FloridaSnow

Why so cynical?

If we lose to the Eagles, then they make it...

... and to get all this in exchange for playing a game that you love. Absolutely.

I'd be interested. I just got the game after not having played the series for a while. I should mention that I'm just a semi-casual gamer. How often do you generally play in an online dynasty? My gamertag is Snow627

College Football will be the big winner, especially if there's a prolonged strike.

They also forced us to change QBs... If you're on thin ice, this is definitely not the team you want to line up against.

This and it's a travesty.

We were? Crap, how did we screw it up this time?

The Raiders are more organized because they are trying to address their needs, and taking chances when the possible long-term benefits outweigh the short-term costs. They will return to the playoffs before we do. His failure and the move itself are not causes for celebration. I never said either was; simply that the move made sense and it would have been nice to see us try to address our greatest weakness for a minimal price (even if it involves taking a chance). How can you be so sure bringing him in would have undermined rather than motivated our QBs? Do you think they came into this season especially motivated? Funny, it almost sounds like you didn't read the post being addressed. Learn to read when you're in class tomorrow or sue your school district for completely failing you. Yes, your ability to blindly impose dialectical logic is impressive. All Bills fans who are critical of the front office will be so regardless of what the front office does because they simply enjoy taking oppositional stances. It must be nice to live in such a simple world. While I didn't necessarily want them to bring in Campbell in particular, he was worth taking a chance on given the cheap asking price. The fact that he hasn't succeeded in Oakland thus far does not prove 1) he cannot do well anywhere or 2) he will not turn things around. There were similar threads about the Bills front office making the right choice by not bringing in Cutler at this time last year (oops). Our QBs are insufficient and it would have been nice to have another option, even if this other option simply functioned as motivation to the starting QBs (this scenario would involve someone else other than Campbell obvious). Let me state this again. I am not saying Campbell was a blue chip prospect (such a prospect would have cost more), but the front office should have brought someone (anyone) in this off season to compete with our QBs. Campbell was worth the risk, and it is understandable that people were arguing for him during this past off season, especially when he went so cheaply in the draft.

I seem to recall the mentality being that he was worth a shot for a 5th round pick. Given our QB situation, it is unbelievable that we brought in no one this offseason. The Raiders are more organized at this point, and if I were a fan of theirs, I would be happy the team explored all options. People weren't clamorong for the team to bring Campbell in so much as anyone, and Gradkowski's name even came up a few times early in the offseason. He was moldy bread to a starving man. I'm glad you were right about this person not being any good though. Congratulations and Bravo!

Yep, I read somewhere a few days ago that this Sanchez character they have at QB is no good, so they're probably looking for someone now and must be getting pretty desperate at this point.

Yes, you are delusional. Miami looks good, New England is going to trounce us next week, and the Jets, while maybe not completely living up to their hype, will also be solid. We are in a division with three teams that seem to be secure and improving (though it's debatable regarding the Pats because they are coming from such a high level). We are not only bad but also seem to completely lack direction. Things could not be much worse at the moment. Sorry to be a downer; today was a rough loss. I may think you're delusional, but I also envy your ability to have such optimism right now.

At least they have other options there. They didn't exactly break the bank for him either...

@ Dork, I'm guessing the view of video games changes significantly depending on the age group one falls into. Those who are 30+ probably tend to have a very different view of them than those who are in their 20s or (especially) in their teens.

It's a moot point, but they're probably pretty close. Culpepper's past success was much more significant than anything Edwards has done, though that success was also a lifetime ago. I think they're both bad QBs but bad in different ways. Culpepper can't come to terms with the fact that he's not who he used to be (something I respect in a way) and Edwards doesn't have the ability to actualize his potential (assuming his potential is what we claim it to be on this board).

I like the new Madden. I'm not necessarily looking for realism (I get enough of the real Bills during the regular season), though I also only play a couple hours a week and only online against other people. My guess is that people who buy it to play lots of regular seasons against the computer or others may be into it for a different reason.

I like the swagger. Whether he can back it up or not is a different story, but I'd rather have that than "it's hard to win in the NFL."

Noted, but the writer makes a good point here: "There are plenty of reasons why the Packers might not be able to swing a deal for Lynch, beginning with the Bills’ stubbornness. Though Buffalo drafted former Clemson back C.J. Spiller(notes) with the ninth overall pick in April and got an unexpected 1,000-yard season from Fred Jackson(notes) in ’09, a source familiar with the situation said the team resisted overtures from at least four teams (including the Seahawks and Texans) interested in trading for Lynch, a former Pro Bowl selection coming off a disappointing campaign. According to the source, one team called as recently as last week to inquire about trading for Lynch, and the Bills essentially treated them like unwelcome stalkers. All of this makes me wonder what Nix and head coach Chan Gailey are possibly thinking. Unless they are delusional, they know they have a team that isn’t close to contending for a championship, and the organization clearly is committed to Spiller as its running back of the future. Judging from the Bills’ 15-10 loss to the Dolphins in their season opener at home, Gailey’s plan to use all three backs is a disaster: Spiller started and carried seven times for six yards while Jackson (four carries, 19 yards) and Lynch (three carries, 13 yards) saw spot duty. On a positive note, Spiller and Jackson combined to catch six passes; on a negative note, they gained a collective eight yards on those receptions The Bills may feel that Lynch, who has two years left on his rookie deal, is a relative bargain at a reported $885,000 for 2010 – and they’d be right. For that reason, it’s tempting to keep him, at least for this season. But if Nix is thinking long term, he should get what he can in a trade while Lynch still has value and use the bounty to address other areas of need"

I posted this in the shout box, but figured that I would add a thread just so everyone could see it. He began by discussing the Bills and their performance in Week 1. Unsurprisingly, he sounded very disappointed in the team's performance. He said that he and other Bills fans had the first game circled as an opportunity to set a new tone for the team. While he was impressed and encouraged by the defense (which he mentioned looked bad in the preseasion), he said that the offense looks just like last year. He also mentioned that you need to take shots down the field to win a game and can't simply play it safe (shifted talk from Sanchez to Edwards during this conversation). He did say that he thought Edwards had the ability to win, but that he needed to be willing to take the shots and the team needed to be willing to let him do so. He didn't like the Bills chances during the next few games given how they looked in the first week...

Jackson is not that bad. Their offence will still have a good ground game.

Great, let's trade Trend Edwards to Houston for Matt Shaub and a draft pick then. Just show Houston this breakdown, and I'm sure they'll go for it.

He's a second year QB playing in the first game of his second season. They're trying not to ask him to do too much against the best defense in the NFL. Comparing him to Edwards makes little to no sense. Compare Edwards to other 3rd year QBs.

Sanchez is playing against a better defense and has something called upside. Edwards is not a good quarterback. Let it go. There, I said it.

Look, I don't have a particular dog in this fight, but the fact that you are comparing Trent Edwards performance today with a QB who threw for 297 yards is ludicrous. Completion percentage is not everything.

You're assuming all of those short passes were supposed to be screens...