ans4e64

The inside 3 aren't the problem. It's how Walker will do for a full season at LT and how Butler can transition to RT.

Simpson, Kelsay.

I'm still wondering why they haven't signed Winborn, especially not having gotten a LB in the draft (I'm aware of Nic Harris). Winborn LEAD THEIR TEAM IN TACKLES last year, and can still be productive. Keep in mind DJ Williams, who is a very fine LB, is also on that squad. Also, I always thought before free agency that the Bills would look at DT Dewayne Robertson. I remember he is a penetrating tackle that the Jets tried to make a 3-4 nose-run-stuffer. Not sure how he did in Denver after that, but I thought he could still play and would flourish in a scheme like ours. Guess not.

How can anyone say he's better suited for RT? He came in as a tackle, and was so stiff, they had to move him into guard. Unless his footwork has drastically improved, he's going to get walked around all year long.

Pre-game foursome? Me, Jessica Alba, Selma Hayek, Scarlett Johansson.

Tim, Are people just seeing the possible hole at LT for the Bills, and ASSUMING we are interested in Jones, or have you actually heard that we are? Thanks!

This guy hasn't been able to play at a high level in almost 3 years. If you bring him in, and go through the camps with him at LT, Wood, Hangartner, Butler, Walker... and then get into the season and find out he can't play anymore (which he's already proved) then you've got to re-shuffle the entire line (to the way we have it now) except they haven't had the offseason to practice and get comfortable in their new spots.

I thought someone in your circles would know what the word positive means, and what the word edgy means, and might even be able to put the two together to form a meaning. Obviously, I was stretching.

I don't have a problem with people complaining so much as I do about WHY they are complaining. Hell, you've been around this board long enough to know I reply with a snide remark to almost everything myself. If someone (like Sully) wants to be negative and complain all the time because they love the Bills and they're frustrated, and they just want to see the Bills do right for once, and win more than anything, then fine. Their anger and frustration is caused because they are sick of losing, and actually want the Bills to win and do well. But when someone (like Schopp) wants to be negative and complain all the time because it's his job to cover a team he doesn't like, so he is in a miserable mood all the time, that is a problem. There is a place for people like Sully.

The season hasn't even been played yet, how are you rubbing anything in anyone's face? So they weren't going to take a TE in the first two rounds, how the hell would you know that? What if Pettigrew was there at 28, numbnuts? The Lions fans hated the pick because they desperately needed a OT and MLB. Both Michael Oher and Rey Maualuga were there and they chose neither of them. Get your facts straight.

Polian and Smith have a connection with those guys... they were here. Jauron and Brandon do not.

If you were hired right now to coach the Jacksonville Jaguars, would you hire the coaches you know and have worked with, or would you hire Mark Brunell and Donovan Darius?

Is Kelly really complaining that people are whiny and bitchy?

That is a horrible list. 1.) Campbell? Seriously? Why does he need to step up? He's not filling the shoes of anyone important, and him playing well vs. not isn't going to make or break Arizona's defense. 2.) How does Doucet need to step up, he's the 4th WR on the depth chart! Fitzgerald is there, Boldin's back, and Breaston is one of the top producing 3rd WR's in this league. Doucet doesn't even need to touch the field. 3.) Same here. Why does Hardy need to step up, he's like 9th on the depth chart. We signed T.O., we don't need Hardy to be the 2nd receiver anymore this year. Jesus. 4.) The Bears signed Orlando Pace and Kevin Schaffer, Williams doesn't need to step up. If he can, it's gravy, but not necessary. I could keep going on. That is a horrible list.

So who is he an upgrade over?

No.

I certainly hope you don't consider a bust an upgrade.

If we actually had competition at DT and quality depth, I'd agree with you. But what are the alternatives to McCargo not making it, going with 3 DT's on the roster?

I'm going to ask you to join me in reading what's written, because you must have missed the part where I said, "A positive report with an eye towards skepticism does seem like the modus of good reporting," Forgive me for being confused when you comment in a thread with "WGR" and "Schopp" in the title, and then post comments that have nothing to do with either of those words. Silly me, I should have assumed you weren't including Schopp while commenting in the Mike Schopp thread. I'm not going to go round upon round with you here. Sullivan, Schopp and others mostly write, comment or act in negative ways and there is nothing that is going to convince me that either that is not true, or that it is acceptable. I could care less how Sully is as a person or neighbor, or what he says in the press box. When I hear him on air or occasionally read a column of his, it makes me question why he is even interested in covering the Bills. I say the same for Schopp, only worse. I at least respect Sully because he actually cares about the Bills, perhaps even more than the average fan. Schopp... not so much.

The no huddle is a common sense approach, for anyone who is denying we are going to use it. 1.) The Pats won't be ready to defend it. 2.) We can take advantage of their aging defense. 3.) We have the personnel on offense to make it work. 4.) It actually masks the rookies on the o-line, not magnifies them. 5.) Makes the defense tired and keeps them off Trent.

I am agreeing with you that good reporters are skeptical. All I'm saying is I picture that motto as positive writing with a skeptical edge to it. We hardly see that here. It is mostly negative, with a slight positive edge. There's a difference. And onto your dare. I've never heard Schopp optimistic about anything regarding the Bills. This certainly doesn't mean he never is, as I have never listened to every word that's come out of his mouth. But I had never heard it. I don't read enough of Sully's columns to know his general mood, I just hear his interviews on WGR. Howard and White always make fun of Sully because of how negative he is. It is so bad that people just laugh. Again, I don't know about his columns, or how he is in real life (don't really care), but I never see the positive but edgy theme you speak of here in Buffalo. At least with the bigger names.

Your post seems to suggest that good reporters are negative, and that the behavior is justified because the team hasn't won in so long. Comparing a line of work to comments that "might" be made by fans at a bar? Really? So because there are negative fans that exist somewhere around Buffalo, that means that reporters are allowed to fill columns with words that make us readers feel the writer is on the verge of slitting their wrists? A positive report with an eye towards skepticism does seem like the modus of good reporting, but that is far from what goes on here in Buffalo. I understand the team hasn't won in so long, and I understand that it makes people feel down in the dumps, but are you telling me that means there is nothing to ever be excited about? Sully and Schopp can't be excited after a draft where we "might" have filled a bundle of needs? We've added new players to the team that have talent, we have a new offensive line, we signed one of the best wide receivers in NFL history, yet most reporters can't grasp the excitement. I don't know if I just misread your post, but I'll never believe that 100% negative reporting is EVER the mark of a good reporter, and I'll NEVER believe that it is ok to report that way just because you're frustrated with the team not winning. You can sometimes end up on the all negative side, and sometimes on the all positive, or even find a happy medium somewhere in the middle, but to always come at a sports team from a negative view no matter what the circumstances is never a good reporter in my mind. It is a child.