Rat-boy

Did you listen to Rome this morning? Can't think of any other reason for that signature.

Nice recovery following your earlier flawed argument BF! Way to fit the data to match your hypothesis. To which journal will you submit your paper for peer-review? You and the other anti-Bledsoe trolls have the vision of a horse with four pairs of blinders on. You constantly try to blame losses on DB. When the Bills win, they win "in spite of Drew." When they win six in a row you go away and are silent...only to return, OH-SO-VINDICATED when the Bills lose to Pitt, vocal as ever, crying for Drew's head...and every time you choose your data to fit your overwhelming hypothesis that Drew is the source of all Buffalo's ills. Do you have some narcissitic need for attention like ICE? Or do you just get high off saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over.... Nobody's arguing whether or not he had a lousy game against Pitt. Nobody's saying DB doesn't have glaring faults. Just TRY to accept that he's not the only player on this team who screwed up. As many have posted before, and AD reiterated in this thread: "Teams win and lose." Rarely does any NFL quarterback suck enough to have the entire game blamed on him. In the Pitt game, there was plenty of blame to go around. Drew gets his share of it.

I see your point. However, put yourself in the Dolts' shoes. Do you risk your franchise being hurt in a game that's meaningless for your because a team in your division has a chance to get into the dance? How stupid does Dungy look if Manning goes down on a fluke play? There is little "class" in professional sports. Teams will do what is best for them. Just my $0.02.

Right...teams that earned an early playoff spot haven't also earned the right to be as prepared as possible for the upcoming playoff game.

Good point. If Bledsoe is the starter, we could use: 1) Solid TE 2) More depth at OL 3) A 100% Willis and Travis. 4) Sure-handed receivers. We're not done copying the Steelers yet.

Having watched the Pitt-Buff game, it was quite evident that these teams are very similar in makeup and philosophy...mirror images of each other. We lost for one reason: Pitt did everything similarly, but BETTER than we did. It could be for a myriad of reasons. Were our boys too wound up and Pitt had nothing to play for so played relaxed, even ball? Does Pitt's offensive line more consistently execute its playcalls and block effectively? Is their defense better against the run? Was our offensive scheme too conservative (why was there not a SINGLE pass of more than 10 yards until the bomb to Evans after it was too late)? All disappointed griping about the refs, or about Bledsoe, or about competing poorly against Pitt's backups, etc., aside, the game needs to be looked at in the context of the season. What have we seen? The 2004 Bills were clearly better than the mediocre teams, but not complete enough as a team to compete with the upper echelon of the NFL. We are a few players and another year in Mularkey's system away from doing so. Anyone who blames this loss solely on Bledsoe or the refs or the D is refusing to look at the big picture. The loss to Pitt was a total TEAM loss. Pitt is just better than we are right now. I for one trust the coaching staff to make the moves, WHATEVER they are, to make the team a real contender in 2005. I think we fans tend to get far too carried away by one weeks' results. This game showed us how far the Bills have to go to compete with the big boys. Go Bills!

Oh, ICE has got it made. Here are possible scenarios for his comeback this weekend. 1. Bills win 47-10. ICE: "Bills wouldn't have won with Drew as QB against a REAL team that plays its REAL defense in a REAL meaningful game." 2. Bills win 20-19. ICE: "If Drew were a REAL QB he would have beaten the Stillers scrubs 47-10. Drew still can't win decisively against a REAL team, even at home. We are not going anywhere with Drew as QB." 3. Bills lose. ICE: "See? We're not going anywhere with Drew as QB. He can't beat a REAL defense."

What, has ICE been banned again?

Leave it to an ICE posting to bring out all the anti-Bledsoe trolls. How happy are you guys now that your fearless leader is back? Found your purpose in life again? Merry Christmas, ICE.

Good post.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!

Couldn't resist the self-congratulatory speech at the end I see.

Last post on this thread for me...have to work. You can ask the same thing about a ton of receivers who were great #2s but didn't succeed in the #1 role without a solid second wideout. Peerless. Harper with the 'Pokes in the '90s...Lelie (look how he fared without Rod Smith)...the list goes on. There's no definitive proof here, of course...but blazing speed and good hands do not GUARANTEE good production as the #1. That much is clear. Does LE have the ability? Absolutely. Time will tell. I'd just as soon not rock the boat if we don't have to.

Fair enough. We're on the same page except I differ with your assessment of our #1 vs. #2 guys. In my opinion Evans is stylin' because of EM's presence. Taking EM's single-year "dropoff in production" without considering all the factors is a bit silly.

Part of the reason Evans has been getting the ball is because of the presence of EM. Our passing offense is better with both of them...or do you forget what happened to the O after PP left for Atlanta? Oh yeah, i forgot...that's ALL DB's fault.

Sorry, I was sarcastically disagreeing with JP-era. My point is that it's folly to judge a player by his production in 3/4 of a season with a totally revamped offense and coaching staff.

Right. Anyone who considers the last several years of production and the current offensive personnel and scheme in addition to the current season has a "clouded mind" and is stuck in the past.

I disagree with you. There are several teams in the league (e.g. Denver, Kansas City) who have repeatedly shown that average runners can succeed behind a well-designed and executed blocking scheme. It all begins up front, and in MM's offense the blocking tight end is crucial cog. WM has had more runs for negative yardage and less success against supposedly poor rush defenses in the weeks since our starting TEs went out.

I thought for sure ICE had been locked out...but I'm sure I've heard these exact lines from him. Here is Bossman we have another self-aggrandizing troll who tries to bring negativity (thinly-veiled as "reality") to this board as a desperate cry for attention. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: And has the gall to claim he "doesn't post much" after about fifty posts in this thread alone. Not getting enough cuddles from mommy at home, eh? You're entitled to your half-baked "facts" about how the Bills win "with smoke and mirrors", the quality of our QB and the quality of our opposition. The insipid logic and rationale you use to support your claims clearly indicate your complete ignorance that football is a TEAM sport. One last thing: just like you have your opinions, most of the rest of this board have and are entitled to to their opinions: 1) that the Bills can play only the schedule we're presented, and in the last six weeks we've done a good job of it trouncing lesser teams, 2) the Bills have greatly improved this year (including our QB), and 3) with the right breaks we'll make the playoffs. If you don't like to hear the other opinions, go troll a Patsy or Dolfelon board, because your presence here clearly is dragging everyone into the gutter. Merry Christmas.

The ProBowl is a travesty. I agree with Jim Rome's take: "The Pro Bowl was played this weekend. Nobody cared." When the Bills start winning consistently again, their players will start getting more recognition (even the one's who don't quite deserve it). Moorman DID get shafted, but ask a casual fan if they know who he is, and you'll likely get a look as blank as a white wall.

Those two passes by Marcia WERE works of genius.

Another reason to hate the Yankees...Red Sox fan or no. Baseball is boring anyway, but when teams can buy championships or (for those nitpickers out there) contention for championship EVERY year, it kind of makes things boring for the casual sports fan. Sorry, I forgot about all those Americans who visit McDonald's in foreign countries at the first sign of the Golden Arches.

Well written. Trying to analyze football by focusing on one aspect (e.g. statistics, quartback, RB, etc.) is asinine. Unfortunately, most of the media likes to do that so that can come up with "stories" to sell to a wanting public (e.g. Marcia Brady, Belichick the "genius", Parcells, JJ, etc.)

Not taking sides in the "I think you made this bet but you say you didn't but I think you did blah blah blah" posts...but I've just gotta say that FM and TH are generally knowledgeable, if hopelessly Patsy-biased, football fans. I've enjoyed reading their posts over the years, just as I've enjoyed reading stevestojan's and many others...with one notable exception in whose absence I've actually decided to post again. As a relative outsider, I just suggest everyone simmer down. Take your betting crusades elsewhere. Hell, hire a government arbitrator to figure it out...just don't try to divide the board.

Like that ref in the Jests-Seattle game a few years back, he probably got the helmet and the ball confused.