The Big Cat

I joined this board in 2006 because, even then, us out-of-towners were hard-pressed to consume on-going Bills news. I got a lot of news and insight from posting and participating in the on-going dialogue here, and I continued to come back to settle some inexplicable urge to always right (what I perceived to be) un-informed, and misguided masses who dare speak out against our beloved Bills in short-sighted, Well, it's consumed more of my time than I'd like, it's interfering with my professional life, and bickering/curbing the idiot fringe is quite frankly not worth my time anymore. I've come to realize that my input isn't needed, that others will carry the same banner I would have hoisted anyways. Plus, thanks to Twitter, et al, there are plenty of outlets to receive news, plus the opportunity to just lurk here, account be-damned. I'll still watch the Bills every Sunday, but after yesterday, I'm learning to just smile and go on with my life, completely unaffected by the outcome. I am grateful for the 6+ years I had here, the mods have a thankless and noble job keeping this place up and running, but it's no longer for me. I really enjoy what a lot of you have to say, and for every poster who makes me want to chuck my monitor out the window, there's at least one more who brightens my day, makes me laugh out loud, and makes me love the Bills that much more. Thank you, all of you. AND GO BILLS!

I think they have hotlines for people like you...

1.) The Indian burial curses that plague Western New York 2.) Our linebackers (all of them) 3.) Marcel 4.) Mario 5.) George Wilson 6.) Aaron Williams 7.) David Nelson's injury 8.) Wannstadt 9.) The fact that nobody takes pride in playing for Buffalo 10.) Stevie's cheek ring 11.) Freddie's stubbornness 12.) Injuries to the o-line 13.) Fitz

Kyle Williams. The NFL's first and best player/coach.

And I'd grant you your opinion if it didn't differ with every soundbyte coming out of the locker room and with every actual analysis of our front seven I've read... I agree that something has to be done coaching-wise, but the fact is, our guys are seemingly overrated--at least to the extent that they cannot execute the scheme.

Again, unless you're trolling, I think it's important you understand a very basic aspect of football: Our defense got beat by their backup, and our quarterback was unable to beat their defense.

Yeah, no. The opposing quarterback isn't in an arm wrestling contest with ours, so how is it that you inferred from what I said that I think their "backup" is better than our starter?

Your post makes no sense.

What is the worst that could happen? Yes, blitz like all !@#$ing hell. Jump routes, gamble, double team. DO SOMETHING. Jesus! May be we end up giving up 35 points a game, but at least it looks like we're !@#$ing trying. May be we'll register more than one measly sack. May be we'll force a turnover. May be our middling quarterback wouldn't then have to play a perfect !@#$ing game, just to keep us competitive!

Sorry, technically Hasslebeck is the "backup." Your implication (or at least my inference) of him being their second best quarterback, is false.

Actually, I don't think we need a QB. We need a defense that could at the VERY least be ranked in the top 22. If we had that AND the QB we have now, we'd be at 5-2, with a win over the Pats, a win yesterday, and may be, just may be 6-1 with a win over the Jets. Our offense is the top 10 in points and yards. Our defense is the worst in the league, franchise history, league history. So what do we neeeeeed? We neeeeeeeed a defense that can play. A new QB, at this point, is a luxury.

This is false. Folks here were wise to fear Hasselbeck. He's smart, can read defenses, and make the passes. He manages well and won't lose the game for his team. The same CANNOT be said about Locker. He's much more volatile, and fans were right to dread facing the steady, savvy vet.

I've seen Sheppherd blitz well. Moore pressures well, McKelvin is good at jumping routes, Byrd blitzes well, I'd venture to say a guy with Bradham's intensity blitzes well. Our line runs twists with success. Instead we don't do ANYTHING aggressive on defense--and I can't think of a single solid defense in the NFL that has success with this formula---MAY BE the Giants. This was my biggest concern when we hired Stache the first time around. He's notorious for being Captain Vanilla--when we've got players built to be NASTY out there.

This kind of coaching drives me INSANE. My high school basketball coach had a great scheme. He won more than 400 games in his career, but he never won the big one, and he could never consistently beat the coach of our rival. Why? Because in a school of 2,200 students, he wedged players into HIS scheme, never the other way around. Our rival coach? Changed his gameplan with his game to game roster. I don't know if it's an ego thing or what, but this isn't specific to our coach, but it is a thing. Ha, that must have been what was cutting off circulation to his balls.

Which one of next year's rookie QB's will get us the 40 ppg we'll need to have a winning season?

I wanted to chuck my TV out the window last night when I heard re: Dick LaBeau on SNF: "adjustments are my favorite part of the game. Sure, you come in with your Plan A, but if that doesn't work, you move to Plan B, then C, and so on." IF THE PLAYERS CAN'T !@#$ING EXECUTE THE SCHEME, GIVE THEM SOMETHING THEY CAN !@#$ING DO. IF THE SEVEN PLAYERS IN COVERAGE CAN'T PROTECT THE MIDDLE OF THE FIELD, 15 YARDS FROM THE LOS ON 3rd and 8, THEN SEND ONE OR TWO GUYS ON A !@#$ING BLITZ. WHAT ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT? GIVING UP 15 YARDS DOWN THE MIDDLE ON 3RD AND 8!? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!

Yes they do. Favre, Big Ben, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, THEY'VE AL DONE IT. I get that I'm straying from the point, but the bolded part of your post is flat out wrong.

I'll post this again: Our defense allows 32 ppg. To win, we'd have to score 33 ppg--and NINE professional teams have done so since 1941. Yes, Fitz is indeed the problem.

I'll repeat: we need to score 33 ppg to win with this defense. NINE teams since 1941 have done so.

Yeah you must have completely missed his TD throws to Jones and SJ.

I don't believe ANYONE is arguing that Fitz ought to be evaluated on today's performance based on his ability to orchestrate a game winning drive (except you). He took A LOT more four snaps, just to KEEP us in the game when the defense indicated no desire to do so.

Precisely. The math is simple, the facts don't lie: giving up 32 ppg means you have to score 33 ppg to win, a feat only edit: nine professional teams since 1941 have accomplished. Even the most ardent Fitz supporters concede he doesn't belong among those ranks...duh. www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/greatest-scoring-offenses-all-nfl-history/6100

Except Fitz didn't suck today. His TD bullet to Jones and his audible/TD pass to SJ were BRILLIANT. The pick was a steamy turd, but if the defense did ANYTHING, then it's a non-issue.

Graham's report made it sound as though KW was holding back on calling out his teammates.

If your quarterback is having an "outstanding game"---as many here acknowledge, then the defense needs to give him a modicum of support. A quaerback's "outstanding performance" doesn't get negated by one play if his defense has even a middling performance. Instead Fitz's "outstanding performance" was completely negated by defensive mistakes.