Sisyphean Bills

Pierce On!

Maybe while all that is going on, you could launch rockets, have the cheerleaders mud wrestle on the sidelines, streakers, miniature ponies dancing, midgets being tossed, and 4 or 5 rings of MMA human rooster-fighting at the 50 yard line. We want people to be entertained after all. Squeeze it all in before the next 15 minute break for commercials. Get your popcorn ready!

Yeah. Wall Street. Land with all the answers.

Well, since he came in as a blank slate, we might as well be wildly optimistic. Hardy for the Hall! "A route? What's that coach? We were just dancing with the stars at Indiana."

Thanks. I agree with Brian on the QB evaluation point to a certain extent. Steve Young would not be in the HoF now if he had stayed in Leeman Bennett's offense his entire career. People that didn't appreciate the game rode SY mercilessly in Tampa and blamed him for their pathetic franchise, a franchise that was dead from the neck up. It wasn't all him. And neither was his great success in SF entirely his doing.

The defense wasn't as good as that 14th ranking. They had no pass rush but did manage to keep teams in front of them and forced them to march the ball down the field, melting the clock, and giving both themselves and the opponents fewer opportunities. (The glories of the Tampa 2 defense. Yey!) And, yes, the offense was terrible for the most part. It showed some signs of life in the Chiefs game and in some other drives here and there, but it was mostly dysfunctional. Finally, the jury is still out on Trent Edwards. He has started 20+ games, which is enough for some people to crucify him, but he still hasn't shown that he can execute in the red zone consistently enough to win, let alone excel to the point of leading a team deep into the playoffs. And, of course, I couldn't agree with you more about coaching. Our staff consists of noobs and greenhorns, and while they are all working hard, sometimes they get their diapers yanked off and bottoms wiped by the more experienced & bigger boys. As far as the Colts, yes, they are Peyton's team. Unfortunately for him, if he was on a more complete team (see John Elway early years) then he'd have racked up more Super Bowls than 1. Indeed, the "Colts can't win the big one" is reminiscent of some other Bill Polian teams. (Don't get me wrong, I'd take Bill over the 3 stooges we have now in a heartbeat.)

Parcells, Belichick, Coughlin ... these guys have established themselves as the elite of the NFL. You can take a crap on their records if you want and hold up Peyton Manning as the poster boy of the fallacious "all you need is a great QB" argument if you want. Great QBs are fun to watch and they put butts in the seats, no question. But, having a great QB does not automatically gift someone a championship. Marino, Kelly, Tarkenton ... Hall of Fame, great QBs ... no championships. Meanwhile, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Trent Dilfer are champions. Sure, it doesn't mean anything other than some people can't get it through their head that it is a team game and the sport has evolved from the days when you just put 22 athletes out on the field and kicked the opposition's ass.

The Ray Perkins tree of coaches has been far more successful at winning championships than has Peyton Manning. The approach has been proven to work repeatedly.

So, what you are saying is that there is only one way to go...

It worked for the Dolphins last year. Oh wait...

There is no rule for when an offensive lineman "cleans up" a pile slightly after the whistle by diving into a defensive player's legs (a guy he may outweigh by over 100 pounds) after that same defender has stopped playing. Putting in rules that make it illegal to tackle a QB with a hit that is not more than 3.2cm above the top of the knee cap don't really "protect the QB" anyway. They just make the game harder to officiate and that in turn makes the officiating more uneven. The unlevel officiating affects the illusion of fairness and for some makes the game less enjoyable to watch. You know going in that a team like New England is going to benefit from a "tuck rule" while another team is going to have calls go against them because, as John Madden puts it, "well, everyone knows bad teams get more calls going against them." If they really want to protect the players, they need to do away with hitting and tackling altogether and turn the game into touch "patty cakes" football.

Here is a good article on what is meant by "technique" for a DL. http://football.calsci.com/DefensiveLine.html Bear Bryant's numbering system is a bit different. The 3-tech is still in the G-T gap, but odds are shades and evens are on the nose.

Actually, I don't think Parker did such a great job with Peters last year. A holdout is an instrument (really one of very few options) to express, unmistakably, a player's dissatisfaction to management. Jason Peters was, justifiably in my opinion, upset about his contract and that the Bills were paying far more for lesser lineman at less valued positions than they were paying him. It's completely understandable why someone would be upset in his position. Making that disappointment crystal clear to the front office was a business decision on Peters part. Did Parker and Peters feel that Peters could pull off a Walter Jones sort of holdout and come back with limited reps and play mistake free football? That didn't happen, primarily because Peters is not Walter Jones -- nobody is. Were the Bills trying to undermine the player/agent relationship? It wouldn't be the first time. Regardless, the decision to have a protracted holdout and miss all of camp and preseason was a mistake; as it was a mistake to holdout with Ralph Wilson pulling the strings in Buffalo. The owner can really dig in his heels when he wants to. It would've been better tactics to express the dissatisfaction with a limited holdout, but showing up for the mandatory stuff and demonstrating on the practice field the readiness and ability to continue to play at an elite level. Why? Because, the Bills would've had far fewer public opinion cards to play and could have been brought to the negotiating table sooner and easier, perhaps. Not to mention that Peters wouldn't have racked up all those fines and given the team back money that should have been his. Also, if Peters practiced well and had taken yet another huge stride forward in his profession, he'd have unquestionably been the best LT in the NFL at the rate he had been improving. Now, there are real questions about whether he was more of a quick horse out of the gates and is going to fade badly after the first turn...

To clarify my original question: Tim, I was in no way taking a shot at you, your work, or your sources. I understood that your chat expressed your opinion of Peters trade value, and as such I was only questioning that anyone's opinion on these things is unquestionable as was sort of implied. For example, I have no doubt that John Clayton, Chris Mortenson, etc. have many, many NFL sources and they absolutely do get story breaking leads at times. Yet they are human and far for perfect and their opinions are not always correct. The question I posed was perhaps a subtle point: it is not simply a matter of who you know -- it is about who you know and what he/she is willing to divulge. Thank you for taking the time to chat with the fans here. I respect your opinion and enjoy your articles and posts.

Why do you say that? Did he plant mics in the Bills offices?

Any way you slice it, Losman was another train wreck for the Bills. Thank you, Tom and Tom.

"Why the long face?" asked the cowboy of his horse. I don't find it surprising at all that in a year when the draft is the deepest it has been in decades at the C position, the Bills brain trust went out & signed another team's backup and plays the "experience" card. Who wouldn't rather have a guy that was a decent backup and did OK when his former team had to go to him as opposed to a stud that could anchor the line for a decade? I mean it's like you could have Tuten Reyes or Steve Hutchinson -- of course, you'd chose Reyes every time because he might be great some day.

Maybe he thinks Barwin is a HoF guy.

They need you in Vegas. The recession has slowed the sucker parade.

The Dockery situation is not comparable to the McCargo situation. Dockery was the highest paid guy on the team and was due a huge roster bonus. McCargo is on his rookie contract. If Dockery had been willing to cut his salary back to what he made in his rookie contract, the Bills no doubt would have kept his underperforming lame game around and kept their fingers crossed.

Sounds like our sort of guy. Welcome to Buf-full-OW!

Maybe they asked the Bills if they could verify that he was indeed an employee and had proof he was an eagle scout.

The Bills simply have not drafted well. The strength of the team, the veteran leadership, should be the drafts that happened 4-8 years ago. The Bills have Parrish, Evans, Kelsay, McGee, Reed, Denney, and Schobel. 3 of those guys are DEs and people here are wanting a DE in this upcoming draft. It's so pathetic that Kelsay is counted among the team leaders because of his training habits, despite being pwned on the field. 3 of them are WRs (1 of those is in fact just a punt catcher) and people here wanted a WR last year and they brought in TO via FA this year. That is a pretty sad commentary and paltry haul for 42 overall picks. 0 QBs, RBs, TEs, or OL. 0 defensive players up the middle. Thank you Modrak and Donahoe. Killer job.

Of course, if the Bills surround Whitner (and the new guy) with enough great players, they'll be OK.

Hmm. I kind of like playing poker against a guy that lays his cards face up on the table.