OCinBuffalo

Much depends on your interpretation of "greatest of all time", and "times", as in whether you consider the 50s = to today. I don't know how whoever said this meant it. If it's the way you guys are saying, then yeah, they just might be the greatest of all time. But, be careful: there are some senior citizens here who will tell you that Otto Grahm was a monster, and perhaps the best QB ever, etc. They will start hauling out stats that are ridiculous. I know, they did it to me once. The article says Grahmn led the league in TDs his rookie year. Dalton isn't going to do that this year, is he?

You know that I only posted that, half-cocked btw, for you Bill, right? I think we sorta agree, IIRC. I have never been against drafting O line. I have always been for drafting BPA. I do not subscribe to reaching for any player, for any reason. IF there is an O lineman who grades = or even a little less than = to a DB, then sure, I have no problem with drafting the O lineman, or D lineman, because having a SLIGHT bias towards the lines can't be a bad thing. That's not where I have a problem. When I hear that we shouldn't draft a top 15 overall, #1 CB player in McKelvin, and instead should take the 3rd best tackle, who projects to RT and 10 spots lower than our pick, for the sole reason that he is an O lineman? That is retarded, and always will be. And, while we are on the topic of McKelvin....whose pick of Brady was the turning point in the game....will probably be one of the major reasons we make the playoffs this year. The fact is that O lineman are never going to be exposed and scrutinized by the average fan as much as CB. You are not the average fan. You are the guy who can break down every play and tell me exactly what every O lineman did, cause you were watching them the whole game. I simply can't do that. Also, I think trading down is stupid, especially in the first round, unless you rape the other team for its picks, and those picks better be in the top 15. Do you see the Patriots D this year? Simple: Not enough talent. Wanna know how that happened? Too many years of "smart drafting" by Belechik. They have a whole lot of 2nd/3rd round talent, and 0 first round talent. They could have had Clay Matthews, but they "smartly" traded down. The bottom line is: since I have been here, I have been called every name in the book for refusing to see the so-called "wisdom". As per normal, I am just as patient as I am right! And yeah: I couldn't care less about college football, so, if you say Alabama/SEC is the Sam's Club for getting new Bills like Dareus, then let's back up the truck and load it up! Finally, let me ask you this: what level of confidence do you have in the current brain trust regarding the draft, as opposed to what we have had the last 20 years?

#3 above is a ridiculous claim to make 7 games into the season. That I can agree with. Saying Dalton is massively annoying because of it? Well, I suppose I can only attempt to explain that one: "bitching on this board" withdrawal. We simply aren't used to having this little to complain about. So, some of us are reaching to get our fix. Believe me, there are much worse cases than this one on this board.

voted 10 times for Dareus Maximus They aren't even trying to stop it. They even give you a handy little popup to "vote again". They are learning.

Yes, if we don't beat ourselves, we will be in good shape, regardless of the refs.

Buddy is asleep.

Google yields this: Run down of rookie qbs and wrs I was gonna say Zorn and Largent...but I had no idea if they were both rookies together. If that is true Dalton/Green have a loooooong way to go to be called greater than those 2. Edit: unless you are willing to put Green in the HOF right friggin now.

Meh. The AFC North hasn't really started yet. We've played more division games than they have I think. We'll see what Dalton does, and where cincy is a month from now, but until then, I agree it's way too early to be talking in terms of all-time anything.

The single best indicator of the Bills being good? We only get horrible, game changing officiating when we are good. Did you all forget about "overofficious jerk"? Marv said that....when the refs were hosing us. Did you all forget about "just give it to em?" (The 1 foot down....in the white stripe on the sidelines, the other next to a camera guy..."catch" that allowed the Pats to beat us, and make the playoffs for the first time in forever?) ...when the refs were hosing us so badly, that Ralph insisted that replay be brought back? Yes, this is the call that brought back replay. Don't like replay? Blame the crew that Just Gave It to the Patriots. Did you all forget Bruce Smith, standing on the sidelines, bellowing at the ref: "We just want a fair game, that's all"...when the refs were hosing us. Therefore, the lemons out of lemonade version of this is: Hey, this proves the Bills MUST be good. We are officially back.

It was a great analysis, but the guy is missing some things: 1. The pocket was forcibly collapsed almost every play. It's hard to keep your eyes where they are supposed to be, if its also readily apparent that things are closing in around you. The delay in trying to attend to both, along with the fact that our pass coverage was good, certainly caused problems for Beck. And, this guy correctly identified the cumulative effect of seeing the pocket collapse over and over = happy feet. 2. We had 9 sacks from 8 different players. So, there wasn't one guy/area for Beck to key on and shift protection to. This guy is expecting Beck to understand every player on our team and their strengths and weaknesses. There are only a very few QBs who do that on a consistent basis, and those guys are in the top 5. The balance of our defense was just as key as Beck's happy feet. 3. Beck's O line could have helped him on multiple occasions, but they, in Chanspeak, got whipped. In every "50/50" instance, we won the battle. Their O line could have done more to win some of those battles, but every time Beck was in reach, we got him. 4. Play action? Here's a hint: you have to be able to RUN the ball, for play action fakes to work, pal. That is not Beck's fault. They did not get 1 first down running the ball. They could not run against us on any down, really. So, WTF did they expect when they tried to run play action? What they got was our guys in space staying disciplined in their roles and covering their assigned areas, or, our guys knocking the F out of the man in front of them. Nobody bought the fake, and all of them were constantly closing in on Beck. I understand wishing to blame the QB...but this guy has to admit that his line was physically tossed around this past game. Nobody could block Moats, and he was the root cause of many of the D line getting sacks. In running away from Moats, Beck ran right into them.

How about the fact that we have had hurt guys go out, and backups come up with HUGE games? How about the fact that not only do we have 7 quality guys, but that they are versatile enough to change positions and not miss a beat? The biggest B word on this board since I have been here has been: drafting O line. The second biggest B word has been: O line depth. We draft Wood, Levitre and still they B word. We dump Jason Peters, who has not even come close to earning his contract in Philly, and still they B word. Bell is clearly a solid starting LT, and still they B word. Hairston is clearly a solid back-up tackle, and still they B word. Reinhart has come in and started 3 games now at guard, and done extremely well, and still they B word. Meanwhile, if we hadn't drafted the DBs we have, there's no way we'd be winning, especially last game. How many of the 9 sacks came 4-5 seconds after the snap? How exactly would we have beaten the Pats without STELLAR play from the defensive backfield? What role did our O line have in picking off Brady 4 times? And finally, these are largely the same guys we had last year. QB is the clear difference. Coaching is the clear difference. That means: O lineman simply aren't as important as the "draft O line" crowd says they are. Not if such a wild swing is made possible by switching out the QB and Coach.

5 years ago, I would have agreed with you. Now? No. This is another in a looong line of questionable, to outright baffling, moves Belechik has made in the last 3 years. His recent drafts have been terrible. I have no idea WTF he was doing last time around. Yes, we can talk about getting a QB for After Brady, but, few of the defensive picks have worked out, and 0 have surpassed mediocre. They did get a good O lineman, but, Belechik is supposed to be a defensive guru. Why is he messing up defensive picks? The Belechik kiss asses here, who LOVE to talk about trading down like he does, are looking pretty stupid right now. Belechik had an opportunity to draft Clay Matthews. How's trading down instead looking now, kids? Can you imagine having to play Matthews 2x a year? There are other examples as well. ESPN Boston has an article, Here, that says some of what I have been thinking for the last few years. In the past, whenever I was right about where the Pats would fail(old linebackers being replaced by old LBs, Adailius Thomas and Junior Seau, for example), it didn't matter. They would create strengths elsewhere and the accurate weaknesses I saw became irrelevant. Not anymore. Put simply: the Pats lack talent on defense. No amount of scheming makes a guy smart, strong, and quick enough to get off a block. He has to do that on his own. Many times a 2nd round pick is simply a 2nd round pick, and trading away a chance at a 1st round talent to get 2 less talented guys kicks you in the balls. So, either Belechik has started believing his own BS, and he needs to get some new eyes on the situation, or, he's just having a very unlucky stretch...that has lasted 3 years.

What's my name? Is it OCinShitOnTheStreetFrancisco?

You aren't getting this, and I read further that you are insisting on talking about our skill players in term of "options". As has already been explained, there is clearly no "read progression" here in the traditional sense, therefore, there are not "options" in the traditional sense. On any given play 3 of our guys are the "primary receiver". I would call it the "judo" offense, because it uses whatever you are trying to do against you. This is the perfect offense to run against a big fat blowhard who want to attack it with physicality.... The other point that needs to be reinforced is: Who are your #4 and #5 CB? They will be on the field...a lot. Namaan Roosevelt has owned everybody else's #4 and #5 and again, he's not the #4 option. On these plays, he is often the first guy Fitz looks at, especially on 3rd down. Who can cover Spiller and Freddy...as WRs? Because, I assure you, they will be lining up there. The final point is: I guarantee your MLB and S cannot cover David Nelson or Scott Chandler. Those 2 guys have left a trail of dead "MLB/S covers Nelson/Chandler" defensive schemes behind them. But, by all means, stack the box with short, light weight guys who can't cover. Or better, have them blitz! Nothing would please me more than watching Fitz throw the ball over their heads to Chandler/Nelson. If the Jets look to take things away(Revis Island), that only helps us. Let me say that again: Revis Island HELPS us. Please feel free to take one of your defenders out of your team defensive scheme, and create an opportunity for us to clear out that side of the field so we can run outs/screens to it, and have a pre-positioned lead blocker on Revis. You take Revis Island, and add to that you have to play nickel, at least, all game.....and that's when we start running Fred Jackson off tackle, and off center for Pete's sake, with 5-6 of your defenders at least 10 yards down field. Please feel free to have the fat man run his mouth and be "intimidating" we will let you have your big D play to nowhere, and simply run/pass to wherever the "big play" guy was supposed to be. We have 6 skill players you MUST account for. Taking away 1 or 2 "options" solves nothing.

Did neither of you unmitigated morons watch the game yesterday? What time was it played, in EDT?

Yawn.

I don't doubt any of this. My post is strictly limited to the timing...and laughing at it. Irony, ya know?

Look, I don't care what cowtud said, clearly he was wrong then, and, whaddya know? He's wrong now. I am more interested in the numbers here. However, Cowturd's idiot baseline is a fun thing to destroy. (3 weeks ago he said that the Steelers, Raiders, Chargers and Pats, etc. are better than us because they've played a tougher schedule, and have easier schedules going forward. ) Exhibit #1 As of today, we have have had the toughest schedule in the AFC. So, Wrong Cowturd. In fact, the Steelers and the Chargers have had the easiest schedules. And, on the other side, ONLY the Pats, of course , have an easier schedule than us going forward. (Edit: of the teams cowturd referred to specifically as better than the Bills) So there you have it: quantifiable evidence that not only was Cowturd wrong, 3 weeks later he was MASSIVELY wrong. Again, you can say it's too early/doesn't matter. That's fine, but I wasn't the one talking schit on national radio, Cowturd was.

3.5, don't forget to tell him about 3.5...

Yes, but we can count on 3.5 sacks per game to win. EDIT: Edwards_Arm = Holcomb's_Arm, right?

I think Wannstache had something to do with it. This team has never blitzed like that. And, on a drafting note, we have the corners and DBs to make those blitzes work

I will say: I am nowhere near as displeased with Kelsay this year as in years past. Tell you what: if Kelsay can go out and kill Dallas, like he did last time, then I will be the first to say I was wrong about him being inconsistent. Between then and now, hopefully he steadily improves.

Of all the days to post this thread.... Dareus was a beast today. He crumpled the pocket over and over.

Hey hey, hey hey!

Pardon my ignorance, but how do you say "blow it out your ass" in French?