Fan in Chicago

I suppose that is a rhetorical question but I will play along. I can give a regime a pass for one but not two blown high picks in a three year span. I look at this list and weep: http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft...0&type=team

Sad isn't it ? I was hoping Hardy would develop into a Moss or TO kind of receiver. Looks like that is not to be. Unless Johnson and Easley develop this year, we will have little talent at the # 2 and # 3 spots.

Bell is unproven and so is Spiller. As we are in the speculative world right now, I would like to believe we could have traded down and acquired another pick. But Dean does make some good arguments but I stand by my opposition to picking a RB with our top pick this year and would love to be proven wrong.

I would say no based on what I have heard. But I need more than serviceable from a #9 pick. If we traded down and got two players at positions of need, we would be better as a team and any shortfall at the backup RB position could be filled with an UDFA or cast-off. Do you really not get my point or are you just playing with me ?

Now that it is official, I would like to say a big thank you to AS for a wonderful and self-less career for the Bills. I wish things had turned out differently in that he would play this year, contribute, help the youngsters and then retire a Bill. But that was not to be and I wish him success in the future within or without the NFL.

My point is that it is not difficult to get a serviceable back-up RB off the street. Bell just happens to re-inforce that view.

I know I am re-hashing an oft-debated item, but if Bell ends up playing well, it will add to an already strong stable of RBs including Jackson and Lynch. Which further re-inforces the question about why we used our #9 to draft a RB. For those wondering what my position is - I would have traded down if there was no player we liked at #9.

Well, I would agree with you. But so what if he shuts down Evans ? We have .... umm.... aahh...... Nevermind - I agree with you.

Good to see Nix take this approach. Schobel's career with the Bills has been good and if he had decided that he would play one last season and then retire, then it would have been nice to have him. However, his indecision and resulting lack of commitment to the team must have forced Nix's hand. I am sure Nix wanted to end the uncertainty and move on.

Well written and fair, however depressing it is. I look forward to your article next year about how Nix and Gailey turned the franchise around.

While I disagree with the 70-30 percent, the rest seems fairly likely to open the season. With our unproven OL, questionable LT, the offense has to be based on quick passes rather than long developing plays. The other option is keeping a TE back for blocking which hampers the passing options. If our OL surprises us or gets better during the season, then we may see longer pass completions. But as it stands right now, the only QB on our roster who can make quick decisions and does not need to have a great deep ball (per above argument) is TE and logically that makes him the starter. Ofcourse this is not an ideal situation (unproven OL, starting QB by default etc) but we have to make do with what we have (duh!). Presumably we fixed the D this year, next year is the one for the O.

I have been truly hoping he plays well just so we get some semblance of stability at the QB position. I, for one, do not hate Trent. What I do hate is people giving him credit for much more than he has accomplished on the field besides looking 'poised'.

A small size and lack of opportunity are not reasons he is not considered a legitimate WR. He has had a tough time gaining separation/getting open and also hasn't shown an ability to fight for the ball. If he starts performing as a WR, it will be for the first time in his career.

No kidding, this summer movie season has been pretty poor so far. As a side note, see the following for terrific takes on tired genres: "Let the Right one In" with a vampire "Revanche" for a very different type of revenge

True and I don't necessarily have a problem (nor a choice) with rehashed plot lines. I was responding to the refrain I have been hearing that this is an 'original' story and concept. Which it most definitely is not.

I have not seen that movie but to me it seemed similar in concept to Existenz. In any case, the point being that this is not an original story as is hyped in the reviews and public reaction. It may be a different take on the idea but the premise is not ground-breaking.

My comments on your thoughts: I saw Inception and was not very impressed. On the plus side - good visuals, good direction. Gripes - (1) the concept is not original and is ripped from Cronenberg's Existenz. (2) DiCaprio is not showing any range in his acting. His acting and dialog delivery in Departed, Shutter Island and Inception are the same (3) There is a fine line between a complex story and a confusing one and this movie crossed it. (4) Too long by half an hour. The last 45 minutes or so were just like some dumb action movie. Ultimately, I came away unimpressed with the story. But it won't spoil your afternoon if you do watch it

After such a boring summer of movies, I am looking forward to this one.

I agree with that last statement. I think if Brohm does not win the starting job, he will be cut. Trent starting and Fitz as bacu-up purely because he has more playing experience than Brohm.

I would vote for Pat Williams or Antoine Winfield

What a world of talent gone to waste due to poor work ethics. The Bills have all the leverage in this situation. Lynch is under contract and have no pressing need to get rid of him. If he plays poorly this coming season, Gailey can bench him and Lynch only hurts himself by making himself incredibly unattractive for a decent contract with another team next year. If someone needs him badly, as reportedly Seattle does, we can trade him. So the only loser in this situation is Lynch which I am not sure he has the mental IQ to realize. I was not happy spending a first rounder on a RB that year but seeing his boyish enthusiasm and the press about 'Mama's Boy' I was hopeful that we have a player who will really help the team. Sadly that did not come to pass and the frustrating thing is that it is not due to lack of talent.

I was rather hoping for a nude Marilyn Monroe myself. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

Whew ! 2-0

My guess is that the front office has tried. I expected him to be traded the weekend before the draft. But who knows ? Perhaps there were no takers given his apparent lack of motivation and his off-field troubles.

Really ? Schobel - the guy who has been the most consistent feature of our defense for the last several years ? The guy who shuts up and does his job ? Nary a controversy nor a sucky attitude ? P.S. If you were being sarcastic, I take my post back