Dr. K

I haven't seen any of the ESPN stuff, but I agree with you. He deserves neither overwhelming praise or dissing. After all, it is only one game. I think, based on seeing Rivers in college (he played at NC State, where I work) that he is likely to be a good QB, but I could be wrong. But also there's no reason to write him off (or write Brees off, either). Why do people who follow sports always have to go to extremes in their opinions? Either a player walks on water or he is dirt. It's like we insist on seeing sports as superhero comic books. I guess it's fun for adults to act like 13-year-olds sometimes, but a sense of perspective helps.

All true, but how does any of that make Rivers a "bust"?

...15-21, 169 yards in one half of play against the Packers Saturday. He threw a 22-yard touchdown pass (after a 17-yard TD pass was ruled out of bounds) on his first drive. Led an 86-yard drive to TD in second quarter. QB rating for the game: 111.0 It's just one game, but the guy is going to be good. It really annoyed me to hear people on the board (who prabably never saw him play) call him a "bust."

I was at the game in Charlotte last night, and this morning I looked over a lot of it that I'd recorded on the DVR. Yes, the o-line play was ragged, but it was by no means as bad as this thread would imply. I understand the frustration. This is a first pre-season game against one of the strongest lines in the NFC. Even the two bad plays by Peters against Peppers were interesting. On the first (where Peppers sacked Holcomb) Peters engaged with him, then slipped off Peppers to try to block a blitzing linebacker (whom a running back, unseen to Peters, was about to pick up) so Peppers got unabated to the QB. Seems to me this is correctable. The other play was a blatant hold against Peppers when Peters got beat and was trying to protect Holcomb. The Bills broke no long running plays in the game, and quite a few of the gains were very short, but they did get prositive yardage on most running plays. They did not seem to open up much room in the middle of the line, but they did bouce a few plays outside. I think this o-line is a work in progress, and we'll know better at the end of pre-season. If they stay healthy, I expect the starters to be better than last year's line. About the game and team as a whole, I saw lots of things that need to get better, but also a number of positive signs. The fact that the Bills shut out the Panters after their first possession is not insignificant. I worried about the run defense in the middle, but aside from a few plays the tackles seemed to me to play pretty well, especially the rookie Williams. There was not real pass rush, but I hope that will come. McGee got beat on that first series, but at least one of the passes was a case where the receiver came back on a badly underthrown ball by Delhomme and made a great catch although McGee had him well covered. And the TD throw was a close thing--Crowell the linebacker took his eyes off the QB for a split second to peek at the receiver, and was therefore just a fraction of a second slow in dropping back. As it was he still almost batted down the pass. I won't talk about the QB situation because everybody else here has beaten it to death. Antonio Gates made some nice positive runs. Aiken was getting open in the second half. Losman spread the ball around. Lindell made two long field goals. I am encouraged about the defense and I aqm not ready to abandon the offense, not even the o-line. I think there are enough guys who can play to make a decent O-line.

Quite a crew of us Bills fans from Raleigh are driving down to Charlotte for the game. I just want to see some good QB and o-line play from the Bills.

Rivers was the smartest college QB I ever saw play,a dn the best in the clutch. That doesn't mean he's going to be a star, but I wouldn't bet against the guy. I don't know where anyone got the idea he "has bust written all over him."

One other factor to mention--the Bills lost some close games last year, in particular the Jets and Miami games, the Carolina game, and even one of the New England games. Given the disarray on last year's team, it might not take much--some better teamwork, some better coaching decisions, some marginally better play at crucial moments--for the Bills to win such games. In other words, I agree that they may not be as far away as we fear. But then I am such a diehard fan that I can't stand going into the season expecting them to fail. Like Charlie Brown, I always hope Lucy won't jerk the football away this time, no matter how many times she has in the past.

I just want to suggest a possibility. Last season the Bills performed better on their first drives of the game than then ever did in their history (I believe they scored 11 times on their opening drive). We all know that this did not mean the offense played well for the rest of the game; in fact, they stank. However, it does suggest to me that the team was not lacking offensive talent. When prepped well enough for those first quarters, they could carry out a game plan initially. Perhaps this is an indicator of two things: 1) The game coaching was not up to snuff (surprise). Once the other team made adjustments, the Bills could not counter. 2) There is enough talent on this team (even with the loss of Moulds) for them to score much more consistently than they did last season--with the right game plan and proper coaching. Anyway, I raise this possbility to suggest maybe the O won't be as bad as it was last year. We may be surprised, assuming Fairchild and Jauron can install an offense that makes best use of the players' abilities, and can adjust to adversity within the game. One more possibility that I am sure will warrant rebuttal (this is not my main point, it's just a footnote that I'm not sure I believe but will throw out there): 3) Mularkey (aka "Meathead") was not a total loss as an offensive coach. He took a team that started 0-4 in 2004 and led them to a 9-7 finish, and got Bledsoe to more or less play within himself. He could script an opening drive (or at least someone on the team could). But, given a defense that slumped badly, he was not a good enough game coach to provide an offense that would compensate.

I've always been convinced that Anderson missed those kicks in pre-season on purpose. It does not make sense that he would miss EVERY kick he attempted. And I seem to recall him saying publically that he did not want to be drafted by the Bills, before they drafted him.

Just to give this some perspective, what percentage of top-ten draftees end up as pro bowlers by their third year? I ask this sincerely, since I don't know. I suspect the number is nowhere near 50%. I would be surprised if it goes past 30%. I think the bar is being set a little too high.

I think they will do better than 3-6 wins, though I very much understand those who pick them for last in the division. But I think that is based too much on the underachievements of last year than the potential for this one.

Yep. The song was written in the 1844 and it was indeed about young girls from Buffalo, NY. It is mentioned in the "Little House on the Prairie" books by Laura Ingalls Wilder and makes an significant appearance in Frank Capra's "It's a Wonderful Life", which is set in upstate New York.

"As flies to wanton boys are we to the [hockey] gods, They kill us for their sport." W. Shakespeare

So sad. RIP.

I'm sorry I raked up all this old stuff--it was not my intention. I do not understand, Bill, what this has to do with JP Losman. Losman may be the worst QB on the planet, but that does not improve Bledsoe's record. I was skeptical of Bledsoe when we got him, mostly because we hated Rob Johnson because he took too many sacks, and I figured Bledsoe would only take more. But I also was generally his supporter while he was here. My attitude about Bills players is that I want them to succeed, even if my judgment may not be the same as the coaching staff's. You seem to have an obsession with hating JP.

Losman may not be the answer, but Bledsoe wasn't going to get any better. 49 sacks, 17 (!) fumbles, 17 interceptions in a "good" season for him. And in the second half of the season an overall QB rating of 72.1, inlcuding games rated 53, 42, and 36.

I saw that Peter King has made the Cowboys his early NFC Super Bowl pick. That got me thinking about Bledsoe's 2005 season, and wondering if she played any differently than he did in Buffalo, for better or worse. So I wasted some of my Memorial Day looking up his stats and breaking them down for the two halves of the season. In the first half of 2005, Bledsoe was the QB we saw in Buffalo in the first half of 2003: Attempts 244 Completions 156 Comp % 63.9 TD 13 INT 6 Sacks 20 Fumbles 10 In the second half of 2005, we had the classic Bledsoe fall-off, and the QB most of us were happy to see leave: Attempts 255 Completions 144 Comp % 56.4 TD 10 INT 11 Sacks 29 Fumbles 7 I suppose adding Tyrell Owens could help him out, but it ain't going to change a patter that has been established over his entire career. I do not see this quarterback taking The 'Boys to the Super Bowl. FYI

If it weren't for Lamonica, Kemp would never have played in a title game for the Bills. He never in his entire career here copleted 50% of his passes. He could not throw to a receiver before the receiver made his break. He was a leader, but not a great quarterback, even for that less demanding time.

My ranking: Calvin & Hobbes Far Side (very close second) Bloom County Doonsbury . . . . . . . Garfield (unreadable)

I'll be there. Section 308, Row K, Seat 5. Want to meet up beforehand?

Well said! This is EXACTLY my judgment of what happened last season. The bet that Donohoe and the rest of the coaching staff made did not pay off, and the team did not handle itself well once it became clear that the plan wasn't going to work--thus the vacillation between JP and Holcomb. It wasn't a bad plan, in my opinion, and it's not workign cost a lot of people their jobs. That's probably as it should be. The page is turned and now there's a new plan. We'll see how it works.

Just bought my ticket for game one, whenever it is. I'm in the nosebleed section, but I'll be there!

Thanks for saying this. I have thought these things silently for a long time, and I think TD and the Bills fans treated TH shamelessly. No one worked harder than Henry. Willis, despite his obvious skills, doesn't seem like a team player to me. I expect him to be out of here once his contract runs out.

Amazing game. I could not believe how many times the Sabres came back. And the last two minutes were surreal. When the Senators were on the power play I thought, this is probably over. Then the sabers score short=handed and I'm thinking, overtime. Then the Senators score less than half a minute later, and I'm crushed. Sabers pull the goalie but lose the puck and again I'm thinking it's REALLY over now. Then Connoly scores with 10 seconds left. Then the Sabres score 16 seconds into the OT. Complete roller coaster ride. I was wrung out just watching. Just unbelievable.

Ran across this blog posting today, with a link to an academic paper that analyzes on economic terms when, in terms of field postion and yards-to-go, it makes sense for an NFL offense to try for the first down on fourth rather than attempting a kick. The paper concludes that coaches are too conservative--that an analysis shows that it makes sense to go for the first down about twice as often as NFL coaches typically do. Here's the link: http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginal...otball_coa.html (PS: This is a political blog, but you can ignore the politics)