finknottle

How do we know any of this? I know it's being spun that way... I would be stunned if, for example, they would ever confirm or deny that "so-and-so has not been on a covert mission for x years.'

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

I agree with your post, but don't understand this at all. In my mind Manning has been a great success. Ok, no superbowl appearances, but he has made them a legit power over time. Who are we - Buffalo - to assign failure for anything short of winning the superbowl? Does that mean Kelly, Thomas et al have produced near nothing? Or is a selective thing, where the line is conveniently drawn at getting to the Superbowl, while merely winning your division counts for naught? Bottom-line: I agree with your post, but you have to count Manning as a player who has panned out as good as you might hope. We should be so lucky if JP turns out as well.

If losing builds character, then what's up with MM getting mad about the Raiders scoring on that last drive instead of taking a knee? He should be used to long run-only drives that score...

3-5 years is a long time to start a guy in order to figure out if he can be an NFL caliber player. Did we cut Collins and Johnson loose too quickly? And how many years of starter time did Holcomb get in order to develop? I say you stay on the bench untill you are the best quarterback on the team, because there are a lot of guys with great creditionals that never pan out.

Was satire. The point is that it is all well and good to talk about taking a step back during the season in order to groom the quarterback of the future, but it is by no means a sure thing that he will pan out. And if he doesn't, as those teams illustrate, you can piss away a lot of years and still be right where you started. And it is my belief (havn't crunched the numbers) that that is what happens in most cases.

Why is it that 'midget' comes out of certain peoples mouths anytime they can say it. Is it a compensentation thing?

I agree. And let's not forget Joey Harrington, Kyle Boller, and David Carr. The Lions and the Ravens and Texans also sacrificed on offense to gain their qb's valuable experience and it has been paying dividends. Sure, they might have been more competative starting 2nd tier veteran qb's while these guys sat, and in the case of the Raven's might even have made the playoffs, but now they are years ahead offensively then where they would have been. For them, the past few years has been an offensive investment well-spent.

I'm just curious how you can say that based on watching Holcomb you conclude he will never be better than a solid backup, and yet you say JP is our QB of the future. What have you seen in JP on the field (but not in Holcomb) that propels him ahead? Or is it because he's a 1st round draft choice, therefore he will become starter caliber?

I disagree with all of the choices. I said this all through summer - the thing that made me most nervous going into the season was the teams decision to essentially stand pat on defense, under the assumption that it would be better than last year with experience and carry the offense. In this NFL people drop off suddenly and unexpectedly, and you have to be aggressive about upgrading at all positions, weak and strong. Well, the defense is dissolving and that has thrown the offensive plan in disarray. Under TD, this franchise seems to swing back and forth. One year its revamp the offense. Then its revamp the defense. Then its revamp the offense again. Now it looks like time to clean house defensively...

So we let go a guy who will give away a game to a playoff team in the last minute, so that instead we can have games where we are out of it by the 4th quarter against a 1-4 team hobbled by injuries. At least they were close... Speaking of which, the Raiders lost two starters in the secondary in the first quarter, and we still couldn't pass. Havn't I seen this game before?

That would be fine if JP goes 7-9. Was that where we were headed before they made the switch? Suppose we finish 8-8 with KH. At least that makes the offseason easy - KH is the starter unless JP looks better, and we devote our attentions to improving elsewhere. But what if we had stick with JP and finished or 4-12? Would you feel good about sitting tight at qb and having next season depend on him improving dramatically?

Should we never fire coaches and GM's? How many years do we give him? (Any reply that contains the expression 'salary cap hell' will be disregarded.)

I don't know how much game time he's getting, but even if he's looking good in practice if I were Dallas I'd be saying 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.'

Good number-crunching - thanks. As for the comments that the sample size was too small, with Elway and Bradshaw getting mentions, I think we have to realize that it's a different game today with starters typically having less time in the system. I'd be reluctant to go back more than 5 years for a meaningfull comparison.

You all remind me of my brother. He lives in Florida and keeps ranting about (based on what he hears on Rush et al) the left-wing radio stations in DC. I honestly have never even heard of the stations he goes on about, let alone encountered an actual station with solidly leftist programming (the closest is NPR). For all I know it's two guys in a basement using a transmitter powered by AA batteries, if it isn't completely made up... Measuring the public opinion of a group by googling for the most radical responses is something you do at your own risk.

Is it better to have a shutdown corner and a nobody, or two good corners? I think you sign quality depth, because in this league people WIN by exploiting mismatches at corners 2 & 3 and linebackers who can't cover. Spread your money wisely, and let NC go.

but they might be if you throw in anybody else who comes up in the next few years... TKO and WM, and the occasional lineman come to mind.

Most of the island teams do it too. Not sure what's more interesting - watching NZ get up into the expressionless faces of England etc, or watching Fiji and Tonga do it to each other and nearly start a riot before the match even begins!

aren't you special!

Line, both sides. But also keep looking turning over late-round rocks at WR and RB. Moulds will be gone, followed by WM in 2 years.

Maybe, maybe not. A quarter of the guys on the roster can make the same claim - Virriallel, Evans, McGee... They arn't all going the hit the payday jackpot with the Bills, and some will walk. I only hope we don't break the bank over any of them.

him too. Arrington was (I think) the first guy drafted under Schneider. Lewis, Schottenheimer - I think they understood that one of the costs to being here was that you had to let Arrington do what he wanted, especially if it made him (and thus Schneider) look good... one can't help but wonder, in hindsight, if that's why Spurrier seemed to make a public show not knowing who was who or what was going on on the defense. I think that with the untouchability of Gibbs, together with experience, weariness, call it what you will on the part of Schneider, that's all changed. If the guy won't be coached, they won't play him.

I assume these were nude prayers? He was right to walk - no man should be told how he should lead his team in prayer.

Ironically, part of the problem is that not enough people have been dying in natural disasters. This lull over the last few hundred years has resulted in unsustainable buildup. To give one example, the earthquakes in the California fault zones have been relatively quiet over the last 50 years, and development has proceeded accordingly. But the plates havn't stopped moving - the energy continues to build, so that when it is released it will snap with much more force than it would if there were more regularly occuring 4.5's to release the tension. Same thing - an unusually quiet fault zone - is happening in the Northern India area, and (I think) Japan. And don't even ask about Yellowstone!