DanInUticaTampa

I think the 2010 draft is still shakey. The one out of that draft that looks most promising is moats he seems to be pretty much what the bills expected out of maybin. Carrington looks ok. Troup I haven't been impressed with. And spiller has seen limited action, and shows he still has a lot to learn. This most recent draft looks a lot more promising. And I think that gailey had a lot more say in it, with there being a couple senior bowl players that we picked. But out of this years draft, dareus looks like the real deal, sheppard has shown more flashes than troup and carrington combined, and harriston proved himself well in his first start. Nix's first draft is hard for me to judge. The spiller pick was a bit questionable, and now that spiller hardly touches the ball, it seems more questionable. I do still feel that if the raiders didn't pick mcclain, that we would have. which sucks, because I would have loved him a lot more than spiller. I don't hate the spiller pick, but the jury is still out on him. And then for carrington and troup, I didn't get the "small school" thing that year. kind of came out of nowhere. And I knew very little about them. for me, the best I can say for a lot of the 2010 choices is that it is too early to call them a bust. though carrington has shown some nice flashes and can develop. and it is too bad easly can't stay on the field, because the gems these guy find at WR that go undrafted/later rounds is impressive. Really makes you wonder what a they can find with a 4th round pick when they find someone like nelson undrafted. But this whole thing with young players starting reminds me when we had an entire roster of marv's new young players with like edwards at QB, whitner, poz, mr. "im worth millions," lynch, etc, and now the team has none of them. So just because they are starting doesn't excite me. They actually have to play well during that start to give me the wow factor.

I agree, somebody has to be screwing up. But that doesn't mean it is automatically williams and dareus. They are not the problem with the defense. the problem is on the outside of the defense, not the middle. the middle of the defense is amazing. Just the fact that barnett can drop into coverage so often is evidence that williams/dareus are doing their job. with the outside, all those players need help with the rush by bringing in safties to help them out. Williams and dareus are fine, and blaming them for other players' mistakes doesn't fit.

I would have to agree with that as well. We have definently faced better offenses than defenses this year.

The oline is def playing better than expected, but I hope they still try to upgrade it in the offseason. one thing that might factor into is that we havent exactly played many good defenses. Oakland has some good players up front, and the bengals D is great (and gave us the most trouble) but the pats*, eagles, and chiefs don't exactly present a tough matchup for any oline. But as for the eagles D, the oline did a good job with Babin. This oline is playing pretty good, but I think we could use upgrades if we want a superbowl type of team. I am also thinking wood might be having a probowl year so far.

It is obvious all the big running plays are away from the middle. not just williams/dareus, but barnet right behind them as well. all the problems with the run defense are on the edges. Merriman has been servicible, but I thought the front office was crazy for thinking he was the answer to their pass rushing troubles. He has played a lot better than expected and it is nice to see him on the field, but we need to upgrade that. Kelsey has had several nice plays, but when teams run at you that often, you better has at least some good plays. carrington is nice on the edge, but he doesn't seem to be good against the run. The edges of that defense need work. And it is hard to judge our secondary.... mkelvin is hot and cold. The guy either has a great game or a terrible game. But they seem to be tackleing better and better each week. people who hate on williams for not tackleing on plays that are away from him are being ridiculous. that would be like a jests fan hating on revis because he isn't intercepting the ball because the ball is being thrown away from him. williams/dareus taking out the middle of the field is just has important as revis shutting down the number 1 reciever for the jests.

keyword being "win."

pretty much. roosevelt caught a lot of mild passes, but they were able to shut us down prety much. we need someone to run deep. Jones has a lot more potential than evans, but the one thing I miss about evans is he drew double coverage pretty often. I hardly see anyone double cover jones. and on the flipside, one think I like about jones way more than evans is the guy is a fighter. when fitz threw that int in the redzone, he didn't just stand and stare. he knocked it out of the defender's hands. He worries me that he drops too many balls, but in all honesty, I think we are going to need him this season.

absolutly

amen!

pretty much should end the discussion with the whole argument. And I really don't understand why people think that people who make their living as a public figure wouldn't have consequences for saying something contraversial. it happens all the time. it has nothing to do with freedom of speech. if you make your living off the public, then your pay goes way down once you do something the public doesn't like. it isn't like a normal job where you can say **** at a bar and go in the next day an no one has any idea that you ran your mouth.

You shouldn't have to provide examples when something is common knowledge. why are you nitpicking at something so silly? and why would you ask for examples when you have already heard of such examples? If you are trying to prove a point, stop beating around the bush because no one cant get what you are trying to prove except you want "examples" of things you already know exist.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=calls+bush+hitler and this one pretty much has every bush/hitler comment ever http://semiskimmed.net/bushhitler.html

give it to anyone. need a new song and a new personality. I don't care if it is even some crappy rap song.

I don't think people should hate a guy for speaking his mind, especially when no one really listens to him. whether it is the dixie chicks or hank Williams, Jr. people want to say silly things with no thought, go ahead. with that said though, I will support any stand that keeps that song from playing. hate that song.

but if they said the bills, then it would be business as usuall. except there isn't much of an "if" there

here is an idea. after the season, we will really know what we have!

the titans and skins games will be a tough sell. they have a better shot at beating the jests twice, imo.

mckelvin is one problem on defense. donald jones is a smaller problem on offense. if jones didn't come back from sucking in the first half of the NE game, he would be an even bigger problem. I would let the guy slide for now though, because he is fairly new and has room to grow. mckelvin looks like he isn't worth having on the field though. our oline isn't strong enough to handle the top defenses though. people can say they played well against the raiders, which have a great dline, but that is misleading. The raiders d might be good, but they play dirty. They drew a lot of penalties that saved a lot of drives for us. with that said, the oline is very much improved from last year, so I hate to point it out as the problem. it isn't bad, it is just still a weakness for us. and overall, I like where this team is heading and I hope these draft picks the past couple years start to work out.

that has not been the case at all this year. unless you think the chiefs are a "tough" team. This team has always had the MO of beating the easy teams, but never beating a tough team. that is the way it has been for a decade. we lose to ravens, steelers, pats*, jests and we beat chiefs, bengals, indy's backups, raiders when they sucked, etc. the problem with the bills is they just are not as good as the elite teams. Our oline has been solid this year, but put them up against a top 5 defense, and jackson gets stopped and fitz gets pressured, then our entire offense is ruined. Then have elite WR go up against our DBS, and our defense gets smoked, tired, and out of breath. If the problem was the bills take the easy teams too easy, then that score of the chiefs game would read like 14-10. not 45-7 or whatever it was. with that said, we might be able to beat philly with the oline problems they are having and their defense being terrible. but the giants, and probably the cowgirls, are going to own us in all phases of the game. and gawd help this team when brady comes back for revenge. but the jests and phins don't scare me. it is more than realistic we beat each of them at least once. this team has at least 4-5 more wins left in it, and end at about 8-8 which is fine by me as long as the add more players in the offseason. dareus/barnett type of additions. they really need pass rush help, oline help, and if jones continues to struggle, they might need WR help. agreed, they have been getting treated like celeberties. they have been everywhere, including gailey. I am glad they got some exposure, because they deserve it. but now put that to rest and get back to putting it all into winning.

well, I thought it was a bad game for the most part. And being out muscled was a big reason for that, like you said. we just got a beat down at the LOS. I was kinda expecting it to happen in the raiders game, but since we came out of that pretty well, I was expecting us to play better today. We have a lot of work to do to improve.

we really needed this win to get into the playoffs. out of all our games, this one and denver were the easiest on our schedule. the rest of the games look to be fairly difficult... maybe the phins wont be hard. but this looks more like an 8-8 team this year. the team has gotten better, but it has a lot of work to do.

yeah, but he lost all that money playing blackjack, so now he is living off of food stamps and paying the staff with IOUs

as for the SJ drop, I don't know if the refs made the right call or not, but to me, it looked like a catch. There might be some crazy detailed rule that would explain why it wouldn't be a catch, but there was no explanation as to why, which is very suspect. So there might be some crazy rule, but chances are, the refs messed up. Usually when a call like that is made, there is an explanation like, the ball hit the ground, the reciever didn't maintain control, reciever stepped out of bounds, didn't have both feet in, etc. the fact that there was no explanation is a huge red flag that the call might not be that great. I wouldn't be surprised if they had to explanations, and the refs disaggreed on them, and the just decided to say nothing.

yeah, because we all know that referees dont make mistakes. especially when two of them agree!

Well, with that syracuse play, it is obvious the ball went wide left. if you can't see that, then you are just being stubborn.