starrymessenger

All I know is that I would hate to be on the business end of those haymakers Johnson was throwing at Courtland Finnegan.

A funny trance-like feeling came over me. All was still. Suddenly I heard a deep voice, maybe God, maybe Lucifer. The voice said "THATS WHY SO SERIOUS STEVIE". Then I remembered something Solomon Willcots said earlier about how Chan Gailey was saying the night before the big game how much he liked Steve Johnson but how he needed to work on his concentration and staying focussed through 60 minutes of football. I started to feel better because this confirmed my belief that Chan was a really good football coach. Then I saw Hangartner congratulating Fitz and I started to laugh out loud. Then I went and changed my underwear.

Correct. Avoiding big hits is smart. But there is no getting away from the fact that football is the premier contact sport and sometimes you have to sacrifice the body to get things done, otherwise you are underperforming. Just another reason Andre Reed should be in the HOF.

He has found his right level. He is probably a decent DB coach.

We need to improve our running game. They don't run Spiller between the tackles (except once for + five yards) and Freddie was never a good 3rd down short yardage back. There are a couple of unheralded backs that nobody wanted tearin up the league right now - A. Bradshaw and A. Foster. Why not Joique?

Fitz is 27 or 28 years old. Tony Romo is 31. Playing QB at this level is one of the hardest jobs in all of pro sport. Some take to it quickly, some only over time. Most never make it. I am pretty sure I see noticeable improvement in Fitz's play over last year. He still makes errors in execution (not so much mental mistakes)but he makes fewer of them and he does things not infrequently, like thread the needle with pace on the ball, that I have not seen him do except occasionally before. I think there is a chance that we have not yet seen the best of Fitz and I am keen to see what Gailey and Cortez can do with him in the remaining games.

So it seems to work for everyone. Perfection!

Funny how Shanny and McDaniels both employ a similar style of very public confrontation with their franchise players. Is there method, foresight or purpose at work in all of this or are they just a couple of insecure jerks who need to show the world that they can win pi$$ing matches? Be interesting to see if Childress holds onto his job too. Looks like he's coming apart.

Don't like the Pats and don't wish them well because they are a division rival. But any team that can impose their will on the Vikings run D when the game is on the line by running the likes of Ben Jarvis Green Ellis and that midget wrestler Woodhead has got to be great.

Maybe Ok to pass IMO (though three consecutive downs in that situation is a bit much) but I prefer play action to spread in the pro game, especially where the D expects the run.

Waive Kelsay.

Of course the Bills are not a good football team. Still they are improving, at least to the point where on consecutive Sundays (because consistency is the key)they can play competitively with much more talented teams. Really the credit has to go to Gailey who is getting the guys to play very hard instead of just mailing it in (like the Cowboys have done). I said at the beginning of the year that towards the end of the season we would start to see the type of team they would be when eventually they become truly competitive again and I think we are styarting to see that. My prediction was that late in the season, barring significant injuries, the Bills might surprise a few teams with a lot to play for - a wildcard or home field advantage in the playoffs, and that if they did that things would be looking a lot better for next year. Appers to me that is the direction things are going in. Obviously they need a good draft next year and one or two choice free agent signings would help immensely. If all that happens, they will be competitive in their division next year.

He is obviously a great athlete and yes I've seen his highlight reel - but that is a college highlight reel. What I don't know is how much his achievements as a college player depend upon the existence of a signficant difference between his athleticism and that of his opponents on D - a margin which is at best much reduced in the pro ranks. Maybe he can't run quite the way he did in college in the pros. Maybe he has to adjust. I don't have any "devastating evidence". What I think I see is a RB who fails to see the hole, fails to see how the play is developing, and who does not create holes through changes in direction - for a point of comparison see the video clip and comments on Johnson in last weeks' Playbook, for example. The guys commenting on the Ravens game had the same thing to say when CJ tried to turn the corner in lieu of turning it upfield. On that play in particular, it was not just a case of his getting the important extra yards instead of looking for the home run ball, as they said. If he turned it upfield he had a much better chance of breaking it. Even you say he hesitates and picks the wrong hole. Lots of other posters in this thread have seen the same or similoar things. I'm just saying that bears watching and could be a problem.

Everybody knows he is a rook. Everybody knows (and hopes) that he will get better with experience. I don't say he has got to be a worldbeater from the get go to be great. I'm saying there is a potential problem there that needs to be monitored. We all hope it resolves favourably, and it may indeed prove to be transitory, but to deny that it exists is plain flat wrong.

Spiller has clearly not yet adjusted to the pro game. That may very well be why he is underutilized. He seems not to see the play developing and does not run to daylight. That is indeed something that great backs can do and is one of their principal attributes. Neither does he show patience in following his blocking. He cannot rely on his superior athleticism alone in the pro ranks to beat defenders because the guys are simply so much better than in college. I don't know whether its simply a matter of getting some experience. I don't pretend to know whether the "vision" or anticipation great backs have can be acquired or whether its instinctual - if I had to guess I would say instinctual. Either you've got it or you don't. Gale Sayers didn't learn it. He himself says it was God given. IMO same applies to Chris Johnson. I have not seen any of that from Spiller so far. Obviously everyone on this board wants the kid to succeed big time, and maybe he will fulfill all expectations. However his demonstrated inability at this level to find (or create through directional changes)the holes bears watching and is a cause for concern. To say otherwise is just to bury one's head in the sand.

He was at his comical best all day long. When he is really on top of his game he is ineffective. Anything less than his best effort and he is a liability.

IMO there was both offensive and defensive pass interference on that play. Corner first interfered with Boldin before the ball arrived and Boldin interfered with Corner when Corner caught the ball. What happens if both players are guilty of a foul? Replay the down? At least the Ravens lost a down, though it didn't make a difference.

Following what I think was Fletcher's last game as a Bill (in any event after the close loss to Vince Young & Tennessee)Fletcher was interviewed and asked specifically about the chances of his remaining a Bill. He said that his folks were having discussions that involved "Mr Wilson" and he said that he hoped "Mr. Wilson" would understand that as a player he (Fletcher) only had so many chances to look after himself and his family i.e. he needed to be paid, having proven his value. Now as football fans we are for the most part interested observers and outsiders. That means that we have to piece together what information we have and try to fashion logical conclusions based upon all we know - what players said, whats reported in the media, what we observe to be a course or pattern of conduct on the part of management/ownership. You can call that fabrication if you like. I prefer to call it an informed guess or a speculation. All of us, perhaps you excepted of course, do it because that is all we can do. But lets have it your way - yes, I am so compltely non compis mentis that I believe Buddy Nix should have extended Fletcher, even though he was not in a position to do so at the time. Furthermore, the Bills back then had no interest whasoever in having players who represented quality veteran leadership on the team, and, last but not least, we will take Buddy's comments at face value: he firmly believes Kelsay is a good football player. Feel better?

Of course Buddy could not extend London Fletcher. Did not say or imply that he could. Ralph Wilson did not want Fletcher because his contract was up and he was going to have to pay to keep him. Ralph Wilson likes Kelsay and thats the real reason he got an extention. Its not so much Buddy I'm talking about as the Buffalo Bills. The point remains that if the Bills (not necessarily Buddy) really wanted quality veteran leadership, Fletcher was a better candidate for an extension than Kelsay. BTW out of respect for Buddy I prefer to interpret his statements re Kelsay along the following lines "Look, we all know the guy's a bum but the old man likes him, we can cut his a$$ anytime, he will never reach his incentives of course (cause hes a bum, like I just said)and he won't cost us much money or interfere with our development program, so lets just put this behind us and get on with it." Now, if you disagree with that and prefer to take Buddy's comments literally, which out of respect for Buddy I personally won't do because I think he is smarter than that, think about the consequences to the Bills, specifically, that the man who will be presiding over football operations, likely the next three drafts and free agency, actually believes that Kelsay is a good player. After the last ten years I just cant let myself go there.

The only semi-cogent argument I have heard for extending Kelsay, one specifically endorsed by Buddy, is that a young team needs veteran leadership and the young ones need to understand what the team expects both on and off the field. In a sort of contradictory vein, the aside often repeated by apologists for the move is that he can have his a$$ cut at any time and it won't cost the Bills much money. Well I think I remember a veteran leader who exemplified all the core values the team could endorse. In addition, unlike Kelsay, he was a superior player. I mean London Fletcher. I guess the only difference then, outside of on the field performance, is that Fletcher would have cost more money. So really its maybe just about money.

The same Mark Schlereth who used to piss himself during games and thought he was putting one over on the fans who would never guess what he was up to? What an a$$.

The only bright spot I can see is your avatar.

The real problem is that Bills drafts have not been managed by football professionals. They have been directed by a poltergeist impersonating the VP of college scouting, with the assistance of Satan's little wizards, impersonating the rest of the front office, and who are collectively hell bent on irritating human beings, specifically Bills fans. No other explanation can plausibly account for the goings on at OBD.