RuntheDamnBall

Most of us went into the season with level headed or low expectations. The one big expectation is that this team would be IN games to the wire and make it interesting while on the learning curve. They've done that so far, and ended up with a tough road split. If that's not cause for excitement, I don't know what is. We've got a Jets team that we've been picked to fight for the basement with, next. Win it and we are above .500 for the first time in close to two years. I am all for the optimism.

Simon, I believe you on the number of called running plays. I'm still arguing that Brown should have been featured.

You really did it, didn't you? Delete this sh--. Now. On the off chance that the football gods are still watching the 50th repeat of NFL Total Access and missed this.

Strength, stench, same thing.

I'm not sure this assessment was really necessary. In fact, I'm certain this is the kind of thing nobody who's just lost a friend needs to hear.

Condolences, man. Nobody should be thinking it's over that young. There's so much good ahead. I'm sorry for your loss.

I'm saying merely that down 16 in the third is not quite time to abandon the run if it's the one thing that's succeeding in your offensive gameplan. It might take the pressure off the passing game and allow it to do something. And when you are running, play your best cards. Brown is that card for Miami. By the fourth, it's time to air it out and see if you can't pick up the big yardage quickly.

Maybe not in the 4th, Simon, but in the 3rd? When you're just getting demolished by the pass rush and Ronnie Brown is ripping for a first down on every other carry? Two scores is nothing, we saw that last year. I'm sure Mularkey can design good plays, but I don't think he knows how to draw them to best suit his players and put inexperienced players in a position to succeed. And he definitely doesn't know how to stick with what works.

Right, that's exactly what I said. Because I said a guy needs 7 seasons in the NFL to prove himself. I hope JP succeeds on more than one level so I can be around for the warm memories the haters will have of him later on, as though they always supported him as one of their beloved Bills. It'll be the kind of moment in which it's nice to rely on Darin and the search function here.

Not at all. Hell, Johnson already had three NFL seasons under his belt before we took him on. Not full seasons of play, hence the reason we gave him a longer look and chance to grow and play out his potential, which no one can argue he didn't have. But he had a reasonable amount of time to prove something in four years here. And Kelly had two USFL years and a few more years to learn before he brought us to the playoffs. One can only imagine what would have happened if he started his career in Buffalo. At the first sign of failure, the first few bonehead interceptions, Jimbo probably would have been thrown under the bus by the same people who are doing it to Losman today. But people forget this all the time. In the revisionist history he was always great and always a Buffalo hero, whom everyone loved. Look, the point is, we gave these guys a shot. Losman deserves the same.

Explain Huff's totals, then, b/c the Raiders are as bad as it gets right now and that defense has been on the field a hell of a lot. I'll again dispute that this depends a lot on the scheme you run. Some schemes depend on more safety help / safety acting as another LB. Others don't.

Right, but if you run your horse who just plowed for about 70 yards on 13 carries but TWICE in the second half, I think criticism is warranted.

Steve Young: total failure. That guy wasn't good until like his fifth year. As we know, any QB who isn't pro bowl caliber by year 3 is worthless. Now let's play Nall ball! Winning sucks! Yee haw!

Typical. Welcome to pdh1's world: where history has no bearing on the present. Here's more where that came from: In our advanced, ideal society, blacks have always had it great (hey, those lynchings were like 40 years ago, ancient history! Today calling!). Women have always been equals in Western society (aside from earning 75% of what a man does --and they've always had the vote (for the last 86 years)). It's beginning to appear obvious as to how you've developed your worldview.

So Britain promoted free thinking and open discussion among all citizens in all of its colonies and somehow the dumb "stuck in the 7th century" natives didn't get it, right?

That's a baseless question entirely because the location of power has everything to do with the fueling of radical Islam. They are in a weak position generally and a virus feeds on weakness. Two responses here: 1) Just because we are capable of much greater destruction doesn't mean we shouldn't heed caution and realize how bad ANY killing of innocents looks. Being the good guy means being the good guy all the time. It doesn't mean just being better than the worst. 2) You still divide it into us and them when it's much deeper than that. There is a more neutral segment of "them" that is much greater in numbers but doesn't use violent means. We need them and I'd like to think they need us. The radicals know that when there is violence, people watch. It is incredibly difficult to raise one's voice so that it rises above violence. I hope we can make that possible. If we don't let ourselves become the center of attention in this struggle, we will see moderate Muslims take a stand against the violent strands. Right now, we're doing everything possible to keep the attention on us. And that's just the way AQ and co. like it.

Or, the jury is out, and few teams can rightfully be called bad at this time of the year (even Miami), and jokers who should be flipping burgers like Cowherd are just looking for sh-- to talk about. These people only have jobs because it's determined that somebody, somewhere, is listening. I like our team and this douchebag has every right to call them bad, and he has every right to be wrong later. I'm smarter for having never listened to him.

Hey, if we're bad, what are the Dolphins? What are the Patriots, who we owned for three quarters? I'm curious.

Does he moonlight in the department of redundancy department?

No, it's more about the act of your inserting your idea of what my opinion is as a stand-in for what it really is, to defuse it and treat it as an invalid argument. It's a classic tactic of the right, where a world of language, image, and impressions is a much better facsimile of the real thing. Remember "we create our own reality"? Who said that? My opinion is that we should consider context, not as an excuse, but as a template for understanding how we can approach the present and the future without repeating the mistakes of the past. No one is absolving non-Westerners for their actions, and you shouldn't do the same for the West. "We're #1!" is no better than "Blame Whitey."

Great post.

Now that is encouraging. So wait, Super Bowl Shuffle vs. Marino getting a ring and you'd be in favor of the latter? Say it ain't so!

I'll agree. And again, I'll state that the effects of technology and media have a lot more to do with this. The broadcasting of these sentiments from both sides amplifies the severity. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have made it through the dark ages if the same tools were available then.

Food for thought: Roethlisberger's line tonight. Bear in mind this is a franchise, Super Bowl QB with a 23-3 record. Hmm. 12-21 96yds 57.1% 4.6 YPC 0 TD.

Wilfork was viewed as coming along pretty slowly in his first year, too, and now seems dominant. Same with Henderson on Jax. It's going to take time.