MRW

1 day later, still struggling to understand how this is an issue in any way, shape, or form.

Am I the only one who expected this sentence: "It would mark the fewest sacks since 2002, when the Houston Texans entered the league," to end, "adding nearly 100 sacks per year to the league total."?

Maybe to publically express their confidence in Losman and encourage the team to build on what they've done so far? It's not like this is exactly stirring up any controversy, so I can't imagine it being a distraction.

Actually the draft's abysmal because no one made any lasting contribution to the Bills and out of the top 3 rounds Butler only came up with one marginal starter. However, I disagree that a draft pick's career with other teams is irrelevant to evaluating the quality of a draft. Sammy Morris was a pretty good fifth-round draft pick and I daresay could still be an important contributor to this team if TD had elected to keep him around. Anyway, I'm probably going to drop this because I'm painting myself into a corner of defending a hypothetical draft that could've happened 6 years ago.

Moore was another big miss, but washing out of the NFL after a couple of years is my expectation for most late-round picks, so I would give a pass on Larsen and Black. I would say mediocre (if Flowers wasn't a bust) because Tillman, Morris, and Polk have had longer than average careers, and Tillman has been a marginal starter at least most of that time. As it is IMO it's the misses on Flowers and Moore that make this one of the poorer drafts on record.

If Flowers hadn't been a total whiff and had instead developed into an adequate player (or we'd gotten an actual performer at that spot) I think the 2000 draft could rise to the level of mediocre. Just goes to show how big a difference one player can make in how you think of things.

Well, see, they're a series of tubes...

What, were you there with him last night?

Not to mention his reception at the end of the game to set up the game winning FG!

Yeah, I wasn't dissing Schobel at all, he consistently got pressure. It's just nice to see him with the luxury of a big lead at the end of a game so he could really tee off on the QB.

Honestly, yesterday was the first game I can recall this season where Schobel picked up garbage time sacks. Hell, it's the first game I can remember that had garbage time (with the Bills in front).

To each his own, but we're scoring touchdowns and winning games. Games like yesterday's are plenty exciting for me to watch, and I don't think I'd enjoy them more if JP threw the ball 10 more times.

Why is this an issue? JP has proven he can throw for more, but the Bills have shown the ability to win with a conservative game plan. What are you looking to see that having JP throw for 300/3td/1int will show you as opposed to 150/2/0?

This is why I love your posts.

I wouldn't bother debating flea, he has a serious hate going on for McGahee. I think anyone thinking A-Train is better than McGahee is kidding himself. Having said that, I don't think McGahee is performing like a marquee back, and if he expects to get paid like one I hope the Bills will look elsewhere. I don't think we should be running him out of town, though. I think he'll take himself away soon enough.

Yeah, so since the new administration only replaced 1/3 of Donahoe's starters, he must've done a great job! Like you, I don't get it. Of course, the argument was never that Donahoe was a complete incompetent, but that he didn't have the team moving in a positive direction. His coaching hires were more of a black mark for him than any player personnel decisions he oversaw IMO.

Very good points, and it could be that he's not the guy for this team 2 or 3 years down the line when (if?) we have upgraded the talent. But for now I think he's worked out very well and brought some stability back to a team that was reeling. In all honesty, at this point I would accept a few years of Marty-ball if it meant that we could actually see the team in a playoff game.

With those stats it's pretty clear that it's not the QB that got the Bears to 10-2.

Now if it was Dallas, on the other hand...

I agree with you, but at the same time I think the larger point stands. Parrish didn't have his head in the game and left 3 potential points on the field. In a game like this, it's huge.

That's enough out of you!

mv, take a careful look at the responses. Do you see even one supporting you? Maybe you should reconsider your position, or at least rethink how you're approaching people in this discussion.

I wish everyone could be this good-humored and willing to admit error.

Ways to ensure you're not taken seriously, #4,156: Create a fifth-grade insulting nickname for a player and be sure to use it in place of the player's actual name at every opportunity.

So apparently having one coach per player is not a good move. Who knew?