Dan

And, for the most part, I agree with you. However, as I alluded to just prior, how do we really know there's a local investor that's actually capable of buying the team. Ok, yes, Ralph can sell it at a discount. But, even 10%-15% off market value for the Bills is a hell of a price tag. Does someone really have that kind of money that has also approached Ralph and said here it, let me buy the team? Also, we have to consider the league. What's to say the league hasn't told Ralph he can't discount the price of the team more than a certain percentage. Let's not forget, the league has the final say in who buys the Bills. Maybe the only serious interest he's gotten has been a group from LA? And Ralph really is doing the right thing by not selling and giving a local investor ttime to get the funds. We really just don't know.

Firstly, I think that the financial burden of buying an NFL franchise brings can change the way an owner feels. Do you think any of the teams that have moved, moved because they didn't like the city they were in or because they wanted/needed to make more money? I don't think a Kelly-backed group would want to move the group. However, the financial reality may force his backers into a decision that Kelly has no choice but to accept. Bottom line, any new owner will have to make quite a bit more money than Ralph currently does due to their much larger debt. Secondly, do we have any solid evidence that someone like Golisano or a Kelly-backed ownership group has the money or interest to actually buy the team right now? Everyone keeps saying sell it to Kelly. Well, where's Kelly's money? Where's his backers? Where's anything more than Kelly dropping cryptic hints at oppurtune times? How are we to know that Ralph didn't sit down with Kelly and discussed it, only to realize that Kelly's group is woefully unprepared at the moment to buy the franchise? Bottom line, here, is that we have no idea who has legitimately approached Ralph to buy the team.

Agreed! Another horrible decision by the league, IMO. The Pro Bowl now becomes just another of the Super Bowl spectacles. Not to mention, a large number of the league's best players won't be participating in the game nor any of the stupid little challenge things they do. As meaningless as it is, I enjoy it all. The season is over, you know football is done. So, its become my one last chance to see some of my favorite players for a while. Yet another reason Goodell is an abomination of a commissioner.

What I just don't get is how does selling the team guarantee that the Bills stay in Buffalo? There's absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that a new owner will keep the team here. Regardless of what they say, they'll be buying something that leaves them 100's of millions of dollars in debt. They'll do whatever they can to make money. Ralph has owned the team since its inception and has said that as long as he's alive, the Bills will be in Buffalo. That is the only sure way to guarantee the team stay. Period. We have an owner that has promised to keep the team in Buffalo as long as he's alive. So, what do people want? They want him to die so some unkown person can buy the team and do with it as they wish. How does that make any sense? It doesn't. So, everyone's upset about the quality of product on the field. And rightfully so. But booing Ralph during a HOF ceremony does not send a message that you're unhappy about the Bills' play. It sends the message that you're unhappy about Ralph making the HOF. There's a time and place for everything. And a ceremony honoring a person's lifetime achievement is not the time nor the place to boo the present. It's a time to honor him for giving us a reason to cheer, and cry, for 50 years. There's plenty of oppurtunity to boo Ralph for the Bills' current state of affairs. Heck, there's a smart guy that's taking donations to put that message on billboards. There are plenty of other avenues to state your dislike of the current state of the franchise. It would be far more effective to pursue one of them. I've said it before, and I'll say it one last time, I read threads like this and it's like listening to some spoiled little brat kid pissing and moaning about their parents. How much they hate them. How unfair life is. Because they wanted a new Porsche for their birthday and all they got was Mustang. Whaaa... whaaaa Mommy and Daddy have so much money, they should give it all to me, me, me. Pathetic.

For all the people that complain about the lack of quality journalism or reporting.... read the above linked article. A very good read, Tim (and this from a guy that tries not to read).

Although huddling up may have helped the line get their heads in the game regarding the snap count, the Bills' no huddle was not a hurry up offense. In other words, it did not lead to less time of possession - that is yet another falsehood that is rampant on this board. week 1 - Bills -22:52 Pats* -37:08 week 2 - Bills -29:33 Bucs -30:27 week 3 - Bills -26:26 Saints -33:34 week 4 - Bills -22:51 Fins -37:09 week 5 - Bills -31:34 Browns -28:26 week 6 - Bills -39:03 Jets -33:13 week 7 - Bills -25:20 Pants -34:40 source: nfl.com In the no huddle, we lost TOP in 3 games, won TOP in 1 game, and 1 game was essentially equal. So, 3/5 or 60% of the games we lost TOP. In the last 2 games we huddled up, but only had the TOP advantage in the first game. So, 50% of our games we lost TOP. Yeah, yeah, not enough games, stats are flawed, did I watch the games, all of that. But, the end result is the same. The Bills did not run a hurry up no huddle; they routinely hiked the ball with 10 seconds or less on the clock. Hence, they did not lose TOP in every one of their games. However, I do believe going back to a huddle offense has helped the offense the last two weeks. The line seems to be much more on the same page and making fewer fundamental mistakes. But, I there's no reason to think it's given them an edge in the TOP statistic.

Breaking down QB play is really hard in the NFL.

Agreed. I say playoffs or bust. I don't care what the record is - playoffs or bust.

What are you saying, Trent... you take what the defense gives you? While I agree, your gameplan should change week to week to take advantage of the defense you're facing; that doesn't mean you allow the defense to dictate what you do. Do that and you lose. Yes, sometimes a defense may be shifting coverage to your best WR, but that doesn't mean you don't try to get him involved in the offense. You have to dictate to them, not the other way around. On your second point, it's difficult to average out the plays over a longer time frame considering that Fitzy has only started one game and played roughly half of another.

Am I the only one that watched the 2nd half just hoping for Delhomme to thrown because you just knew Byrd was back there about to get another interception? Byrd is single handedly transforming this defense making everyone more agressive, trying to get hits and turnovers. I just hope he continue it for another week.

Well that would be a short debate.

You sound like a Bills whore. So you'll cheer for anyone, just as long as the Bills are winning? Pick a side! Choose a player and defend him through thick and thin for years, and if the Bills cut him all the better watching them lose because it proves you right. This wishy washy I just cheer for anyone in a Bills uniform has no place around here.

I truly hope you're wrong too. Because, as I see it, I'd be absolutely shocked if they draft an OT early next year. I'm sure they'll be thinking... "Bell had a full year and with another offseason, he'll only get better. And we have Butler coming back, who is solid." I guess we'll have to see how the season plays out, but we may be in desparate need for a QB as well. And we've been in desparate need for a LB. I guess we'll know more in a few months.

Perhaps its just my Bills colored glasses, but I see our line getting most abused by bull rushes. The outside rushes don't seem to do as well against the. If so, then their technique wouldn't be so much the problem as would their strength. Am I correct in thinking these guys could get better, in time, with more strength and conditioning work? Or am I just hoping against hope?

No doubt. I would completely agree that our play calling and predictability add to the problem. And, of course, let's not forget the inexperienced line. That play in the end zone was horrible. You're running ar Peppers, pulling guards, deep setup, not to mention the Panthers had it read perfectly. They did nothing to disguise it even after several audibles and after a time out.

In my opinion, and this is just opinion as I have no stats to back it up, teams have been increasingly playing up to stop the run and short passing game each week. Because, with each week it has become more apparent that we were not looking down field to Lee or TO. Initially, teams were concerned about Evans or TO beating them deep; however, by week 3 it was apparent they didn't need to. So you're seeing more teams cheat their safeties up. As a result, the run game and short passing game have become largely ineffective and our offense has looked abyssmal. Until we have a QB demonstrate that he will routinely and effectively throw 15+ yards downfield, I suspect we'll continue to see limited production from the RBs.

You're missing the big picture. If the Bills turn the season around and somehow make the playoffs, then we'll never get rid of Jauron and be able to hire us a coach that will take us to the playoffs.

I truly don't understand this. It's been well researched and defined that all Buffalo needs is a new owner that will spend money and we'll have a winning team. So how is it the Redskins have an owner that spends money like that and they're not winning every year?

Excellent points made and interesting pass distribution. Thanks for noticing. I was hoping someone would appreciate the effort I made at making up those bullets.

There's a few things at work here. First off, it really doesn't matter what anyone thinks because Jauron has already stated that Trent is still too shaken up to play this week. So, in that sense, there is no debate. Second, stats being what they are, all any one has to do is watch the last first 5 games of this season. Trent played progressively worse in each of those games. It got so bad that he couldn't muster more than 1 FG against the Browns - at home. Now, say what you want about stats or throws or arm strength or anything. But your QB has to be a leader and lead his team to more than 3 points against that Browns team. All else is fluff to a certain extent. C. I'm still a little unclear as to what we've classified as a long ball here, but what's even more important that the depth of the pass is when the pass is thrown. When it's 3rd and long, in the 4th quarter, and you're behind; you do not throw check offs to a RB. Period. We've all seen Trent's propensity to do exactly that. 3C. In reference to the last statement, many of us have pondered... is Trent being coached to throw the dump offs or are the WRs just not open down field. Well, Fitzy, has shown that WRs sare indeed open and Jauron doesn't insist that the ball be checked down at all costs. For proof that Trent checks down more than Fitzy, I prefer to look at the number of RB recpetions: Week 1 - FJ (5) Week 2 - FJ (6) Week 3 - FJ (5) Week 4 - ML (5); FJ (3) Week 5 - ML (6); FJ (2) Week 6 - ML (2); CM (2) Week 7 - ML (1) Seems, easy to me to conclude that the RBs are catching more balls out of the backfield with Trent in the game than with Fitzy in the game. Fifthly, I forgot what I was talking about after looking up those stats. Suffice it to say, I think there's more to it than just the number of "long passes" the QB makes. I think we have to consider the intermediate routes, the timing of the various passes, and the overall offensive production - 20 points (yesterday) is better than 3 points (against the Browns). So, I agree with you Simon to a point, but I just think its more to it than just the number of deep passes that makes many posters want to see Fitzy starting.

What happened to the screen passes we ran so well in Week 1? I'm not saying we need to run them on every series, but a few screens might do wonders to help slow down the pass rush, jsut a little.

True, Edwards has some talent. But, IMO, Fitzy is putting to rest the "gameplan" arguement. Look at the first pass he attempted. Down the middle, about 15-20 yards, to TO with a CB underneath and a safety over the top. Yes, he threw the ball high and TO didn't make the catch. But, that's exactly the type of throw that Trent has just refused to attempt. And, IMO, its been one of our biggest offensive problems this season. More and more, I'm thinking the gameplan calls for plenty of slants and mid-range passes. Its just been that we've had a QB that was unwilling to attempt those throws. Fitz needs to do a ton of work to improve his accuracy, but at least he's trying. I can live with trying and failure, but failure without even trying - well that's jsut demoralizing. And increaasingly, week after week, this team was looking demoralized.

Looked to me that on several passes, the pass rusher got right in Fitz' face and he couldn't step into the throw at all or even follow through properly which made the passes go high and long. So I'd blame poor Oline protection for at least some of those "WTF" throws over winds or Fitz being off.

Sounds like someone around here needs a plate of homemade cookies.

I'd say the Oline looked pretty bad today; absolutely no runnig lanes, no passing lanes. Pretty bad. IMO, Fitz makes them look better because he moves just enough and throws the ball a lot quicker than Trent. So, he's taking less sacks and looking less hurried. But, several of his bad throws were due to someone being right in his face not allowing him to follow through with the pass. So, I'd say... no, the line was not very good at all today.