Rubes

Really nice post, thanks Shaw. I agree with most of what you said, and it's nice that you placed it into a broader context that isn't doom-and-gloom. Oh, and I agree with the posters that say this is not a bend-but-don't-break defense. You can't stop every single drive. The Bills only allowed one lengthy drive in the second half.

Thanks for doing that, Scott. The grown ups around here appreciate it.

Well, I'm glad at least that we all agree who is most at fault here.

I don't understand why this discussion keeps devolving into "I don't like the BN writers, so I'm not giving them my money." Fine, don't give them your money. Just like if you passed an actual newsstand and saw a copy of the BN there, you don't have to buy it if you don't want to read it. This is about the expectation that you should read BN stories for free. These people's work shouldn't be free. If you like it enough to want to read it, go ahead. Just pay a really little bit of money for it, so it will always be there for you. If nobody likes the BN, it will go away. If some people like it but nobody pays for it, it will go away. If you're fine with that, more power to you. I'm not fine with it. Even though I despise Bucky and Sully and their constant crap, I still like the other writers. And I also like some of the other non-sports writers at BN. Jerry Zremsky is one of the best journalists in the entire country. I moved away from Buffalo a long time ago, but I subscribe online because I keep coming back to BN articles and I want to see that resource survive. I also subscribe to three other newspapers, one here in Salt Lake and two others online, because I keep coming back to their content and I appreciate it, and I want to see good journalism survive. Nobody is forcing anyone to pay for something they don't like. But if you like even some small part of it and want to see it continue, it's time to reconsider.

But "it was just the Jets"....

I guess I must have misread it then. I was just saying that bringing up his interception as a way of defending his coverage ability is a bit misleading. He did play a very good game, but from what I saw and read his coverage skills were not his strength in that game.

A pick on a deflected 2-point conversion hardly provides a good counter argument.

Sounds like Humber may be a liability in coverage, so perhaps Jenkins is being brought in as a 3rd down back.

Wow, happy birthday! I didn't think anyone other than Rockpile came close to me in age.

Still don't know how they explained that one.

Just be thankful we didn't have the refs from the Packers-Seahawks game. Brutal.

Well, if there's one thing you can say about the opener against the Jets, it's that one would have hoped the stats would turn out that way against a bad team (although I still think the Jets have a pretty good defense). Carolina's the #3 defense, so if we're looking for a good test of this offense and where it's at, this would be the one.

Ask what? You expect him to be able to speak an answer?

Nothing better than knowing right off the bat that NE won't go undefeated. Even if it meant KC getting the W.

Are we really projecting an entire season based on an opening day drubbing? Seems that's happened in the past several times.

Ding! We have a winner.

I thought it would take at least a page or two to see Kinnebrew. I can't believe it was the second post in the thread! Well done.

Thanks, Shaw. Not everybody agrees with what you said, but I think everyone appreciates a well-thought-out argument like that.

Perhaps, and I wouldn't say the Bills are obligated to sign Matthews, but if you believe the plan is to stock draft picks to move up and select a QB, then letting Matthews walk leaves a big hole at WR that they may not be able to fill with that draft pick. Given that Boldin is also on a one-year contract, that becomes a pretty big hole.

Short walkthrough-type practice Friday, none on Saturday. Back at it today.

It's a tough one. I like what they did with the draft picks, and hopefully that will translate into a top QB next year. But I think Sammy is a supreme talent and really liked watching him play when healthy. He made this offense better. But I also get why they did it. Overall I prefer having Sammy vs. no Sammy plus draft picks, but I can see their logic at least.

Really? I thought that was a fairly crappy article, filled with complete speculation. Matthews value isn't high because he's going into a contract year? But that's not true for Sammy? Oh, and "this trade wasn’t just a player-for-player swap" and the draft pick had to be included because Matthews doesn't have high value? Are you kidding me? Well no ****, Sherlock, it was a 3rd round pick, not a 7th round pick. But that doesn't mean Matthews value isn't high -- it just means it isn't as high as Darby's value -- for a team that was desperate for a good CB. I found that quite unenlightening, myself.

Well that's a disappointment!

Thanks, Astro! You're the best!

Ain't that the truth. I'd just vomit everything back up.