Luxy312

It's a joke. Unfortunately, it's one of those jokes that isn't funny....and about cancer.....and killing puppies.

That will change this year with Fred Jackson.....

Fans throw up the caveats because of seasons like last year and like 2008. The team starts off winning games that we don't think they should win and then completely implode later into the season. If you're talking 20 weeks from now, you're certainly just talking about the first half of the season. If they're 6-2 at that point and more importantly playing good on both sides of the ball, I'll be thinking about the playoffs. The problem with years like last year and 2008 is that they weren't. They won games they shouldn't have by virtue of just outscoring their opponents.

I'm not "making" it sound like anything. More than half of his picks were not in a situation where the team was getting pummeled as suggested in a prior post. They were in games when Fitzpatrick was making bone headed throws. Play calling wasn't desperate at all. Fitzpatrick said the exact same thing on WGR himself, so I'll take his word over that of the armchair posters here. He didn't chalk up his INT's to anything other than poor judgement.

The NFLPA is not going to get more involved with college football just because there's a playoff system. There's simply no fiscal implications at all to the change. People made similar comments when the BCS formulas came to be and we see how that changed things. I.e. not at all. More important and to the point, even if they have a "right" to play in the NFL, who's to say that the NFL just can't collectively say no? Many jobs require qualifications. Who's to say that the NFL and NFLPA couldn't just jointly say that a qualification for anyone to play in the NFL is at least 2 years of college? There's a myriad of reasons why that could be a valid requirement. I.e. back to your question, there's no significance to the change of the college football system on any level other than the college level where we don't have to wonder what could have been with the stupid BCS system.

But not far behind (double digits) as posted. You're not playing desperation football when you're down by 1 score. Simple point if you can wrap your brain around it. Look at the situational stats on CBS Sportsline. You don't have to go to the game logs to figure this stuff out. It's all provided right in front of you.

On #3, you couldn't be more wrong. Within the 20 yard line, Fitzpatrick had 20 TD's and only 2 interceptions last year. That's not an area of weakness at all. Freddy also had 4 of his 6 TD's before injury in the same. 2 of Spiller's 4 TD's were also in the red zone. You might want to check the facts before you make a judgement like that. On #5, that is my contention as well. People want to say that they were playing "come from behind" football and that's why the interceptions that were thrown happened. You can see from the numbers that it's just not true. More than 50% of Fitzpatrick's INT's actually came when they were ahead, even, or within one score. On #7, that makes no sense. Killer instinct from the coaches? The coaches don't run the ball either. On #8, the leadership was there. The fact that most of the best players were hurt and not playing was a bigger factor than leadership. On the remainder, it comes down to injuries. You simply can't replace Kyle Williams and expect to get similar production from him. Losing Fred Jackson was huge. It's easy to suggest that you're going to have a comparable backup to every position, but very much not realistic. The Bills were bad mainly from the number and severity of injuries at key positions. That has been the same story for a number of years. Hopefully it's not the case in 2012. Let's remember that through that Washington game that this team was 5-2 with a win over New England. Injuries really affected them from there.

The problem with your point here is that it's just factually inaccurate. Let's look at last year as an example, shall we? Fitzpatrick had a total of 23 interceptions. Off the top, 3 were when the team was ahead. Absolutely no excuses there. 4 more came when the team was dead even. Again, no excuses. 5 came when they were within one score of tying the game or taking the lead. Right there, more than half of his interceptions came when the Bills were ahead, even, or not far behind like you suggest. In fact, he only through 3 interceptions when the game was 2 scores or more away. I watch all the games too and he has some things that won't simply be fixed because of the defense. Heck, Fitzpatrick even said it himself in terms of the QB coach and what he's learned so far.

To add to this point, neither the Giants or the Packers had squat in the way of a running game. Does anyone think it's a strange coincidence that the last teams to beat the Patriots in the playoffs all had pretty amazing pass rushers at that time? I don't know as though I'm "drinking the koolaid", but I am as optimistic as I've been in 10 years.

Loved the Bruce Smith video. Classic and gave me goosebumps remembering just how good those Jim Kelly teams were.

I would extend Byrd and Levitre before this season and wait on the other guys. The way I look at it, it comes down to who's replaceable and who's actually showed that they can contribute for a full season and at a high level. With that said, it also depends on the question of how much. At the right price, I would extend any other player on that list. However, there couldn't be a lot of guaranteed money in the deal (incentives?) and there would have to be a way to still dump them if they didn't play well this season. So I guess that's another question for the group really. It's not just whether you extend them now, but how much they would have to pay to do so. Some of these guys (Merriman) may actually want to play for their contract if they feel like they've returned to form.

LT's are NOT the key to the playoffs or the Superbowl. For the Bills, the key is Fitzpatrick. If he alone accounts for 2+ turnovers a game like he did last year while accounting for basically the same amount of TD's, they aren't going anywhere. I don't care who's playing left tackle.

There are idiot fans out there of every team in the NFL, just like there are fans that can give respect to others. It's the low-brow types that get their panties in a bunch when they see a jersey of another team in their city. Nothing more than insecurity.

Very easy answer. Find that handful of friends/family that you know are going to keep things at the level you need them to be. If you can't find enough people to fill out a league, ask them if they have friends/family that want to be part of it with the understanding that there's kids on the site. I've been running a keeper league myself now for going on 15 years and there's a waiting list for people that want to be part of it. It makes a huge difference when you don't have a bunch of idiots on your site saying things they shouldn't. Heck, even if something does come up, you as the commissioner can deal with it directly.

Given the fact that the Patriots defense was even more disfunctional than ours, I have no doubt. Throwing out a word......SWEEP!

As a fan, we have every reason to believe that the playoffs are an eventuality with one caveat. Fitzpatrick has to get better with his turnovers. I have no doubt that an improved defense (which they definitely have) will help take pressure off the offense to move down the field and score on every play. No matter how good the defense is or how good Cordy Glenn plays at LT, it won't matter if Fitzpatrick doesn't turn the corner. Despite that, he's a smart guy, so we have good reason there too to be optimistic.

Based on what I've been reading so far, I'm not at all concerned about whether his ball has a little wobble in it or whether it's a perfect spiral. In camp, all I care about is that he's putting the ball to where only his receivers can generally get to it. That's what I want to see during the season. Plus, I go back to the days of watching Jim Kelly. He didn't throw the best spiral all the time either. All that mattered was that he was aggressive.

If Welker was 24 years old, he wouldn't be accepting his franchise tag and $9+ million salary this year. Your pipe dream is still very much irrelevant. Harvin is going to work through his issues with the front office and will be business as usual. In terms of a "gadget" guy, how about Devin Hester? In 2008, he signed a 4 year $41 deal going through 2013 with $15 million guaranteed. Harvin has outperformed him in almost every way. Also, you can continue to make Harvin a one dimensional player, but he simply will not become one because of your opinion. Finally to put this matter to rest. Spielman (GM from the Vikings) today: "We have absolutely no interest in trading Percy Harvin". Dream over.

Watch the video. He was clearly joking around. He actually threw Mark a compliment.

You ignore the fact that he's not just a slot receiver. He runs the ball and returns kicks. When has Welker had a 50 carry season? Never. Also, I will bet money today that Harvin will get more than $8 million. Steve Smith made more than that and he's 32 years old. Brandon Marshall will collect over $10 million in base salary alone from the Bears this year. You're fooling yourself big time if you think a dynamic player like Harvin is going to be happy just coming in and being a slot receiver for someone. Not happening.

Good to see the comaraderie.

I could have picked 5, but it wouldn't have mattered. If you go back 5, there's just one loss and against a team they wouldn't see until the playoffs (Giants). Regardless, I think going back too far is a skewed view. They and many of their opponents have very different teams the further you go back. Even if you reduced it to the last 3 years, those same 10 games still apply. My simple point is that they're not invincible like everyone wants to perceive them to be at the beginning of the year.

He hasn't returned kickoffs in the last 5 years, which represents 4,105 yards of your total above. He's not relevant in the kick return game, where Harvin is. Your comparison is completely skewed none the less. Welker has been in the league for 8 years and is 31 years old. Harvin is only 24 and has only been in the league for 3 years. OK, so say by example you think that Welker is the right comparison. Do you realize that he signed a fully guaranteed deal with the Patriots for 2012 of $9.515 million. Do you think to pay a guy with a boatload of off the field issues that you don't even know will be playing every week $9.515 million per season? You would have to sign him to a multiple year deal anyway and guarantee him a lot more money than that. I just don't see it. Regardless, the hyperbole of his availability is a joke. The Vikings head coach has already said they're going to sit down and that he expects things to be worked out. Like I said before, it's simply a pipe dream for you.

Very good point as well. It's baffling though that if you actually just watch these two players play how different they are. Welker is a dink and dunk receiver and pretty much that's it. You get the feeling that Harvin can pretty much score any time he touches the ball. He's just so more dynamic.

No it's not. Welker - 122 receptions for 1,569 all in the slot. 4 carries for 30. 8 punt returns for 82 yards. 0 kick returns Harvin - 87 receptions for 967 yards in the slot and on the outside. 52 carries for 345 yards. 0 punt returns. 16 kick returns for 520. These players are used in completely different manners. Welker is purely a slot receiver and rarely used in any other capacity. Harvin is used in the slot, outside, as a ball carrier and as a kick returner. They're vastly different.