Flbillsfan#1

No, but all things being equal, if the defense plays as it did & Trent plays the entire game, I would bet the Bills lose the game.

I agree the person calling the shots makes all the difference. Chicago's defense looks totally different (better) since Lovie Smith took over the playcalling for the Defense.

I don't understand what you are saying. Are you telling me I don't have a right to express my views about Trent on this board? There a a NUMBER of posters that have CRUSADED against JP & continue to do so even though he is no longer on the team without getting any kind of warning. I am always polite on this board.

I am so SICK of the stats people use to defend Trent. Yeah he was 5 for 5.........................the same way he always has a high completion percentage, by throwing SHORT, SAFE passes that amount to NOTHING. Trent put THREE points on the board................as USUAL.

I agree, the only question is what defense will the Bills run next year. I PRAY it isn't the Tampa 2.

A Steelers fan told me this week that they really wanted Woods as their new Center. I think the Bills move him to Center next year & move Butler back to right Guard.

Trent put up THREE points, that is 3 points, ONE field goal, the ENTIRE time he played. The ONLY reason the Bills won is because he was injured with a lot of time left as I predicted before the game.

Who knows how many Trent had in college?

They played right into our hands by injuring Trent. NO WAY the Bills win if Trent plays the entire game.

If you think Bills fans would go to Toronto to watch a TORONTO team, you are CRAZY. FEW people in Buffalo go to watch the Jays play, there would be FEWER people that go see a TORONTO team that USED TO be the Bills. If they split the games between Buffalo & Toronto SOME people would go from Buffalo.

As I posted in another thread, at least Fitz was willing to throw downfield. Another game Trent FAILS to put 7 on the board.

At least he was willing to throw the ball DOWNFIELD.

Sims has not been the same QB since his injury.

Well it sounded like you were saying the Bills don't spend enough at the QB & LT positions. Since you NEVER say Trent was a problem for a loss it stands to reason you think he deserves a raise. How can a person no longer on the team be a slug on said team? Maybe if Jauron had let Losman develop in the 2 years he had left on his contract instead of promoting a QB that does not have the physical tools it takes to be an elite QB, that would be one less position the Bills would have to worry about. If you ask me Edwards is the Biggest Slug on the Bills.

Only if Trent is injured with plenty of time left on the clock against the Jets.

Good Post. A lot of people don't seem to get the fact that higher ticket prices do not mean more profit. Jerry Jones & many other owners have a HUGE NUT to crack paying off what they owe. Those fancy new stadiums cost PLENTY & will take a long time to be paid off. A new owner could keep the team in Buffalo with only the cost of the team to pay off. The stadium is paid for & could be updated much cheaper than building a new one. I am sure the State & county would pay for renovations with a new long term lease, & ANYONE that wants a new stadium to be built in Buffalo should think again. Season ticket holders in particular should beware of a new stadium. In Tampa when the new stadium was built, people that had seats on the 50 yd line 10 rows up were moved to the 20 yd line 40 rows up. On top of that they were forced to pay a seat license of a about $1500 & the cost per ticket went up about 150%. ALL of the PRIME seats were held for Corporations, people that had season tickets for YEARS could not get a crack at them.

That is because it took Dick until this year to TOTALY Dick up Trent.

So are you saying you want the Bills to give Trent a raise in pay?

Here are my final thoughts on the Peters saga. I was ALL FOR the Bills resigning Peters & was disappointed when he was traded. Anyone can look up my posts to see I'm telling the truth. There is no way to know if he would have signed with the Bills or not for the amount he signed with the Eagles. It was only after reading Peters remarks after the trade that I changed my mind about him. Those remarks along with the hold out & POOR PLAY the previous year spoke volumes about Peters character or lack there of to me. He may have a very good career with the Eagles. I do not care. He is not a player I want on the team I love.

I realize how negotiations work, that is why I KNEW you could not provide a link about what Peters was willing to accept prior to the trade with Philly. The point is you said you & everyone but me knew what Peters would accept which just is not true.

This Link also proves my point that at that time, Peters was asking to be paid as the best LT in the game. Thanks for helping prove my point.

I bumped the thread because it kept getting buried on page two. I posted in the morning, afternoon & late at night, that is hardly every hour. The reason I did this is because you like to call everyone else out for links then you CAN'T provide one yourself. You provided two links. One was AFTER the agreement was in place to trade Peters which is NOT the link I asked for & the other PROVED MY POINT that Peters was asking for MORE than he signed for with the Eagles.

So this link PROVES my point. Peters according to Lombardi was asking for OVER 10 Million per year.

NOTHING in that article states what Peters was willing to ACCEPT prior to being traded to the Eagles.

YOU are the one calling EVERYONE else out about links & deriding them for not providing one. Can you spell HYPOCRITE?