RJ (not THAT RJ)

Very well put. I was thinking this morning that getting Favre was a huge risk for the Jets, and if it did not work out, which would mean Favre retires for good in February, they would find themselves next summer with all the same problems they had before they signed Brett, and all their FA signees would be a year older. I bet a lot of Jets fans are feeling serious buyer's remorse as they contemplate that.

It's the miracle of TSW! It turns Water into Whine...

Yes he did... the kind of lifting injury that is common among young men who like the juice....

It was in 1981, and there were still a few seconds left as Hooks caught the ball, so technically it was not the last play.

Amen to that! I have to say that the 1975 Bills are one of the most confounding teams of all time. They looked unstoppable those first 4 games, then they just fell apart. OJ talking retirement did not help, nor did tension between Saban and Wilson, nor did a depleted secondary, but man that team was a disappointment... the end of a brief blip of positive Bills news in the midst of the long dry spell of 1966-1980.

Trying to hard to spark something. Need to avoid panic decisions.

I am with you on this Max. They have a chance to turn it around, and it is too early to give up. EVANS!

I do!

Excellent point... the inconsistency is a problem.

I am not all that impressed with Murph this year... his play calls are hesitant and flat more and more. His calls on run plays are especially annoying. One never knows if a play has started well or not, since he usually says "hand off, Lynch.... (longish pause)... across the 25 (which is behind the line of scrimmage) and leans (silence)... for about 2 yards." I know it is not easy to do PbP, but it sounds to me that Murph has not progressed much.

Well, yes and no... they stiffened nicely after the Raiders had a short field. Raiders only have 100 total yards.

Good observation. They are trying to give him open looks down the field, but all that bootlegging also reduces the available receivers.

As someone who has seen a lot of poor performances by bad teams, I am feeling good now... The Raiders came out with all kinds of emotion, but could not get TDs. Once mistake and [madden] BOOM [/madden] they are behind. Time for the Bills to take over the momentum....

They did... but Criqui missed that.

That is a great story, both for what it says about Bruce and for what it says about Skin.

It's funny because it's true, man.

I have to admit that I do find the "challenging Brandon" story line to be intriguing, and I will wager that IF (there's that word again!) the Bills end up having a good year, there will be a wave of stories about the "next Scott Pioli." (Am I correct in remembering that Pioli was a business guy, and not a football guy, when he started as Pats GM?) IF the Bills falter, well, that's another story... This certainly has been a challenging summer for the Bills organ-eye-zation. So far the team has done well, and Brandon deserves credit in there somewhere. Only time will tell, of course, how much credit for how much good, and there is no way to make the future hurry up and tell us anything. As experienced Bills fans, though, we never forget that catastrophe is always just around the corner. If not that one there... then the next one.... So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly to TSW.

If he would indeed be back for those 11 games... which is precisely the question. The "knee-jerk" decision that Graham mentions in his title would more appropriately be applied to the rush by so many to label the decision vindictive or dumb. There is a third option beyond vindictive and dumb (indeed, there are many gradations between those poles).. One could, for example, taking your positive statements about what Crowell has done for the team, argue that this is neither vindictive nor dumb, but rather a favor to Crowell. Other posters have noted that the Bills may have seen this as the end of the road for him. Such predictions have their dangers, but teams need to think about the future when it comes to 6-year veterans. Cutting him was not likely, and was impossible if there is an injury, but keeping him on the roster had its costs too. By putting him on IR, the Bills have to pay him, which is a partial reward for his services. This way he gets to rehab, and try for a contract next year with someone. If he does indeed recover quickly, then he can negotiate a settlement with the Bills and take his chances this season. Just a thought.

With Ditka on his back...

Yeah, dat's right. Just for the last five years. You must be here longer, considering that is the perfect spelling for the way the locals say it... in the close in burbs, actually.

I know what you mean about mixed feelings, but that "if" is at the heart of the problem. Did they really think he was going to come back by mid-season? Or did they realize that it was more likely that he was going to need more time? We will never actually know, of course, since it is impossible to re-play history. If it was a matter of a few weeks, then it is a real shame that Crowell did not have the "clean up" done in the spring, or even at the start of camp. It was a tough situation all around.

So true... Even otherwise solid reporters often rely on incomplete or outdated info to write about other teams, but that does not make it excusable, especially when it is the team your local bunch is playing. I bet that Oakland reporter can't spell "incompetent" either... j/k Brother. Go Bills!

That is my feeling too, eball. I really appreciate Tim's willingness to join in the discussion as he has, but still think that it is a big leap to assume vindictiveness as he appears to do in his article. Crowell is a good, perhaps even very good, football player, but it looks as though the Bills did not have him in their long term plans, and when you combine that with eball's equation, the explanation for putting him on IR is not so hard to figure out, and requires no dark conspiracies to explain.

Thanks Lori. Pleasant dreams... and Go Bills!

Too true! Heck, I do not begrudge an agent his right to spin things any way that helps his client, and I am no orthopaedist, so maybe Crowell would have been good as new in four weeks. But Graham and France are not doctors either, and we know that Crowell had several consultations once he decided to have surgery, resulting in this decision to go for the works. How can anyone write a story on this topic and not at least consider that the works is the surgery that Crowell would have ended up needing all along? It is that particular assumption, that it was obviously going to be 4-5 weeks and, paraphrasing Graham, the Bills would have had 11 weeks of their leading tackler if they had not inexplicably gotten all mean and petty, that continues to bug me—not because I believe that the Bills front office is perfect in this, but because questions of surgery, especially knee surgery, are often too complex to be jammed into either/or categories.