SuperKillerRobots

Chill out.

The beginning of the D BVell era reminds me a lot of the beginning of the B Butler era - both hurt in TC befor ethey could solidify a starting position, but both handed the keys when proven healthy.

I'm hoping that for the first third and 4 to 8 play the Pats have to run, we line up with Ellis as one DE, Schobel the other, and Maybin as OLB in base D. Hopefully that'll be a tough package to play against if you are going to pass.

Wouldn't it be great if we had a pass rusher on this team that talked about using the "gator roll" to bring down big QBs? Ware really is an animal.

I would tak eout the Packers, Bears and Titans, while adding the Steelers. Just because a team is better than the Bills doesn't make them a model franchise. The Packers were basically Brett Favre and with him gone, they are rebuilding. They haven't been a model franchise since the 90s. The Bears have a decent team (SB contender now that they have Cutler), but they don't contend enough to be a model franchise. As for the Titans, Detroit would have won 8 games last year if Haynesworth played for them like he did for the Titans. The Steelers are the model frnchise as far as I'm concerned. They pick the right coaches, draft/develop/evalutate well, and generally put out a good team most years. I woudl say they do a better job of being a model franchise than every other team on the list. Maybe the Pats overtake them ,but I don't know you can say that until they change coaches and stilla re able to win. The Steelers were good under Cowher, they are good under Tomlin. NE was horrid until Belichek came on, but then you could make that case for the Chargers as well.

This is a bad supposition - if the Bills finish better than 5 or 6 of the teams that need QBs, they probably will nto be looking for a QB. If Edwards is good enough to at least keep us out of the bottom 12 or 15, they won't draft a QB high unless the new coach really doesn't like something about him. I guess it's possible that we finish 15th due entirely to our defense and special teams, while the offense is atrocious, but I doubt that.

Walker Wood (so far) Leo (didn't think much of him until I saw him play for us) Josh Reed (he was re-signed under DJ instead of being tarred and feathered) Lynch (didn't think he'd be as good as he was) Copeland Bryan (reach, but I never thought he'd make the team or PS) I guess with the rookies it could be attributed to me not paying a lot of attention to the college game and as such I don't have a good feel for what the rookies are capable of, but there were some that did better or overachieved (as far as I am concerned) during DJ's tenure.

Hey man, love the avatar and that's a great quote froma great movie, but what the hell is up with your post? If the Bills resemble a fast-moving, electrically-charged ion this football season, I think we'll make the playoffs.

That's a great thought - really warms the cockles.

I keep getting only 52 guys with Lynch counted towards the active roster. So with two free roster spots for opening day, I would make the following changes: Add: Parish Fine McCargo Kelsey Ellis Remove: Mace McIntyre Huggins I also have a had time believing that Youboty won't make the team, but I am having an equally hard time deciding who to cut in his favor.

Is it just me or does this thread illustrate the old Bills vs the new Bills? You have the classic high motor, trying, heady, show-you-like-your-job-and-got-paid Kelsey going against the tenacious, mean, smart, athletic (for a man with that build), Wood. This little training camp skirmish is why I think the Bills will get better each year from here on out. Another couple drafts with more Woods and less Kelseys will turn this franchise right around.

I definitely don't see DJ here if the team doesn't win at least half of the first 8 games and possibly the first 6. They won't give him the last 8 games to bring the record up and Bobby April's been waiting for a while for this opportunity. I agree with the original poster in that DE is the first round pick next year, but there's no way all 4 of the guys he listed go. But I wouldn't be surprised if one or two of the old guys went out the door and had some healthy competition in camp next year (regardless of what happens this year).

I was never a big fan of your posts - probably because most were just the basic offseason crap that everyone tries to occupy theirs minds with until real football (or a semblence of real football, as we have now) begins, but also, for some reason, I never liked your balck and gray avatar. Let me just say, not only is your avatar much-improved, but your quote is from one of the greatest movies, and by the best character in that movie, of all time. Good adjustment. As far as your post, I actually think the running game is just as good as it was in 2006 and the passing game appears to be leaps and bounds better. Absolutely correct that the pass rush was better back then, but I have to say our D-line was weaker overall that season than they are now. The DTs that year were rough and the DEs were the same people except for Hargrove (all 11 of him). Also, as far as your out-coached comments, I don't think they game plan for these pre-season games, so it's hard to say that we got "out-coached" when our coach (and possibly theirs) was not trying. I think a good indication of the coaching is the no-huddle offense, which looked a lot better than I thought it would. To be honest, I figured they would come out in no-huddle for three first three plays. Then after they punted and got the ball back they would start to huddle. So this was a pleasant surprise for me. "It appears my hypocrisy knows no bounds..." "I'm your huckleberry."

Athlete inflections from an ESPN interview should be taken with a grain of salt. I think you're looking into this too closely.

Isn't that the kryptonite of the cover 2?

If that is indeed true, that's a pretty good number. You don't always use that much of the play clock when you do huddle. The no huddle, as I have said before, works the best when you use the same amount of time pre-snap as with any other offense, you just do it at the LOS instead of in the huddle.

I agree that multiple INTs in a game are no good, but I'd rather see him throw 14 INTs and 27 TDs than 6 INTs and 16 TDs (those numbers by the way serve no other significance than to illustrate my point that I'd rather have him throwing the ball all over the place than playing conservative). All right, I'm sorry you can't see the obvious: Dick purposely had the offense go three and out and tire down the defense in preparation for just this season. You see, not other defense is better prepared to spend the entire game on the field! Seriously though, I gotta think they only use it situationally. I'm half thinking that they are making such a big deal of it because they want the Pats to come out trying to stop it in week one, while they pull out something else. Another way I could see it used would be solely in the first half or or second half, with a normal huddle offense the rest of the time. If they can learn how to mix it up, they could be really good. It's all about finding the unconditioned defender and exploiting them. Also, in your post you talk about using the spread offense and power running game as opposed to the no-huddle. I think the offense this year is going to be a mixed bag of no-huddle hurry-up, 2 TE runnning game, and 4-wide (mostly with a TE or RB in the slot). I think the strength of our offense is in the 3-wide two RB/RB, TE set and that's what will be used most. It seems to give us the best match-ups.

I thought it was a good read on the play, but a bad throw, which looked like it was caused by the pressure. He hit the lineman with his hand during the release and that could have been the difference between having the ball sail on him (as it did) and dropping it inbetween the two defenders (Lee was open, but about 2 yards behind where the ball landed). I really hope that something like this doesn't mak ehim gun-shy in the future. To make the offense work, he has to throw the ball into coverage and be able to accept a pick here and there. Getting 50 yards and throwing a pick is much better than going three and out. Good teams can at least get a first down or two before they give the ball back. This will help mitigate the time of possession problems the no-huddle causes. Also, if you look back to the 90s Bills teams (mid-90s actually) you see tha tthe no huddle stopped working so well because we kept going three and out, which wore down the defense and put the opposing offense on the field all the time.

The Bruce Hall experiment is over. Last night confirmed that. He couldn't do anything.

He got hurt in practice the other day and may be out for the season. He's about to get stashed on IR.

Shouldn't the comparison really be Peters vs Wood & half of Levitre? I thought we used that extra pick to move up to get him. Seriously though, I have a feeling that the Peters trade and drafting of Wood will go a long way towards making the o-line better. The attitude and love of the game seem to go a long way towards making o-lines good, as opposed to having athletic freaks at key positions. I guess what I'm trying to get to here is that geting 5 guys to the point where they cover for each other and know what to do and where to be is better than having a two guys who are freaks and can make up for their own mistakes, but not those of others. Seems like covering for your other linemen is a big part of playing o-line.

Chris Watson was the greatest punt-catcher this - or any - organization ever saw.

I think they'll cut Hall once Lynch comes off suspension. Also, I think this year, along with some of the ST guys, goes McIntyre and the FB position altogether - especially if they keep 4 TEs.