2003Contenders

And to make it worse, the stupid Canadians will probably be rooting for Ricky.

I have always believe that the Whitner pick was a symbolic one by Marv. After five years of Donahoe's alleged micro-management, I believe that Marv wanted to start off on the right foot by building a strong sense of unity and consensus with the team -- and not leaving anyone out. I imagine that there were some in the War Room that wanted a QB (and Cutler is reportedly the guy they had graded the highest). There was also some disagreement about the DTs, as Nagata wasn't the prototypical Cover-2 DT, and Buckley was a better fit but had question marks. I think Whitner was a guy that everyone in the room was on board with -- and he was a SAFE pick in the sense that he was very unlikely to be an outright bust. From that perspective, the pick was a very, very good one.

I think he is talking about Keith Rivers, not Philip. Anyway, the linebacker Rivers was gone when the Bills picked anyway.

My guess is that it was probably Sullivan who asked the question. He has a knack for being somewhat tactless. Although I personally believe that any such question would be fair game, perhaps if worded tactfully, Sullivan (or whoever asked the question) may have actually gotten a decent response from Marshawn. Instead, the question was presented in a way to provoke him -- and that is probably what the intent was in the first place. Now, if Marshawn can just pin up this anger and take it out on the Raiders...

Aside from the good point about free agency looming for Greer -- and how crazy the market has become for CBs in the market -- last year is testimony to how long the season can be when injuries occur. McKelvin was their top-rated player, so I suspect they would have taken him anyway.

The emphasis should have been on "Kurt was killing THE DOLPHINS". Recall that Trent Edwards threw 4 TDs against this sorry bunch last year. You are right that Warner is a fine QB when his protection holds up. However, he is not mobile in the slightest and is very reliant upon a great offensive line and quality receivers to perform well. I dare say that Bledsoe would perform quite well given the supporting cast that Warner currently has. Perhaps, more than anything else, that is a major indictment of Matt Linart. As for the Rams, looking at their woeful OL, Kurt should be happy that he is playing in Arizona.

No it is not true. And this is the kind of nonsense drivel on message boards that leads to falsehoods and character assassinations. Del Rio did, in fact, trot across the field and gave Jauron a hearty congratulatory handshake.

True -- and if Lynch hadn't slightly stepped out of bounds on that run where the offense was backed up against the goal line, he would possibly have scored on a 90-something yard TD.

It's nice to see quality plays WANTING contract extensions to stay in Buffalo.

I am searching for silver linings and starting to find them with the holdout: 1. Last year when Peters went down, Chambers was a mess filling it at LT. By holding out all of training camp, it gave the team time to try different options, and Chambers proved to be pretty good at RT -- and Walker didn't embarrass himself at LT. Believe it or not, we actually have a little depth now, and it isn't the end of theworld if (God forbid) either Peters or Walker go down for any period of time. 2. Through it all, at least publicly, Peters' teammates have stood by him. In particular, Trent Edwards has had his back. Edwards even stayed late after practice the other day to work more on-on-one with Peters. In at least a small way, this helps Edwards to grow as a leader and to build trust and comradare with Peters and the other teammates. Suffice to say, GOd help any defender foolish enough to take a cheap shot at Edwards, when Peters is in the game. Look, I am as annoyed with Peters and Parker as anyone. I think they went about it all wrong. However, in the final analysis, no one got hurt and everything appears to be OK. Let's just hope that Peters in indeed 100% ready to go and that his stamina holds up if he does indeed play on Sunday.

That 2005 draft wasn't a very good one - and it was even seen AT THE TIME as a weak crop. Three RBs going in the first 5 picks -- all three of whom had sizeable question marks -- tells you something. That is one of the main reasons why Modrak and Donahoe were content to trade that #1 pick to move up in 2004 for JP. I remember at the time that there were discussions that had JP been available in 2005 instead of 2004, he may have been the top pick. Of course, there will be those who say that we could have just waited, used our 2nd round pick in 2004 on an OL/DL and taken Aaron Rodgers with our own original 2005 pick. Maybe. But hindsight is 20/20 and who is to say how well Rodgers would have fared if put in the same position as JP? Moreover, the verdict is still out on Rodgers too.

Actually, as I watched that game last night, I wasn't thinking about Hardy. Rather, I was thinking about Roscoe. Notice how much movement Royal was making PRIOR to the snap? The Broncos did a great job moving him around and placing him in situations where he could find mismatches -- or was outright uncovered. It would be nice to see formations like that to best utilize Roscoe's unique skillset.

I wouldn't worry too much. 1. Evans racked up over 100 yards. And that doesn't count all of the near-hookups that he and Trent had on Sunday. 2. The game never got to a point where we needed to get into a pass-happy mode. 3. For as much as folks are down on Reed, he really does a lot of things in addition to catching the ball that helps the offense. 4. It is nice to see our team (for a change) set enough with talent that we don't HAVE to rely on the rookies to contribute right away.

Agreed. And part of the reason that Garrard had so much trouble is that the Titans' D did a great job shutting down the Jags' running game. For the Bills to win, they must also have success stopping Fred Taylor and MJD.

Once again someone in the national media scoops the local ass clowns in Buffalo.

No link, just pure speculation on my part. I just find the timing very coincidental.

Allow me to be the first to say that I wonder if this has anything to do with his contract situation. He was holding out hope that he and the team could reach an agreement on an extension -- and was willing to put off the surgery until such time. Now that it is apparent that no deal will be reached prior to next off-season, he has decided to take care of numero uno and get the surgery done now -- so as not to aggravate it and fail to cash in on the free agent market.

Actually that is not how I remember it. The Bills dealt with Schobel in the same fashion by refusing to renegotiate. Schobel then held a silent protest by skipping voluntary OTAs, but showed up for mandatory workouts. His deal was worked out shortly thereafter. In fact, Peters and Parker should have used this blueprint to get what they want -- if, in fact, they really do want an extension. But, as I said earlier, has Peters ever come right out and said that he was not showing up until the two sides started working on an extension?

Have we actually seen any quotes at all come out of the Parker/Peters camp? They haven't returned calls to the front office or media -- and the only evidence that we have that Peters is even alive is that he has sent Dockery a few text messages. I just find the complete and utter silence very strange. And it isn't Parker's MO either, as Jackson, Hester and Harvey all made it loud and clear what their financial expectations were (prior to getting their raises). Something just smells funny here. I can't even speculate, but could it be that the dude isn't really after a contract extension at all -- and just simply no longer wants to play football?

Living in the DC area and being FORCED to watch the whole game last week with Theismann and Patrick gave me new appreciation for Tasker and Bentley.

Hardy actually looked pretty good in the blocking department last night. He was in on one block that sprung Marshawn for a pretty good gain.

The Bills swept the Jets last year (by the skin of their teeth in both games). Adding Favre also decreases the likelihood of that happening again this year.

Actually, I wouldn't mind Favre going to the Jets. The Bills have a pretty food record against Mr. Favre. The likes of JP (in 2006) and RJ (in 2000) managed to take care of ol' number 4. Of course, Bledsoe and the gang lost to the Packers at Lambeau in 2003, but it wasn't like Favre did much in that game. 10-0 if I remember correctly.

The critical difference between Peters and all of these other guys who did get new deals is that all of the other guys made it a point to show up for the MANDATORY sessions. I believe that Peters made his point by skipping the voluntary OTAs. Then he should have shown up to the mandatory ones and specifically communicated his displeasure with his current contract situation. Perhaps then he could have gotten the ball rolling on a new deal. As it is now, he and his agent have lost valuable time and possibly generated some ill will. As it is, Peters has played one exceptional year at LT -- a year that was cut short by injury. For all we know, he is damaged goods, since he hasn't shown his face in months. The timing here seems very strange to me, but that appears to be the paradigm for this Eugene Parker clown: Hester wanting elite WR money when he hasn't proven he can play the position yet, Steven Jackson holding out after an injury-riddled season, and Ryan Grant (who was a nobody prior to last season) claiming that the Packers have insulted him. Only one of these players got what he wanted -- and that was Hester, who actually reported to camp BEFORE the Bears buckled.

I don't ever recall hearing that Spoon had motivational problems. He actually made a pretty good contribution as a rookie, got hurt, the front office signed Fletcher and that was pretty much it for him in Buffalo.