BillsBackersChicago

I love and respect you as a fellow bills fan... But never disrespect the greatest Grocery Store on Earth... BTW, Wegman's is one of fortune 500's best companies to work for. (#1 in 2005, #5 in 2009, #3 in 2011, has been on the list since they started making the list)

great CNN/SI article if you haven't yet read it (its also linked off of TBD), this guy is quickly becoming my favorite bill. Seriously, what other star athelete is this approachable and does normal dude stuff like this. Makes me miss upstate life. Sorry if this was discussed in another thread, I saw it yesterday and just got to posting today. Admin, feel free to close if it was discussed in another thread, I did not see it on a quick search Here's the link

OK, I am glad I read the article about trap games before coming to any final conclusions: A trap game was defined as a good team (greater than .500 win percentage on the year) playing a bad team (less than .500 win percentage on the year) IN BETWEEN playing two good teams the week before and after. The comparison was to good teams playing bad teams on weeks when they do NOT play a good team the week before and after. They showed that the good teams beat the bad teams at the same rate when the game is a "trap" as when it is not a "trap". They appropriately do not compare it to when good teams play other good teams. Based on this, I guess it makes sense that there is no statistical credence to the idea of a trap game. Good teams beat bad teams at the same rate regardless of whether that game is scheduled as a trap or not. Thanks for educating me about this matter2003. Here's the link to the article.

exactly! If there's no such thing as a trap game, teams that are expected to win should win at a higher rate than they do during other weeks where they are either evenly matched or underdogs. I think I am thinking about this right, but maybe I will go try and find the article before I call BS.

Interesting, do you have a link? Would love to read it and see how they worked out that analysis. Wouldn't that mean that they beat bad teams at the same rate as they beat good teams?

Well said, it took me 4 paragraphs to make the same sentiment on a previous thread.

Or dear god, can we please make the nicknames Salt n' Peppa permanent fixtures?!

I love you all for turning this thread into one primarily about Buffalo wings.

I think you said it best. This seems like a perfect trap game that overconfident young players can get caught in. We're coming off the high of one of, if not THE greatest wins of recent Bills history, we have the Eagles and Giants coming after this game, its an away game after two home games where we have been able to get used to playing in friendly confines, Dalton is a rookie, but that can be dangerous as we simply DO NOT have enough tape and knowledge about what he can and can't do in the Bengal's system. (remember how Trent was initially successful when he started, before everyone knew how to defend him) So yes, I hope we win, I think we SHOULD win, but one characteristic of a solid team is to be able to win the games that we are expected to win. We have been pre-game underdogs every game so far, and I think that sometimes its even harder to win when everyone expects you to - perfect example being the pats this week: I don't think anyone would say we are a hands down better team than the Pats, we just had their number this week, and maybe they were not prepared for what we could do. We however, were very hungry, at home, and well prepared. Now, that being said, our players have said nothing that leads me to believe that they are not still hungry. In addition, confidence and "expecting to win" are good things, but we just have to make sure that we are just as prepared, mentally, physically, and emotionally for Cinicinnati as we were for KC, the Raiders and the Pats. If we do that, I think we should be able to win the way we did in KC. We ARE a better team than them, its just that in the past (even during the glory years), we have played down to bad teams and up to good ones. We just need to treat each week like we are 14 point underdogs, regardless of the actual point spread, and prepare for each game like its the superbowl, regardless of who we are playing. Go Bills, I hope marcell dareus tips and then picks a pass at the line, rumbles down the sideline, gets push out of bounds, lands on top of marvin lewis, flattening him like a cartoon, and causing Lewis to have to be carted off the field to be reinflated with all the hot air that he seems to be filled with right now.

Yeah, sorry about that, as I put in the edit of my reply, I didn't see that you are the site administrator. my bad. Thanks for the info, was curious. I also do not care about their intent or why they are advertising. Hell, I obviously did not even know it WAS an ad. Was just curious, thanks for answering. Will close the topic now.

huh. Are you sure? because that link has been on the website every time I have loaded it for the past several months. Its not even like its a rotating link. its ALWAYS there. I am not saying you are wrong, because I actually have no idea, but I just think its weird that it seems like a permanent link. Also, why are they advertising an ambassador on a sports website?! EDIT: My bad, just saw that you are an administrator.... you probably know what you are talking about. Matter settled. thanks.

Sorry if this has been explained before, I DID do a quick search of the threads to find the answer, but could not find it. Does anyone know why a permanent link to the profile of Yousef Al Otaiba (UAE Ambassador to the US) is at the top of the TBD website? Apologize for my ignorance in this matter if its common knowledge. BTW, yesterday was the best day of my life since my wedding, so sorry to distract from the post game discussions with something (apparently) not related to football. I have been wondering about this for months!

I personally prefer the buffalo bounce (the original version of buffalo's lambeau leap. Covered on another thread I saw yesterday. BTW, great to see Thurman hugging Freddie J at the press conference yesterday.

Man I wish I could agree with you, I WANT to agree with you, but I recall some throws (one against cleveland in particular) in which the ball fell 10 feet in front of the receiver, I also recall a ton of passes where the receiver was wider open and the ball sailed atleast a few yards above him. Fitz makes amazing, tight, threading the needle type of throws, but also makes some head scratchers. Not sure if its the way he releases the ball which makes the occasional ball come up as a duck, but at the end of the day, I will take him over any of our last few QB's. He has the balls to make the tight throws (not Edwards), has the intelligence and timing to make the short drop off pass when needed and let his receivers make a play (not JP), He is not a complete statue and does not turn into a ball of Jelly when he gets sacked a few times or gets pressure (not Bledsoe or Rob Johnson). He is a gunslinger, he just doesn't have the elite skill to be an elite gunslinger like kelly, elway or (god forgive me for saying this) Marino. He will get picked off several times this year, but as we saw the last game, if he does not make those "unadvisable" throws, he also won't get the touchdowns we praise him for (see the Chandler pass against the raiders, that was all but picked off before Chandler caught it....not to mention the INT in the end zone which would have ended the game had Donald Jones not made an amazing play to prevent it). I am ok, with the tight throws, hopefully in time those tight throws will become more perfect (so the only person that can catch them is the WR), but the ridiculous overthrows and underthrows which are either mental errors or physical slip ups really should stop, and I think Fitz would agree. Not that I know him, I just blindly believe I can guess what he's thinkin.

wow, you must be fun at parties

Gotta go with the comback game, but only because I was there. my brother was at the 51-3 game and said it was beyond amazing. On a side, note, looking over the stats for that game was rather interesting. 6 picks by our defense?!? two by talley? Also, despite all the picks, only one sack. Also, kelly threw for a very respectable 300 yards (especially back then), but I would have expected more given the score. Also, 3 TD's by Kenneth Williams, only one by Thurman. Two TDs to lofton, none to reed. I definitely don't remember the injury report from that game, to know who was in the game, but the stats are definitely not what I would have expected. good memories, time to make some more. GO BILLS!

I feel like I should already know this, but I don't so I will ask: I get that Wood is a better younger center, but who is going to be our backup center if wood goes down or if one of our guards go down and we need to move wood back to guard? Was is a salary issue? Too expensive of a contract to pay our backup center? Any insight would be appreciated.

oh my dear god if Wegmans and the Bills were to fuse into one, I would spend my life trying to find a way to have sex with it.

quality find. good stuff

now that's good funny It scares me that some people on this board do not think that winning is the only worthwhile measure of improvement. Improvement that does not result in winning is just moving deck chairs.

First, what BIG PLAYS has CJ made in the NFL and how frequently is he able to do it? Second, someone with big play ability, but an INABILITY to do the day to day operations of being an NFL running back (regularly getting positive yardage, a respectable yards per carry, solid blocking, and thereby moving the chains when you need) is by definition the perfect person to have as a number 2 running back. On say second and short, you can try and work CJ in to see if he can get lucky with a big play, if he doesn't you still have another down. But when it comes to 3rd and short (3-4yards), the reliable back, your #1 back should be the one given the ball. Freddie is the guy who can move the chains and sustain drives. yes, maybe CJ will get lucky and bust a big run once every 15 touches (I am being generous, last year he went 16 touches straight with negative yardage). But when he is ineffective at getting the big play, he does not even get the respectable 3-5 yards needed to put the offense in good down and distance situations. If CJ is given the majority of the carries, and the majority of the time he gets minimal (relatively) or negative yardage, that results in wasted plays and stalled drives. Stalled drives keeps the defense on the field, gets them winded and ineffective. A SOLID back is what you need as your number one to keep the offense on the field, keep drives alive and get the OPPOSING defense tired. By all means, work CJ in to see if he can break something, but he is not an every down back (or atleast has not proven himself to be in the NFL with no consistency and downright BAD blocking). Going back to my original point. How can we all be so sure that he has this amazing "big play potential" when he has had very few such "big plays" in the NFL. We are all assuming his potential because of his college success. Different league, he needs to prove that he has regular big play potential in THIS league. And even if he does, that does not make him an every down, (#1) back. Finally, in reference to your point. Isn't not having a HOF QB or a good O-line for pass protection the exact reason you need to have a reliable RB that gains positive yardage with every touch. If its not a HOF QB, you need to be put into good down and distance situations, because you can't expct the QB to bail you out of 3rd and long. With an ineffective running game on 1st and 2nd down (as would be the case with a RB who only rarely gets a big play), the offense is in a tough situation, one that they do not have the talent necessarily to get out of on a regular basis. Just my opinion, but would be happy to hear your thoughts.

No offense, but I think this is crazy! Its not CJ's job to lose because he has done nothing to MAKE it his job. The person who should get the most touches is the person who is the most productive when he touches the ball. That's been fred (more so than Lynch and way more than CJ). The person who should be the number one back is the person who the BEST all around back at blocking, running between the tackles and off tackle, and catching passes...no doubt that's lynch. CJ has a world of potential given his speed. But the only place he has EVER been productive is in college. I am not saying cut CJ or he is a bust, but you get promotions in this league when you perform, but when you have the POTENTIAL to perform. I agree with developing CJ, but until then, Fred is the man. (who better to teach CJ how to do the fundamentals?)

Two things... First, I always find it hard to believe that a tenth of a second in 40 times makes any difference when pads are on and you are running against a CB or safety that may bump you at the line. Its not like these guys start off in blocks on all fours with a gunshot to start a play. That being said, evans certainly did have a talent at getting deep, and probably the best we've had since beebe at that skill, but I think its more important how fast a guy is when running a route against coverage than what he can do when being timed running a straight line in shorts. I mean, just grab a stop watch and try and see if you can start and stop it in a tenth of a second. Its not easy. I know it is the only measure we have for speed, but I think it should be taken with a grain of salt. I don't care what a person's forty time is (as long as its respectable), If he can run with pads with the wind blowing and a guy in his face, or can get to top speed quickly or stop and start quickly, that's a guy that will be successful in my humble and non-professional opinion (I am personally slow as a llama, so I can't make any first hand judgments) Second, on a related note, my uncle knew Lee well and would hang out with him frequently. He was always really nice and down to earth when he would hang out with us, always just acted like a regular guy even if the rest of us thought of him as a superstar. Last guy I saw my uncle hang out with that much was Darryl Talley, someone he still talks to today, so he has a pretty good feel of who the "solid" guys are. I am pretty bummed that Lee has left town, even if he wasn't the best wide receiver in the league, he was sure as hell good enough to be a productive player on the Bills, I mean, do you really think Namaan Roosevelt (who I like) is a better person to have on your team than Lee? As for him not fitting Gailey's scheme, I thought gailey was good at building an offense that matched the talent on the team? Anyways, I am not one to gripe about the coulda, woulda, shoulda. Its time to move forward, but its a shame to see another good player and a really GREAT person leave the bills. Go Bills.

what a great way to start my first day off in 3 weeks. Thanks so much!