RuntheDamnBall

No. Totally not unfair. But unfair to expect that you're not going to pay for giving him extra chances, especially when you have to rely heavily on Duke Williams.

How many minutes of laughter from the Browns GM before he hangs up? I'm betting five.

the facts are super, but another fact is that this guy hasn't been able to stay healthy since he was in college.

that's a very expensive spot on the IR.

I just really disagree and I think it's fairer to expect a better offensive showing than it is to expect the D to stop Brady with three extra chances.

Sarcasm is funny but it was 13 points due to turnovers (including CJ's) plus the opportunity cost of not scoring when we had the ball and turned it over - against a team that was not returning the favor. But hell, as long as you're satisfied that they tried very hard with a better QB, that's stupendous. I thought that the objective was to win, though.

sure. Because we lost the turnover battle. Fully and completely.

Think about it this way: being one dimensional for some of the game is OK and can actually open things up for the run later on. NE proves this by just f---ing killing people with Gronk until they just have to absolutely sell out to stop the passing game. We are never going to force the issue with this "take what they give us between the 20s" stuff. At some point you need to make the opposition pay by getting the ball into the hands of your least stoppable guys. That's Sammy. And the plays were there. I don't care if Hogan made a few decent plays. *Because he didn't turn the ball over once or twice* Plus my statement had little to do with our D.

I'm really afraid of what would happen once Bradford encountered the rubber mats at the practice facilities.

#14 against the run, looked like #1 against us. Again, not enough if it's the only phase of your game that is working.

I don't know. On a day where the running game isn't working, 300 yards with two turnovers is pretty pedestrian against NE. It kept them in the game for sure, but I would bet that that's not enough about 90% of the time against the Pats.

This actually points out pretty well that they weren't getting the ball to Sammy enough. Even if there were good, positive plays to other receivers, the whole point of getting it in his hands is to score or get close to that possibility. NE knows they have this kind of weapon in Gronk. We used ours as a decoy.

Over Fergy and Kemp, without question? Really? I think it's at least a question. Especially since it was such a short lived stint with no playoff wins.

The myth of the little guy who could continues. He must watch tape of all those playoff victories to remember the good old days. It must have been awesome owning the Rough Riders or the Roughriders and scoring all those rouges.

I would rather Orton have the confidence that he can hit an open Watkins, than concede simply on the basis of Revis' presence. Revis is a few years removed from being all world. I simply want Orton to make the plays when they are there, and I don't think that is too much to ask before I can say he played well in a loss where he committed two turnovers. Also, to the bolded, I said "deep passing game." It was rarely utilized, again, on Sunday. That could just be Hackett's fault.

I thought that Orton was going to throw guys open and utilize the deep passing game that was dormant under EJ, though. Orton threw a pick and fumbled the ball in the process of making "safer" plays. So that argument is dubious on its face. I think Belicheck and co were pleased to win the game. I'm sure they weren't celebrating because that's not their style. But they were betting the Bills would be scared to target Revis. They bet right. They got gashed by Chandler but that was about it. If it means they don't get burned by the run game or the big play, I'm sure they take that every time. Chicago?

If you want to ask why I'm perturbed that they weren't using Sammy more, it boils down to the fact that he was open more often than a simple analysis of "don't throw near Revis" would suggest. I was at the game and this was clear. Now the guards were terrible and this didn't help, but I think you have to get your best weapons involved in a NE game that is Likely to be a shootout. They will give the Bills a career day for Chandler between the 20s if it means they don't get burned for a big score. And the kid's not going to make ANY big plays if he isn't targeted.

Probably not giving away the ball twice? Be honest, if EJ threw for 300 yards, kept the team in the game, but scarcely looked Watkins' way, and coughed up two turnovers that New England turned into opportunities to score, would any poster say he played well? I wouldn't.

It's adorable how much you want to crush on any QB that isn't EJ Manuel. Did the dude run over your dog and steal your girlfriend or something?

The realistic supporter of EJ thinks the benching was warranted, will hopefully do him good in the long run, and that Orton is a limited QB. He doesn't suck, but a lot would have to break right for him to lead this team deep into the playoffs. EJ isn't ready right now and Orton does give the team the best shot, but I think it's no more likely that he is a long term solution than is EJ. Odds are that Orton will be better, but I'd like for him to be a lot better. I want to see some dominance against an inferior Minnesota team before I buy in.

WAR in baseball doesn't work in that you add Player X and pile on his wins. And it would be silly to apply it to football where you need 10 other guys working in concert with you. Individual performance is much more easily tracked in baseball than in the NFL. Regardless, you just can't chalk it up and say that Orton is worth those two wins. You may believe it, but it's very hard to substantiate that claim. Football is a game of so many variables that he could have been worse, depending on the game plan and the opposition's approach. The smart money says he'd be better, but that doesn't mean anything. By the way - read the post history and you'll see that I supported the move to Orton. I just don't think the book is closed on Manuel yet, though it may be.

Kyle Orton would be even worse at getting away from JJ Watt than was Manuel. I wouldn't be so sure about that one.

You should do some yoga, have a beer, do a J, or something.

This is both willfully ignorant of how the WAR stat is applied in baseball, and it's making stuff up to apply a baseball stat to a football projection for an imagined scenario. Well done? Take it easy on metz, he has some inside info.

Headley Lamar?