Mickey

Now you are just being coy, and its sooooooo cute. Here is what "fruitier" means, the word among all other you chose to best convey your meaning: 1. Of, containing, or relating to fruit. 2. Tasting or smelling richly of or as if of fruit. 3. Excessively sentimental or sweet. 4. Slang Crazy; eccentric. 5. Offensive Slang Homosexual. Since 1, 2 and 3 would make no sense in the context you were using it, that leaves either offensive slang for gay or "eccentric". Snice it would have been quite easy to come up with a word that more clearly meant crazy and only that, it is apparent that you didn't mean that either. "Crazy" also would be quite a stretch for describing use of the word "swaggering". I'd also be willing to bet that offensive slang for gay is the far more common usage of fruity than is eccentric. I find it hard to beleive that you meant "crazy" and rather than use a word that meant simply that, chose instead to use a word that is so often used as offensive slang. No one knows what is in your head or your heart where true intentions reside but based on what you actually said, you can't really complain at the rational conclusions drawn therefrom. Not knowing you, I would give you the benefit of the doubt as not really having meant to offend. Certainly, when it comes to that kind of thing, there are far, far, far worse comments around here. It is too often the first insult out of the box when posters go at it.

Way too early. We lost in week one and won in week two, at home, before a great crowd against a team that is apparently not very good. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't enjoy every bit of this, it is why we are fans to begin with, to enjoy weeks like this. So let the good times roll.

I disagree on Chambers, he looked awful in camp and in the preseason games, against back ups. I think Trent played exceedingly well yesterday. He took the shots that were there, found the TE frequently and made some good calls at the line. As usual, he was pretty nuts on accurate for most of the game. He missed a likely TD to Schouman and had a ball slip out of his hands on the pick which was a 10 point turnaround in the game but apart from that, there isn't much at all to complain about. The line, even though it has allowed 6 sacks in two games, is playing pretty well, well enough for us to have won 2 games so give their experience level, again, little to complain about. I would just caution the exuberance for bit as Tampa's defense was shredded in the opener and yesterday proved that was no accident. The Pats should be 0-2 so I am not sure their defense is quite the dominant force it has been. Still, they are NFL defenses, with more experience certainly than our line and they held their own. AVP is doing a pretty good job minimizing their problems and taking advantage of what they do betst. The defense had a number of huge stops and though the pass rush faded badly after the first quarter, they made enough plays to get it done. One thing they did that the Bucs weren't able to exploit because the line played so well, was to make up for the loss of Poz by playing a lot of nickel where they pulled Buggs top make room for the extra corner. The Bucs should have been able to run with more success. It was a great evening of football, the only downer, apart from the injuries, was the sobriety check they set up on Transit after the game where it goes from 3 lanes down to 2. With check set up, it went from 3 lanes to 1 causing a huge jam. I spent a good 45 minutes to an hour covering the mile before the check. I am all for nabbing drunk drivers but jeez, was creating that big of a mess any less dangerous? Any reason they can't run a check using two lanes?

Weren't we come closer to beating the undefeated Dolphins in '72, losing by a point? I can't recall the circumstances but I am sure we found some horrific way to lose it.

I would add that playoff game we lost to San Diego, Fouts and company when Fergy had that bad ankle. I think it was 1983?

Why not fire van pelt? Afterall, the WR's dropped several passes and there were a number of penalties on the line. He is the top offensive coach, it is his responsibility to make sure that the players don't make dumb mistakes and clearly, he has failed to live up to that responsibility so why not fire him? Your logic could be used to justify firing anyone and everyone on the team.

Nice to have the numbers but this was pretty obvious to anyone watching the game. The Pats apparently didn't think much of our line or, w/out Lynch, our running game so they focused on the only threats that worried them, TO and Lee. That played right to Trent's strengths as he doesn't get the ball to the WRs even when they aren't double teamed. Maybe he will this year but his record so far demonstrates a clear reluctance to go down filed. Giving him the short stuff took pressure off our young line and took advantage of Trent's uncanny ability to hit people in stride on the shorter routes. I don't know why the Pats didn't defend us the way everyone else does, which is to load up on the run and the short stuff, forcing Trent to go downfiled which means the line has to hold pass pro for an extra click or two. I guess they didn't think much of Freddie and our TE's.

I am not sure taking this poll right after Freddie played the best game of his life and while Lynch is under suspension is all that fair. Point is though, Freddie is very, very good, and to think we almost lost him this offseason over a contract dispute.

Also, Schobel's pick six had as much to do with the TOP disparity and number of plays as did the no huddle. We had just as many possessions as they did. I think the number of plays is meaningless as far as the no huddle is concerned. What does matter is that our possessions are short, time wise, even when they are successful in terms of scoring so that our defense gets less time to rest.

If I were coaching the opposing defenses, I wouldn't worry as much about the WR's. Trent has not shown the ability to make teams pay deep and those deeper routes put more pressure on our young line to hold out for a second or two longer. Giving Trent the short stuff is a dream situation for him, it is what he does best. He pretty consistently delivers the ball accurately enough for the receiver to play catch and run. If you back has to twist, turn, dive or jump to catch the screen, the defense gets an extra click or two to react. Screens depend on timing. I don't know why the Pats didn't take their chances downfield and instead, play us the way everyone else does. I guess I understimated just how much teams think Owens is capable of. And I just have to say this....I love Freddie. Not in a gay way but every other way. If he plays like that for the next two weeks, we may have a "runningback" controversey.

I think it is always a mistake to judge teams based on the first 3-4 games. Nobody has any fresh film on anyone, everything is a surprise. After 3-4 games, teams more effectively game plan for one another and at that point, you have start flat out beating people, you aren't going to win on surprises. I think that, unlike NE, as long as we don't have a lot of injuries, we are going to get better as the year goes on. The Patriots didn't impress me last night. Brady and Moss can still kill you, no doubt, but that defense was nothing special and they were unable to run the football effectively. They may be as good as they are going to be right now. The nice thing about young guys is the potential to improve with experience. I predict that we continue to play well, win or lose up to game 3 or 4 and then we stumble a bit as teams get a feel for Van Pelt and before the young guys take that next step. I think we will be a whole different team.

I would add to that the fact that Owens was drawing double coverage as was Lee and that was a major factor in the success of the screens. The Patriots clearly identified Owens and Evans as the primary offensive threats and put all they had into taking them away, figuring that our young line wouldn't be able to make them pay in the running game and that we didn't have a TE or RB who could do much damage underneath. They were pretty much right on the running game as we had very little sustained success though we certainly had some. They were also pretty much right on the TE's with a few exceptions here and there. They were wrong however on the screens and dump offs to Freddie. Everyone seems disappointed in how Owens played but I think he had a much larger impact on that game than the stats would lead you to beleive. He did have a critical drop though that killed a drive.

Very impressive, so tell me Swamee, should I ask that dark haired girl I met at the blues fest for a date? I lost my eight ball so...

Respectfully, I disagree with your belief that only the Bills were willing to take a chance on him. He was listed as a top project LT or "sleeper" that year in the draft. Lots of people had him on their radar and he could have signed as a UDFA with a number of teams. However, Buffalo, as he and his agent correctly determined, offered the best chance for making the roster given their lack of talent. They paid him, he worked for his pay and, for most of his career here, played significantly better than he was paid. I don't think he owed the Bills any more gratitude than they owed him. They didn't sign him as an act of charity, they signed him because of his potential and he did his part to make that potential count.

For quite some time now the Peters haters have dutifully informed us of his every mistake no matter how tiny to justify their way-over-the-top criticism of him. From using the wrong fork to injuring his quad, we have heard it all. Any of us who have offered even the slightest praise for his abilities or regret that we lost him have been relentlessly and personally attacked. I can see why some would want to give some back to the flying monkeys. I recently wrote a post about what I called the decisional whiplash concerning Walker, good enough to be our starting LT one minute, off the roster the next. Never mentioned Peters at all. Sure enough, one of the intertwits who has been calling Peters everything from an ignorant brute to the anti-christ for the better part of a year and a half responded with a personal attack: "And what I find pretty amazing is the # of idiots who have pronounced Demetrius Bell a total failure, while already annointing St. Jason to Pro Bowl status - before either has played a down this season - in their frantic rush to say "I told you so!" I swear, Buffalo's Adam Mickeiwicz Dramatic Circle (aka 'Mickey's') must be named after you. Come back and talk to us after Bell's debut, and after Julius Peppers owns FatBoy today. " The fact that I never mentioned Peters or Bell or said "I told you so", didn't matter. These are just personal attacks that have pretty much nothing to do with fans yakking it up about their team and occasionally disagreeing. I respect your opinion on Bell but frankly, I had no reason to question Peters' work ethic or committment to winning. I think it takes a special kind of player to rise as fast as he did, to get that good in that short a time. But you know, all that is opinion and I don't understand why we can't hold reasonable opinions without being subjected to relentless attack that goes way beyond a simple heated debate. It seems like there are some who, for reasons I can't fathom though I am sure immaturity figures highly in it, come here primarily to insult and bully their fellow fans, somehow getting off on coming up with the coolest insult. Because really, life outside this board doesn't offer enough opportunites for jack asses to be jack asses. Despite the specific invitation to do so, I am not here to rub that poster's face in Peters' excellent performance in not giving up a sack to Peppers. There is nothing I could say that would more thoroughly demonstrate his jack-assery than quoting his own words. Frankly, my opinion of him has nothing to do with the fact that we so strongly disagree on Peters. The problem is his inability to simply be civil with those of whom he disagrees.

Actually, can you think of team more likely to put a stud on the practice squad and start a slug than KC?

I have been critical, in a loving way , of the front office since Brandon's press conference calling Peters out at the start of camp in '08. I have also been very critical of their "plan", consisting as it did of so many different gambles, to retoole the offensive line. I was descended upon by the usual gang of flying monkeys around here and though I think time and recent events have validated my opinions, I sorta wish I had been wrong. The bright side is that either this team will exceed our fairly low expections which means enough wins to be enjoyable and if they don't, it means a high draft pick and a new coaching staff. Win or lose, I am going to just try to enjoy watching Maybin, Wood, Levitre and now, Bell learn the game and hopefully, give us a little taste of a brighter future to come. Come on, sing it with me, "We shall overco--o--ome, we shall overcome---some---day"

What I find pretty amazing is that they somehow concluded that Langston was so good (as did many, many now silent posters hereabouts) that he could make the move to LT only to later decide that he was so bad, he wasn't even worth keeping on the roster. Decisional whiplash. Who decided he could play LT and how did we go from that brialliant move to this one? Can you imagine that meeting? What did the person or persons responsible say? "Whoops"? "My bad"? "Sorry, heh, heh, don't know what I was thinking..."? Oh well, I always thought this was a year to reload and so it makes sense to get these guys as much game experience as possible and quicken the day that they will be seasoned vets.

Sadly, having quite a bit of experience with just what a psycho ex-wife can do, I can verify your point.

I pay 40 bucks for every pay channel there is, NFL ST, DVR, two hookups and it all in HD baby.

...and thus wisdom came at last to the masses. Sure would have been nice to have an all pro LT anchoring a young, developing line. Oh well.

Makes sense if what they are doing is...is...is...is rebuilding. Cue ominous music.

..and the way to solve that was to jettison the only decent lineman they had.

Oh great, I was hoping someone would start yet another thread about other posters rather than, ya know, football.

Chambers was awful in preseason and he only went up against the opponents 2nd and 3rd string. I thought he would be half way decent safety valve if the OL experiments got ugly. Please don't tell me how great he was last year. I watched him in preseason and, well, ick.