Cynical

Excellent. Now all we need is for the WRs to run around with a bullseye painted on their back and a flashing light attached to their helmet. Super Bowl, here we come!

Actually Dog, Heels was backing you. Instead of replying to Cocktosten, he accidentally replied to you. He was essentially telling Cocktosten (and everybody else who had the same idea) to back off, and leave you alone.

Yea, I am cautiously optimistic. Do I think they will win the SEC West division? Without question. Do I think they will win the SEC? Very possible. Do I think they win the NC? Oof, ... ah, ... well ... um... Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Not so much. Replacing 9 starters on defense is hard (no matter who you are), especially when there is no Cody replacement in the wings. If Bama was an offensive powerhouse last year, than losing those 9 guys would not bother me so much. That's 9 guys from a key component. Ouch. Possibility of missing M. Dareus during a crucial game or games (For those who don't know who Dareus is, he was the guy who knocked McCoy out of the BCS CG, and snagged the INT for a TD return before the half) Again, 6 out of 8 conference opponents will have an extra week to rest and prepare to play against Bama (S. Carolina, Tenn, Ole Miss, Miss ST, LSU, and of course, the Barn). And that is not a coincidence. Bama has to travel to Knoxville and Baton Rouge this year (as noted before, both teams will have the week before off) Did I forget to mention Bama plays Florida this year? So it's real possible one of the SEC CG participants will have at least one ding on their record, possibly 2, entering that game. If Bama can put together a third consecutive undefeated regular season (Go wrap your head around that. What are those chances?), then I'll say Bama chances to repeat are looking pretty damn good. So to reiterate, I am cautious because the odds are not in Bama's favor. However, I never expected Bama to produce consecutive undefeated regular seasons, and win the NC by Saban's third year either. I have no particular favorites for the BCS CG this early (I never do). But, if Boise goes undefeated, it will be hard for the BCS NOT to consider them for the CG, especially if the rest of the traditional powers have at least one loss on their records. I can see Ohio, Texas, and Boise battling it out for top spots this year (assuming Boise goes undefeated).

I am on the fence on such games. It looks bad for big schools, but the weaker and/or smaller schools benefit financially (more than usual) and, hopefully, competitively. About 3 years ago, UB traveled to Auburn. Auburn stomped the snot out of UB, but, IIRC, UB received a check that was bigger than anything they received playing a conference rival. Besides, this is how the weaker/smaller schools move up. Look at Boise St. Today, people are running around yelping about how the big schools are scared to play them. Yet, if the same big schools played Boise St 10 years ago, the same people would B word about how the big school was packing their schedule with a powder puff opponent, with absolutely no thought that Boise State MAY have wanted such a match up.

I was interested, so I went looking: http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/about_us/staff/erin-nicole And yes, I would, even in that city.

Hopefully not. Trent's play was pitiful, but he happened to play against some of the worst defenses that year during that stretch.

And in 2008. The one difference I am now reading is his desire to actually engage in communication with his WRs. For Edwards, that's a huge step forward. Now, if just can continue that into the regular season ...

A panic attack caused that? IDK, call me crazy, but somehow I think the drinking had more to do with the attack more so than a panic attack.

This is good news. This was something Edwards failed to do in the past and why he lost the locker room last year (IMO). It also one of the reasons Fitzy out played Edwards last year. Fitzy was willing to seek out and discuss the play with his team mates, while Edwards tended to sit on the sidelines and sulk. No communication is sure fire way to failure.

1.) Practice what you preach. 2.) I will be cynical of Trent's play because after 3 years of watching him play, it has not been good. Not all of his problems were due OL, coaching, etc.. Even Jauron got frustrated with Trent's unwillingness to throw down field citing "missed opportunities" more than once in post game interviews. Recently, Edwards has finally admitted he failed to take chances down field. 3.) I am not freaking out over Trent leading this team as long as he is capable of doing it, which takes us back to #1. Let's wait and see how the regular season goes before declaring Edwards a "championship" QB. He has done the same thing the last 2 TC. Again, let's wait and see how the regular season goes before declaring him "saved" or "on a mission". The Dean made a very good point in another thread. Trent looks great when not under pressure. Apply pressure, and Trent's playing goes to hell. Once again, I must have missed the part of Chan's resume where it says "God". If anything, I would be willing to bet Chan has concerns regarding how Edwards will react come the regular season. Don't gloss over the facts: 1. if the Bills had the opportunity to draft Bradford, they would have 2. the Bills tried to acquire a veteran QB during the off season Gailey is working with what he has, but it's obvious he was not overly comfortable with what he's got.

Sorry. I must have missed the part on Chan's resume where it said "God". And until Trent can prove he is productive in an actual game, any "Chan knows best" excuse is a cop out. The reality is, nobody knows how Trent will react once the pads start hitting for real.

Another cop out. You can't argue against the facts so you hide behind HC. I remember the Jauron apologists trying to argue something similar. How did that work out?

Thus proving Bill Walsh was no better than anybody else at predicting how well a player would perform at the NFL level. Nobody has the capacity to predict how a player will react psychologically when they face adversity.

Whoopee. In 2006, the Bills had 6 rookies either starting or seeing significant playing time. In 2010, how's that working out for us? To many idiots automatically equate young/youth as being "better". As others have already pointed out, Spikes is slow. He was slow by college standards. With that in mind, see above.

Good thing they actually play the games. Bama has a tough row to hoe this year, losing 9 starters on D, and having to play 6 of their 8 conference games when the opponent has a week off prior to the Bama match up. Throw in the possibility of losing Marcell Dareus for a couple of games (or more), and Bama could be in trouble before the season is even half over. This is Boise State's year. If they want to be taken seriously, this is the year to do it. Looking at the top 10 of that list: Bama and Florida have their issues (already discussed), Texas is switching their offense to a more pro style (to match Gilbert's abilities), OU has to replace Bradford, and Nebraska is still rebuilding (their offense was putrid last year). Ohio State, Iowa, and even Wisconsin @ 12 all have to play each other, and whoever is the top team out of the Big Tenleven+1 will have at least one ding on their record (IMO). That leaves TCU and Virginia Tech. They can't do anything about TCU (and who also could end up in the running for the BCS CG). But the Broncos do play VT right out of the gate, and that does give them an opportunity to make a statement early in the season.

Since losing the Big XII-2 conference championship game, ole' Jerry Jones is looking for a new angle to help payoff that stadium. Mash here If Bama and Michigan do hook up, I hope they reconsider doing a home and home series. !@#$ Jones. I hope Jerry chokes on that monstrosity.

Keep reaching.

And was promptly benched the following year for a rookie, never to play football again. He was 32. Why was he benched? For the same reason that plagued Plummer his entire career: He was inconsistent. He never became the next Joe Montana, "including Super Bowls" as Walsh predicted. Can we include you in that description? Or are you, or have been, a professional scout? I hope Trent pans out, so we can move on from this silly discussion. But I have seen this musical before. 1) Trent looks good in TC, says all the right things, Trent fans go nuts. 2) Trent plays questionable during preseason, Trent fans down play his performance citing vanilla offense, it's only preseason", and such. 3) Trent plays horrible during regular season, Trent fans blame Bills management, HC, OC, OL, defense, special teams, other players, concussions, phantom concussions, play calling, offensive schemes, my dead grandmother, his uncle, her twice removed niece, Chucky the Killer doll, Satan, etc ..... We are seeing #1 all over again. How about we wait until we see 2 and 3 before we start circle jerking to his poster?

Thank you! And bedsides the part you highlighted, the other passage that sticks out is: "Even Walsh, who acquired Joe Montana and Steve Young for the 49ers, needed to be pushed into selecting Montana in the third round in 1979. Walsh nearly chose Steve Dils." So for all the blabbering about how great Walsh was selecting QB talent, the guy needed to be pushed into selecting Montana. As somebody else pointed out, Walsh was very high on Fuller. The only reason Marv was able to select Fuller before Walsh was due to the fact the 49ers had no first round pick that year.

So says the person who is notorious for doing just that. Try following your own advice.

Oh, Jesus Christ. Can we PLEASE stop with the Ratliff comparisons? This is the 4th reference to him in this thread alone. Troup has yet to take the field, and unless I missed it, he's not even signed. At this point, Troup isn't even qualified to hold Ratliff's jock strap. At this point, I no longer care how well Troup played in college. He's looking to play in the NFL. As for Ratliff, just like JStranger76 said: "... there are always exceptions. If a player is gonna perform way better at a certain weight than that's where he'll play."

Um, Mularkey was still the HC in 05. Jauron took over in 06. The 05 defense was subjected player loss and injuries. Pat Williams was let go after 04. Spikes and Williams replacement (Edwards) were both lost for the season early in the year. That meant Tim Anderson was a starting DT. Edwards wasn't a great player, but he was a hell of a lot better than Anderson.

I can feel the love just oozing out of this thread.

Agreed. USC would have no clue what clauses were contained in his contract to the Titans. IMHO, the only way USC/Kiffin is in trouble is if Pola told Kiffin about the clause and Kiffin then chose to ignore it.

Panther Homer. Same thing as a Bills Homer. Both have little to no ability to objectively analyze their teams strengths and weaknesses. The 2009 Panthers went 8-8 last year despite being "one of the best teams in the league on paper" (according to Panther homer). He doesn't understand why the team just cannot get it together. That's because the Panthers were not nearly as good as you thought they were, dumbass.