Sisyphean Bills

Going after young up-n-comers is the way to go. Like Melvin Fowler and Larry Tripplett.

Hello, Beanie Wells.

Just curious, but how often do teams have injury free seasons?

Is this some sort of argument in defense of the Bills? The Bills, or Trent Edwards if you prefer, were declared a dark horse having beat the Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Bengals, and Redskins. The Dolphins and Jets make some changes and the Bills are caught flat footed and have a -4 game swing. Conclusion: advantage Bills? Again, is this an argument in defense of the Bills? They coulda, shoulda, woulda, mighta? Shirley, you jest. The fact is that they did choke and cough up these games. That's not a good sign at all. It's a sign that the Bills regressed and can't close out games. The Dolphins and Jets of 08 were better than 07, but so were the Bills on paper. What are you talking about? The Bills went 0-6 against the division and the division had a very, very easy schedule. Do you disagree? The Bills faced all of the very worst teams in the NFL, except (ironically) the Detroit Lions. I'm not trying to "make it sound" like anything. It's what happened. The major themes of how the Bills were going to turn it all around in 08 were: The "Trent Edwards has nowhere to go but up" theory. That one fell on its face. He did not go up and the team still has a major question mark at QB. The "Dick Jauron will be a better coach now that he finally has talent" theory. Oops. That one fell apart too. Jauron showed the same sideline buffoonery as always and lost his team games. The "Marcus Stroud solves all our Tampa 2 problems" theory. That one died quickly as the DL couldn't generate any pressure, though some would say that adding Aaron Schobel would fix this. (Didn't the Giants lose 2 great pass rushers this past offseason? But they still managed 42 sacks, 6th overall, and nearly twice as many as Buffalo.) "The only thing wrong with the offense is Fairchild and not having a tall player at WR" theories were wrong as well. The offense was downright pathetic for most of Oct, Nov, and Dec and only showed up a couple times. Hardy had little impact and was useless when Reed went down. By the way, you guys might find this interesting with respect to the offense and the 5-1 start ending with the 2-8 skid. The talk is that the once the other teams had the book on Schonert, the Bills became very easy to defend and weren't capable of getting out of the rut they were in. There has been some pretty harsh criticism directed towards Schonert, Van Pelt, and Edwards for their lack of preparation, self-scouting, keeping tabs on the opposition, and adjusting things to counter what was being directed at them. FWIW (not much to some) as a rumor through the grapevine.

Can someone explain why the "AFC East was a tough division" in 08? I see the old saw argument of W-L record but then there is the following facts. All AFC East teams played the AFC West and NFC West which harbored some of the worst teams in the NFL in terms of records and stats. That's half a schedule against divisions stocked with awful teams. West coast teams were horrible coming to the east coast this year. Tom Brady went down in the first game of the season and the Patriots, the class of the division, were hit with a plethora of injuries. Despite that they nearly won the division anyway. A rookie coach, a QB with a noodle arm, and team that went 1-15 the season before won the division with one of the biggest 1 season turnarounds of all time, the definition of anomaly. The Jets spent money to buy a winner but it didn't translate on the field and they blew the whole thing up immediately, disappointed in their lack of results in a down year and a cream puff slate. The only team from the division that made the playoffs got bounced out in a 1 and done playoff snooze. Yawn. The Bills went 0-6 against the "mighty" AFC East and we're supposed to be impressed?

I liked when VY was being interviewed and said that he didn't need to listen to nobody [sic] cause he had it all covered and nothing to learn. Yeah, hitch your lil red wagon to that.

Monroe, Maclin, Raji, Orakpo, Maybin, Wells, and Pettigrew are fairly common names around the #11 position. I'll add the OT Smith in there because he's a top 10 guy that is slipping. That's 3 DL, 2 OL, 1 RB, 1 WR, and 1 TE. Of course, the only position that matters is QB, but really any one of those guys (other than Wells) would help this team eventually if he pans out. (Wouldn't that be a kick though to draft a RB? Indeed, even if Wells were an elite back, a RB is a tough piece to trade -- too many capable ones and too short a career -- so that's why I strike him off the list.)

Beats me. Maybe it goes along with wishful thinking the Bills will switch to a 3-4?

Yes, but what are the differences? Big Ben has won 2 Super Bowls and Collins hasn't. So, Ben makes plays and Collins doesn't. That's dumb. Of course, Collins made plays. Collins had bad luck in that his primary weapon went lame in the playoffs. If not for that, this whole argument is probably turned upside down and we're talking about how Collins is a better QB than Ben because the Titans won a Super Bowl. It just boils down to the same argument over and over. Not so long ago, the problem with this team was the QB. He was no good and got sacked too much and ran around too much and should just throw the ball away. On the other hand, if he didn't complete enough passes, he was no good either. How does one take this? Is the QB supposed to block for himself? Is he supposed to create a running game by wishful thinking? Is he supposed to teach the coaches how to design plays and correct their bad calls with audibles every snap? Is he supposed to run the routes and catch his own passes? Is he in the war room on draft day selecting defensive backs? But, to raise a doubt about this QB myopic view of football opens the door to straw men arguments, posturing, and wishful misrepresentation. For apparently, if you see more problems than simply the kid under center, you can't see that the kid under center has issues even if you've never stopped saying he had those issues even when the Polyannas were running around calling him Savior. Last offseason, some of the same people claiming QB play -- Trent Edwards is the QB -- is holding the team back now where throwing homophobic rhetoric around in defense of Edwards.

Kerry Collins is not a great "franchise QB," but he is better than many and good enough to win games including playoff games. He's started in a Super Bowl for crying out loud. As for this past year, the Titans were dominating the game up until Chris Johnson went down with an injury and left the game. Laying the blame on Kerry Collins for that is a coach potato view of the game where all one watches is the football and the guy holding it. Also, it is not true that Collins never made a play last year.

Thanks, Ram. I think it is a better approach to fix what you can and transition where you have to. Chasing QBs is what the Bills have done since Jim Kelly retired and it has been a foolish strategy as evidenced by the results.

Actually, it was just easier to find some obvious examples that way. There are examples like Gannon and Elway that don't fit your simplistic explanation. Bledsoe had success very early and struggled in the middle and late. The landscape is endlessly varied and the terms are piss poorly defined, so I'm not going to argue with your obtuseness.

Dick Vermeil came in and turned the organization inside out. Bill Parcells came to town, new ownership, and they got Bill Belichick to come back. Mike Holmgren and Ron Wolf came to town. Holmgren taught Favre how to be a QB and to play in the WCO. Are you serious? The only reason Miami won last year was Pennington?! So, football is an individual sport where success is defined simply by who is under center. Good. Drew Brees is a great QB, and how's that working out for ya? Yes, having a good QB is a good thing. But there are numerous counterexamples of teams that did very well with less than exceptional QBing and teams that failed in spite of great QBing (like Marino and Kelly), so your correlation has vanished before you started say nothing of your previously disproven causality.

So, by this theory Daunte Culpepper is the guy that held the Lions back to 0-16 but was also the guy that was good enough to lead the Vikings to a #1 seed in the salary cap era. Trent Dilfer was the guy that held the Bucs back but led the Ravens to a Super Bowl victory. Brett Favre won a Super Bowl in Green Bay but also held them back in seasons they stunk as he held back the Jets. Jeff Garcia has been to 4 Pro Bowls and led the 49ers to the playoffs as well as Tampa but held back 5 teams including the 49ers and Tampa. Rex Grossman dragged the Bears to a Super Bowl and has also held the Bears back ever since. Neal O'Donnell led the Steelers and held back the Jets. Bledsoe led the Patriots and held back 3 teams including the Patriots. Kurt Warner led the Rams and Cardinals to the Super Bowl but held the New York Giants back. I can go on... Football is a team game. The modern game is about coaching as much as it is about players. In the old NFL, teams lined up 11 on 11 and the better team prevailed. If you had Jim Brown, you had a guy that was physically dominant, you gave him the ball, he ran over everyone, and you won games and championships. Now, talent is much more evenly distributed and evolved. (If you don't believe it look at all the worst-to-firsts, late season runs, and teams that nobody predicts doing very well over the last few years -- indeed, the Bills are the anomaly in that they are one of the few dysfunctional organizations that seems to find a way to blow it each and every year.) Modern football is about match-ups, exploiting weaknesses, game planning, systems, play calling, sets, formations, packages, clock management, proper technique, keeping the team focused. And, guess what? The QB doesn't do any of that. That's why you see guys like Grossman, Johnson, Delhomme, Gannon, Dilfer, Collins, Chandler, McNair, Bledsoe, O'Donnell, and Humphries "drag their teams" all the way to the Super Bowl in the salary cap era. It's why winning teams and franchises that stay in the hunt invest in and pay for good front offices and coaches.

The Patriots are stupid and crazy ... like a fox in a hen house.

Maybe a can of Jolt with the prunes?

Who doesn't like coming to Buffalo (or Toronto) and beating the creme filling out of the Bills?

I don't see that one either, bizzy. One is old, one young. One has had some excellent seasons, one hasn't. One runs around and uses his legs to make plays, one doesn't. But there are similarities like having an average arm, being a WCO system QB, being content to check down every down, getting the ball out quick, durability and leadership questions, etc.

Did they re-sign Preston?

All I know is that the Giants were tards when they picked Taylor. They already had Hall-of-Fame caliber linebackers and Taylor wasn't a good fit for their system anyway. It was a bad pick as it didn't consider their needs. Should've drafted a WR or TE, obviously.

Michael Koenen's mom called my brother and told him that the Falcons were going to franchise tag her son because she remembered he was a Bills fan from a chance meeting at the Ferndale Starbucks. I guess there weren't many guys named Oedipus in the phone book. Oedipus was 9th string on the Trojans too.

Since we didn't really fix the problem last year, why would you be?

Wile E. Coyote. Mad props, I say. Mad props.

Do they were gloves as a family unit?

Yeah, it's not clear at all why Edwards would automatically start over Anderson or vice versa.