PolishDave

Totally agree dude! There are lots of stats NAZI's out there who manipulate stats to make a point as well as politicians do. It doesn't take a genius to see that this team doesn't sustain drives well. In order to have confidence in the offense, you want to see them move the chains consistently. They don't do that well at all. That is why I think this offense is below average. They have a long, long way to go on offense, starting at quarterback. Anyone who wants to claim that this Bills offense is in the same league as Denver's offense just because the end score of games has been over 20 is pulling the wool over their own eyes. Comparing the Bills offense to Denver's offense is ridiculous. They are not even close.

Dolphin backward splash! Tannehill fin broken ouch Fishing season ends

I get your point Jim. But considering that we lost to New England and that we have to play them again, I think New England injuries have a great deal to do with whether or not the Bills have a miserable record. It is a nagging emotional problem for Bills fans too. They are just sick of having to play against and lose against one of all time great Quarterbacks twice every year in our own division..

I think something else that should be reviewed by the NFL during the off season is whether a play like that should count. Many times you will see the refs giving forward progress to a receiver even when the receiver was running a come back route. If the receiver is running back towards the quarterback, then that receiver is willingly moving the ball backwards. How is it any different than a running back running backwards or a QB running backwards? If they willingly move the ball backward towards the line of scrimmage after a catch, then I believe that forward progress should not count. The ball should be dead wherever they are finally tackled or wherever they go out of bounds. Next year and going forward, In a case like this play, I think the touchdown should not count. The receiver moved the ball out of the end zone on his own effort. His body was in motion back that way when the ball was caught. It is not like his forward progress was halted by a tackler. Just a thought. It probably doesn't happen in the end zone that much to make a huge deal out of it. But a touchdown can be a game breaker.

lol....Well dude.....it was nice knowing ya! I expect the defense will improve greatly moving forward. So I am confident that the Bills will be "in" most of the games. I don't expect them to win many though. Still worried about who the quaterback is going to be for the Bills future and whether or not that Qb is going to be good enough to win with any consistency......

I have seen a few people on this forum mention this and I agree. Chandler is being under-utilized in a big way. He looks open a lot. He gets the last 2 tough yards. He also tends to catch the slightly off target passes that the other receivers drop. If fitz could complete passes to him as often as he did, then these other quarterbacks should be able to do the same. I think it is a hidden asset on this team that could produce very handsome dividends if he was targeted in the passing game more.

For those of you who wanted to kick the field goal there, do you also want to bring Dick Jauron back? That is what he would have done. And when we lost the game anyway you would have been wondering "what if" we had gone for it there? Would you also like to punt from the opponents 35 yard line instead of trying a field goal? I have been dreaming of the day when the Bills would get a coach with the sense to go for it in situations like that 4th and goal from the one. In my opinion it was a no-brainer call. I commend them for going for the touchdown. They were playing to win instead of playing "not to lose" As others have said, you certainly don't expect them to go 99 yards for 6 if you don't get it. Allowing that 99 yard drive was their biggest mistake. They made the right decision to go for it.

Nice story dude. Welcome to the fraternity. And remember, the Bills aren't the only NFL team from upstate NY. They are the only team from NY period. Don't those other two supposed New York teams actually play in New Jersey? Real New Yorkers only have one NFL team. (High five) Go Bills!

If don't mind them covering the Sabres at certain times. I like the Sabres too, but I don't pay any attention to them whatsoever during football season. I know a lot of football guys who are the same way. Sabres will always be number 2 on my list unless the Bills ever leave town. As long as it is football season I won't listen to a show about hockey period. I just don't care about it enough when football is in season. My biggest beef with WGR is with the show that is on at 3pm weekdays because that is the only time it is convenient for me to tune in. I have heard the John Murphy show at night before and it was terrific. I have no beef with that show. Regardless of that though, I really only try to listen to WGR on the ride home from work which is usually in that 3pm, 4pm, 5pm-ish time slot. I am a creature of habit. On my ride home from work I turn on the radio. It is football season. So I try to catch up on what is happening with the Bills by tuning in WGR. What sucks is that you never know what kind of show you are going to get in that 3PM time slot. Once in a while, you get a good show where they are covering something interesting about the Bills. But often times, they start talking about the Sabres or else they start acting immature or something else annoying. I shake my head in disgust and change the station. I expect more professionalism personally. I would prefer if the sports guys didn't act like my nine year old nephew who runs around his house farting and giggling about it. It is cute when a kid does it. Heck it is funny when an adult does it the first couple times. But, it gets old quick when every time you turn the show on they are doing it. (3pm show in particular I am talking about) If their jobs are so boring that they have to act silly when they come to work then maybe WGR should have an ad on Monster.com looking for a professional sports talk show host. It is actually possible to be entertaining without acting like you are nine years old. Well, maybe it isn't possible for the 3pm "talent". I expect "professional" people who breakdown football and analyze it to know what they are talking about or to, at bare minimum, "like" the sport of football. I would like better coverage of the Bills during football season. That means anything related to the Bills is worth discussing as far as I am concerned. Just don't mix in hockey in the same time slot as football. Either do hockey or do football. I think you have way more football fans in Buffalo, especially during football season. So if I was running the station, I would dedicate certain time slots to either football every day or hockey every day with a predominance toward football. That way my listeners would know that they can expect football talk at a certain time every day and hockey talk at a certain time every day. I don't think that is too much to ask for. When they take their ten minute news breaks they can mix the two, but the primary shows should be predictably dedicated to either hockey or football so we know what to expect. I would be as loyal listener as hell if I knew that I could get good Buffalo Bills and AFC East football analysis on the radio during my ride home from work everyday. That would be ideal in my opinion. Obviously you can't have everything you want. But that is the only way WGR will earn my attention on a daily basis for any length of time during football season. Maybe they don't want listeners like me. I am a forty-something Bills season ticket holding Western NY'er who is the head of his household. Maybe they have other bigger audiences to cater to. I don't know. I am not in the radio business. But that is my take on it.

Let’s consider these two different styles of coaching: 1) A coach who devises a scheme and tries to acquire players that fit into it and coach them on how to execute it to the best of their ability. Or 2) A coach who devises a scheme based on the players and talent areas he already has on the team. I think most coaches in the NFL (especially new coaches) are in the first camp where they dream up the perfect plays on paper and then try to get their team to execute it. But, my intuition tells me that the better approach would be to have a coach who fits the second category more. I think Marv Levy was more of the second type. And I think Wade Phillips was more type 2 also. Do you think it matters all that much or not which of those camps they fall into?

True. In my opinion the reason why those underneath throws were often there for those guys is because the defense was trying to takeaway their deep threat. Both of those QB's are/were proven home run throwers. So the threat was there even when they were throwing shorter passes. They throw short underneath routes because defenses are more willing to give them that than a homerun pass. Teams would gameplan to take away those big homerun plays.

It is not a right or wrong thing guys...all I was asking for is opinions on how you would do it. What is most important to you? Obviously there is more than one way to build a championship team. If you analyze each team from year to year, their talent level at different positions differs. Look at the Trent Dilfer year as proof of that. Obviously not the best QB in the league and certainly not a real deep threat. So yes you can build a championship team without a deep threat. I never said you couldn't. I said that is how I would do it. How would you do it?

I would say that you number 1 is the number 1 requirement for having a consistently good team year after year. Either that or you have to get really lucky picking a hall of fame QB like New England did. And yes it was luck. They got him in a late round and he sat the bench for a while behind Bledsoe. They did not realize early in the draft that Brady was going to be as good as he ended up being. If they did, then obviously he would have been their number one pick. Instead they drafted a bunch of people who were obviously way less talented at their positions than Brady ultimately ended up being at his.

Because if other teams can run the ball against you consistently, then you are not going to win consistently unless you obviously are way better in other areas that compensate for that. That is why I say your run defense has to be a little better than average. It doesn't have to be the best in the league, but if it is below average, that will be your biggest Achilles heel. Dude..... 3) Must have a consistent deep threat passing the ball that other teams fear constantly Obviously if you have a consistent deep threat passing the ball that teams fear constantly then you have a great quarterback. Maybe I shouldn't have assumed you would understand that? So you could say that a great passing QB is 3rd on my list because you need a great passing QB to have a consistent deep threat that teams will fear all the time.

I don't see anyone mentioning the lack of a passing attack as being a huge part of the reason why the Bills running game isn't creating more big plays. When you force teams to respect your deep ball, they don't stack the box every 1st and 2nd down. The Bills have not proven they have a deep threat and therefore teams do not respect it. You don't hear about how coaches are game planning to prevent Stevie, TJ or Woods from burning them deep. Teams don't have to game plan for it because the Bills can't execute it. If the Bills could execute deep passing plays, all of a sudden you would see the big plays in the running game start happening. Thurman Thomas used to get huge plays running the ball and in shovel passes because teams were afraid the ball was going deep to lofton, Bebe or deep over the middle to Andre Reed. The Bills used to run draws out of the shotgun a lot. Remember how bad teams used to crap themselves when on the first play of the game on offense Jim Kelly would launch a sideline missile to Lofton or someone else? If they fear your passing threat, you will be able to run the ball even with backs not as good as Spiller or Jackson. If they don't fear your passing threat then you have to have the best talent in the NFL (on the OL and in the backfield) to run the ball well consistently. That is my opinion.

The more I think about it, I wonder why the NFL doesn't have its own radio station in every NFL city in America? And why doesn't the NHL have the same thing in every NHL city in America? Think about it. If you had an AM radio station that covered your team 24/7 and anything happening in the league that was relevant to your team, wouldn't you listen? I would listen to a dedicated Bills station on and off all day long especially during the football season. I would have about 4-5 predetermined live shows throughout the day and just replay those shows back to back in the evening and overnight. Having a dedicated station like that would really help the team deepen its relationship with the fan base (make them more loyal) and also help them increase the size of the fan base within the listening area. Just a thought.......maybe I am crazy.....If colleges can afford to run radio stations I am sure the Bills and Sabres have deep enough pockets to run one of their own too.

My opinion listed in order of importance: 1) Must have an above average run stopping defense 2) Must have an awesome pass rush (close to best in the league) 3) Must have a consistent deep threat passing the ball that other teams fear constantly I am a firm believer in the idea that you are better off having an above average defense rather than an above average offense if you could only have one or the other. I believe that because I think it is easier to play consistently good defense than it is to play consistently good offense. So, if I was a head coach in the NFL, those three attributes would be the three top things on my “overall philosophy” of building a championship team. I am excited for the Bills because I see them getting much better at number one and two. Actually I believe that is the only reason that our games this season haven't been one sided blowouts against us. I am not too optimistic about number three on my list given the way that the Bills have been playing so far this year. What is your take?

There is a lot more to talk about than just EJ. In fact, I am all for covering the whole AFC East more thoroughly. You guys are die hard Bills fans like me. On Sunday when the Bills game is over which game do you look for on television first? I bet a lot of you are like me and my family. We look for another game that has an AFC East opponent involved so we can see our competition play and so we can root against them. Don't you guys do that? On the Rochester talk radio programs, they cover the AFC East a lot more than any Buffalo programs I have heard. In fact, on that crappy afternoon GR show, they hardly mention other AFC East opponents at all. Conversely, on Bob Matthews' show on WHAM 1180 in Rochester, when he has Fred Smerlas on, they go deep into analyzing the Patriots. Smerlas is a Boston guy (I think based on his accent) and he covers the Patriots deeply. So you get to know what is happening there behind the scenes with much more depth. It really makes for interesting talk. If I was a program director or producer or whatever the right title is for the guys who control the shows on WGR, I would make sure my commentators broke down all AFC East opponents on a weekly basis. There is much more to talk about that Bills fans care about then just talking about Bills players and whether they suck or not. Heck, on this forum we talk about more topics and better topics than those schmucks do on the radio for the most part. And to be honest, you get way more knowledgeable, insightful and entertaining talk here. I find that amazing seeing as we are just average Joe's and not "professional" sports people.

Dude you are so right on. I agree with you 100%. It annoys me to no end that I turn on GR after 3PM to get my Bills fix and within 2 minutes they are talking about the Sabers. I am a Sabers fan too, but to be honest, until it starts snowing out, I don’t even think about hockey. I change the station. It sucks because I never listen to morning sports radio. It is always the afternoon ride home kind of thing for me. And to be honest, I don’t think I am in their target market for their show. The intelligence level of that show is like they are catering to high school kids or something where everyone sits around giggling and farting. It is just too immature for me. And I don’t really respect the opinions of the hosts either. Well, I do respect Bulldog a bit, but not Schopp. In fact I recall hearing Schopp (about 2 years ago on the same afternoon show) say something to the effect that he didn’t even really like football. He basically made it sound like he wishes he never had to talk about it. He said he would rather cover tennis and golf. That was the point where he squashed any respect I had for him as a football commentator. Knowing how Schopp is I am sure he would deny ever saying that. I guarantee it is in an archive somewhere though because I heard him say it live and I was shocked. I’m like “Dude….why are you in this business in Buffalo if you are not a huge football fan?” I actually used to like him on the radio in Rochester back before his WGR days. I think he was on 1280 WHTK in Rochester back then. His commentary was much better. And he was okay when he was paired up with Chuck Dickerson. Now his commentary lacks professionalism to say the least. Bob Mathews out of Rochester makes these guys look like amateurs. If you can get it where you live, you should try tuning in after 6PM on WHAM 1180 out of Rochester. Much, much better Bills coverage even though they also cover many other sports like baseball. He used to have Fred Smerlas on all the time too. Really good intelligent coverage of the Bills. I don’t blame GR for trying to cover the Sabers a lot. I just wish they would dedicate shows to either hockey or football instead of mish-mashing them. It would be nice if I knew that I could reliably get good Bills coverage on a station every weekday afternoon during the drive home from work. The best coverage is the John Murphy show. But he isn’t on when I am listening to the radio.

Fair enough. Point taken.

I like a lot of your points on the forum, but bashing Ralph Wilson isn't one of them. I think it is un-classy. It's Ralph's team and he can do what he wants with his money. It is his money, not yours. Be glad we have an NFL team to B word about. This whole NFL thing is a business after all. And the goal of business is to make money for its shareholders. I don't begrudge him for doing that. He is a classy guy and has enriched western NY a little bit by giving us a home team to cheer for. I hope he is around another 50 years.

I hope they don't introduce him at the start of the game coming out of the tunnel. I have a feeling he will get the boo birds going.

Fact of the matter is that when you make a round one pick then you are making a major statement. Round one pick means that “We believe this guy is going to be one of the best at his position in the NFL.” (not immediately, but reasonably soon) If he is not at least average by the end of his first year, then you screwed up. Fans will give him time to prove himself, but not more than one season. And they shouldn't be expected to give him more than one season to look average or better. If he has greatness in him (as everyone says), then he should look pretty good (with more upside potential yet) by the end of this season. If he doesn't look at least average (with more upside potential yet), then I would declare him to be “too big of a project” and try very hard to find someone else to quarterback this team. Waiting for more than one season for your most important position player to prove himself to be average or slightly above average is nuts unless you literally have no better options.

The coaches should be playing whichever quarterback they feel gives the Bills the best chance of winning the game that Sunday regardless of whose name is on the jersey. Who cares whose name is on the jersey? Play your best guy period. whoever that is. Anything else is stupid unless you are intentionally trying to lose. If it was a dead heat or too close to call then they are going to play EJ because they have so much money invested in him. If Lewis is clearly better though, then you play Lewis until you reach a point where you feel EJ is better than him.

This ^^ In my opinion, the most important thing to get out of this experiment (cuz that is exactly what it is) is whether or not EJ is going to be a good enough Quarterback to lead this team for years to come. What I am fearful of happening is that he will miss enough games where the coaches will say "well, we didn't get to see a full season from him" and use that as an excuse to experiment with him again next year. I want EJ to excel and I want him to be my QB next year and going forward, but only if he proves he can do it this year. If his performance improves enough as the year plays out, then he is the guy. If his performance does not improve, I would be looking to bring in someone better IF there is someone available that would be better.