BuffaloBob

Then why don't they schedule some of those "big boys" teams during their regular season? I am all for an NCAA playoff, but this game does not make the case for it. Yes, these guys did something special, BUT Oklahoma ain't all that. The only reason they got into the Big 12 championship to begin with is Colt McCoy got injured early in the Longhorns second to the last game and didn't recover in time for the last game. Otherwise, they would have been playing some second tier bowl game. If Boise State wants a shot at the national title, then they need to play with the Big Boys during the season, instead of playing low-level competition all season, going undefeated and claiming they should have a shot at the national title game as a result. Having said that, I loved the fact they beat Stoops and the Sooners. I am ROTFLMAO still over that game.

Oh STOP it with your logic and your objective comparisons. These guys KNOW Willis sucks, has underperformed, has a crappy attitude, and will be out of the league momentarily. They have well-developed football eyes that tell them so. Perspective and objectivity are for those who have a crush on Willis and simply can't see what is obvious to those in the know. You will come around eventually, resistance is futile!

Ooops! Sorry for not making the point more explicit for those whose reading comprehension and logical reasoning abilities prohibit them from making the obvious inference. So now I will spell it out for you. 1) Simply saying that the 49ers Oline is as bad or worse than the Bills without more is mental masturbation and self-serving. Unless you have broken down the performances of the O-lines, and at least made some adjustment for the competence of your opponents run defense, simply saying it doesn't make it so. 2) Which leads to the second point: All but 4 of the games that Willis played in were against teams ranked 8th or higher against the run. Gore played in only three games against similar competition. Eight were against teams ranked below 21st. Obviously, when one is making a blanket statement about two running backs, one should be considering what teams they were playing and how good they were against the run. Point number 1 should be obvious. I realize that there are many on this board who fancy themselves able to draw such sweeping conclusions without the benefit of film, let alone real NFL expertise, but they are legends in their own minds. With respect to point two, characterizing the information as nitpicking in an attempt to somehow marginalize its value is sound strategy when one has no other ammunition, but the stats speak for themselves. Willis played against much tougher defenses against the run by far. Period. And yes, Willis didn't run for 250 yards against the Titans. Part of the reason is that he was once again sick during the game and was on the bench for over a quarter. A result of pain medication for his ribs, he aggravated his bum ankle, or effects of the flu going around that week. Who knows? Oh no, what am I thinking. Willis didn't want to play so he took a quarter and a half off to play with himself on the bench! This may come as a shock, but one can easily look at certain games Gore played against teams weaker against the run and draw the same conclusions you are attempting: 40 yards against the 23rd ranked Saints; 52 yards against the 26th ranked Eagles; 65 yards against the 18th ranked Chiefs. But hey, that's nitpicking. But far be it from me to question a guy who is obviously personal friends with Marv Levy and has been apprised of Marv's personal assessment of Willis! Join you and the Willis bashing party? I think not. I prefer to draw conclusions from fact, not from personal shoot-from-the-hip assessments I'm not competent to make in the first place. But that's me.

I believe Willis had TWO blown knees as well, it's just that the second one was all THREE ligaments. As for comparing the two O-lines, on what basis is this comparison being made? Every yard he gets, he gets by himself? Sounds like hyperbole to make a point to me. But let's look at a few stats that may bear some actual light on the subject. In the 16 games in which frank Gore played, half of them were against teams ranked 21st or below against the run. In contrast, of the 13 games in which Willis played (excluding the GB game in which his two ribs were cracked and one broken early in the game, apparently due to his lack of effort and hitting the hole with passion), Willis played nine against teams ranked 8th or below against the run. Indeed, Gore made his living against teams lousy against the run. In two games against the 22nd ranked Seattle alone, he had 356 yards. In two games against the even worse 31st ranked St. Louis Rams, he had another 261 yards for a grand total of 617 yards for an average per game of 154 yards! By contrast, in the only THREE games against which he played teams ranked in the top ten against the run, he had 207 yards for average of 69 yards per game. Morever, Willis played games from the Jax game on in no doubt extreme pain. Anyone who has ever had one cracked rib, let alone three knows how painful that is how long it takes for them to truly heal. But I guess, in your expert opinion, no doubt after breaking down film of every Bills and Niners game, grading the play of each O-line, and factoring in the level of competition presented by their defensive opponents, you have concluded that Willis is a kitty and Frank Gore earns every yard he gets on his own. Better alert the Bills quickly, because I am sure they are completely unaware of this flawless assessment! BTW, I am not taking anything away from Frank Gore, as I think he is a very good back.

Ummm, how about a running back that saw three tendons in his knee ripped to shreds, and who gets two ribs cracked and one broken because his O-line doesn't run block very well and because the offense is so damned conservative that teams can stack the box? It is all about security when it comes to an extension. Roll the dice and hope your O-line doesn't get you killed, and opens up enough holes to give you a chance to have an above average contract year performance, or negotiate an extension based on decent production notwithstanding the foregoing and hedge against serious injury in the future. Edgerrin James learned a huge lesson regarding the value of a competent offensive line and a star QB in the backfield with him. The good thing for him is it worked for him in the reverse. He got his big bucks to go to a team with no line. I guess the jury is still out as to whether he'll stay healthy enough to collect it all. Your statement proves nothing.

I see. I just don't see that scenario playing out here. I think Willis would like security and the fact they have offered the Bills a chance for an extension now is a good thing. The Bills are in the driver seat here. Willis has been reasonably productive, especially in view of our O-line during his tenure here, but certainly not stellar. I don't get all of this"If Willis played as hard as Travis this season" commentary. The guy played with major injuries and made no big deal about it. I love people who say he should hit the hole harder. There needs to be one there first, before he can hit it. I get such a kick out of Jerry "The Fart Sniffing Weasel" Sullivan's article about how Willis doesn't deserve an extension. On what basis is this statement made? Doesn't it matter what kind of money we are talking about? Has Willis not performed well enough that the Bills would like him to remain on the team for the right price? If the Bills can extend him without paying some huge bonus and with incentives, what the hell is wrong with that??? Everyone is jumping to conclusions on this thing. First, that he is going to want some huge contract that he doesn't deserve. Says who? So far, DR has only said that he'd like to get Willis an extension. And second, this notion that he is demanding one or else! Where was that ever stated or implied? I'm sure every agent would like to get his client extended if possible. DR's style is to do it with lot's of media play, but that's just his style. The fact is that Willis has been reasonably productive on a team with a very shaky O-line situation, and he has played VERY hurt and very hard. Surely there is a price at which it would be worth it for the Bills to extend Willis, avoid his contract year and keep him from hitting the free market after next season, especially if the Bills O-line continues to improve and and he has a strong year next year. So if Willis and DR are reasonable, this could be very advantageous for the Bills. And so far, there has been absolutely no indication that they won't be.

My sense was, yes a mistake of forcing it by JP, but out of frustration on his part. Fairchild has got to get himself more comfortable between this and next season so they can open up the offense. I think he was so respectful of the Ravens that they were able to sit on those short routes all night. This was the game they could have made the Raven D pay for that, withing nothing on the line. Granted the Ravens are an excellent defense, but I can't help but wonder how much of that is self-fulfilled prophesy on the part of opposing OCs.

It annoyed me no end! I completely agree with the sentiment that it was the last game with nothing on the line, so why the hell not. If ANYTHING other than a .500 season had been on the line in this game, I agree with the call. But HELLO! I really hope they can get more offense installed and with continuity in the offensive personnel, they can open up this offense a little more. I can't argue with the fact that playing conservatively kept us in games we would not have otherwise been in, but it sure is excruciating to watch for a whole season. But in the last game, no playoffs, come on. Let's unclench the butt cheeks and do something entertaining.

Just curious, but has either Willis or his agent ever even suggested, let alone stated outright, that Willis wouldn't play out his contract if required to do so?

I don't see anything wrong with a player saying he would like to re-up now for purposes of security, and giving a team the chance to tie him up long-term for what may and should be far less money than what he may command in the open market a year from now. Just because his agent is posturing with his "one of the best backs in the league" tripe doesn't mean that he expects Willis to a get an Edgerrin James type deal. Remember, it was the writer that mentioned that deal, not DR. The Bills have shown the moxy to get some of their better players extended now, rather than waiting until their contract years. There is clearly many good reasons for doing so. It can be a win-win for both the player and the team. If the demands are reasonable, or at least if the ultimate numbers are reasonable, then why not? I don't think there is or has been any indication that Willis isn't willing to play for what he is owed next year under his current contract. Once again, it was clearly the writer bringing up the hold-out possibility, not DR. The Bills are in the driver seat here. Willis has been productive, but far from a superstar. The numbers should reflect that. If they don't, Willis can play out his contract and the Bills can go from there. If the numbers are reasonable, it can be a real win-win for both sides. Willis gets security, and hopefully we get a very productive back for a number of years at a relative bargain.

Can I get an AMEN! Willis had some serious injuries and played anyway. Anybody forget that this O-line at best is a work in progress?? I have been very impressed with Willis since he returned from the rib injury. And during that time, he was also battling a bum ankle as well. Lacks a burst to the outside? Willis ran away from DBs several times this year once he broke into the open. I was at the Titans game, and I thought he ran really well, and with authority. He has really shown me something this season, and especially down the stretch since the O-line shuffle. Willis has great upside in my opinion. If the dollars he is asking for is reasonable, I think the Bills would be nuts not to extend him now, while the gettin' is good. While I think Nate the Great is a very good player, I am far less enraptured with the idea of giving him Champ Bailey money. I think Nate would be one of those guys who would take that kind of money and cruise into retirement. I don't see that with Willis, and he'll be far less expensive.

Sorry, I didn't read that as the main assertion of the thread. Also, I believe what I was taking issue with was your opinion that JP hasn't yet demonstrated, based on your observation of stats and play-by-play summary sheets, the ability to play the role of a field-general. I remain firm in my belief that intangibles such as leadership ability, coolness under fire, proper decision making with the game on the line (all traits I equate with the role of a field-general) are not something that can be gleaned from even the most careful parsing of the stats and "result-of-play" summaries. I didn't get to see either the Jax or Texan games unitl I saw them on NFL Network replay. I did hear them on the radio, and I parsed the stat sheets. Until I got to actually watch JP direct those game-winning drives, I was really suprised that it was inspiring on no level I could achieve through the other media. Frankly, I don't get all this stuff about turning from the team. All I was saying is that your assessment that JP hasn't demonstrated the ability to act the role of field-general is simply missing some very important observational information. Of course you are entitled to your opinion however you come by it. I simply disagree with your assertion that stats and play summaries in the right hands are sufficient to properly support the assessment of such an intangible quality in a QB. I also submit that had you had the opportunity to see JP in action over the last 4-5 games, your opinion would likely be significantly different in this regard.

With all do respect, NOTHING that those stats told you demonstrated the calm, cool demeanor of JP when he went out and led the team to victory in those two games, and nearly pulled it off again against San Diego notwithstanding some not so great clock management exhibited by our head coach and another poor performance against the run by our defense. It was a thing of beauty to watch. The kid came out for those two final drives, and willed the Bills to victory against Jax and Houston. I was sure the Bills would fold or Frig things up. He made amazing throws and his touch in the short game was perfect. He never panicked, took what they gave him until the right time to go for the strike, and gave that team exactly what it needed. Pontificating from afar is all well and good, but assessing the demeanor of a young and developing QB based on stats and NFL.com play-by-play just ain't gonna cut it. The kid has what it takes, and as they continue to expand the offense and give him more leash, he is going to be great. You can see this team starting to believe in him. It's a beautiful thing.

Oh, that certainly makes me feel much better!

Oh Christ! He made a play in 2004! Whoooppeee! (And no, I didn't miss it, I was there). Too bad he hasn't done jack squat in 2005 or 2006 except miss key tackle after key tackle. I could give a crap about his two forced fumbles per year or the INT he ran back at the end of 2004. I would take a solid tackling, sound coverage DB any day of the year and twice on Sunday for those few "big plays" he makes every year because he's gambling and not playing sound football. But please, do continue your non-sensical Clements praising!

I've been to two home games so far this season, the others I have to admit I just couldn't see flying to see. I suspect you watched those same ones on TV that I did. With Nate the Great, I ain't impressed either live or on TV. He ain't worth half the salary their paying him this year. BTW, a crapload of used cap space on a so-so player is far worse. That money isn't free. It comes out of the team one way or the other. And in a long-term deal, that cap space is tied up for much longer than just the current year. Nate wants to tie up that cap space for 4 or more years. Why do you think Marv agreed to pay him franchise tag money just this year? Because they had some space and could afford to overpay him in the short-term (i.e. for ONE year). He wasn't about to tie up cap space for this year and forseeable future years on a guy who is simply not performing at that level. Better to commit that money to a player who's worth it.

Oh, those posts have definitely changed my mind. NOT! Nate hasn't done everything right on a play in two years. Whenever I see Nate on TV is when he's blowing a critical tackle. And who gives a crap if we have cap space. It's not monopoly money you know. It still comes out of somebody's pocket. I haven't seen jack from Nate since that Jax game when he should have knocked the ball down but stupidly went for the INT instead, giving the Jags the chance to win the game. Nate has been nothing more than ordinary to slightly above average for the past two or three years. Christ, at least Winfield could tackle. Him I could have seen spending the money on. Not Nate the Great. But this is all moot anyway, because some sucker team is going to pony up ridiculous doe for him and we aren't going to be anywhere near that foolish.

Ummm, I don't know what games you've been watching, but Nate is neither solid nor does he make 10 solid plays for every missed play. He hasn't been solid in two years. And he certainly doesn't warrant the kind of money some sucker team will be willing to pony up for him. And no, I don't think we should anyway just because we have it to pay him. That's just plain idiocy.

Nobody said we CAN'T, they said we WON'T! And I am on the side of won't. Nate the Great is way overpaid as it is and I would be really pissed if we paid him even more to stay. The guy is a fair CB and he's being paid franchise player money. I don't care that we HAVE the money to overpay him. Every time he misses a key tackle, I want to trade his ass to the CFL for a couple sixes of Molson. He ain't worth the money.

I like TK on PTI, but not on MNF. To me, there is just way too much effort on his part to add something constructive during the game. It sounds forced and that annoys me. On the other hand, JT is also hard to listen to. I had to laugh when he was talking about a player (I wasn't paying that close attention) but the gist of it was that his work ethinc and leadership was infectious and permeated the entire team. Unfortunately, he said it "transcends" the entire team, instead. Joe needs to limit his attempts to use big words.

No he wasn't. He was kncoked down by his own player who was tied up with a Pat. You need to go back and watch the replay in slow motion. It was clearly a correct no call.

Sorry to take way some peoples' excuses for blaming the refs for our loss. There were NO penalties on those punts. I watched the first incident three times, in slow motion and Moorman was knocked down by his own player who was blocking a Pat. This does not consititue a penalty, unless you want to penalize ourselves of course. On the second one, Moorman got the kick off cleanly with no one within three yards of him. The camera panned downfield and then you hear the announcer exclaim that Moorman had been decked. This just in: Once a punter gets the kick away and regains his feet, he is a defender just like everyone else and can be blocked, yes even knocked on his keester. And for good measure (as long as we're on the suject), those two blocks in the back were clear, even if not the worst example of them. That is irrelevant though. Both pushes ion the back came at the point of attack and were right in front of the ref. And for the last time, the spot on the 4th and 1 was correctly made, and even possibly in favor of the Bills. Willis' knee was down well before he stretched for the first. This was clearly demonstrated by the replay after the commercial. I am as pissed off as anyone that we lost an opportunity to pin a loss on the Pats in their house. But quit blaming the officiating! The Bills lost this game, not the refs!

Yeah, except Everett had a stupid holding penalty which cost on another big play.

McGahee spot, correctly made and was clearly shown to be by replay after they came back from the commercial. Moorman was knocked down twice, once by a Bill who was blocking and once off camera. I think he was probably blocked, which is perfectly legal once the kick is away. If there were no hold calls on NE, it's because they are very good at it. It happens on every play in the NFL, the question is whether it was done with proper technique. There was only one I saw that was blatant, against Schobel wehn he knocked the pass down. The block in the back on Royal is marked from the spot of the foul. It was 8 yards downfield, hence a 3rd and 2. Had it been 12 yards, it would have been a first down.