RJ (not THAT RJ)

Indeed... and really, people, do we think that Freddie has such a photographic memory that, deep in the bowels of the Pats training facility, he will divulge the entire Bills playbook? Please. I can see it now, dim lighting like in 24, Belichek and Freddie... BB: Now Fred, about the playbook FF: Um... yeah.... on this play, I was supposed to run fast down the field... BB: Good, good... *smirking as he makes notes* And on this play? FF: Um... yeah.... I was supposed to run fast down the field... BB: *cackling with evil glee* I knew it! Mwahahahahaha! And on punt returns? FF: Um... yeah.... I am supposed to run fast down the field... *Cut to commerical as the clock ticks toward opening day* If the Pats crush the Bills on Sunday, which is quite possible, it will not be because of Fast Freddie.

Good point. I need to resist those temptations....

yeah, because signing people to the Practice Squad is usually such a thrill...

Oh, he has given up on pushing Holcomb, but is desperately trying to push for Nall.... Mine was the screen pass to Royal, because it indicated we might actually throw to the TE this year.

Not quick enough... Big is nice, but he was much too slow for NFL LBs.

It should be, but TV is so enamored of the college-style scatback QB that we will not see the hype fade for some time yet.

Every good rule has its exception, sort of.... Shula did have success in Baltimore before Miami, but he was more successful in Miami, thus putting him on the rising tide a la Vermeil. Shula was wise enough to know when to step down, though, and also wise enough to resist the temptation and big bucks to go coach somewhere after Miami.

A fascinating list. I have to admit, when I read it I had a pang of regret for Sam Cowart. He was never the same after Frank Freaking Middleton ended his season in Tampa in 2000. Thus a career with so much promise ends on the cut list. It is a cruel world.

An excellent point; I had not thought that through when I wrote my message. Seifert is another excellent example. Even Vince Lombardi fits in here; he had some success with the Redskins, but no championships. Though there as well his sickness came into play.

An excellent reference as well!

No, of course they do not. Now, why they do not, when they get paid to watch football, is the greatest mystery of all. On the other hand, I have to say I love the use of the word "nimrod." It does not get nearly enough play these days, yet it is so expressive.

Eeewww... too true, brother! That be some serious Pain!

Must be. HOU is the fourth largest city in the USA, if you can believe that. Philly and Phoenix have been duking it out for #5.... alas, the desert metropolis is moving ahead.

Parcells has had great success as a coach, yes, but before anyone assumes he will continue to be a success, he has to take into account the Parcells Law of Diminishing Returns, viz: Giants: 2 Super Bowl Wins Patriots: 1 SB appearance, no wins Jets: 1 Conference Championship appearance Cowboys: 1 playoff appearance (to date) At each stop, he has not lived up to the level from the last one. Now, I am no economist, so will not assume that the past predicts the future, but thought this was worth mentioning. It is the very rare coach who is as successful (let alone more so) at his next job after he has enjoyed great success. Most of the time, they generate a great deal of hype, then fail to live up to expectations. (For further confirmation of this, cf. the Jimmy Johnson Corollary.) Dick Vermeil is the only exception who comes to mind, who went to an SB with one team and lost, then won it with another, but there were more than 15 years in between. Belichek does not count here, I hasten to add, nor does Marv, since it is more common for coaches to have a poor first performance then get it right the second time, and they fall into that group. I think that people expect too much of a big name coach, forgetting that there is a special alchemy that makes it possible for a coach and a team to reach the very top. Parcells looks a lot better when he has LT, for example, and Jimmy J looked much more like a genius when he had Troy Aikman than when he had Jay Fiedler at QB. Granted, an exceptional coach may indeed be able to get more out of his players than a bad one, but that is no guarantee of ultimate success.

*standing up slowly, eyes glistening with tears, starting the slow clap... voice a husky whisper* "Amen, brother.... Go Bills!"

I am torn... I never liked FF to begin with, and the overexposure has made me like it even less... So which option does that mean I should pick?

man, that needed to be said! Well done!

You offer a lot of interesting evidence, but I really want to know: Did the MAC kick your dog or something? You seem to have devoted a lot of energy to crapping on it. Wait, are you a UB grad? That would explain a hostility to the MAC....

I did not see the game, but noticed that he only had 3 catches for 28 yards, which would suggest he is turning into a short-game player. That might explain his love for KH, and he could of course extend his career being a short-game #2, though it does make me less upset about his departure from Buffalo.

Thank You!

Your last sentence is spot on, Bill, though it also contains a philosophical problem. Clearly there is a big difference between "neglecting" and "failing." To neglect would mean to do nothing, while it is quite possible to do many things and have them not work. The Bills' problem has been less that the O-Line has been neglected, and more that things have not worked out properly. That is not a defense of TD or JB or Marv, but rather an indication of the degree of chance that goes into sports success. One can draft OL men high, and find out one has drafted Tony Mandarich or Mike Williams just as easily as Anthony Munoz or Orlando Pace. One can sign FAs and sometimes get LeCharles Bentley and sometimes get Joe Panos--both of whom then suffered injuries after signing. You know what I mean. To answer the original post in this thread, it appears that there is no single formula for creating a good OL, or a good team, beyond saying that one needs to find good players who play well together. How to do that is a constant challenge, and chance plays a huge role....

Why should I respond to a man who claims to play golf and thinks people shout "Four!" ? Oh well... Can't speak for anyone else, but I am not crying; don't flatter yourself. Most of the folks here are strong enough to know the team has a lot of question marks, but they have chosen to look forward to seeing how things turn out, rather than taken on "Internet Courage" and beat their breasts about how "realistic" they are.

Bingo on both, Lothar.

Amen, brother!

No Freudian slip at all. I was referring specifically to the tendency of some people on TBD who post the most relentlessly negative stuff to claim to have the market cornered on truth and realism. You know, the kind of people who would write something like "a cup of truth" tasting bitter and all that. It is no more realistic to constantly predict doom than it is to constantly predict happiness, though it is more annoying. When one pairs relentless negativity with smug claims to realism, the annoyance factor rises, and that inspired my response. I make no claim to knowing whether the Bills will be good or horrible next year. Chances are excellent they will not win a championship; but I will wait until the games are played before I claim to know how things will turn out. I will be disappointed if they suck, but I will survive. I do not understand why anyone would bother choosing a voluntary activity like being a sports fan, then spend all their time predicting awful things for their team and imputing base motives to the ownership and management. Maybe, as LA Billz Fan wrote once a while back, people do that to protect their fragile egos against disappointment. Perhaps Dr. Freud would know better than I how to explain that.