ny33

To be fair- and I'm not defending the coaching staff, but rather the players- we instilled a new defensive scheme and added multiple new starters/rotation players. The defense has been second in the NFL since the bye. That's a massive improvement and indicates that the defense has more experience playing with each other; I have faith in its continued improvement. The offense, however, is a different story without improved QB/WR play.

He's 18th in salary, but around 23rd-27th in performance. He's actually underperforming his contract.

It's on the Stadium Wall, not another forum; plus he said, "May give a lot potential free agents a different perspective other than it's a cold barren s**thole that no one in there right mind would want to live." While this is great for Buffalo, this has nothing to do with Bills football.

Good post. FYI, it's "crème brûlée."

The listed reasons (affordability, unemployment below the national average, growing healthcare and education industries) have zero impact on the life of an NFL player, particularly a marquee free agent. Quit deluding yourself; Buffalo may be a perfectly fine area for the average recent graduate, but it is far from the ideal location for football and lifestyle reasons for NFL free agents.

Easley will see playing time if he shows that he can run routes consistently well. He didn't in the preseason, and I presume hasn't during practice yet.

http://wp.advancednflstats.com/defenderstats.php?pos=CB Here you go.

http://wgr550.com/two-bills-drive/14935147 The link doesn't mention anything about his being too slow, but from the subheading on the TBD front page: 'Morrison was supposed to start at outside linebacker, but it was obvious during training camp he was too slow for the move. Arthur Moats won the job and later surrendered it to rookie. Nigel Bradham.' I understand that Morrison was cut to get depth on the o-line. My point is this: it was clear that Morrison had no role on this team throughout the season. Given the various injuries- none as severe as the current situation- we've had to the o-line, why didn't we sign someone when Rinehart went on IR? Yes, it's a minor qualm, but Morrison's spot seems to have been pointless throughout the year. I believe we could have stashed better depth from the scrap heap if we had cut him several weeks ago.

He should have been cut earlier in the season. Not much changes from week 1 to week 12 with a healthy, veteran starter.

How many teams sign a healthy vet, keep him inactive through 12 weeks, then cut him because he's "too slow"? That's bad personnel assessment and roster management, especially when you know exactly what you have in the guy. I like Morrison; I blame the organization, not him, as minor as this is in the scheme of the Bills' management.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000105398/article/kirk-morrison-released-by-buffalo-bills-to-make-room-for-ol-help

What?

Given that there are 4 games left in the season, I wouldn't be too concerned if he has to miss the rest of the year. There's a difference between a six-week injury and something that keeps him rehabbing throughout the offseason.

How could we be officially knocked out when they have 8 wins, and we have 7 losses? No, we aren't.

I agree that Buffalo won't make it despite, I'm guessing, 3 more wins on the year, but the 6 seed will be Cincy, not Pitt.

Is Luck available in this draft? Is RGIII? No; we have a strong class of DTs, DEs, and 3-4 OLBs. Let the team see what they have, and let's hope we draft WELL, not high.

He'll be a long-term starter, definitely. As for our game vs. Seattle, I hope Browner and Sherman are out. It's a bad matchup for us.

I don't prefer them. Nor did I say he won't be good, but rather not elite and probably not worth drafting. At this point, though, I take that back. He's a player.

63,222

Right: we can beat the teams with worse QBs, but not the ones with good ones. Swap Fitz with, say, Rivers, and we are probably 7-4 with wins against the Jets, Titans, and Colts.

Again, the 49ers were an exception. The Jets also had a great defense and running game that carried the team. I believe those Jets teams, and the 49ers, are the exception, not the rule.

There's a new owner/GM in place. I think they'll give Weeden another year, but that'll be the extent of his window to perform given his age. I do believe he will be a good QB, though, and the Browns will be serious contenders if Josh Gordon is the real deal and they draft well next year.

I think Arizona/KC/NYJ are the three most likely teams to draft a QB this year. The draft is fairly weak, and I see Cleveland, Jacksonville and Buffalo addressing other positions in the first round, unless they really love Barkley/Bray/Wilson.

The Browns look improved recently, and I wouldn't be shocked if they're a contender next year with the improvement of Weeden and Gordon. They have a strong o-line and defense. I don't see them drafting a QB, at least in the first or second rounds.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings At this point in the season, it is pretty clear who the contenders and pretenders are. The Saints, ranked 15th, have been on fire recently thanks to Brees and the passing game; the 16th rank Vikings have collapsed with the mediocre Ponder at QB. Using the below list, most of the top 16- or top half of QBs- are leading teams that are contenders. The Lions have an awful defense, while the Chargers and Cowboys are teams that just don't know how to win, compounded by weak QB play from otherwise solid QBs. We're in an era where, thanks to a combination of talent and rules favoring the passing game, most teams have either a serviceable QB or a prospect starting for them. There are, of course, only a few elite QBs, and these are the guys who win Super Bowls, but you don't see Trent Dilfers leading teams anymore. Nor are half the QBs in the league the Todd Collins, Kelly Holcomb journeyman types. It's clear that this team will not win unless it makes an effort to draft a strong quarterback, given how much more critical the passing game has become. We can run Spiller 25 times a game, but that's not going to take us to the Super Bowl. We may not need a Rodgers, but we can't win unless we have, at the least, a Flacco-type. 1) Rodgers 2) P. Manning 3) Brady 4) Brees 5) Roethlisberger 6) Ryan 7) E. Manning 8) Schaub 9) Freeman 10) Flacco 11) Cutler 12) Stafford 13) RGIII 14) Luck 15) Rivers 16) Romo 17) Wilson 18) Dalton 19) Smith 20) Newton 21) Palmer 22) Vick 23) Bradford 24) Fitzpatrick 25) Locker 26) Tannehill 27) Ponder 28) Sanchez 29) Weeden 30) Gabbert 31) Kolb 32) Cassel Edit: I failed to account for Alex Smith, who I think is a below-average QB, but has one of the best receiving corps, o-lines, and coaching support systems in the league. The 49ers are certainly the exception, and Kaepernick may prove to be a very good player. Either way, they are such a well-run team, and Smith is smart/accurate enough to not lose them games, that they can win without a top-10-15 QB.