Dan

IMO, it's all of the above to varying degrees. Yes, we have a young, seive-like O line. However, there are plays that can be designed to minimmize that. Is AVP calling those plays? Are they even in the playbook? I think at least some are. It was noteworthy to see our 2 backups play in the preseason and suddenly start theowing mid-range passes. Bottom line, though, Trent absolutely has to throw the ball deep. Whether TO or Lee are covered, it doesn't matter. Whether the ball falls incomplte, it doesn't matter. The line has, at least some snaps, given Trent the few seconds needed to dop back and throw the ball downfield. By not throwing deep more often, Trent is only making the defense defend about 20 yards - effectively putting us in the red zone for the entire game. And of course, Jauron is to share in the blame for all things. He's taught this team to not take chances, to take what the defense gives them, to accept losing provided they learn from it. He needs to put a shock callar on Trent and zap him every time he throws a checkdown, plain and simple. Ultimately if he can't see that this is the biggest problem with our offense and he doesn't do something about it; he should/will be gone.

I think this whole topic has just about been played, so I hesitated to even post again on it. However, just wanted to be clear... my grievance was with the idea that TO (or any athlete) has an obligation to us (the fans) or the media to answer questions and tell us their opinions on the game. It seems that's at the root of most of this "mess". TO didn't want to speak to the press, some took that as an offense, the league stepped in, we all got a neat press meeting out of it, then the storm ensued. IMO, I would rather the players focus on playing and not talking. Perhaps that's just me. I agree though, I don't think the line of questioning was particularly heinous and TO certainly added to the melodrama with his attitude. But, hey, we all hoped/wanted TO to bring some excitement to the team, right? Well, we're getting it. I find it quite facinating that one individual can be so polarizing, so easily. When has a player said so little yet created such impassioned opinions? Perhaps there's already just a lot of deep seated angst among Bills fans and TO is just the final degree needed to bring it to a boil? Either way, at least we get something to talk about other than the boring, uninspired play on the field. Again, thanks for all your efforts here and in covering the best team in all of sports (by that I mean the Bills just to avoid potential confusion ).

Untrue. Tim is just busy with things like life and a career. He happened to write one piece that many of us disagree with. But, that doesn't in any way detract from the many good pieces he's written nor the contributions he's made to TSW.

But see this is where I guess we just disagree. I don't see any reason for TO to talk to anyone after the game. If a player wants to, great. But, if they don't then great as well. Personally, I didn't notice nor care that I didn't get a TO sound bite after the first 2 games. So I don't get the issue with that. So, he didn't speak. So what? I do agree with DC, though, no hard feelings towards Tim. Hilarious.

I respect your opinions very much and almost always agree with them. However, I have to disagree here. To continue with your analogy, TO did buy the ticket, he took the ride (this summer), now he wants off; but they won't let him. Just because you pander to the press on some occasions doesn't mean you're fair game for all intrusions for the rest of your life. It's similar to the real estate agent taking press into his house. Yes, TO invites cameras into his home all the time; but that's at his chosing. The cameras don't get to then come into his home whenever they want. As someone else said, the press' job is to report the newsn ot create it. If TO or any athlete doesn't want to speak, they shouldn't have to.

Actually, Mike Pierra (or however you spell that), head of officiating, talked about the Dallas play last week on NFL Network. He said the play is over when the Referee signals its over - not when the whistle is blown. So the whistle is not important. It's' when the Ref signals the play is over. In that game, the Ref signaled the play over after the Giant caught the ball off of Whitten's foot because he thought the ball hit the ground. So, upon review, the Giants got the ball because the ball didn't hit the ground; but they didn't get the touchdown (the Giant DB had run the ball into the endzone) because the ref signaled the play was dead. No whistle was blown. Now keep in mind, that this guy talks out of his ass each week to defend whatever bad call the refs made that week. Back to Josh, upon rewind, he definitely looked down. So, the Bills could have challenged the spot. It didn't look like they got a good spot. But, I'm sure Jauron would have punted anyway.

Tim, I tried to post this in the comments section of your latest TO article, but they want me to register and I hate sites that want me to participate, but then force me to register. So, I thought I'd post the comments here, FWIW: ================== Tim, with all due respect, TO is paid $6.5 million to catch a football and make plays on the football field, not to do press interviews. For whatever reasons, he didn't want to do interviews; his boss (the league) stepped in and essentially forced him to. Did you honestly expect him to be happy about that and willfully answer any and all questions in a positive manner? Was he petulant? Was he immature? Yes. But, he's a professional athlete that's been catered to for most of his life. Again, would you expect him to act differently? Finally, although you may have had pure intentions in your question asking, can you vouch for everyone else in the room? After seeing the way his Vick comments were blown out of proportion, can't you understand that any answer given, even in response to a seemingly simple question from you, could be twisted into a negative from other media outlets?

Well, ok. If they're gonna go no back, 4 WR set and try to throw for a yard; then yeah I agree with you. However, I was thinking how many times has Jackson been stopped for no gain? Run him and get the 1st down.

You're losing by 2 scores. There are 7 minutes left in the game. How's is putting the game back in your defense's hands the higher percentage way to score? We were running out of time, it was a yard (or less), we have a really good RB, you go for it and try to keep the scoring opportunity alive.

You're welcome.

See... Jauron's plan is working to perfection. I just love it when a plan comes together.

That's kinda how I see it. We don't need to necessarily blow people out. But, good, solid performances while racking up some wins and gaining confidence could be very good thing. Of course, if they fail miserably after that.. well then they are who we think they are. Still though, I'm not sure I could call any game on the Bills' schedule "easy". This is the Bills and Trentative we're talkign about.

Please exercise your right to delete this nonsense. Thanks.

Yes and no. I think the way to look at it is.. we have a relatively weak few game scoming up. So, if we beat these teams, great. But, there's nothing wrong with beating bad teams. We should. The question I have is do the Bills beat these teams, all the while learning and growing from their mistakes and more importantly gaining confidence to beat the better teams? So, yes, we may be somewhat inflated by beating "bad" teams. But, there's nothing wrong with that. Every good team beats bad teams every year. But, you have to use the weaker games to learn what they do bet, to gain confidence, and to figure out how to beat better teams.

Fail Biology much? In the strictest sense, Steroids are types of hormones. HGH is a hormone secreted by the pituitary gland that promotes the growth of skeletal muscles and bones in much the same way that synthesized anabolic steroids do. HGH just does it without the nasty side effects. Therefore, it's not an entirely inaccurate statement.

I think the thread poses a misleading question. Technically, wouldn't the Bills have to use Lee and TO in their offense, first? Then we could determine if they're being used properly or not. I would suggest that a better question, at this point, would be: Why are the Bills giving Lee and TO so many weeks off? We need them to play on Sundays as well as Fridays.

I very much agree with you. I was thinking about this last night and came to a similar thought. The biggest problem with this offense is the whole attitiude of "we take what the defense gives us". Do they honestly think the defense is going to give them the keys to a win? Of course not, the defense is going to do everything they can to limit the offense and there we are... playing right into their hands. The Bills need to dictate to the defense. But how do they do that? Just as you said. Run the damn ball. We have 2 top flight RBs and a solid run blocking line. AVP needs to set up a run first offense. Pound it down the defense's throats. Loosen them up screens and then hit them with timing patterns to the WRs. And stop worrying about whether or not every play gets your 10 yards. Yes, when you run the ball plenty of runs will be stopped at the line. Screens will be shut down. But, its about dictating to the defense and wearing them down. I said it before; I'd cut the play book down to about 12 plays and run them consistently. I'd limit Trent's reads to no more than 2 recievers. He needs to drop back, look once and throw on 2. He's obviously still too slow to go throw all his reads and figure out which one is the best option then throw it. Not only is he too slow, but the line can't hold their blocks for the 5-6 seconds he needs to do that. Simplify the offense, simplify the reads, dictate with Lynch and Jackson, and consider putting a shock collar on Trent and zap his ass ever time he dumps off Fine.

Agreed. I'm all for it. Run Lynch and Jackson 25 times each.

Exactly. Too many people either don't understand the game or are just looking for unnecessary reasons to bash Jauron. We had the ball to end the half. We then got the opening kickoff of the 2nd half. That's an opportunity to score 14 unanswered points with the Saints offense not even stepping on the field. And that is exactly why so many coaches defer. Of course, you have to have a competent offense to score those points which seems like a much more appropriate reason to bash the coaching staff to me.

Well there ya have it. While great teams like Detroit and Houston can get their single good WR open each week and throw him the ball, the Bills need a three #1 WRs so that someone can get open.

I saw that too. And remember thinking... wow, now that was impressive! Little did I realize at the time that Trent apparently has only one good throw per game. I still wonder... does Trent suck because he's still young and learning to read defenses? Or does he just suck? But he does seem to make more bad decisions than good.

Post #43, bizell brings it up. Post #46, you stated TE had the game in the bag. Post #47, I refuted that he had it in the bag based on his stats from the game. So by my count (granted I didn't use a calculator to do the math), I was the 3rd person to bring TE's performance in that game into the discussion.

Ivy League schools.

First of all.... what car do you drive? B. It would be more believable if you were quoting sources deep within the organization.

That's an interesting point I haven't thought about. I don't recall when Whitner got injured? Does that coincide with Pierre Thomas' running gains? It wouldn't be the first time that a safety got injured and a team's run defense suffered dramatically. Maybe we should line TO and Evans up in the slot? Put Fine and Jackson as wideouts and see what happens. It would be an interesting exercise to say the least. Would Trent go into spasms in this bizarro world of throwing to WRs or would he search the field in vain looking for Fine while TO and Evans have a meeting in the middle of the field and talk about the latest designer invisibility cloak fashions?