birdog1960

while discovering the oddities and extravagances of soap and toilet paper.

i just don't see the upside of the pro -manuel argument. firstly, it's an argument against the conventional wisdom around the rest of the league. nobody seems to value him highly. secondly, it's an argument against the long term well being of the franchise: even some of the fanboys here have conceded that, at best he's a backup. as frugal as most here pretend to be, aren't there cheaper backups available? um... like cassel after he was re-signed? thirdly, how can anyone still believe this dude is worth the cost of a continued "project". cuz that's what he is, far too deep into his "rookie" time.

replace pot with caldron and vile with disgusting. happy? you're one of the leading sewer dwellers. there's 2 more multisyllabic words...

publishing in sf gate, it's news. it's meant to present both sides. on the cesspool that mostly is ppp it's inflammatory red meat and meant to stir the vile pot bubbling here.

and once again winning or losing yesterdays game is not the point. he just wasn't good enough yesterday or in the vast majority of games he's started to win consistently or even (occasionally) against good teams. he's not going to lead this team over New England with the game on his shoulders. ever. I think the better question, if we are living for the moment, is whether he would have won the titans game last week. we'll never know but i'd put the odds at less than 1:!.

do you really think that any true bills fan would be disappointed if manuel was wildly successful - as good or better than expected by whaley? this isn't about disdain. it's about a not very good qb. on this, it seems almost everyone interested in the nfl agrees except for the few die hard homers here.

no, to me it's not an either/or question of did he or did he not lose the game does manuel stink as a qb is the question the op posed. I think he does.

c'mon man. bills fans are generally the model for patience. they have to be or they'd have stopped watching long ago. the guy has had enough time and probably too much opportunity. I think many teams would have dumped him by now. i think the bills might have as well with a different gm that didn't spend such a high draft choice on him. if ej was a 3rd round pick, he'd likely be gone by now.

which clearly illustrates how statistics can be deceiving. no one watching that game objectively could judge those 2 qb's to be equally valuable. and the folks that matter, league general managers (with the possible exclusion of whaley) have likely long ago determined a minimal value for manuel.

the defense sucked. i doubt anyone will disagree. ej sucked and many apparently disagree. why?

i am. very. we had a dinner party and i recorded the game for after dinner. we'd have been much better off playing cards or listening to music and talking instead. i'm pissed at all the wasted energy, time and hope. at least i minimize the waste by fast forwarding through so much of most games. this is an historically horrible sports franchise. it would be near impossible to choose a worse one to follow.

agree on every point. well said.

the real psychopathology involves following a team for years that has produced so very little entertainment and quality. somehow i still have hope especially with a new owner but it's still pathological to be a bills fan. but bipolar? nope.

what was whaley's biggest gamble in your eyes? watkins? there's another bet that's not looking so great.

not al all sure how you conclude this. so far, they're all losers. that's all that matters. there's no honor among losers in a sport defined by winning.

agreed. ergo whaley's biggest gamble (among many others) is a clear failure. and some people here still think he's the best thing since packaged american plastic cheese slices.

well, looking at just the first page of the thread, the op (who said pretty much the same thing as i just did) was savaged by 5 out of 6 of the next posters including you. not seeing a lot of support for his or my thesis but if you've changed your mind, i'm glad you've seen the light.

there's nothing nuanced about the 16th pick of the 2013 draft being a barely adequate backup. probably wouldn't make many teams that didn't have ulterior motives. so give me your highly detailed, profound, reasoned analysis of why we shouldn't consider manuel a bust at this point. i'm usually a gray type of guy but in this case it's black and white to me. he's not remotely the guy that anyone that follows the bills hoped for

not weird at all. it might have been a game past the middle of the 3rd quarter had cassell played. i would have watched it on tivo in and hour rather than 30 mins.

no. this thread is definitive proof that this board is partially populated with astroturf, planted bills "fans". no objective fan can defend manuel or whaley's pick of him at 16 in 2013. FAIL.

i'd say it's much more meaningful than a bunch of homers that can't condemn a clear 1st round bust or even one of the worst owners in the history of professional sports. it's good to be optimistic. it's bad to be delusional.

so you didn't feel compelled to respond to multiple posters calling a man that you supposedly openly admire and clearly approve of a hypocrite? yet it's of utmost importance to weigh in on all things clinton. sorry, there's no reconciling these things. the explanation is pretty obvious.

terrible. he's barely an adequate backup. watched the game with a lions fan who has no dog in the hunt. he just kept saying "manuel is awful" he's absolutely correct. justt shows how little objectivity so many here have. cassel might not have won today but i'd sure rather have had him.

big frank stands on his own. his words need no defense. yet i'm curious. where's st bonaventure dude when he's most needed? asleep at the wheel?. where's the link to some right wing site defending his office from losers like those showing themselves here? guess this lefty will have to suffice.

you fools are hilarious. any moderately dim light bulb can see that...