Matt in KC

Dark Fan, I'm not sure how you calculate that's over half our starters bolded. Dark indeed.... Williams Denney Ellison Scott / Wilson / Simpson Lindell Denney, Ellison, and Scott are backups that were filling in because of injury. Kyle Williams was fine IMO. Not great, but a decent starter, certainly not a glaring weakness. I thought Scott was good, and very good near the LOS. Yes, Lindell had a down year, but I'm no where near out of patience with him (and also don't have a problem with competition so long as it's not just a personnel gimmick). C.Biscuit97 gave kicker a C- and DTs a C+. That sounds level-headed to me, not insane. Going into the offseason needing 3-4 defenders is not end-of-the-world stuff, especially when one of those positions will see the return of a Pro Bowler (Schobel). Yes, we're probably going to have to settle with second tier FAs or throw in young players somewhere in the lineup, but that happens to most teams each year. If you're trying to do better than Kyle Williams at every position, then I thnik you're crazy. As a GM, of course you push for that, but as a fan I'm telling you it won't happen in a year. But, I think we can improve next year, maybe even enough to get to the playoffs. (I AM a glass half-full kinda guy.)

IMO, this is the only reason I see Crowell coming back to Buffalo. He could sign a one year deal at a reasonable salary for the opportunity to showcase his skill for his big carreer payday. I'd be very suprised to see the Bills sign him for three years or for him to accept a two year deal with the Bills. Crowell played well enough with the Bills I could see him getting a good 3 year offer from someone late in free agency after the other top FA LBs are taken. --- Thanks, WVUFootball29! Just a thought: post a link to your earlier installments at the end of your initial entry for each of these?

Broncos fire coach Mike Shanahan after collapse Okay, so I know Ralph just announced we're keeping Jauron. Is there any reason he couldn't also hire Shanahan?

Wow! I would take Shanahan as the Bills coach in a heartbeat! And the flip side: I'll be pissed if he's the next coach of the Jets.

links aren't working.... But I found them by copying the numbers at the end of your URLs into the eBay Search box.

Really. So what? Usually Whitner could have taken the hit too. Sure he was out of position a bit. Morris, leaning with leverage, put his helmet directly into Whitner's bad shoulder. And Whitner is a shmuck for A) allowing that to hurt his shoulder B) Allowing it to be a backup RB that hurt his shoulder C) being unable to finish the play after getting hurt D) all of the above ? This is not just directed at you, d_wag, but to everyone being critical of Whitner here. There aren't that may plays where players get seriously hurt. I'd recommend picking on some of the other plays/players, if you want to be negative. He embarrassed you with how he looked when he got hurt? Boo hoo! Be good fans and wish him well.

It was definitely Sammy Morris. It was as clear a "flattening" as I remember ever seeing a RB lay on a defender. I'm almost never critical of players on plays where they get hurt (but have no problem praising them when they make the play or give good effort anyway). I hope Whitner is okay, both in terms of pain and prognosis.

I read it that way at first as well, and almost responded until I realised LabattBlue meant 32 years old, not 32 games.

When healthy, I think Schobel is one of our best players. The sugestions that we cut him and our other DEs is obviously bourne out of frustration, not reason. As for IR, I think the risk of aggrevating his injury is not worth the possible payoff in the last few games. Unless he's going full speed now, I'd put him on IR. Even in the criticism of Schobel, I have not heard anyone claim he's not our best pass rusher. Sure, he's not Bruce Smitth, but it would be folly to cut or risk injury to your best pass rusher who's under contract.

Sorry, but no way do I buy this. Which came first, the winning, or the Hall of fame? It's harder to diagnose losing than winning. To win at the level the Superbowl Bills did a lot of things have to go right, including talent, coaching and an effective organization. I think the coaching then was very good, and no doubt worlds beyond what we have now. Along these lines, I'd like to see someone step up and say clearly that calling time outs because the players don't line up fast enough, the plays haven't come in on time, the wrong players are on the field, the QB can't read a defense and audible etc. is NOT acceptible. Yes, these happen to all teams sometime, but should not be a crutch. These timeouts are just markers of a poorly run team (coaching). Time outs should be seen as vauable strategic resources that allow you to challenge plays and help you put points on the board. Trying to get a FG in the last minute of the first half should not be considered a risky maneuver. So yeah, I think our coaching is lacking, but to be critical of Levy-era coaching is nit-picking at best. (And that's when examples are provided.)

Holy crud. That was not just a beatifl catch by Moss, but a clutch strike thrown by Cassel on the run. Kudos! That was a very disciplined march down the field. ...f@&king Patriots!

It sounds like he's getting close. http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=76663

I'd guess the top loss-haters are: Josh Reed, Whitner and Lynch. (While I think Lynch hates losing, he is NOT vocal.) In the recent past: London Fletcher and Takeo Spikes. I actually wondered if this had something to do with their release. If a team is close, then this fire can push the team to elevate their play. But the Bills were suffering when these two were released and I think their emotional displays may have driven a sense of division on the team. I saw these two yelling furiously (especially LF-B) and not looking at anyone as they went to the locker room a number of times after a loss, pissed off at the loss and apparently their team/teammates. I agree this fire is missing right now, but it's more than just passion, it's motivation, which is a bit trickier. I wish we had a vocal respected leader on this team to get them fired up and "come out swinging". The current apparent attitude ("Darn, it looks like another loss this weekend. Well, we tried.") starting with the coaches is really getting me down.

I think Muhammed is the safest bet, but the least likely to hit the homerun I may need. Henderson is indeed my last choice (almost even with Avery), but he really has been pretty consistently productive, including the last couple weeks (3-34, 1 TD last week; 3-80 the week before). DeShawn is likely to get a big catch or two, though I'm a bit worried his receptions have dropped off. Bumping him back up though is that he returns punts and I get 6 points if he takes one all the way (did so in week 5). Also, I think Phili will struggle against the Giants, which may make them pass-happy in the second half. ...of course, does this make him better than Ward, who will almost certainly be targeted more (but can Leftwich get him the ball if he plays)? Thanks for posting!

I need help picking a WR and a RB/WR flex player for the week. I'm playing a very strong opponent (3rd place) starting Brees, Westbrook, Chris Johnson, Antonio Gates etc.. My league gives bonuses for 100 yard games and long TDs. My choices: Hines Ward (IND) - I usually start him as my final receiver; strongly considering benching him DeShawn Jackson (NYG) Kevin Faulk Devery Henderson (@ATL) Muhsin Muhammad (@OAK) also Avery is available in FA. I've already started B Marshall, and plan to start M Lynch, but think Faulk will do as well, though of course pray he won't. Romo is obviously benched; I'm starting Gerrard. I'm not sure if I'm depressed from the Bills losing, or what, but I don't see a big difference between my choices. I'm leaning toward Kevin Faulk and Jackson. With Big Ben's health, I feel like Ward is looking at a weak week. Thanks in advance for any feedback!

I think Mckelvin has been decent at returning kicks for us. Yeah, I've been critical of him (in my head), but I've chalked up many of his errors to being a young rookie out there. He looked much more decisive in pre-season than regular season , and has indeed run into his own players a number of times. The fact that his average still puts him in the top half of the league is a testiment to his skills and potential. He could clearly break a number of returns once he gets settled in. Also, I think that the criticism I've read of LM here has been a reflection of how spoiled we've been watching McGee, who has an excellent mix of vision, balance, strength, decision-making and speed on returns. It looks like McKelvin could perhaps be as good or better when he settles down. For reference, here are McGee's averages the last few years: 2007 24.0 (1 TD) 2006 26.1 2005 30.2 (1 TD) 2004 26.3 (3 TDs) McKelvin this year so far: 24.2.

288

Stop the poetry It is time for some football Let's crush those cheaters!

As much as I agree with you, your response is even more inflamatory and out of place than keepthefaith's (wrong forum). ...and it was $700 Billion (ouch!)

28:00

Well they did sub in Copelan Bryan who applied the pass rush from RDE on the Mitchell INT. (He also recovered the fumble caused by Mitchell later.) I think Bryan is just ahead of Ellis on the depth chart, which is fine for now. He's a rookie. . . give him a chance. I haven't watched half of the game even once yet. I'm hoping the "Short Cuts" replay has more game footage, but I'm not optimistic. I'll post anything I notice about Denney's moves and would appreciate reading what anyone else sees.

Forget the "only one game ball" rule for a minute.... I'd like to give a game ball to Copeland Bryan. I've not heard anyone give him any credit, but he 1) provided the pass rush pressure off RDE on the Mitchell INT and 2) recovered the fumble caused by KM. No, he wasn't one of the top few players on the field today, but nice to see a new player contributing.

I tink this is the station that had the video I saw. This article has the quotes: http://www.nbcactionnews.com/sports/story....32-cf8d061045a0

I have no idea. But, it was clear he has a problem with KC, and does not feel like he's being respected. He sounded disgusted that he "didn't even get a call back" . No mention of Bills or Giants or any team, saying "I told them if they had an offer they should take it." (paraphrasing due to my memory, but clearly did not seem to care where he went) I really don't care enough to follow the Chiefs at all, so I'm not a great source for info, but I'll pass on what I happen to hear....

I saw Gonzales on the local (KC) news the other night. He said he called Carl Peterson and told him to talk the deal if he had one. He sounded pretty annoyed, saying that he was callnig and leaving messages up to an hour before the deadline, but didn't get a call back until after the deadline with the explanation of "we didn't get any offers we liked". It very clearly was NOT TG blocking a trade. And it didn't seem at all like TG was focused on the Giants as much as getting out of KC.