Cynical

Old? He's not even 30 yet. So you can't even say he's old by NFL standards.

I have 2: Bills vs. LA Raiders, AFC Championship game Bills 51, Raiders 3 Bills picked off the Raiders 6 times, and rolled up 500+ yards on offense 'Nuff said. Second game. I do not remember the opponent other the the Bills won. I do remember the side show. Nice looking drunk Canadian chick kept flashing me and my friends during the game. Her boyfriend got annoyed with her antics. It also may had something to do with the "words of encouragement" my friends and I were giving her .

And if your writing ability was even remotely near as strong as your unbridled love for DJ, you would not have written something like this: Note how you did NOT say his first season plus some games ... But if that is how desperate you are in trying to prove the greatness of DJ, fine. Let's take a closer look: BB coached the Browns for 5 years, plus one year in NE 6 seasons x 16 games (per season) = 96 games Now you want to include only the first 4 games of of his second season in NE: 96 + 4 = 100 games DJ coached the Bears for 5 years, and we will throw in the his first year with the Bills: 6 x 16 = 96 Now we have to include a partial year for DJ. And luckily for us, DJ already has one: from Detroit where he was the HC for 5 games. 96 + 5 = 101 Obviously, 100 does not equal 101. And in all fairness, we want it to be equal. So how do we fix this disparity. We could remove one game from DJ, but that would not be right. Because if we did it that way, we would be leaving out games out from the past of both coaches. Both coaches did coach in a playoff game(s). Since your argument is based on BB pre-Brady, and those playoff games for BB were pre-Brady ... DJ coached in one (and lost), and BB coached in 2 (won one) Let's add those playoff games in: BB => 100 + 2 = 102 games coached DJ => 101 + 1 = 102 games coached Even amount of games, all accounted for, both being their first 102 games as a HC, and all the games BB coached pre-Brady. Let's add those wins up: BB => 6 + 7 + 7 + 11 + 1 (playoff game he won) + 5 + 5 + 1 (his one win from his 2nd season in NE) = 43 DJ => 6 + 5 + 13 + 4 + 7 + 1 (from his time in Detroit) + 7 (his first season in Buffalo) = 43 Same number of wins. Same number of games coached. Looks like your attempt to spin has failed again. Hell, after 3 seasons, DJ was near .500, the highest winning percentage in his entire coaching career. He should have retired then. His reputation would have been intact, and we would not be subjected to his incompetent coaching now.

Cynical thinks Donte needs to shut his yap, and focus on how he can be real leader on this team. Cynical thinks if Donte put in as much effort into winning as he does into defending a coach, we might not have to worry about what Donte thinks about the team critics. Cynical wonders how Donte would respond to a REAL head coach.

Please do look at Marv's pre-Bills days. In KC, the number of wins per season improved under Marv. His last year being the exception. By his 8th year as a HC, Levy took the Bills to the AFC championship game (where he lost to the Bengals). In Buffalo, we are still waiting for the DICK to prove he can produce a winning season.

How is it ironic? Moulds wasn't bashing TO, Moulds was taking shots at the Bills coaching staff. And he's right. You can choose to deny it all you want. One winning season out of eight says otherwise. And guess what TO has done in the past: called out a coach and his staff.

Do you get a headache from all the "spinning" you do? After 7 seasons, BB had compiled a record of 52-60. Jauron compiled a record of 49-63. (not counting playoffs) Please explain to everybody how Jauron had a better winning % than BB after 7 seasons. Oh, you must have meant after 6 years. BB - 41-55 DJ - 42-54 There you go. A 1 game difference. You are so right. BB was so much more horrendous than DJ.

Okay. In comparing last years line to this year (on paper): LT - the same or worse (probably worse) - a slow footed LT is going to struggle against the elite pass rushers LG - the same of worse (probably same) - Dockery was far from great and he wasn't the worst player on the line, but he is being replaced by a rookie C - should be an upgrade - Fowler /Preston sucked RG - worse - a player many people on this board feel was the best lineman is getting replaced by a rookie RT - the same - Walker was a decent RT, and I expect Butler to be at least that.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the majority of the people working in America are working under a "contract". Yes, even Joe Blow at Wegmans. Did you even bother reading those papers you signed when you got hired? You might be surprised at what they say. I see. He's a millionaire. That makes it "different". Apparently millionaires do not work in environments that may cause them to have responsibilities that are different from one position to another.

Yep. The year he was promoted from RT to LT. I guess we can assume you also would have no problem of not getting a raise after being promoted.

I do not have a problem with that. My problem is with automatically assuming this OL will be better. In order to make that assumption, one has to believe Peters play will continue to deteriorate. And that a 366 lb slow footed RT is now going to be a fleet footed agile LT. And that 2 rookie OL are going to adjust to the speed and complexity of the NFL in one off season. And that back up C from another team will quickly get into sync with his new third year QB. And the RG is now the RT. In short, the entire OL has been rebuilt, from one end to the other. If this was college ball, I would not have a problem with that. But this is not college. And on opening day, that's not Syracuse University the Bills will be playing. It will be BB and the Patriots*. BB has a made a living and a reputation of exploiting other teams weaknesses. Until proven otherwise, a slow footed LT, and 2 rookies are weaknesses waiting to be exploited. BB could literally set the template on how to beat the Bills this season.

Apparently you missed the part where Peters wanted to be "rewarded" the year before, after 2007. You know, the year where he was pretty damn good. The year he was elected as an ALL-PRO. The year the Bills organization essentially told him to off. And can we assume if you were in a similar position, your attitude would be "perky"?

This excuse is still being used. It's their excuse "trump" card. I am not sad to see Dockery go, but I think letting Peters go was a mistake. Walker's play as a LT for the entire year is going to make people forget that Peters 2008 season was "bad". And I do like the drafting of the 2 OL. For once, it shows the Bills organization taking a serious stance on fixing the OL. Normally, the Bills would have cut loose Dockery, traded Peters, and then followed that by filling in those gaps with cast offs from another team, and 6th and 7th round project picks.

We just drafted two rookies who have yet to play a single down in the NFL. And the Bills are expecting them to come in, adjust to the speed and complexity of the NFL, while playing in the no huddle. Talk about a crap shoot.

You mean like "svelte" 366 lb. "new" LT Langston Walker? I just love how people tend to gloss over the fact Peters was pretty damn good in 2007. Instead, they like to focus in on 2008. Like that year is a foreshadow of he'll play from now on.

Did you bother to read the article? He mentions that only two players finished above 80% for POA. One of those players was a guy called Derrick Dockery. The left guard. Who they cut (after they botched the attempted trade to Detroit). Now, I am not saying the release of Dockery was a bad move, but it is apparent that Dockery was one of the better run blockers on the team, despite what some people thought of him.

From your keyboard to Ralph's ears... Unfortunately, he's here for this year, and possibly next (if they can spin it enough)

Then you will not have to worry this year about his ability to play G. He's going to be the RT this year.

I am glad you can foretell the future. Now, what are the winning numbers for the next draw of the Mega Millions? Right now, Maybin is nothing more than a one trick pony with ZERO NFL sacks. While I like his potential, he still has to prove he can play at this level. That's not Coastal Carolina or Temple he's going to be facing from now on.

Especially when the Bills will be down 30+ points after Trent gets knocked out of the game in the first quarter because somebody blew a blocking assignment.

Yeah, it's not like Buffalo has it's own set of melodramatic problems that would grab the attention of the national media. Stuff like: - a weak WNY economy - a 90+ year old owner that could (unfortunately) pass away bringing into question the franchise's ability to stay in WNY - 4 straight SB losses - this thing called "Toronto"

See, that's the problem. Nobody else was even brought in for an interview. How can we answer that question when there are no other options? As for "stinginess", the Bills have hired well known coordinators before.

I'll be interested in hearing your excuse of why the Bills finished under .500 AGAIN. Like most Jauron apologists, I am quite sure it will not be the "Dicks" fault.

You started this thread. You now have spent 12 pages defending a proven perennial loser. You willingly choose to ignore reality and long term results, preferring to rely on selective "evidence" that cannot substantiate your position. Most people would call that denial. In fact, I think the only seed of doubt that was sewn was yours. And now you are trying immensely to convince yourself said doubt does not exist.

You can cite intangibles all you want. But you have been unable to prove those intangibles have any bearing on Jauron being a productive coach. Your entire argument is based on the ASSUMPTION those intangibles equate to being a good productive coach. Unfortunately for you, 1 winning season out of 8 proves you wrong.