Delete This Account

go on. jw

go on ...

odd that my objectiveness, based on everything that i've seen so far regarding the quarterback seems to be in conflict with your objectiveness. as for Larry, i do believe that there were more than a few times in his career during which he assessed a player and came to the conclusion that that player had not yet stacked up to the NFL measure. all writers want to be famous. why else do you think we'd get into this profession? certainly not the hours. or the pay. or the perennial losing. jw

oh, i was referring to his "entire" career. jw

that's funny. jw

no. it's not. jw

ok, i'll go one further: who had a 10-5 record through his first 15 starts, went 257 for 421 (61 percent) with 12 TDs and 10 interceptions? why Trent Edwards, of course. jw

sure, let's. but that was not the title of this thread, which is what put me off to begin with, creating that very same "straw man" with the offensive line. it all comes back to quarterback, and the quarterback has been inconsistent at best, and a drain on the team's resources given how much they've invested in the offense already this offseason. and if Palmer is being brought in to help "tutor" Manuel, then now that development process is eating up another roster spot. last year, Manuel contributed to costing the team one or two wins by failing to get out of bounds against Cleveland. what price do the Bills pay this season if that big leap in development that many inside 1 Bills Drive (and outside it) seek fails to materialize. i haven't seen much of it. but, according to the OP, that's the O-line's problem. ... sorry, a few more things. it's not the o-line's fault when EJ persistently stares down receivers in the red zone. it's not the o-line's fault either when EJ has, on occasion, taken off and run the ball during 7-on-7 drills in practice when, in fact, there is no o-line. have there been positives? sure. but comparing this preseason with the last one, not sure if there's anything to indicate a big leap forward despite added talent and coaches around him. before camp, Doug Whaley spoke about an objective of how he wanted to see come out of camp with a better command of the offense, carrying a swagger perhaps. and yet, EJ joked last week that one of the biggest things he got out of camp was staying healthy. i guess that's a start ... but. jw

New thread thought: "We don't have so much a QB problem as a TE problem." let's start blaming them, too. jw

and deservedly so. jw

hmmmm. seems some guy named Jim Kelly is pinning some of the blame on EJ. jw

no. he. wasn't. jw

why do i need to explain myself? i don't post stuff here because i'm guessing. jw interesting. Rob Johnson was knocked for lacking leadership, too. jw

said it once, i'll say it again: not a big fan of rush. jw

puh-leeze. the criticism is not at all abstract it points directly toward leadership, which is what a QB ultimately is responsible for and, in many cases, judged upon in the room. jw

no.

what i'm suggesting is however poorly the offense played in the first half on Saturday, there was a distinct lack of ownership for the troubles continuing to come from the supposed leader, whether it was post-game or in-game (when Fred Jackson huddled up the offense on the sideline to try to inspire them). there seems to be no clear accountability coming from that position, and it's raising further questions in regards to whether EJ can ever develop into a starter. jw

there are enough questions being raised inside 1 Bills Drive to render this topic absurd. jw

i'm not playing a game, i just question why there is need to deflect the blame, when it's becoming painfully clear that EJ's inconsistencies are his only consistency. jw

really? it's just the o-line. really? c'mon. jw

so, you're a JBJ supporter, then, eh? hey, just asking given that much of the Buffalo business community has lined up behind Terry and Kim, and they're likely to get the team? jw

And ... when was the last time I did in the sale process? Trust me or don't, don't care. I'll stand by Tim in what he reported today. jw

very unlikely. is the answer to the topic of this thread. jw

it's included in the lease's wording. the "Bills" are the "Bills" no matter who owns them through the course of the lease. jw

i'll say this. some of you folks here get on my nerves sometimes. at the very least -- with the exception of Beerball, of course -- many of you here aren't sniffing the glue that's being passed around on the bb.com message board. yowza. just saying. jw at the very least, i got to say hello to Beerball ...