BuffOrange

Where did you get this? I don't recall any primetime games in 2004.

I hate to jump on the media bashing bandwagon but honestly, count me in. I told everybody last year Miami wasn't that bad, but everyone on espn was talking like they're the worst team ever. Then they go and win a few games at the end of last year (BARELY beating terrible Bills & Jets teams AT HOME and the Patriots' 3rd string) and all of the sudden they're a serious contender in the AFC. WTF are you kidding me? That said, they are always tough at home in September even when they suck so I do not expect to win that game.

rofl at this because it's so true. There's always that token road game every year where the defense gives up 110 yards and 3 first downs and yet we find a way to lose 27-3. Postgame on the Wall, Clements will probably get a bulk of the blame for the loss because he gave up that key 12 yard completion.

Yep I agree completely (except for the refs part because they DO screw us most of the time). This team is just not good at any position except CB. Maybe LB if TKO recovers ok at LB and RB when Willis decides to try. And of course Special Teams. But overall it's a bad team. I think we would be underdogs vs. any of the 31 teams if we played them on the road on opening day. As for this huge weather advantage that everyone's talking about....it didn't help us so much vs. Miami when we had bad teams in 2000 and 2003. The September home game for them is just as big of an advantage IMO. As for Tennessee, well if we can't beat them at home in any kind of weather we have some problems.

I don't see how you can realistically say that we have better than a 50/50 shot of beating ANYBODY in their backyards this year, and that includes Houston & Detroit.

Don't forget Ken Albert and the 7th string Fox team for the Viking/Packer games

We might as well start preparing for the Jets now

Falcons-Saints on MNF two years in a row? Awesome. I could hardly take the excitement last year.

Who cares - lately we've had better luck vs. them when hosting the first game anyway.

I'd say our chances of a Top 5 pick next year are are fair to good. It's easily the most pessimistic I've ever been about a Bills team entering a season since I started following them in the late 80's. Lets face it - we have no QB, a crappy OL, a mediocre WR core, a RB who clearly quit towards the end of last year, a bad DL, and no safties. We have a couple good corners and a couple of linebackers (one coming off a devastating injury), good special teams and that's it. If we win 6 games Jauron should get coach of the year.

He used to be on in Syracuse. He likes baseball a lot. He sucks at discussing everything else.

Bye Eric - I appreciate the work you've done with the organization. Like others I thought last year's routine was kinda Bush League. Unlike others I give you a pass for it after playing with crappy QB's for 10 years. I mean there comes a point where enough is enough already and I understand your frustration. I'll never forget your season in 1998, although I really wish you would've hung on to that ball in Miami. Anyway, good luck in football and with your kids and all your kids' mothers.

WTF is going on here? IMHO this thread reflects the deterioration of this board in general. It seems like everyone's slamming the integrity of the article because they don't want the information to be true. Stop your pathetic whining. lurker - Is WGR "first-tier" media? Do you remember anything about 2001? daninator - I don't know how you can interperate this quote to mean "JP isn't going anywhere under any circumstances".

Good work. I'll assume it's a home game as it usually is. Pats are unlikely cause the league would want them to play a better team on opening day. We've hosted the Jets opening day a lot it seems like... I would say Packers & Titans are the 2 most likely. Also, there's a 90% chance Don Criqui and his 7th string partner will do the Titans game whenever that is, so that might be a good game to go to.

Are you a football fan?

49ers

The better football team still has the advantage. Even on opening day. Their record in home september games is really really really good.

Yeah that was pretty cool. The interview was mostly a boring fluff piece to me though, not that I blame 60 minutes for that.

Certainly improbable but not that surprising that a couple people out of that many pegged it. If you're a George Mason homer, the other 3 teams were perfectly reasonable picks (I had them all in my elite 8).

I had LSU, Memphis, Uconn and Nova: three 1 seeds but Memphis doesn't count as chalk since nobody else picked them. Thought I was gonna get 4 for 4 after LSU won the first game Saturday... FYI - if you go to espn.com you can vote "who you want to win" and a map comes up. Every single state voted Mason except not surprisingly: Fla, CA, and LA.

I thought Uconn played their best game of the tourney today. You really have to give George Mason credit for being a good team that played extremely well. It takes more than heart and luck to beat Mich. St., UNC, and Uconn in a week's span. The officiating in the Washington game was a complete joke btw.

What about the 19 times he tried to drive and had it stripped/blocked?

[LAMP] I have LSU-West Virginia in the regional finals in my bracket. I should be awarded 1st place automatically if WV ends up winning this game. Anyway, this is not much of a surprise. Reddick typically plays like Peyton Manning in the postseason and they were basically a 2man team to begin with.

Good post - the constant Eli comparisons do get annoying. He was a rookie and he also played against sick defenses in more than half his games in '04 - including Baltimore, Washington, Philly, and Pittsburgh. Moreover, whose to say Eli is any closer to QB X than QB Z based on how he played at times last year? It's almost as tired as the Bellicheck comparisons when we were looking for a coach. "Oh really - you mean you don't want to hire this guy who sucked in _? What about Bill!" I mean for every Bellicheck there are a dozen Dom Capers' and Rich Kotites out there.

I don't understand what you're getting at. Don't you think some of those differences were largely because of: Different opponenets? Different capabilities of the QB's? The fact that one QB was better able to check off? Opponent gameplanning different QB's differently? Different QB's making different decisions as to where to throw the ball? Or are you saying the coaches intentionally put JP in a position to fail? They purposely asked a rookie QB to do more than a 10 year veteran?