Orton's Arm

Lol. Being right is something I'm used to. Getting credit for it, well that's something new! I admit I did forget about April. But wasn't Krumrie here before Mularkey?

I hope you're joking. The last thing I want to see TD do is to try to improve this offense by using yet more 2nd and 3rd round picks on WRs.

For once I agree with Simon. Mularkey has: - Compiled a winning season, the only coach in TD's Bills' tenure to do so - Brought in strong position coaches on the offensive side of the ball. Sam Wyche at QB coach. Jim McNally at o-line. Anquan Boldin's receivers coach. - Committed to running the ball, unlike Kevin Gilbride

You're making him sound like an adolescent male. Seriously, though, I've looked at Dawgg's posts. While I don't always agree with him, I've noticed he often supports his points with facts, reasoning, or observations. I also noticed he wrote about a number of themes, so I'm at a loss to understand your contention that he's obsessed with only one topic.

You are right: refusing to help your team in the heat of battle goes beyond anything T.O. has ever done. Whatever else he was guilty of, at least T.O. always gave everything he had come gameday.

I'll agree with 95% of this. The only difference of opinion is that I'd be open to suspending a guy for missing a meeting. Now that the team is only playing for pride, it would be very easy to let discipline go by the wayside. If you start letting guys miss meetings, things will only deteriorate.

This post makes a lot more sense to me than most I've seen on this thread. As someone pointed out earlier, we don't really know why this benching is taking place. But your reasoning seems to make as much sense to me as anything. Maybe this is Mularkey's way of proving to the team there are no sacred cows, that even a player of Moulds' status can't rest on his laurels.

Possible reasons for benching: - A power struggle between Losman and Moulds - A desire to save Ralph Wilson some money on Moulds' salary - A desire to make the same statement the Bills made by releasing Bobby Shaw - Moulds having an attitude problem/being a cancer

I like the idea of having a big, physical receiver being the go-to guy. Evans isn't tall enough to play the same way a TO can play. After what he's been through with the Philly suspension, I think TO will be a little more careful about what he says.

It's funny. I've been hearing how the season is over, the playoffs are impossible, and it's time to get JP experience. Well, Mularkey gave JP experience throwing the ball in a red zone situation. Now people from the "give JP experience" crowd are calling for Mularkey's head.

Based strictly on performance, TO would be the best option. The downside is his big mouth.

I agree with this. In fact I've coined a term for the outcome of yesterday's Miami game: it was a draft-day victory! I'd like a string of draft-day victories from now until the end of the season, followed by an upgrade at the general manager position.

Excellent initial post, AKC. But there is another way of looking at the trends you're describing. I've noticed that the offensive line seems to be at its best in the first drive or two of games. Maybe the players on the line are themselves not that good, but during the week McNally finds tricks for them to mask this weakness by exploiting the tendencies of other teams. These tricks work for a drive or two, after which the other team starts to figure them out. After that, the winner of the line of scrimmage will be the team with more talent--in other words, not Buffalo.

Duke Preston is a backup, while Peters and Mohrman weren't draft picks.

Angelo Crowell was a third round pick in 2003. Other than McGee, TD hasn't found any bona fide starters on the second day of the draft. The good news about this loss is that it brings us one step closer to having a new GM this offseason.

Neither does Bill Gates. I'll make my assessments of Simon's intelligence based on what I see in his posts, not on the letters after his name. Thus far I haven't seen much, but I'm open to changing my opinion. Certainly a thread picking on one of Sully's articles would be a unique contribution to these boards. Maybe you should start one. It's hard to talk about football for 365 days a year without being repetitive. Since I hate repetition, I added some new things to the discussion, such as the ratio of first day picks spent on the o-line compared to the percentage of offensive linemen who are starters. You certainly have fallen short of this goal on this particular thread. Speculated, not known. Besides that, TD said he'd basically fallen in love with Mike Williams, and that it would take a very generous offer for him to trade down. Are there any specific facts you're accusing me of being ignorant of, or do you just like to hear yourself talk? No need was more pressing than the offensive line, and there were those needs that were less pressing. If you're talking need, the offensive line should have gotten more than its proportionate share of first day picks. I'd agree that you shouldn't reach for a player based on a perceived need, but over the course of five drafts you should be able to address the line without reaching for players. Earlier in this thread, you asked me what Donahoe should have done on the first day of the draft to address the offensive line. It's not my fault you're crying about getting what you asked for. I consistently call it like I see it. The Clements trade-down was good, the Bledsoe trade was not. Though if Clements walks in free agency, the only thing the Bills will have left from that trade-down is Tennessee's third round pick. When I wrote about the Antoine Winfield trade, I was referring to Antoine Winfield. Once that guy hit free agency, there was a lot of interest in him, especially from the Jets and the Vikings. I felt (and still feel) that TD should have put the franchise tag on Winfield, and then traded those rights away for at least a 2nd round pick, but hopefully a pick in the first round. Basically he would have been trying to pull a Peerless deal all over again.

Thanks for thinking my post was clever enough to represent an entire night's effort.

Spend enough time on these boards, and you'll get plenty of experience in identifying feces!

I agree with this, especially with the use of the word "cesspool." Now we just have to figure out which of us has been flinging the feces. Based on smell, I'd say the fecal matter came from a monkey. Hmmm . . .

Or any other intelligent discussion, for that matter.

He did. A long, long time ago.

This from someone who's never risen to the level of having an intelligent discussion, and whose only tool of persuasion is name-calling?

You know, every time you say something incredibly stupid like this, it makes me want to change my login name to Locke. My sig would be, "It seems we have a Ramius problem."

An excellent post, though I'm not going to agree with your characterization of BackInDaDay as a "blind loyal fan." Loyal yes, but he seems to think too much to be blind.

Good point. You could put a monkey in the Buffalo GM spot--even a feces-throwing monkey--and you'd still get attendance. But as the fans become disillusioned with TD and his hype, going in a different direction with the GM position will start to make more financial sense.