MRW

Edwards was a steal, especially if we see more pass protection performances like today and not what we saw in the first 5 games. I like this team's chances as long as Edwards stays healthy.

Trent also got support from the D today. Look, I'd agree with you that Edwards instills confidence in a way that JP does not just now. But who out there is clamoring for JP to be starting? The constant digs at JP after EVERY game whether he plays or not are extremely tiresome.

I don't know about you but I can reel off by reflex all the ways the Bills could blow a game. Although in the last year or so they've managed to come up with ways I hadn't anticipated.

Bill, I've been impressed by TE's play so far this year. But the offense isn't just Edwards, it's the receivers, backs, and (especially) the OL. Based on the first 4 games I see little reason to expect that this offense is poised to be the next great explosive offense. Do I think that Edwards is capable of that kind of performance? Yes, but I don't think he's there yet, and more importantly I don't think the offense as a whole is built for it. Start any of the QBs on this roster against that Arizona team, with our D playing that poorly, and I don't think the results would be much different.

We were. His name was Kurt Warner.

The D wasn't playing well? If by "not playing well" you mean "performed so abysmally that only a Jim Kelly-led Bills offense could keep up with the scoring" then I agree with you. If that's not what you mean then I think we were watching different games.

Sorry, but I don't think this is true at all. I could buy it if the D forced the Cards to punt or even just to kick a field goal in the first half (other than by time running out) but they never came close to stopping them. The second turnover came with the Bills down 14, the third with the Bills down 24. This game was not about turnovers. If the Bills hadn't turned the ball over and had put another TD on the board, I think the Cards would've scored 50+. But they didn't need to because the Bills aren't that kind of offensive team.

Bills down 14-0 - Losman connects on a long strike to Evans to pull within a TD. What does the defense do? Give up a long drive for a TD. Bills down 21-7 - Losman leads the offense on another TD drive. What does the defense do? Lets the Cardinals drive down for a field goal attempt to end the half, probably would've been another TD if time hadn't run out. I see nothing to back up the idea that the defense would decide to show up at any point. This game was nothing at all like the Raiders and Rams games.

To you and everyone else saying this or something similar - how is it that you think there's even a chance TE would've won that game? The defense, prior to the Royal fumble which set things up for a three-score deficit, forced one punt. One. Did you see anything out of that defense which would lead you to believe the problem was that they weren't rested enough? They were horrible from start to finish of that game, and we don't have an offense built to win a shootout, no matter who the QB is.

I think center is being shown as a glaring need for this team, moreso than linebacker.

I haven't seen you mention any alternative aside from Roy Williams. But he's going to be the #1 FA WR this offseason, assuming he's not franchised, and I expect a huge deal for him, making it tough for the Bills to really be in that competition. I think most observers would agree that Evans would've been the #2 FA WR, so look at it like we just signed the second best free agent out there to a contract that will not seem that exorbitant a year or two from now.

But doesn't that help to relax you a bit?

That's a great idea. I'm sure the Bills would not face any competition for Roy Williams in the offseason, so it would make a great deal of sense to put all our eggs in that basket. So in your scenario, what happens next year after Roy Williams is signed somewhere else for $11mil/year and Evans has departed for greener pastures?

You could make an argument (a pretty strong argument, actually) that Albert would have been a good pick. But if you're saying that CB looked like our most loaded position going into the draft, I think you're looking with the benefit of hindsight.

Of course. I don't think anyone thinks that "no one" will want to coach. But the hotshot young coordinators will probably make the calculation that they can hold out for another year and make the jump to a much better situation than the Raiders, and I think a lot of college coaches would think long and hard about whether it was worthwhile to give up their control over recruitment etc. to go to the Raiders vs. hoping for a better college coaching job. Obviously someone will sign up for it. Hey, Al Davis could always hire me. I'd consider doing it for just $1mil/year.

I think you're wrong here, unless they look to lesser schools. Why, for instance, would a Pete Carroll ever go coach for Davis? The Raiders' pool of coaches is going to be unproven NFL assistants looking for a shot and coaches at middling colleges. Maybe also some NFL retreads.

Giving a heads up on website policy isn't whining, especially given how polite he was. You, on the other hand, have contributed absolutely nothing of value with this post. And I'm aware of the irony that my post is worthless as well.

Absolutely, but look at the number of injuries that occur on completely clean plays. At the end of the game yesterday, what was the optimal outcome for the Cardinals? A TD as time expired to pull within two scores? Is there any sense to that whatsoever?

You know, I don't see people not supporting our team. Who really cares if the Titans are seen as better than the Bills 1/4 of the way into the season? Either they'll both keep up this level of play and be headed for a meeting in the postseason, or one will fall off letting us know which is better, or they'll both fall off. Any way you slice it, it may be a fun debate topic, but when you start saying that people who disagree with you aren't supporting the team, you're taking it way too seriously.

I don't think the Rams dominated most of the game. Their defense caused a lot of problems in the first half, but offensively they had one big play and one nice drive. Certainly the St. Louis D dominated the first half, but when they were unable to pad their lead I was not worried about the outcome of the game. Now Oakland I'll give you, they controlled the pace of that game until the fourth.

Goes to show how poor a team the Rams are. Once the Bills got it together they had it in hand pretty easily. I do agree that this Arizona game could be trouble. Unlike the last few teams we've faced, Arizona has the offensive weapons to put a lot of points on the board if the Bills have a slow start. If the Bills can perform at fourth quarter level early in the game, Arizona will be outmatched, but I think this team needs to learn that they can't just turn it on late and expect to pull out every game. A big early lead for Arizona could really cause problems.

Remember years back (think it was the year the Ravens won the Super Bowl) when Tony Siragusa barreled through the line and fell on top of Gannon, knocking him out of the game? Pretty sure it wasn't a penalty at the time but rules additions and extensions made it one in response to that play.

Wow, he's doing quite the job there.

Maybe I'm the only one who finds this amusing, but I just realized that Fred Jackson scored on a 22-yard run and Jabari Greer scored on a 33-yard return. It's too bad the pass to Evans was only 39 yards instead of 83...

Gotta wonder why the Cards are chasing points at this time. Well, they're 1 for 2 anyway, so I guess it really didn't hurt them.