Cynical

Why would Trent giving up make a difference if he should start or not? He's not getting the job done, regardless of the reason or rationale. Plan A was to develop TE while he played. Plan A has turned out to be an utter disaster. Time for Plan B.

Like I have said before: We all are Bills fans. We all want the same thing. We just disagree on the path to get there. And this time we happen to be on the same patch of road.

You are not convinced yet? How much more do you need to see? Players complaining he's missing reads. 3 consecutive downs of the same passing play, 3 bad passes. But you need to see more ...

They were not this demanding at Stanford ...

We have thought about it, and discussed it. The following QBs were recommended/highly touted by Bill Walsh: Joey Harrington David Carr Jake Plummer Steve Fuller (sp?) Steve Young The following QB was NOT highly regarded by Bill Walsh: Joe Montana You need to think about THAT. That's because a certain QB with the initials of TE doesn't throw him the ball. During the preseason, it was revealed BOTH Evans and Owens were begging TE to throw the ball deep. Some of Trent's problems were caused by poor coaching, but the time has come to admit, not all of them. And those ones not caused by poor coaching are on Trent.

Third. And lets stop with the nonsense that Trent should/must start. The only thing Trent is better at than Fitzpatrick is giving me a headache. Ryan sucks, but at least he looks like he's trying to win.

TO did? When? The outburst on the sideline was backed up by Josh Reed, and it was presumed to be about Edwards missing reads, and nothing more. I don't think TO and Reed were bitching because TO was open, I think they were bitching because they saw the same thing, tried to tell Edwards, and he blew them off. Maybe TE did do it intentionally. But I doubt it. I wouldn't be surprised to learn if those were plays were called just to see if Edwards was processing the defensive reads correctly. My guess would be he wasn't.

let me get this straight: You are willing to get rid of Stroud (because he is old and only has 3-4 years left), and you are willing to keep Boo-Boo Butler (when he gets healthy again.) That's frigging smart. Let's get rid of a guy that has performed consistently and has not missed a game since he has been here. On top of that, by dumping him, you create an immediate need at the DT position. And we'll keep the guy that has shown the only thing he can do consistently is get injured, thereby necessitating a need for a high quality back up to fill in for said young starter. Brad Boo-Boo Butler is nothing more than Jonas Jennings redux. If anything, that's a prime example of what hes been WRONG with this organization, especially under Jauron. Dump what works and create need where one did not exist. Retain marginal talent because it has potential.

Russ? How about Jauron? He can longer defend/shield his precious Edwards, and claim the football equivalent of 'stay the course'. His players are not buying it. A **** storm is a brewin', and poor little Dickie knows it. Do people still believe Russ has any actual authority over this team?

Other than Wood and maybe Levitre, who else on the Bills OL fits that description to begin with? Tinker Bell? Boo-Boo Butler? Chamber Pot?

Nice. Maybe it's my age, but it seems the Twilight zone always had some nice little plot twist with their stories.

GA, TN, and AL still do.

Strictly my opinion, I think he does to some extent. I would like to think he realizes his own poor play at times limits his "desire" to vocally hold others accountable. i.e. Kind of hard to blast Edwards poor play on a public stage when TO whiffs on a catch that goes for a pick 6. IMHO, I think that is just another way TO is calling out this coaching staff. I think it has become pretty obvious TO has given up on this team. There's not much public information to go on WRT the relationship between Edwards and Evans. However, based on the limited amount of info available, it rarely speaks in Edwards favor.

Just something to think about: You hit the button numerous times. You're rich. You rush home to tell the family, only to find out your spouse and your kids all died in a car crash. Hmmmm....... Or how about: as soon as you hit the button for the first time, you start suffering from a heart attack ....

Correct. He has also thrown other players and even a coach under the bus. I was actually excited by TO's signing. Given TO's nature, either he was going to light a fire under this teams ass, or he would start calling people out. Simply put, play better or be held accountable. It was a win-win situation in my book. And he's been holding people accountable all year.

Cassel? Really? In some ways, I think that's an apt comparison. Cassel was never really good to begin with. He benefited by the talent surrounding him and from superior coaching. Is this what Edwards needs to be productive? Superior coaching and great supporting talent? If so, does that not bring into question just how good Edwards really is? If you are not, why do you keep bringing up 3 OC in 3 seasons? It's not like Edwards had to learn 3 completely different offenses. It is the same base offense from his first day as a Bill. Every OC was chosen to ensure continuity so the offense would NOT have to learn a new system. Same base system three years later, and he still looks confused and unsure of what to do. If he can't be decisive in this simple offense, he will never grasp the complexities of a west coast system. Trent's problem is mental. Better talent, different coordinators, and/or systems will not change a thing.

Ah, I see. Since you cannot refute the argument, insult the poster. Got it. Aren't you the same poster that tried to claim Edwards was/would be better than Kelly? While you continue to think of new insults for me, I will leave you with some more info tidbits: Good/great players inspire those around them to play even better. During the preseason, it was revealed not a single Bills player would not unequivocally say Trent Edwards was the leader on the team. During the preseason, it was also revealed both Lee Evans and TO were constantly telling "Trentative" to throw the ball down field. Now, feel free to B word about TO's body language all you want. But I do not think TO is the problem there. In fact, I think it speaks volumes of his opinion of this offense, and more importantly, of "his" QB. Hell, even Donte called out the offense. It's beginning to look like the players have given up on Mr. Edwards. But feel free to support that sinking ship.

Trent happened. Are you kidding me? If Edwards played with half the emotion Losman had, Edwards might still have a chance. Losman called out the coaching staff. TWICE. What has Edwards done? Oh yeah, claimed Jauron was the "bestest" head coach he has ever head in the NFL. As what, a back up? Turk was chosen to replace Fairchild so a whole new offense would not have to be learned. AVP took over for Turk and changed nothing. In short, Trent is basically playing within the same offense for the past 3 years. Trent does not need a another coordinator, he needs a psychologist. He's afraid to take chances. Give it up. Edwards blows. It will not matter what offensive system he plays under. Until he can abandon his "comfort" zones on a consistent basis, he's back up material.

The very definition of a homer. He is an optimist because he continues to believe the Bills are just ready to break out and win. And I do agree he likes to attack other posters, especially when he cannot "spin" away from the facts.

Never said it was difficult, but it would not be as easy as some you claim it would. You're right. I only focused on one area of the their arguments: the bye. Why? First, I AM NOT OPPOSED TO A PLAYOFF SYSTEM. In fact, please reference post #18 where I said I would lean towards (read "prefer") a 16 team system. I prefer a 16 team system because every conference champion would make it, and every team would have to play the same number of games to win the NC. Incorporating a bye means a team could win the NC playing one less game than some other team. And how hard is it to fathom the fans of a repeat conference champion, that never makes it beyond the second round, bitching and complaining they are getting screwed because they never get the bye. So, I find no real fault in your suggestion other than I do not believe you should limit each conference to only two teams. Would you only limit the amount of independents eligible to only 1? College BB has 32 conferences vying for 64 spots (65 if you count the game played to determine the 64th seed). D1AA football has 8 conferences that are vying for 16 playoff spots. D1A football has 11 conferences. Notice a difference? 11 doesn't play nice with 8, 16, 32, etc ... Never said the current system does not have problems. It does. My argument has been a playoff system will not solve the issues (or perceptions) of bias, teams being screwed, etc ..., and at some point down the line will cause people to start complaining of the how system needs to be fixed. As you guys like to keep saying. It's not rocket surgery. 11 does not divide cleanly by 2. Talk about your faulty assumptions ...

Nah. Just an overly optimistic homer who refuses to believe Jauron really is a terrible coach.

Another Moral Victory!!!! What's our record now?

He is? Could have fooled me. Still waiting on his "guarantee" ...

Don't worry. Arena Football is expected to be back in 2010 ...

If a playoff system does happen, I would lean towards a 16 team set up myself. That way it includes at least 1 team from each conference. "Bias" would still exist, at least in the minds of ACC fans. I can already hear the howls of 'bias' when the SEC sends at least 2 teams every year into the playoffs, yet the ACC some how only gets to send 1. And if by chance the SEC qualifies 3 teams for the playoffs ...