apuszczalowski

You are calling me an excuse maker when all I did was add in that Schobel was also hurt too and a game time decision, along with Stroud, someone you mentioned was not playing 100% The extent of Schobels injury isn't fully known to the public right now, and he sat out part of the 4th Quarter whne the game became out of hand. He is also not going to practice much during the Bye. What excuse was I trying to make?

Theres a couple of differences in those very similar hits. 1. Frerrottes feet don't leave the ground until he was hit, Edwards "hopped" as he threw the ball and was in the air when he was hit. 2. Edwards was hit from the front, Gus was hit from the side Otherwise they were the exact same hit. They both had there helmets at the same height on the QB, and both held the QB as they finished the tackle and were driven to the ground. The biggest difference is #2. Edwards was hit from the front side so because of their body location, Wilsons helmet is located on Edwards chest as he hits the ground. Frerrotte was hit from his side/behind and because of the defenders location on the hit, his helmet is behind Frerrottes body. Frerrotte is shaken up and comes back in the game because he landed on his side, Trent landed flat on his back causing his head to smack the ground from behind. Theres no difference in how both QB's were tackled besides where the player came and made the hit. Wilson, from the front, and the NO player more from the side. Maybe the league should just rule out hitting a QB completly. *EDIT, sorry, I was watching the hit at about 40 seconds in. Watching the one that you suggested, the difference was, Wilson followed through and finished the tackle, the guy on the Saints came in and pushed the QB down instead of trying to make the tackle. Both QB's were injured as a result of what both defenders did, the difference being that Frerrotte came back, Edwards didn't. So why should the hit on Gus also be considered dirty? He was vulnerable and had thrown the ball, pushing him down was unecessary and dangerous too

No, the NFC East is dangerous, and almost all those teams can beat almost every other team in the league. The AFC East is just really close when it comes to their teams

Sure, we can revist it I don't think it really helps your arguement The Rams defence is giving up 36.8 points per game, and 411.8 yards per game. They are ranked in the bottom 2 of the league after this weeks games (this week was their bye so it skews the placement a little since some teams have played one more game) Buffalo's 31 points total, was the least amount of points given up by the Rams this year (they gave up 38 to the Eagles, 41 to the Giants, and 37 to Seattle). Taking out the Bills game, they were giving up 38.7 points a game, almost a touch down more then what the Bills team put up on them. The Bills 277 total yards were less then what the Rams had given up to the rest of the teams they faced this year too. (522 to Philly, 441 to NYG, 407 to Seattle). The Rams had never had a lead in a game until they faced the Bills Say what you want about Losman and the bills offence not being able to put up big yards on a middle of the pact Cards defence, but Just the week before they helped the Rams defensive ranking by improving their average Yards given up per game and points scored against. The Bills offence needed some late game heroics to defeat the leagues worst ranked defence, thats not exactly something to brag about or use to try and make a point that someone/something is better.

So does scoring only 31 against the Rams (and most of that in 4th quarter heroics) I believe the bills were the first team to actually let the Rams lead for any part of a game. Teams were outscoring and putting up huge yards against the Rams D. Why no talk about the Edwards led offence not being able to put up huge numbers against the leagues worst defence. Not all of those 56 total points that the Jets scored were against the Cards defence, they scored some of them against the offence. Their defence isn't horrible, that game against the Jets only looked so bad because the offence kept putting the defence back on the field after turning the ball over so many times

Their defence also kept the Cardinals from scoring and continually got the ball back for Favre and their offence to keep running up the score. If garcia could be a Pro Bowler in the Cover 2 system, i would be all for bringing him in

Didn't they already do that this year? I think they have a guy on their practice squad right now, I can't remember his name

I think the worst part about the cards win over the Bills is that it let the rest of the AFC East back into the picture. A Buffalo win and they are 1.5 games over NE going into week 6, with them being the closest team to possibly catch the Bills. The AFC East is going to be tight this year and they need all the breathing room they can.

add in the fact that since Trents feet were bolth off the ground from his little "jump" (hop would probably be a better description of it) when throwing the ball, the hit is going to be more forceful then if he was still on the ground. If you don't think that makes a difference, have someone stand on the ground and give them a little push with one hand on their shoulder and see what happens. They might step back, or just move their shoulder to take the impact. Now get that person to "hop" in the air and push them when their feet leave the ground and see what happens. If Trents feet were still on the ground, this would have been a hard hit, but would just result in him being taken down. His "hop" with his feet off the ground made the hit look worse then it would have been if he had both feet on the ground

Stroud and Schoebel were both hurt all week and game time decisions

Ok, you might want to add in one that could stay on the field and play, that eliminates him now (and that is not a comment or joke about his last injury, it has nothing to do with it) Everett was injury prone and couldn't stay on the field long enough for the Bills to be able to see what they had in him

Some people are over reacting looking for huge changes after only one loss. It may have only been one loss, and its not the fact that they lost, or that the season over because of it. Its the way they lost. They looked horrible all game, and were embarrassed after finaling looking like they could be a very good team. They came out and played very bad against a team that looked horrible the previous 2 weeks. This Cardinals team is good, but they looked bad over the last 2 weeks, and then Buffalo made them looked great in that game. You don't get respect, or get to be considered great if you can't beat the good teams. They struggled against 2 bad teams (Oakland and St. Louis, and actually made St. louis look better then they really are), beat a great team that struggled to start the season (Jags) and the only game that they actually had full control of was the opener against a team that most thought was going to be good because of the previous years team, yet now we are finding out they are not good at all. This team has flaws, like all teams, but this last game highlighted them with some big neon signs and it was an embarrassment. Thats why people are overreacting. It would be different had they atleast looked like they gave 100% and just lost the game at the end.

Ellis can't even beat out Bryan on the depth chart right now. Has he even been placed on the active roster for any of the games? And you think the bills should start him, a rookie with no NFL experience, ovre a 2 time Pro Bowler? What has Ellis done so far to get a shot at playing time, let alone starting?

I think we all hope so, but concussions are not easy to get a read on and give a recovery time on, especially if you have had them before in the past I would say that it was a good time for the Bye week as it is more then likely that he will be ready because they have the extra week. If they played next week, I would say that theres about a 95% chance he wouldn't play

I was one of the ones mentioning the symptom free thing, I thought it was the same accross all sports, Guess I was wrong

Sounds like Bush had a great game I always found him overhyped. For a RB taken #2 overall, which was considered too low for him since they expected him to go #1 overall, I expected more from him. As a RB, he doesn't impress me much, as an extra WR out of the backfield, he is really good. I didn't even know he was returning punts until I heard he ran back 2 last night. I would never expect the #2 overall pick in the draft 3 years ago to still be playing special teams. I would take the Bills return guys over Bush as a return man, but I do agree, fans around the league would probably take Hester as a return man over Roscoe, only because of all of Hesters TD returns

The stairs were dirty and had a previous history of being dirty though

I'd blame Fowler and Dockery together on that play. If you watch it again, Fowler turns to his right and Dockery moves to the left to no one letting the guy come right up the middle un touched. Dockery then goes after someone behind the d-line while Fowler is tied up with another D-linemen.

But in this last game he would have had to put up more then 40 unless Trents Poise also please defence and could stop Warner and the Cards offence.

If only he had played for the Bengals, they would probably name the stadium after him for what he has done after his football career ended! (I hear the Cowboys are inquiring if he would be eligible to finish the season playing for them too)

Why? because at that point in the game it was going to take a pretty big miracle, or atleast the teams defence a complete turn around and have them do stuff that they haven't been able to do all day to even have a chance to come back? The game was quickly getting out of hand, and time was quickly clicking down.

Its a popularity contest having the coaches in the league vote for who they feel is the dirtiest player in the game? I think you are really reaching on this one

I would not pin that fumble on the handoff to JP, I think Lynch deserves more of the blame on that one, probably cause he caught the Cards player out of the corner of his eye directly in front of him just as he was getting the ball handed to him. AS for his other 2 turnovers, there was the fumble, and the INT after the game was already lost and he was just trying to force the ball to make a play. He was hardly the reason why the Bills lost. The Bills lost because the Cards offence was having their way with the Bills defence, scoring at will and allowing the Cards to wear them out and wear the clock down. The game was going to become a shootout, and the bills offence is not built to play a shootout. The only way for the Bills to have had a chance with the way the defence was playing was to match the Cards point for point, and hope their defence could force some turnovers too. If trent has some weaknesses, I think one of them is that he is not a QB that is going to give you a great chance of winning a shootout, but neither is the Bills offence. He is a ball control QB that will win a game by controling the clock, and needs a good defensive performance to hold the opponents score down. He won't put up 50+ points in a game

I was being sarcastic. The guy was a game time decision, and according to the guys with football experience that are paid to work those games for the network, they didn't think his play was all that bad, and didn't use the excuse that he was a game time decision. Could he play better? Sure Would I say he is a Pro bowler right now? No Could a foot injury be holding him back a little? Probably The entire defence needs to improve, and it would be nice to see Schoebel rack up some Sacks, but those aren't the only stats that determine a good DE. As for gandy, he has actually been pretty good for the Cards at RT. He was horrendous for the Bills at LT, and was mediocre as a Guard, but sometimes a change of scenery or position works. And I believe some even said that he may have been alright in buffalo if they were to have used him as a RT.

from what I saw of that video, it was not a helmet to helmet hit, Wilsons helmet went into Edwards armpit and he followed through on the tackle. Edwards did jump into the air to make the throw, and thats why he went back and fell hard. The force of the hit, plus Edwards being off the grown drove him into the ground. Wilson did push his head off edwards chest into his facemask when getting up, but that was after Edwards was already out. The reason for the injury was edwards landing flat on his back and his head bouncing off the turf and immediatly into Wilsons helmet which was in his chest.