Offside Number 76

I'm not there yet. But if I see the same stuff from the no-names for the next two games, I'll tell you this: The Bills will improve the team by trading Evans for a good draft pick. The improvement won't be next year, it will be 2012 or 2013, when it actually matters because the other pieces will be in place. This team will not be a Super Bowl contender with Evans or without him next year. But with the right moves, 2013 is a different story--and who knows what Evans's abilities will be by then?

I absolutely love the fact that the Bills eliminated Miami from playoff contention. I LOVE it.

Leodis.

It's definitely not a "getting rid of" that I'm proposing, just to be clear. I'm talking about trading him for real value, only if another team would provide real value, as part of the rebuilding process. My concern is that by the time the Bills are good enough for Lee to make a difference, he's almost too old to make a difference. He may be just starting to wane as the Bills just start to get really, really good. And I wouldn't do a thing unless the Bills' nonames absolutely shine these last three weeks.

Assuming for the hell of it that they can get it done, what do you do with respect to Lee? Do you trade him? (I'd strongly consider it if the deal was right--this team is 2-3 years away from being a real contender even if all the right moves are made.)

That's so not the point of what she did. Is there no end to cynicism?

No, they're not. They're agreeing with each other, but saying different things.

Nah, it's complete. It's too complete. The rule might have worked against our guys today, but there's no good alternative, as far as I can tell.

Not only has the rule been around forever, but what would you want it to be? It's the only thing that makes sense. Options: (1) ball goes to defense--no, that's not what the NFL is about; (2) incomplete--that's just stupid (it was DOUBLY complete); (3) come up with another alternative, but I just don't see one.

Sure, FItz is not the guy. We knew that in week four. The question is not whether he's Mr. Right, the question is whether he's Mr. Right Now. He is. Luck is the only QB the Bills should consider in the first round. I used to say Mallett, too, but not anymore. If they want to take a chance on others, fine; do that in the third or fourth. There are bigger needs.

303 Cool idea. Thanks.

I've sat in the M&T a couple of times. There are some big advantages: the food is terrific (it was good enough to make me regret cooking at tailgate), as is the drinks service (especially if you don't like beer and want other adult beverage options), and if you hate the cold, well, you won't have to worry about that. The bathrooms are nice. That said, those above who said that they felt cut off from the rest of the crowd, are right. It's a huge disadvantage. I felt like I was watching the game in a sports bar with a really nice view, not like I was at the game.

That reporter was interested in creating a story by picking on Anderson, not in reporting anything meaningful.

Is defamation his only claim? I would think he would have a decent chance with a tortious interference with contract claim.

That is very funny, but I think you mean masochism. Please describe it. It may be worth the drive to pick one up.

You're inventing a whole new sport, there. This, I've never understood. Nor have I understood why some teams have to have 3 kickers: one to place-kick, one to punt, and one to handle kickoffs (remember Brad Daluiso?). I also think it would be pretty cool if teams could punt a field goal; i.e., drop-kick without having to bounce the ball off of the field.

Yeah, the guy with thirteen thousand posts wandered onto the board by mistake. For my part, I'm with the "it's called football for a reason" crowd. The kicking game is extremely important: (1) most teams' leading scorers are Ks; (2) nothing dictates field position like good kicking and punting.

1. I think you're right, and as for how long it took, wasn't Simpson originally (and very wrongly) converted to WR when he got here? 2. I think it's only Kelly. 3. No Saban? (I am not looking it up, and it was before I was born. Thought the guy had a winning record.) No Jauron? (kidding.) 4. Just a note, on second first round picks: Kelly was one. Who was first (and no looking it up!)?

Really? http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&defensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&conference=ALL&role=OPP&season=2010&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=TOTAL_YARDS_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=1&d-447263-n=1

six more wins.

That's a legit concern. I don't think Carolina will draft a third QB in two years--especially with an early first-round pick--but Dallas well might. I've never understood why Romo was so beloved to begin with; he's an average QB. Give Dallas a shot at Luck, and he's gone.

I don't want them to spend any kind of first round pick on him. If they're going to settle at the QB position, they can settle in the second or third rounds.

Fine, but if the Bills spend a first-round pick on him, I won't be happy.

Newton? Really, for the NFL? I guess it really isn't a QB year, after all. BTW, I love Draftek threads. They really are among my favorites. I love that site, too.

I agree.