Lothar

It seems like the better teams do a great job limiting Atlanta's O by containing Vick, stuffing the run and making him beat you thru the air. But Grey tipped his hand earlier this week and said - unlike last week against Griese - he was going to go after him. I think he made the right move last week against a rhytm west coast offense - but they couldn't tackle anybody. Well, this week I was shocked to see 6 and 7 man blitzes - this just plays into Vick's hands. Unless you have the team speed of Tampa, you want to limit the run game and contain Vick - make him work it slowly down the field since he's not the most accurate of passers. And especially when the run game was gashing us. I still can't understand the last blitz at the end of the first half. There were 40 seconds or so left in the half. One more stop and Atlanta would run the clock out - but we get burned for a 50 yard run by Dunn. Offensively, I see JP staring down receivers an awful lot. Still with 4 street players in the secondary, how hard would it be to find the guy not covered by Deangelo Hall? That may be JP but coaches should be letting him know who to go after. Mularkey said he was hesitant to throw because of the success running the ball but all ATlanta wated to do was get it into a 3rd and 2 and count on JP or the OL to screw things up. Late in the game when our defense showed no propensity to hold back the Falcons, I'd have had JP rolling out with regularity and throw till he got into a rhythm. that's his strength - use it. Since the beginning of last year, I've been impressed with the coaching staff being able to stay the course as the team found its feet. However, I haven't seen very good coaching these last 2 weeks on either side of the ball. And now with the injuries piling up, the strength of the team may soon be a weakness. In that case, do we really want to rely on JP and the offense sputtering every week? If Spikes is down for the year, we may have to bite the bullet (with our decrepit 2nd string 'backers) and hand the keys to the offense over to Holcombe to allow us to stay in games. Believe me, I'm a big JP fan, but the formula of running Willis and counting on the D to keep us in games while he learns may have to take a backseat to the team succeeding. At least, until we're out of the playoff picture.

I'm not that surprised our defense wore down in the heat - no 1st downs from our O till inside the 2 minute warning -22mins on the field. We needed a *liitle* more production from the O to give us a chance. I too thought they should do a couple stop'n'go routes with the way the Bucs were applying press coverage. I know the coaches wanted to protect JP but they should have accounted for the heat factor and taken a few more chances in the 2nd quarter.

I've read about half of his early work - Snowcrash (a bit more juvenile than I expected), Diamond Age (brilliant!) and Zodiac (offbeat and entertaining). Haven't the time lately to invest in one of his epics - the Baroque cycle sounded like one of FFS's posts on Lindell's accuracy x 1000. Also been reading that most of his fans were disappointed at his latest ... your comments have piqued my interest though.

Another point with regard to how well Tampa's defense played against the Vikes supposedly dominant O, Matt Birk is out for the year and was replaced by a pretty non-descript center - as well, Minnesota also had a 1st or 2nd year left guard - both guys were overwhelmed by the interior of the Tampa line. Culpepper looked bad because pressure form inside gave him zero time on several plays. I don't think Tice and Co. adequately adjusted to this issue throughout much of the game. Gawd, I love our coaches when I compare em to some of these cleetuses.

I guess compared to you, you old coot , I may be a young whippersnapper but I'm assuming 3 or 4 years does put us in the same generation. My seventh grade teacher didn't talk much about Watergate, but my appetite for understanding history and perspective led me to read much about both Watergate and the presidency in general. Here's some comments from a 5 year old article about media and the impact of Watergate: govexec.com article 2005 For the national media, 1973 was also a watershed year. The Watergate scandal and the eventual resignation of President Nixon marked a profound shift in how the media viewed its role and relations with government officials and those in authority. Nearly an entire generation of journalists who came of age in the turbulent aftermath of both Vietnam and Watergate saw themselves not so much as skeptical watchdogs, but as aggressive investigators intent on exposing the essential venality of government officials. "I saw journalism change during the Watergate era, when all of the reporters coming out of journalism school suddenly wanted to bypass the fundamentals and regular beats and go right into investigative reporting," says Otto Kreisher, a Marine Corps veteran and longtime defense correspondent for the Copley News Service. "Their mentality was increasingly that journalism was all about bringing down Presidents, embarrassing those in authority, and exposing how the military was screwing things up. That's a very different view from old guys like me, who saw the government solve the Depression and the military win World War II. Even today, I see an attitude in younger editors that if it ain't negative, it ain't news." No one who has straddled the cultural divide between the media and military can fail to notice that over the past quarter century, the two professions have attracted Americans of vastly different natures and perspectives. In turn, these professions nurture and sharpen those natural proclivities. Media outlets entice people who are comfortable questioning authority precisely because they see their role as speaking truth to power. The military tries to attract and indoctrinate those who naturally respect authority because the battlefield brooks neither dissent nor questioning of orders. Joseph Galloway, the former longtime defense and war correspondent for U.S. News and World Report, jokingly called the natural tensions between these two groups a struggle between the "anarchists" and the "control freaks." Because journalists often view their role as protecting the underdogs of society even while serving as watchdogs of the most powerful institutions—or in the shorthand of the profession "comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable"—journalists also tend to be liberal on social issues such as women's rights, gay rights and affirmative action. Given the tremendous risks in lives and even national survival inherent in the profession of arms, military organizations are notoriously conservative by nature, and they tend to attract those who embrace traditionally conservative views on social issues. --- I find the last 3 paragraphs a microcosm of all that goes on on this board. Two views of the world where people talk AT each other instead of trying to understand the differences and seeking to resolve them. I know, I know, this is the moment when we all hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" - it's not that, I just don't get the animosity between sides - reasonable discourse to solve issues seems so much more useful than screaming names and pinning labels at the opposition - more painful and difficult maybe - but in the end we all DO have to live in the same country. OK, that's it for my diatribe. There's a lot of intelligent people on this board but I rarely see that expressed in ways other than belittling those we disagree with - I generally surf this board for comments that try and understand issues from a perspective different from my own. But if I read it every day, jeez - that would warp my world.

I've read enough historical perspective to understand the impact on the relationship between the media and the presidency. I assume you meant to use the sarcasm smiley - but Watergate WAS a watershed moment in terms of that relationship. Young, yeah right

Great job Lori. The wild card in all this is that Losman will be playing a top notch veteran D on the road for the first time in his career. This is one game I think Malarkey plays it close to the vest on offense - even if we punt 5 straight times, I don't think he lets Losman freewheel, even as much as the Texan game. I like our chances against their offense, and as you mentioned, special teams may be our best opportunity to break off a big play.

Oh c'mon BiB - you of all people should know that had very little to do with discretion on the part of JFK. That's just the evolution of the media over the last half century. Hell, 70 years ago, the media was colluding to hide FDR's ailments. Kennedy's indiscretions were anything but discrete - just that the media at the time treated the presidency with more respect. Much of that mutual gladhanding, however, disappeared with the onset of Whitewater, and the bitter partisanship of the last 20 years.

scary part is there are facets of that investigation that are still going on 8+ years later ...

While interesting at the start, that thread is like most threads on our PPP board - some right wing wacko points out some fringe lefty whackjob doing something nutty and says "liberals are morons" followed by a slew of "hallelujah!s" from the faithful - closely followed by a radical response pointing out moral equivalence from some nut job on the right. Even if a discussion starts as insightful and thought-provoking, it usually digresses quickly as the militants on each side take over.

I agree - pound between the tackles and pop a couple deep ones - we can't dink and dunk on these guys. With regard to our D, the Pats do a good job of mixing things up against us - mostly becasue of Brady's quick outs and middle screens, but they take their chances down the field on us as well. In the Bledsoe era, they'd just wait for Drew and our offense to implode.

The Bucs "own" Michael Vick because of their team speed on D - this has to be a game we win by overpowering their line, cause JP won't outrun their backers. http://bbs.buccaneers.com/showthread.php?t=100056 A feast....Please have a look at Buffalo's defensive performance today before you cal next week's game a "feast". As already mentioned earlier, the Bills have a true powerhouse defense. Just have a look at their performance today. Granted, Houston isn't an offensive powerhouse, but Johnson + Davis isn't easy to cover. All Buffalo's defense did today: 120 total yards of offense, 6 sacks, and a whopping 7 forced turnovers. Not to mention Willis McGahee, Moulds and Evans. The Bills are a dauting task. But, after what (at least on paper) seemed like a great outing, I don't think its impossible. Take it for what you will, but here are my keys to winning next week. 1) The O-line held up extremely well (in all respects) against the best pass-rushing front 4 in the NFL, on paper. Now, the Bills don't have anyone in the middle capable of rushing the passer even remotely as well as Kevin Williams. However, Aaron Schrobel is a quality DE. Davis will have to hold up, and if today is any indication, he certain can. 2) Ditto goes for the running game. The key in my mind is to attack Ron Edwards, because Pat Williams was the staple of Buffalo's run defense last year. Buenning's gonna have to hold up, and I think we're gonna have to go strictly up the gut because Buffalo has the best 1-2 punch at LB with Spikes & Fletcher in the NFL. Both can fly to the ball, so if we do go with outside pitches, pulling the guards is a must. I think any outside plays should be run to the strong-side at Jeff Posey, the weakest point (if you can call it a weakness) of their LB core. 3) Spikes plays the WSLB in a very similar fashion to Brooks, with more athleticism but less experience. Lining up against Brooks in practice should help a lot, but Griese better be watching the middle VERY carefully. 4) The drops need to stop. Especially from Clayton, because he's the cornerstone of our passing game. there were 4 incomlete passes intended for Clayton, at least 2 of which I know he dropped. I know still came away with solid numbers, but he needs to hang onto those. I wouldn't be as worried if he didn't look slugging and had a comple of route issues and "dropsies" during the pre-season as well. Believe me, I'm not even close to insinuating that he's doomed, or a bust. He's still my Fav player in the NFL. But he's gotta step up again and be the top-10 receiver he was last year. 5) The running game, again. I know, young offensive line, the whole story. But, Williams has 17 yards of 3 yards or fewer, including 5 or no-gain or less. That needs to improve. In fact, other than the 71-yard dash, Caddy would have 26 carries for 77 yards; 2.67 ypc. And I'm not putting that on Caddy. We won't be facing Pat Williams again, but Sam Adams is just as big and can stuff that gap, and Buffalo's LB's are much better. Caddy... I got faith my man 6) Mr. Griese. We won't be able to come back against Buffalo if you have a similar first quarter. I won't say how to correct it because I've never played QB competitively and have no idea what they see. But whatever it is, Buffalo forces a LOT more turnovers, so we need to seriously cut down. 7) 13 penalties for 100 yars. Absolutely unacceptible. 8) The Offense we ran in the second half will not do. 0 points before the Caddy dash. Quite a lot to accomplish. I have 2 totally different score scenarios: 1) Buffalo 21 - Tampa Bay - 12 2) Tampa 16 - Buffalo 13 I can't decide between the two.

From the official site's message board ... Here are a couple of his comments: Carr said the Bills' defense "was the best defense I've played against." "That's as helpless as I've felt playing quarterback since I've been in the third grade," Carr said. Pretty damn impressive D we have.

I think most of these responses asking for "the good ole days" with Teddy or - who knows - Wade or others, are off-base. Gray and Williams have created an attacking turnover inducing defense - almost a polar opposite of the 2-deep zones and minimize error defenses of Ted and Co. Just watching Wade's passive defense against Bledsoe made me cringe. Now that I have a taste of this high-sack, high TO defense, I don't wanna go back to the solid, but lo-impact defenses of of years past. We WILL promote from within to preserve as much continuity as possible in case Grey gets hired away.

From the "what it's worth" department - Saints were one of the few teams last year that played better on the road than at home (5-3 vs. 3-5) last year - including winning at Carolina, TB, Dallas and Oakland.

I don't buy it T-log ... Matthews wont be making much more than the vet min ... having an untested player as the emergency QB behind a first year starter and a backup who has never played a full season isn't a luxury we can afford. If JP had a couple years under his belt, I'd have no problems with that possibility.

Considering our passing game AND Drew's QB rating were ranked among the 5 worst in the NFL last year, I think most reasonable people expect JP's floor is no worse than where Bledsoe is currently at - while his ceiling is considerably higher. JP may lose a couple games this year but he'll also win a couple - I'm willing to live with that. Plus Clements and Malarkey have a QB who can actually execute a larger playbook - and compensate for OL deficiencies with his mobility. As much as I hate to say this, not making the playoffs last year may have been the best thing for the future of this franchise.

And you share a birthday with our own OLB, Posey. Happy Birthday CL.

you must not be watching the offseason news ticker - they lost 2 starting pro-bowl quality guards - their line may be one of the worst in football right now ... and according to Dr. Z, competing with ours'.

Coming from an intelligent ape like yourself, that's an inane comment ... Blame the ACLU!

about as asinine as wondering how our trade relations would go if we exchanged nukes with China - I have no idea where you're going with this. India is the world's largest democracy. Don't you think the future of our uber-capitalist culture relies on tapping into the developing markets of China and India? I'm no fan of outsourcing, but instability in successful democracies is a far bigger concern to the big picture of preserving national security.

It's not often I find myself agreeing with any of Gavin's non-football posts, but Amen brother!

also - I've read in a couple places how Mueller and TD don't like each other (could explain why Mueller generally bashes the Bills when he talks about the team.) My fave analyst, Len Passthepotatoes - who is a fan of TD and Modrak and appears to get some scoops from the Bills FO - used to slam Mueller when he asked why people would consider Mueller before Modrak. Must be people skills ... either way, I'm glad TM is here with us.

102,800 feet is the record - Joe Kittinger did this from a balloon back in 1960. He was the first individual to freefall faster than the speed of sound. I believe several people in the ensuing years have tried to beat his record and died trying. Now that's a record! Joe Kittinger's jump

When I worked at NASA in the early nineties, the head of one of the branches studying earth science was an ex-astronaut in his 60's. His lifelong dream - mind you, this guy had been in space - was to climb Mt. Everest. He ended up training for 2 years and was given the opportunity to go on an expedition. He ended up suffering common maladies for us non-sherpas - fluid in the lungs and hypoxia. Tragically, he died during the climb - and fulfilling his wishes, was buried up there. I saw his last video to family and friends taped while his health above base camp was deteriorating - one of the more emotional things I've ever witnessed. I can definitely see the appeal of testing one's self on a climb of that magnitude. At this stage in my life, I'd rather read about those exploits. Some of the landscapes I've seen of the Himalayas - mostly recollections from my childhood - are spectacular. What's incredible are the feats already accomplished on that mountain. People climbing solo or without oxygen. Talk about amazing.