Luxy312

In terms of coverage strategy, it's the corners that should have been playing closer to the LOS, not the safeties. That's insanity against a guy like Brady. Furthermore, why concede a quick TD at all? They were making defensive plays all game. The Patriots 23 was a far cry in the end than the average 46 points they've given up in the 4 games prior.

I'm a little cautious about the Carolina game. With them coming off of a week 1 loss as well, they're going to be a little on the desperate side of trying to win this game. Turnovers really killed them against Seattle. I was surprised at how good DeAngelo Williams actually looked running the football. He's the biggest threat to the Bills this weekend. The team still appears to be weak against the run. 3 runners with 30 carries for 160+ yards is not good.

This was my single biggest concern in the off-season and continues to be my single biggest concern after the game last weekend. 30 total carries for running backs and 162 yards on the ground. That MUST be concerning to anyone. To your point, it won't matter if the team gets good pressure on QB's. If this is what they do week to week, you're going to see a lot of teams simply running the ball, controlling the clock and wearing the Bills defense out. Next week, we'll have a better gauge. If DeAngelo Williams runs for 150 and 5+ YPC, then I will be concerned.

Not to belabor another thread here, but this is the reason why a Byrd for Suh trade involving any scenario is foolish. This is the 6th time he's been fined for inappropriate activities on the field. The guy is just stupid.

How about Chicago? We got the Cubs going on 105 years of futility and they still pack Wrigley. LOL.

My thoughts go two ways. One part of me says Jets because a Bills win and Miami loss would mean all teams in the AFC East are 1-1. It's a clean slate for everyone to a degree. The other part of me believes pretty strongly that the Patriots are winning the division no matter what. As such, I want them to win as many games in the division against the Jets and Dolphins as possible to enhance Buffalo's chances of a wildcard. I guess at the end of the day, it's a win-win situation.

This is what absolutely cannot continue to happen going forward. Any time you talk about a defense being on the field that long, you're in a situation where you're probably not going to win a football game, and in most cases are probably getting blow out. Looking at just the last couple of years, this team gave up an average of over 42 points a game to the Patriots. 23 points this weekend is not that bad against what will likely be again one of the top offenses in the NFL.

As always is the case, turnovers were an issue. All but 9 of NE's points came off of turnovers. Nobody is going to beat the Patriots by putting them in a position where they need to do nearly nothing to score. I thought the defense played pretty good, although they're still getting gashed by running backs. That absolutely must stop. I saw exactly what I wanted to see out of EJ. He made good decisions, didn't get rattled in the pocket and didn't turn the ball over. The idea that they somehow should have tried to milk the clock at the end of the game is stupid. Play to not lose and most of the time you will lose.

This is just another one of those "doom and gloom" statistics. The defense looked light years ahead of where they were last year in bringing pressure on Brady. They forced 3 turnovers from one of the best offenses in the game. But for the fumbles, this game was there for the winning for the Bills.

The score really dosn't tell the whole story. The Patriots dominated the time of possession. They were better in the passing game and better in the running game. Buffalo is lucky to not be blown out in this game. They probably make DeAngelo Williams look like Adrian Peterson next week. Penalties and turnovers are the same story as last season. Tiring is an understatement. I am very optimistic about EJ Manuel and the defense looks like they will bring more pressure, but the turnovers have to stop.

Bad analysis. Collectively, those teams account for almost all of the top Quarterbacks in the NFL. Show me a list of 10-12 TE's with journeyman QB's delivering them the ball that are performing at the same level. You can't because it doesn't exist. At best, you have a chicken/egg theory argument that you can't really win, when you're only talking about a guy that might catch 100 balls out of 600+ thrown and ignoring another 300-400 carries on the ground.

To the point of this thread, why not Ron Brooks? He was a rookie last year and hasn't had a lot of opportunity in real game situations. We know what we're getting from a guy like McKelvin along with other guys like Aaron Williams. While we're at it, put Justin Rogers in there and see what he can do. We have nothing to lose as a team at this point. Losing Gilmore for the beginning of the season will sting a bit.

In the last 4 games AGAINST the Pats, Chandler has had a TD in two games and two TD's in a third. Not exactly chump change. We'll see what happens on Sunday.

How so? We cut a decent kicker in Lindell who has a career success rate of 81.3%. Our rookie gets hurt and we turn around and sign a guy with comparable experience to Lindell who has a career success rate of 81.9%. Not concerning at all.

It would be nice if we could rate threads and comments and keep track of who provides good information versus who provides "other". Every team in the NFL is in the same position this time of the year. EVERY TEAM. The fact that they're signing a kicker because our only kicker pulled his groin isn't concerning at all. What would you expect them to do? At the end of the day injuries happen. This year, I'm just extremely satisfied that there's nothing serious besides Stephen Gilmore.

How will he "cash in" with another team if this becomes a chronic injury for him throughout the year? If he sits out the first 4-6 weeks and doesn't practice, blaming it on plantar, he's not suddenly going to become the starter when he's finally ready to play. There's no logic to it. Sure, he's going to collect is franchise tag money, but there's no way he establishes himself as one of the games premier safeties by sitting on the bench and complaining about an arthritic condition. That just provides ammunition for any team negotiating next year. Think about the conversation: "So you lied about your injury condition, because you were mad at the organization for not giving you your contract"? "Yes, but I'm not mad at your organization" "If we give you this contract and you outperform it, are you going to want to renegotiate in 3 years"? "Of course" "If we say no, are you going to be mad at us"? "Of course. That wouldn't be fair"? "What's to stop you from lying to us in 3 years"? You could go on and on with this type of dialogue, but the fact of the matter is that he does nothing to help himself by not playing. If he sits out long enough, he may find himself a backup for the rest of the season, despite his tag. What does THAT do for his career? What if Marrone comes out and just says that Byrd is being outplayed by Da'Norris Searcy, Jim Leonhard, and Duke Williams. Bye bye big contract.

There's a simple fact here that people love to ignore. As fans and assuming we even are fans, we're generally in one or another position come this time of the year. We're either extremely optimistic that the team will finally succeed or we're pessimistic based on the fact that we haven't smelled success in so long. When all is said and done, I'm just happy that there's change. The Gailey/Fitzpatrick experiment is over. Whether EJ succeeds or not, that's a good change. The days of running Spiller and Jackson 50-50 are over. The team is finally going to give their most talented offensive player the ball until he "throws up or asks to come out". They didn't pay Byrd top safety money and now it just so happens he's dealing with plantar fascitis and barely practicing. While I'm not happy he has plantar, it's still good news that they didn't cave and pay the man given that he can't even get on the field. Last and most important is the basic point of the OP. Marrone is going to put the best 5 guys on the field at the position that he knows the most about. How can we be pessimistic about that? Are we mad because they let Levitre walk in lieu of paying a guard top dollar? Personally, I'm not. The two most important postions on the offensive line are center and left tackle. Eric Wood has proved to be much better than average and Glenn was a beast last year despite being a rookie. Optimistic? Go ahead and label me as such.

Stevie isn't the brightest bulb on the tree. Why say anything to get the other side fired up? Just plain stupid.

I would disagree 100%. I would rather have another guy that's working hard to succeed than a (*^*&%^$^#slacker. Give me another Fred Jackson, Stevie Johnson that is working hard than a guy like Rogers. When I think of Rogers, I think of Matt Jones. Potential? Sure, but too stupid.

Trading for a corner, yes. Trading for a draft pick, no. This team is trying to win out of the gates. They've been playing the "look to the future" game for far too long.

Because he stinks and was over paid? Sometimes the most obvious answer is the right answer.

Fixed it for you.

When is this board going to add a "Like" button? LOL.

On that we can certainly agree. I do think they keep 6 on the roster. This was one of the toughest positions last year to field a team week to week due to injuries. I like the way Easley has played in the preseason and don't believe you can simply cut Brad Smith given his utility in other aspects of the game. We'll see none the less.

Doesn't that still leave 8 WR's on the roster? Johnson, Graham, Woods, Goodwin, Easley, Smith, Hogan and Kaufman.