BuffOrange

Yah I guess I was thinking more mid-late 90's where we were still good but I felt like we lost an inordinate amount of games w/ those sort of plays that went against us. Maybe I was just spoiled after growing up in the SB era. Both Talley plays were 1990 and both were 40+ pt destructions. The Broncos/Raiders reg. season games that year though might've been the sickest consecutive home games in team history.

I can't tell if this is a clever crayonz post or if you're actually serious. The Steelers are the posterboys of the league for not re-signing veteran players - many of whom were/are playing at a much higher level than Milloy Version 2005 who couldn't tackle anyone.

Actually I never thought he was the same all-time great after that Cleveland game (still above average of course). Regardless, if you have to go back 14 years to find an example that kinda emphasizes the point.

I was at that game too. It was pretty boring, but also funny to watch Marty give Marcus Allen handoffs between the tackles on every 1st/2nd down when they were trailing in the 2nd half with a postseason birth on the line. I don't think I've ever been more confident about a big game that the Bills lost than that Jags game. Back then we never scored cheap defensive TD's (seemed to give them up all the time though) and when Jeff Burris scored off that tipped pass in the 4th Qtr I was sure the game was over.

It's possible that '01 and '07 were different teams and last year's stacked team was slightly more talented than the Antoine Smith/Troy Brown crew... On the other hand that team scored 3 offensive TD's in 3 postseason games, so if they were stealing defensive signals they didn't do a great job of it.

No. A+ backpedal though.

SoCal - everyone has their own subjective view of how much to weigh #'s vs. supporting cast/crircumstances. I mean I think we could argue all day about Lee vs. Roy Williams or Marques Colston so I'm just going to concede all the gray area for the sake of argument and give you 19 teams and you tell me which ones Lee wouldn't be the #1 WR on: Jets, Dolphins, Steelers, Ravens, Titans, Jaguars, Raiders, Broncos, Chiefs, Chargers, Redskins, Eagles, Vikings, Packers, Bears, Falcons, Bucs, Seahawks, 49ers.

If you cloned him 31 times, he would be the undisputed #1 target on > 50% of the teams in the league. That's a #1 WR. [/discussion].

Well it is May in Buffalo with no hockey playoffs. How many hours can you spend talking about who is going to be returning kicks next year? I don't even listen to sports radio shows I like during the summer (eg Mike & Dog) because I don't like baseball. Can't imagine why you guys listen to shows you don't like.

That's correct. The Bills & Dolphins have been "traveling partners" for years - ie they play the same home/away schedule which is the opposite of the Pats/Jets. In 2012 those west coast trips will be flip flopped as they were in 2004. It always cracks me up when people act like a bunch of NFL exec's in suits are sitting around in a room arbitrarily hashing out home/away schedules.

A big reason we drafted Evans was losing 10 games with a good defense in '03. Big reason for losing 10 games with a good defense was Moulds' groin injury (he was our only playmaker) and the subsequent putrid offense. We don't even know yet if the current defense is good or not; thus I don't really want to think about an Evansless team.

Keyshawn was kinda still in his prime though and he was never a speed guy to begin with. I'm frankly stunned that Eric got old seemingly overnight. Thought he'd be more of a factor for the Titans last year.

I'm pretty indifferent towards them. I mean yeah they're full of it but so were the Kings in their heyday and they never won squat. I also think it's pure hindsight to detract from their dismantling of the Lakers given that none of that stuff ever hurt them vs. mediocre 76ers/Nets teams. Besides, any overconfidence should've been washed away when they needed a buzzer beater from Kobe to salvage a split in the first 2 games in LA. I kinda liked that particular team because they're the only NBA team since the 70's that ever won the whole thing without a mega-superstar (seriously - think about it). The old Isiah/Laimbeer teams otoh were first rate scumbags.

BTW it's good to see the Whitner debate still alive; which I thought was dead after he got outrun by Brandon Jacobs but I guess not.

Can't argue that in general that is the Steelers blueprint and they win with it. But they don't upset the Colts if they don't throw the hell out of the ball in the 1st half; which clashes w/ the traditional "pound the ball & keep Manning off the field" strategy.

I concur that is a pretty good article. re: FG's obviously 50yarders and 30 don't have the same expectation. If there's an argument to be made for turovers being overrated, I think you have to look at how many int's are thrown when a team is already behind in the 2nd half. Of course you can't conclusively prove that they wouldn't have otherwise happened, but it's safe to say that a lot of them wouldn't.

Fair enough. I just think if their fans will find any excuse imaginable to downplay and rationalize the whole thing, the players who got the actual bling bling out of the deal certainly aren't going to act any differently.

Yes

What is the basis for your "players don't respond to him" theory? Thus far it is nothing but speculation. It looked like they responded to him last year. And it looked like they responded to him in '03 after everyone & their brother said that he had lost his team after cutting Lawyer Milloy and getting stomped here on opening day.

Can't really argue w/ the Red Wings, Steelers, Braves & Spurs votes. The Packers don't belong IMO as their image is largely enhanced by the arbitrary timetable of their greatness coinciding with the merger. They were pretty awful thru the 70's & 80's which could be overlooked if they recently dominated reg. seasons as the Braves did for 14 years but they didn't. Mind you I'd root for GB over Pit in a SB in a heartbeat. The Cardinals might deserve more consideration than I think. Perhaps I unfairly penalize them for their '06 team being up there w/ the '01 Patriots as the worst professional champions ever.

I actually think history views Beebe way more favorable than it should. If I had to pick a player at that position in my lifetime, it is Billy Brooks easily just for the '93 Raiders playoff game and the entire '95 season.

Couldn't agree more w/ the others. Not withstanding posting on a board in May of a team that hasn't done squat in 13 years, you're clearly a frontrunner if you think the starting DE stinks.

Mostly my hate boils down to media and/or fans. Dolphins - I still get a kick out of everyone saying "Marino was surrounded by garbage teams" after the fact. I mean it might be true, but it's funny how for a 10+ year period beginning in ~85, those same people picked them to win the AFC practically every year. Patriots - Unlike others I do not think the media "fellates" them more than they would any other team if they had the same track record for the last 8 years. However I am still annoyed by "Just give it to them" as well as the '01 dynasty being jump-started by multiple bogus calls. Cowboys - The hype is a bit much for a team that hasn't won a playoff game in over a decade. Bandwagon fans galore too obv. Red Sox - The rare reverse bandwagon fan that was way too widespread pre '04. "I grew up nowhere near Mass but it's cool to hate the Yankees and I like pretending to be a long-suffering diehard fan. Also it's fun to ask for pity by grossly exaggerating the impact of the Buckner error as if we had the game won before that play". Thankfully there are fewer of them now. Duke - A poor man's Cowboys brand of hate. 1 title in 15 years...yawn. Somebody mentioned Kentucky but they at least played in 3 straight championship games in the late 90's, winning 2 and losing the 3rd in OT - and they don't get half the coverage.

Oh snap i got pwn3d.

I neither voted for or like the guy. I do think that it proves little in terms of how history will remember him. Truman is regarded by most non-partisan analysts as one of the top 3-4 presidents in "modern history", or at least above average.