BuffOrange

Yes, I noticed that too. We're not as lucky as we were last year when the Bills played the NFC East - seemed like they were on every week. Finally, I don't have to deal with a bunch of obnoxious Iggles A-holes who ruin Sunday-Ticket bars by taking up 4 freaking TV's when they can watch the same game at home :I starred in Brokeback Mountain:

Jenna is quite the ButterFace if you ask me.

McAllister is still banged up and the Chargers have the #1 run D. Play Willis&Portis at RB. Moulds & Wayne at WR. The rest are no-brainers.

It sounds like she didn't like you for some other reason and used the hockey thing as an excuse. Northern girls suck, I need a transplanted southerner.

by 2 scores do you mean 2 safties?

I really don't like TO. Everybody who isn't a Philly fan is tired of his act. Having said that, you're right on point here. I'm sick of everyone getting on their knees for Ray Lewis, as if he's a great role-model; and I thought his mocking of RayLew was quite funny. I just wish TO would stop it with the constant Garcia bashing, and other people who don't deserve it.

I personally don't care what Price has or hasn't done in Atlanta. He became a good player in Buffalo in his last year here. That said, I fully supported the move at the time because he wanted too much money and I don't think you need 2 WR's making that kind of dough. I was assuming they would be smart and spend that $ on OL. However, after spending 2 high draft picks on WR's since - I think they might as well have kept Price if TD considered a #2 WR THAT high of a priority.

I'm not being negative for the sake of being negative here, but honestly: If we beat the Jets, we'll have beaten an overachieving team coming off a short week at home in a rivalry game. Again, I'm not saying this just to be negative. In my "random NFL thoughts" thread in the preseason, I predicted the Jets to not be very good. You may not agree with it, but that's honestly how I feel. If they end up 11-5 I'll admit I was wrong, but until then I will remain skeptical about how good that team really is. For the Bills to be considered good, we need to beat NE, or at least play them tough and beat Seattle on the road, in addition to winning all of the home games we "should" win.

PLEASE stop the misuse of the term "bandwagon". It's becoming so widespread that it deserves it's own sticky thread at some point. Bandwagoners wouldn't still be around here getting mad after 3-13, 6-10, and 2-5. This board would be completely dead, and we'd be rooting for one of the PA teams. Seriously, WHY is this so difficult to grasp? Why?

Interesting - I see that we're down the list on # of flags but 5th in yardage.

I don't want to start a new thread on this, but while I'm pimping the guy, he also wrote a phenominal article on Scottie Pippen - one of my favorite players. I've always made basically the same arguments against a good number of idiotic detractors, and he articulates them pretty well. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...=simmons/041101

Sorry if this was posted already, but I missed this last week: Again, I hate the Red Sox, but the guy is uncanny sometimes.

David Terrel has been a bust too. Not that Marquis Walker was a high draft pick, but he was a great WR in college too. Amani Toomer is solid, but that's about it.

I take back all the good things I've said about Miami's D, and their run defense in particular - that was pathetic.

For the first time this year, I'm going to defend Deadsoe. Being at the game really gives you a different perspective. Drew didn't do a lot because the team didn't ask him to. The Cardinals were ridiculously conservative on offense (did they throw once on 1st down?). It was obvious they had no clue how to handle the wind. The ONLY way we could've lost that game after the McGee kickoff was turning the ball over. Sure, the offense had a short field to work with, but they were able to capitalize on it, which this team usually doesn't do. There was single-coverage on the outside the entire 2nd half - I kept screaming for them to throw that fade to Moulds - which they finally did for a TD. He made one dumb play, trying to force the ball to Campbell into triple coverage, otherwise didn't do anything stupid. Now if you want to say we have a better chance to win when we ask #11 to shoulder as little of the workload as possible, or that Losman should start when he's healthy, I would not disagree with that. But man, get off the guy's back concerning yesterday's game.

Peyton Manning - we'd start practicing harder, scoring points & winning games immediately, and nobody would be able to blame the coach's play-calling ever again.

Don't tell me you just picked up Blaylock. The guy isn't going to see the field the rest of the season. Re: the trade - do some research on the Vikings RB situation. If Moore is the full-time starter for the rest of the year, then go ahead & pull the trigger, but I'd double-check that first.

As I've pointed out already, Lofton & Reed weren't on the field in '95. The overall talent may have been slightly better, but nowhere near the discrepancy that the numbers would indicate. Our current defense isn't the best in the turnover department, but when they do create them, the offense doesn't do anything with it. Nothing last week after getting the ball at the 22 yd line. Nothing vs. Jacksonville after getting the ball on the 3 yard line. Nothing vs. a lousy Houston defense last year after a rare Winfield int deep in their territory. Nothing vs. NE last year when Posey sacked Brady & forced a fumble. Nothing vs. KC after a safety... Whatever....if watching Deadsoe play the last 2 years hasn't changed your mind about him, then nothing will - certainly not any post on a message board. Once JP is behind center in 3 weeks, it won't matter.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make. You start by saying this team has no talent, and you end by saying Bledsoe's words are going to motivate everyone to play better. If they're as bad as you say (which they might be), maybe they're not capable of playing any better? Obviously, the team is not as talented as it was in 1991. But what about 95 - Our last division title? Thurman was decent but not dominant, Lofton was retired, Reed was injured the entire year, the go-to WR was Billy Brooks, and the OL was rebuilding & being anchored by a rookie named Rueben Brown. Like the current team, that was a defensive oriented team. Unlike the current team, the QB was able to raise the level of play of the guys around him to SCORE enough points to win more often than not. Not necessarily 31 pts, but at least a respectable 17-20 more often than not - and Kelly wasn't even in the prime of his career at that point. How many 13-10 games do we have to lose until you realize Deadsoe is not capable of doing that? Please, anything but the tired "Drew is not the only problem" straw-man argument - I'm sick of it almost as much as I'm sick of Drew.

That's not entirely true - it was around during the SB years. Where "MadBuff" is mistaken is that Kelly could afford to do that because he could play. Drew Deadsoe cannot play, and thus, is not entitled to point fingers. That's a big difference.

A 7 man front? I'll believe it when I see it. I think they should just cut&paste every week. Really, is there any other team in sports where the gameplan of the opponent changes ZERO from week to week? Blitz, blitz, blitz up the gut on defense. Don't turn it over on offense, make a play or two in the passing game, collect penalty yardage, wait for them to make mistakes in the 4th Qtr, score 13 pts and win the game...

Yeh, I can't wait for a bunch of 20 year old punks to riot and pretend like they've been around for 80+ years. Not to mention soon to be 3 SB's in 4 years. Great story - at least their fans will finally stop whining & pretending like they're the most tortured people (much less sports fans) on earth....Simmons is my favorite writer outside of the whole Boston angle.

I agree that OL play is underestimated by a lot of casual fans, while the importance of QB play is overrated. However, the QB IS the most important player on the team, even if it's not necessarily the most important position. There are 5 OLmen and only 1 QB. It is absurd to say that Kevin Mawae is "carrying" the Jets offense. He might be their best player, but he's a small fraction of the reason for them scoring points. He's been there for what - 9 years? The Jets have had some pretty average offensive teams during that span - particularly without Pennington. Perhaps him, Pete Kendall, and the other 3 guys are a big reason for success. Lets say Bledsoe & Pennington traded teams tommorow: The Jets offense is probably still better, but I think you're fooling yourself to think that the gap doesn't narrow considerably. The goal of course, is to improve the overall team when evaluating these positions. Philadelphia decided a better pass-rush with Jevon Kearse could compensate for losing their CB's since DE's and CB's are not unrelated with respect to the defense. Along similar lines, QB and OL are closely related as well. If it was feasible w/ the salary cap to replace all 5 OLmen, I'd say go for it, but - right now we have no choice but to put all of our eggs into JP's basket for the future.

"stands" being the operative word.

I thought the part about TD saying "OL is not the biggest problem on offense" was the most interesting part of the article.