finn

We've already seen this defense against Brady. The players showed up; Schwartz did not. Rushing three against Brady and covering Gronkowski with a second-string safety. THAT'S going to work.

I do think trading up at that price can be justified, even for a WR, but not in the most loaded draft for receivers in NFL history, and not when the team has no quarterback or line (or coaches who can help make up the difference instead of adding to it). The original poster is correct: the Bills messed up. They should have traded DOWN, picked up Beckam and picked up a quality guard. Instead, Whaley got cute. He fell in love with Watkins like the most sophomoric fantasy footballer and traded away a goldmine on the gamble that E.J. Manuel, Doug Marrone and one of the worst lines in the history of football would take us to the playoffs. Here's the thing: Watkins is the real deal, and every time he shows it fans will applaud Whaley. But Beckam and Benjamin are also studs, and we could have had one of them AND our fourth round pick AND our first round next year. (Or Evans at a much less steep price.) So don't buy the line that if Watkins is great Whaley was right. He wasn't right. He was wrong. Even a HOF career from Watkins won't justify this blunder.

I don't think the owners are rigging the game, but the game is not as fair as most people think. First, refs are in fact biased because they're human and are subject to the same pressures everyone else is. You can find a persuasive account of how in a book called Sportscasting. Second, some NFL refs may be corrupt. I'm not claiming it's true hands down, but corruption in the World Cup tournament is so endemic that you can't rule it out in the NFL. These NFL guys are not full-time refs, and like everyone else they're susceptible to blackmail and other persuasive measures. When huge money is on the table, integrity is not high on everyone's list of values. I'm sounding cynical, but I think the only factor holding back big-scale corruption is fear of losing the whole enchilada: big greed is trumping small greed. For now.

Why "stubborn"? Why not "inept" or "incompetent"? Between last year's left-guard debacle and this year's idiocy, I don't understand why Marrone gets any support at all. What's to like? Really, I ask in earnest. What has he done that any NFL position coach, chosen at random, could not do? At best, he's like Orton: he won't lose you games. But can't we do better than that? Imagine a coach that actually helped WIN games. Am I missing something? Do you really think scenario, even if true, absolves Marrone? Do you mean to say that it's worth playing a rookie not close to ready--and suffer badly for it--just to make a point about effort in training camp? Maybe you bench the better player for a game to make your point, but not half the season. A competent coach doesn't need to hurt the team badly to motivate players.

I'm with you. I would give Orton the extension and go all in on the O-line, the only serious weakness on the team. Yes, it would be gamble, but what is the alternative? E.J. Manuel, Take Two? Another vet? A second round developmental project? With a strong running game and excellent protection, you don't need Orton at his absolute best to make the Bills a top-ten team, especially with this defense and wide receiver corps. They're ready now, in fact, except (a huge except) for what might be the worst line in franchise history. It's a stretch to hope that this coaching staff could pull together a line with what they have to work with (although I fantasize about a Hairston-Glenn-Wood-Urbick-Kujo scenario), but between free agency, the draft and maybe some development of the young guys, it's reasonable to think they might pull it off next year and go deep into the playoffs. But, yes, it starts with resigning Orton.

I've had similar thoughts. Look at Gilmore's almost-break up of the pass in the endzone a few games ago. Does it really make sense to say, as many commentators did, that a great DB breaks that pass up and a not-great DB doesn't? Gilmore arm was between the receiver's arms--it was an extraordinary exhibition of athleticism on both players' parts. Now, maybe his not making the play and the WR making the play shapes how each of them develops from that point on, but I don't agree that Gilmore's failure to break up the pass makes him any less of a player than a DB who does break it up. I think I'll be in the small minority on this one, however...

"Drafting Sammy Watkins, and giving away next year's 1st and 4th(note the proper use of math, logic, the dictionary, and grammar in saying that precisely, and therefore: correctly." You're using the colon incorrectly, bub. I only correct people who are being deliberately obnoxious about other people's grammar. The "Oxford comma" is also questionable to some, and you didn't insert a space between the "4th" and the parentheses, which is another error. In short, why don't you stick to substance, and, while you're at it, tone down the self-righteousness, prickly, self-satisfied tone. Resolve your insecurities elsewhere. As for the substance of your comment, Whaley's move was definitely debatable at the time and probably will remain so for another year or two, maybe more. It is hardly "nonsensical" to challenge it as wrong-headed or reckless, especially in light of E.J.'s face plant this year. Since you have your dictionary handy, I suggest you look up the word. As Inigo Montoya would say, I don't think that word means what you think it means.

They're top to BECAUSE they played Buffalo.

Whaley admits the Hughes trade fell into his lap and said it was a no-brainer. So give him credit for not not having a brain but I wouldn't go further than that. As for the Rivers pickup, it's a lot like the Chris Williams signing: a top draft pick who has under-performed for his career. So we sign both and get...mediocre vets. They may not be awful, but they're not very good, either. I do give him credit for the Graham signing, which was astute, and the Williams pickup, but not so much for Spikes, who is an uneven player. Meanwhile, as others have pointed out, he has left yawning holes at guard. On the whole, I would give Whaley an average (which is to say mediocre) grade if it wasn't for the Manuel pick and the Watkins trade. Both reek of recklessness and haste. Two first round draft picks wasted, and this by a franchise that hasn't been in the playoffs in 14 years.

This is the kind of quality post/response that keeps me coming back to this site. Thanks. I'll look for the Muth posts.

Several posters have said they think Richardson will be good, even very good, with time. Why do you say that? He may be big, tough and play hard, but from what little I've seen, he's constantly being beaten. It looks like he simply isn't quick enough and doesn't have good enough balance to play guard in the NFL. Only when someone runs directly at him does he seem to do ok. But I haven't seen the all-22 reviews, so I defer to those who have or who have paid close attention to line play. Is there really reason to hope, or is it more of the "E.J. has all the tools to be a hall of fame qb" type pie in the sky? I'm a little more hopeful about Henderson, since he plays low for a huge man and does seem to have good balance and lateral movement. When he gets beat, it seems to twists and stunts. He looks clueless, but those plays are hard to defend and depend a lot on good communication with the guard next door, which happens to be the worst tackle in the NFL, according to PFF. Anyway, I'd like to hear why folks are up on Richardson.

Nicely summed up. The best he's done is to rise to the level of adequate. Then everyone is excited: "He's adequate! He's adequate!!" EJ apologists point to a game here, a half here, but this qb has never, not once, flashed greatness or even above-averageness. He's a mediocrity with only the slimmest chance of developing into a very good quarterback. The only question now is when the front office will move on. Given the politics, the answer should be after the season. Worst-case scenario: the "it's too early to judge him!" or "It's his line! And WRs! and...and" sentiment will prevail and we'll be having the same exchanges about his ineptitude for another season, with Promo the Robot intoning that it's too early to judge him. Give him another three seasons. God, it sucks being a Bills fan.

This is more or less the observation I was going to make. The two have made built a pretty good young roster, but they put all their chips on EJ and rushed him into the lineup....all while having had two--count 'em--veteran qbs on the roster, paid for and ready to go, in Jackson and Fitzpatrick. In my view, they (and Nix) have gotten nowhere near the heat they deserve for first signing Fitz to that huge contract then letting him go one year in, meaning that they have to pay him without getting his services in return. They messed up signing him, but why did they then cut him, doubling the mistake? I don't buy the "he'd be a distraction" argument, because a much more plausible explanation is right at hand: they made a mistake and wanted it to go away fast. And it worked. How often do you see this crew flamed for their appalling double mistake--I mean giving Fitz a huge contract then cutting him, burdening the franchise with enough dead money to have signed Byrd and more? Neither qb is the long-term answer obviously, but having one or both would have allowed EJ to learn from the bench--or, far, far (far) better, bought them time to bring in one or more qbs with more potential than EJ. The qb position is just too important to put all your chips on one player. We've seen it a sickening number of times here, and we all know the litany. Yet this is just what these two have done. So no Fitz starting while the coaches have time to develop and evaluate one or two young prospect. No long-term plan to stockpile picks in order to move up in the next year's draft to nab a player with more potential. Whaley is praised constantly on this board for the moves he's made. But it seems to me these moves are all about his own career and making himself look good. Usually that self-interest coincides with the franchise's, but cutting Fitz, drafting a questionable "franchise" qb now versus a more sure thing later--and (doubling down) giving up two first-round picks for a wide receiver (hey, if it means the playoffs, great, if not, Whaley figures he'd be out of here anyway)... those are not the moves of a GM thinking long term and putting the franchise first. He's a talented guy, and it might be best for Pegula to sign him to a long-term contract so he can put the Bills first instead of himself.

This back and forth is getting old, guys. "E.J. sucks"; "Yeah, but he's had only 12 starts" in every variation, with lots of hyperbole on both sides. Can we agree that a) it's too early to judge him definitively, and b) he is awful on bad days and seldom more than adequate on good days? How about an acronym to speed things along: IKIEBHRS: "I know it's early but he really sucks?"

No, I was referring to the backlash I've been reading and hearing in many places charging that the negative reaction to the beatings amounts to political correctness or a lynch-mob mentality. Maybe that's what we call widespread responses that we don't like. But I like to think that virtually all of us can agree on some things, like beating a 4-year old bloody is wrong.

Thanks for posting the video. This is the kind of thing a lot of parents need to hear, directly about their own behavior but also indirectly, about their own parents'. Carter's message is that someone you love can be simply wrong; acknowledging they're wrong doesn't change your love for them. You know, the NFL is all about fun and enjoyment, for us, anyway. But. like any public forum, it's also a means of reinforcing--or, on rare occasions, changing--behaviors. Maybe this outraged response will make a few parents think about what they do to their kids. I wouldn't call the outrage a "mob mentality"; I would call it consensus. You don't do that to a child. Period.

I give Whaley credit for agreeing to what he admitted was a "no-brainer" deal that fell into his lap. But he doesn't deserve more credit than that, at least for that deal. It sure has been terrific for the Bills, though. Hughes is everything May-have-been wasn't.

I don't entirely blame the Bills for drafting E.J. I was pessimistic at the time because I thought they might have been so enamored with his physical attributes that they were deliberately overlooking the problems that caused other teams to pass on him--the same mentality, in reverse, that appears to have caused the Bills to pass on Russell Wilson. But I realize you have to roll the dice on qb's. But that is just what has bummed me out since then---the Bills went all in on this iffy (i.e., not Luck or Manning) prospect. Just like they went all in on Fitzpatrick. It's like they sit on their hands for years then suddenly panic and lunge at whoever is right in front of them at the time. Just in the last few years they've passed on Nassib, Tannehill, Kaepernick, Wilson, Glennon, Dalton, Manziel... and, yes, Geno Smith and Gabbert and a host of mediocrities, too. My point is that they should have been drafting qb's every year--maybe two a year--until they really had someone. It's ok to draft a bust; every team has done so. But it's NOT ok to draft an iffy prospect, decline to bring in competition, then basically cut off your chief recourse in case he's a bust. Even if the Watkins turns out to be terrific, it was still an appalling move to give up the 2015 first round pick for him when the qb spot is unsettled. Think how selfish that move was on the part of Whaley. He figured he'll be fired anyway if Manuel is a bust, so why not go all in with a splashy wr? He isn't gambling with HIS future--he's already committed to Manuel--he's gambling with the BILLS' future, adding still another year of purgatory for the Bills fans if the gamble doesn't work out. Maybe this is just the legacy of Ralph Wilson playing out its last act: one last mediocre front office and coaching staff doing its mediocre thing. But what a cruel little gift Whaley will be giving us and his successor on his way out. He not only leaves a mess but takes away all the cleaning supplies as he leaves. A nice big FU to all of us.

What he said. It seems to me the best qb's throw both a lot of int's and td's their first few seasons. Then gradually the int's fall off as they learn to read defenses better. The mediocre qb's throw few of either because they're timid and so never learn much. Kelly drove me crazy with his interceptions, even in his prime. But he never stopped going for it. At the least E.J. should air it out in the preseason.

A lot of competent coordinators would have struggled with our qb's and the injury to Spiller, to say nothing of the left guard debacle. My beef with Hackett is the hurry-up offense, a "me-too" gimmick that has nothing to do with the personnel here--on the contrary. You have green qb's, a shaky line and a new offense and you use a hurry up? Way to pin back those clueless db's and confused pass rushers! Hackett might be a decent coordinator some day with another team, but only because he's learning on the job at the Bills' expense. But, hey, you get what you pay for.

You know, it goes both ways with the new rules about db's and contact. If EJ would take some shots downfield instead of checking down virtually every time (so it seems), he might at least get some interference calls. He's been way too cautious for a young qb. Yes, we'll complain about int's, but I'll take them if it means more action and fewer punts.

If you want to feel even worse, recall that Whaley was trying frantically to trade the second round pick for Carlos Hyde, who evidently is looking terrific in camp. (I do like the Bryce Brown pickup, though.) By the way, one problem with moving Cyrus K. to guard is his height: strong as he is, it's easy for a DT to get under the pads of someone that tall, which is why you don't see many 6'7" guards or centers in the NFL. The Cordy Glenn pick was brilliant, and picking Eric Wood has worked out well, but otherwise the story of the Bills line is getting by with mediocrity: Pears, Legursky, Brown, Urbick and now Williams, who may work out but was average at best with the Bears and Rams. So it's depressing to see Cyrus K. and Richardson struggling. A fine set of receivers and running backs isn't much help when the OL can't pass protect and open lanes. My hopes are pinned on a Glenn-Williams-Wood-Hairston-Pears/Henderson line, but I realize that this working out is a long-shot. When was the last time the Bills had a terrific line, hands down?

That's conventional wisdom, not to invest too much in one position, but it's not a law or rule, and in the Bills' case, the smart thing is to sign Hughes to a long-term deal. They have very little money invested in the quarterback position (especially compared to what Brady and Manning are being paid), so there should be plenty of room. Plus, after this season, it may be easier to replace the soon-to-be-overpaid Mario than Hughes, a young player on the rise. Sign your young players, Bills. You've taken two steps forward: forget the three steps back for once.

Listen to us. Swap out Manuel's name for Rob Johnson, Todd Collins, J.P Losman, Trent Edwards and all the other failed Bills QBs since Kelly and it's the same pattern of exchanges: "He sucks," "Be patient," "He really sucks," "It's too early to judge, you're an idiot," "I'm pessimistic," "Yeah, but what about that one lovely throw?" "He's not going to make it," "It's the O-line and receivers, not him," "Give him time." "Another wasted four years," "You're a fool, what about all the other late bloomers," "I was right all along--he sucks," "Yeah, well, good for you, jerk." I think we've forgotten what it's like to have a first-rate quarterback on the team. There was a lot of trash about Bledsoe and Flutie, but there was also big time excitement about them (and Kelly at his worst) that never came out with these others--or with Manuel. Be honest--have you ever been really, deep down excited about Manuel? Intellectually, we know he will continue to develop and may--who knows?-- be quite good in the end. Viscerally, we know better. We know what is going to happen.

Sorry, I'm not being clear. What I mean is that I'm concerned that if Henderson continues to develop this year, Whaley et al will be tempted to let Glenn sign elsewhere because his asking price (especially compared to a seventh rounder) will be too high and they recognize a replacement in Henderson. To be fair, this regime has not shown the tendency to value savings over building talent that we've seen for years here. My worry is the flip side of my excitement that the Bills might be building not just a decent line but a first-rate one. Maybe I should have expressed it that way. Too many years of seeing fears come true, I guess.