Dan

Talk about a HOSE job!!! No way that's a fumble. No WAY! So much for the NFL wanting the Saints to win.

Huge balls call on 4th down. I would have kicked the fieldgoal, no questions asked.

Bears blew a great chance there. Just fall on it!!

Why all this encryption? If you have actually have a friend, why not say my friend Bill with the Colts says.... ?? Are NFL scouts not supposed to have friends?

If you say it loud enough and long enough, it becomes true.

I promised myself I wouldn't do this, but what the hey... I'm bored. "I'd take a Kenny Davis in his prime over McGahee any day." Well as long as we're randomly picking players, I'd take Franco Harris over Willis too. What's the point of selecting players at random and comparing them to Willis? "McGahee's just not a likeable guy" There's at least 3 chicks with babies that would disagree with you (or at least would have). I imagine there's a few others that like him as well, somewhere. Bottom line is, you're integrating your personal opinon into an arguement that doesn't require it. Not to mention the fact that I'd warrant a guess that you don't know Willis on a personal level; therefore, your like and dislike are based on incomplete data. "...he's a stud running back who can carry the team into the playoffs." I'm not sure anyone has said he's a stud (well actually having three babies with three women would certainly qualify him as std, but I imagine not in the sense you're using it) or that he'll carry us to the playoffs. I've only said that he's average to above average; whereas, we have many other players that are below average. Doesn't it make sense that they should be replaced first? Smith was rode out of town because he wasn't good enough to get us to the playoffs either; but somehow the Patriots rode him right to a Superbowl win. I'd argue Willis is at least as good as Smith was. So why can't we keep him around and worry about the other aspects of the team that are in more dire need of upgrade?

We all work and go home and do various things. As long as we get to work the next morning and do a good job, it shouldn't matter what we do all night. My guess is that if you held everyone on the board (when they were in their 20's) to the same standard that we want to hold these athletes to the vast majority would fail miserably. Drugs, excessive drinking, promiscuity, talking without thinking, riding motorcycles without helmets, etc. are all common day occurences in American society. No one is ever as perfect as you think they are. Get over it, judge Willis and the other players by what they do on Sunday afternoon. I thought there was some thing about not judging others. I reckon all Bills fans are in line for Sainthood. (I might believe that but I've seen some of those tailgate pics and youtube clips.) The fact is Willis has been average to above average as a RB. Should we keep him another year? Given the alternatives, yes (IMO). Should we sign him to a huge money extension, no (IMO). But, there are far greater problems on this team than a RB that's averaging 1,000 yds a season. Deal with those problems, first; then worry about Willis. I would suggest that the majority of Willis' problem could be remedied with proper coaching and better OL play. If after another year he's no better (or if he doesn't want to play with a solid #2 back), then he gets cut. But, not before.

And people wonder no one ever wants to say anything in a press conference or to a newspaper reporter. No matter what they say, it gets misconstrued and comes out bad to someone. First Willis is damned because he made a stupid statement. Now he's damned because he apologized. Face it, many here appear to hate Willis no matter what he does on or off the field. And long after he's gone, many of these same people will be hatin on another player for some reason or another. I mean, come on, the guy asked for a contract extension so he can play in Buffalo longer; and even that gets turned around into a negative. I think that pretty well sums up the irrationality of the anti-Willis crowd.

I haven't read this entire thread, but in the few posts I've read its gone from ridiculous to hilarious to atrocious. So much so wrong, I wouldn't know where to start. Whitner was a good pick, get over it. He started every game this year, and probably will for years to come. Furthermore in those starts he was a solid player that didn't get routinely burned. What more do you want in a footall player? Draft position is irrelevant. Peters wasn't even drafted. Does that make him less of a lineman than a first round pick? McCargo: the jury is still very much still out due to injury.

Exactly. Tarp off 12,000 seats. Put big advertisments on the tarps, get more revenue for team. Any seats still left unsold, Ralph buy - put money from right pocket into left pocket, give tickets to orphans, get tax reduction. Problem solved. Next issue.

I can appreciate the attempt here, but I have to say, IMO, its about as wrong as wrong can be. I see this plan as more of giving up, rather than finding solutions. The economy is down and in 10 years it'll be tough to be here. So what's the solution: pick up and move that way we ensure the economy is completely ruined. Why not come up with a plan to help the Bills stay in Buffalo because that will also help the local economy and in 10 years make talk of moving seem silly? I can agree with selling the naming rights. As much as I despise the over the top advertising in today's world, it is money the franchise could use right now. I'm sorry, but moving the team and changing the name may bring you (as the owner) more money and it may eventually win you (the owner) a Superbowl, but it'll do nothing for the City of Buffalo or the loyal fans that live and breath for this franchise. You think Los Angeles was happy when the St. Louis Rams won the Superbowl? What would the Niagra Bills (or Niagra Viagras) do for Buffalo if they finally win? Next to nothing. I'm sorry but I see this plan as more of an admission of defeat rather than a plan for success.

I propose that we need to find them from wherever they may be hiding; whether they be UFA or 7th round picks, 1st round picks or whatever. Bottom line: a solid line paves the way for year's of success. Concentrate offseason efforts there first. Then, and only then, do you concern yourself with something like a RB that can be gotten almost any offseason or a WR.

That's actually exactly what my point is... build the lines and you'll be in the playoffs for years to come. The Colts are just one a couple of teams that have solid lines and are in the playoffs every year, while losing RBs or WRs or whatever.

Exactly, either way you have to stop them before a first down. IMO, bad decision.

In my opinion, it depends upon what happens on the field. He could adress the lines (ala Mike Williams) and do it with the wrong players. By the same token, he may not address any of these positions because he and the coaches may realize something about our current players that we don't yet see. Either way, what's most important is wins and losses and how the team looks on the field. Marv, for me at least, gets a few years to put a winning team on the field that is consistently in the playoffs. After 1 year, I'm encouraged. But, I'm certainly prepared to say Marv was a great coach but totally blows as a GM, if it comes to that.

Thanks. And I completely agree. We're really close to being a solid, yearly playoff team. But to do that, we need to get and keep that core. DT, OG, LB - solid players there, along with Peters and Pennington and JP on offense and the upgrades on defense and we'll compete for years.

How exactly did the NFL and the refs ensure a Saint victory yesterday? Just curious.

My thought on Willis is that he'll be good enough (perhaps not great) with a great OL. However, even a great back is not going to do much with our OL. So, I think the priority is clear. Why waste time and resources attending to the RB position, when the OL is much more critical? If we get a great line, we can address Willis and all that surrounds him next off season. We all know you can't fixthe entire team, so what I'm talking about is priority, OL over RB. DL over RB. LB over RB. Get the core solid, then worry about the flashy little things like RB.

At 6'3" and about 175 (more or less depending on the breakfast); I'm thinking 3rd string placeholder.

I agree, 4 and 15 is a super long shot. But the season is on the line; take your shot. At that point, they weren't stopping the Saints at all. No way I'd have given them the ball back.

Watching today's 2 games, one thing is clear: In the playoffs you have to be able to run the ball when you want to and stop the run when you need to. Both the Colts and Saints had huge, time eating drives in the 4th quarter when they needed to protect their lead. The one glaring thing from this season was that when the Bills needed it most, they couldn't... run or stop the run. That, above all else should be our goal. And in my opinion, that means the lines and LBs need to be the priority. Everyone considering WRs, CBs or worried about Willis need to look at how the Colts and Saints won these games today. It's clear, we have to control the line of scrimmage.

Who's this We that we're constantly referring to? We'd really like to know.

The problem here though is that someone didn't come in and make a statement such as you suggested. Someone started a new thread for the sole purpose of slamming Schobel. I'd be the first to agree that Freney is a great DE, perhaps light years better than Schobel. However, why say Schobel is not deserving of a Probowl appearance and Freney is; when statistically Schobel clearly had a better season than Freney? Why fabricate an excuse to slam a Bills player that played his butt off and earned a little respect this year?

I might be mistaken, but I think you found the definition of a troll.

Is it just me or does he look like each week he gets a little worse. Seemd he looked better as a rookie than he does now. I wonder how much of it is coaching?