout meaningless statistics that DO NOT reflect the dynamics of the game as the primary argument for your position, because it makes you sound too stupid to even consider. My above statement is not and indictment of Trent Edwards but rather of the lack of options he had which to deliver the ball. I believe TE will be an excellent and probably even Pro Bowl quarterback this year, *if* the Bills can keep him on his feet. But with a Jason Peters sized hole at LT, that remains a critical conditional statement that logic dictates will be hard to achieve. To suggest that a pro bowl LT can be replaced by drafting a rookie guard is absurd beyond comprehension. That being said, I believe that the Bills acquisition of T.O. increased the talent and potency of their offense to a greater extent than the loss of JP diminished it, and for that reason I believe the Bills have a legitimate shot at making the playoffs. The main difference in my mind being that with JP on the roster, we would have had a Patriots-like offense and been a legitimate SB contender, not just hoping for a playoff birth and being happy with that.

Well that statement just proves your ignorance. I think you should look at the total amount of sacks allowed by the line as a whole, since that would more accurately reflect the fact that JP could be left alone on blocking assignments all the time and LW will require continuous help from backs and TEs.

Even if Wood makes the pro bowl every year of his career, he will never be as valuable as a franchise left tackle.

What makes you flaming idiots think that a coach's temperament is the determining factor in his success?

Of course you wouldn't. And we wouldn't trust you to understand the dynamics of football either.

The only reason that year is unparalleled is because none of the other great offenses in history deliberately tried to run up scores and the record books. Ironic how in the year that the offensive record books were rewritten it was indisputably defense that yielded a super bowl win. Ironic, but no fluke.

A 4th rounder for Roscoe Parrish would be a good deal. They aren't going to acquire any established player who can improve the roster by trading the #4 at best and possibly #6 receiver on the chart. They don't need any player of Rosco-level abilities, but with a 4th round pick they could discover a diamond in the rough or at least break even.

Seems like that has nothing to do with the returner and everything to do with the punting team. No team asks a guy to return punts who isn't looking to take it to the house every time. It is all a function of hang time and coverage. Once he is running, then the onus is on the returner, but he has little control over whether or not the punt is returnable to begin with. Also, on a related note, most of the time big return games are set up by good blocking. It really doesn't matter who is returning the ball, no blocking equals no yardage, and good blocking equals good yardage. The only difference is that a guy like Roscoe can turn good yardage into points if you miss a tackle or two.

Maybe he has just been over-appreciated by some. Personally, I think I'd rather see T.O. with the ball in his hands to be honest. Not sure what the Roscoe Parrish love fest is all about with some of you, but the guy just isn't great at all. Lots of receivers in the NFL are dangerous with the ball in their hands - the problem is getting the ball in their hands. If you are having to rely on trick plays and/or formations to do so, that is likely an indication that you need a more talented player in the position to begin with.