T.O. and McNab make up!

[Doc]

The bottom line that you have difficulty escaping is that the passing game was as good or better without TO in 2008, as was the win loss record. Therefore, you have still done nothing to dispute the fact that TO was a waste of money for his on field play. "Stuff of legends"? Just go look it up again. This is not a brain teaser, bro.

 

And, of course, it's always nice to see the inevitable NKM flip---this time on the value of "talking heads" ("guys like" Marshall Faulk AND Deion Sanders!!).

So wait, NOW you're (essentially) saying that TO was the problem with the passing game? He's the reason they attempted 38 fewer passes in 2009 versus 2008? LOL! You're a mess, bro. As if that wasn't apparent with the "someone has to catch those passes" and "who cares if the OC was inexperienced and unprepared, the O-line was a mess, or the QB's sucked." Sigh.

 

And the value of "talking heads," much less former players and coaches, who are paid to evaluate what goes on in games, especially something as easy to observe as whether someone got open, is obvious to most. Unless you are blind, or more precisely, don't want to see.

 

Look doc, your hatred of TO is duly noted. You don't like loudmouths. You prefer a guy who whine to the refs if someone even brushes him, who benefited from illegal videotaping, and who leaft his pregnant girlfriend. Got it. But the fact of the matter is that a) there are few options available in FA, b) your favorite player Josh Reed is gone, and c) there have been no indications to say that Hardy or Johnson are ready to even catch TO's pedestrian 55 passes for 829 yards and 5 TD's. Conversely, there's no cap and TO is amenable to returning, and the team needs all the players, especially those who (forget your laughable claim of TO being irrelevant) are the only thing making the team relevant, it can get. And I have no doubt that Gailey will know how to use TO.

[Mr. WEO]

So wait, NOW you're (essentially) saying that TO was the problem with the passing game? He's the reason they attempted 38 fewer passes in 2009 versus 2008? LOL! You're a mess, bro. As if that wasn't apparent with the "someone has to catch those passes" and "who cares if the OC was inexperienced and unprepared, or the QB's sucked." Sigh.

 

And the value of "talking heads," much less former players and coaches, who are paid to evaluate what goes on in games, especially something as easy to observe as whether someone got open, is obvious to most. Unless you are blind, or more precisely, don't want to see.

 

Look doc, your irrational hatred of TO is duly noted. You don't like loudmouths. You prefer guys who whine to the refs if someone even brushes them, who benefitted from illegal videotaping, and who leaves his pregnant girlfriend. Got it. But the fact of the matter is that a) there are few options available in FA, b) your favorite player Josh Reed is gone, and c) there have been no indications to say that Hardy or Johnson are ready to even catch TO's pedestrian 55 passes for 829 yards and 5 TD's. Conversely, there's no cap and TO is amenable to returning, and the team needs all the players, especially those who (forget your laughable claim of TO being irrelevant) are the only thing making the team relevant, it can get.

You can never make an argument unless it is against a straw man, can you?

 

No, I didn't (not even "essentially") say that TO was the problem with the passing game. Pure fabrication. I have said he added nothing for what he was paid.

 

His QBs sucked, huh? Not like the All Pros we were working with last year, right? The OC? True, he wasn't as talented as the future HOFer, Turk Schonert, but if TO was open all the time, then AVP must have been an outstanding OC, right? Doesn't it follow? 38 fewer passes---that's a difference of less than 8%: insignificant. The difference in completions is significant between the seasons is significant.

 

As for the "paid analysts", I was just pointing out your flip. But if you want to pay homage to the "paid ananlyst", don't forget the great Emmett Smith, Shannon Sharpe, Dandy Don Meredith....... But why, if it "is obvious to most", why are you even referencing these guys--just tell me what you saw.

 

No, I don't "hate" TO, come on!---Save that "love/hate" silliness for your American Idol board, doc. I don't mind loudmouths--as long as they are winners (a team concept). TO's had one of the best WR careers ever in the league. I have been consistent in my opinion that his problems with his other 3 teams were not wholly created by the media and that no one here would support such antics if he played on any other team. In fact, you and everyone else would join me in this regard if he played for any other AFCE team. Also, I have simply pointed out that he had little or no impact in improving the offense this past season (is that not why he was brought here?) and you cannot dispute this. He did not make our QBs better, he did not make our young receivers any better. I don't mind loudmouths--as long as they are winners (a team concept).

 

There were 46 players with more receptions than TO last year---not all were thrown to by Brady, Big Ben or P Manning. Several were unkowns just a year or two ago. Zach Miller put up "TO numbers" (he was their "leading receiver"!) in Oakland---a crappy offense/QB. Is Zach Miller going to the HOF? You think they would have been better off with TO this year?

 

If you think that TOs performance was everyhting you said it would be--and was therefore worth 6.5 million----and even more next season, well....what can I say?

 

As for Brady, if he were magically to appear on our roster for 2010, you would be again flipped quick as a burger at McDonalds--and your newfound (like TO) affinity would manifest itself right on schedule.. Your pending denial of this will serve as proof that you can't be taken seriously.

[Doc]

You can never make an argument unless it is against a straw man, can you?

 

No, I didn't (not even "essentially") say that TO was the problem with the passing game. Pure fabrication. I have said he added nothing for what he was paid.

 

His QBs sucked, huh? Not like the All Pros we were working with last year, right? The OC? True, he wasn't as talented as the future HOFer, Turk Schonert, but if TO was open all the time, then AVP must have been an outstanding OC, right? Doesn't it follow? 38 fewer passes---that's a difference of less than 8%: insignificant. The difference in completions is significant between the seasons is significant.

 

As for the "paid analysts", I was just pointing out your flip. But if you want to pay homage to the "paid ananlyst", don't forget the great Emmett Smith, Shannon Sharpe, Dandy Don Meredith....... But why, if it "is obvious to most", why are you even referencing these guys--just tell me what you saw.

 

No, I don't "hate" TO, come on!---Save that "love/hate" silliness for your American Idol board, doc. I don't mind loudmouths--as long as they are winners (a team concept). TO's had one of the best WR careers ever in the league. I have been consistent in my opinion that his problems with his other 3 teams were not wholly created by the media and that no one here would support such antics if he played on any other team. In fact, you and everyone else would join me in this regard if he played for any other AFCE team. Also, I have simply pointed out that he had little or no impact in improving the offense this past season (is that not why he was brought here?) and you cannot dispute this. He did not make our QBs better, he did not make our young receivers any better. I don't mind loudmouths--as long as they are winners (a team concept).

 

There were 46 players with more receptions than TO last year---not all were thrown to by Brady, Big Ben or P Manning. Several were unkowns just a year or two ago. Zach Miller put up "TO numbers" (he was their "leading receiver"!) in Oakland---a crappy offense/QB. Is Zach Miller going to the HOF? You think they would have been better off with TO this year?

 

If you think that TOs performance was everyhting you said it would be--and was therefore worth 6.5 million----and even more next season, well....what can I say?

 

As for Brady, if he were magically to appear on our roster for 2010, you would be again flipped quick as a burger at McDonalds--and your newfound (like TO) affinity would manifest itself right on schedule.. Your pending denial of this will serve as proof that you can't be taken seriously.

OK, now I get it. When the Bills were looking for a WR the previous off-season, they should have consulted a medium, who would have told them not to "waste" the $6.5M on TO, because they'd a) trade their LT and replace him with their former RT, who would later get cut right before the season started, b) fire their OC right before the season started and replace him with a novice, c) suffer major injuries to an already weak and inexperienced O-line, and d) have to rely on a backup to replace Edwards because of poor play, even starting a 2nd year player who had been with the team for a month.

 

Good thing they didn't sign Coles (43 catches for 514 yards and 5 TD's in 2009) to a 4-year $28M deal, or Housh (79 catches for 911 yards and 3 TD's) to a 5-year $40M deal. BTW, both had better QB's than the Bills, and who weren't named Manning, Ben R, or Brady.

 

Nice hyperbole on Schonert. While he wasn't even close to a future HOF'er, he was obviously better than AVP. You see, your argument would make at least a little sense if everything on offense stayed the same from 2008 to 2009, with the exception of adding TO. But we all know it wasn't even close. And here's another little secret: good WR's can get open DESPITE the plays called. That's why your "someone has to catch those passes" and "he can be replaced by a bench warmer" statements were priceless.

 

I really don't know what you expected from TO, doc. But before the season started, you already made it known that whatever he did wouldn't be good enough. Hence your definitive statement that "he'll blow up because he won't catch X, Y, or Z," only to change it to the "irrelevant on the field" stuff. As the "talking heads" with more credibility than you confirmed, TO was open a lot last year and his QB just didn't get him the ball. Did you expect TO to make the QB throw him the ball? To play O-line. Call the plays?

 

But let me ask you a question, to gauge if we should start taking you seriously: if the Bills had a better offense, namely QB (like your boy Romo), do you think TO's production would have been the same? Better? Marginally? Significantly?

[Mr. WEO]

OK, now I get it. When the Bills were looking for a WR the previous off-season, they should have consulted a medium, who would have told them not to "waste" the $6.5M on TO, because they'd a) trade their LT and replace him with their former RT, who would later get cut right before the season started, b) fire their OC right before the season started and replace him with a novice, c) suffer major injuries to an already weak and inexperienced O-line, and d) have to rely on a backup to replace Edwards because of poor play, even starting a 2nd year player who had been with the team for a month.

 

Good thing they didn't sign Coles (43 catches for 514 yards and 5 TD's in 2009) to a 4-year $28M deal, or Housh (79 catches for 911 yards and 3 TD's) to a 5-year $40M deal. BTW, both had better QB's than the Bills, and who weren't named Manning, Ben R, or Brady.

 

Nice hyperbole on Schonert. While he wasn't even close to a future HOF'er, he was obviously better than AVP. You see, your argument would make at least a little sense if everything on offense stayed the same from 2008 to 2009, with the exception of adding TO. But we all know it wasn't even close. And here's another little secret: good WR's can get open DESPITE the plays called. That's why your "someone has to catch those passes" and "he can be replaced by a bench warmer" statements were priceless.

 

I really don't know what you expected from TO, doc. But before the season started, you already made it known that whatever he did wouldn't be good enough. Hence your definitive statement that "he'll blow up because he won't catch X, Y, or Z," only to change it to the "irrelevant on the field" stuff. As the "talking heads" with more credibility than you confirmed, TO was open a lot last year and his QB just didn't get him the ball. Did you expect TO to make the QB throw him the ball? To play O-line. Call the plays?

 

But let me ask you a question, to gauge if we should start taking you seriously: if the Bills had a better offense, namely QB (like your boy Romo), do you think TO's production would have been the same? Better? Marginally? Significantly?

Hyperbole on Schonert? hahahaha. Schonert sucked as OC!---guess you missed that. And as you should recall, the consensus after the 2008 season was that the o-line sucked also. Fitzy was an improvement over TE, wasn't he?

 

Were the Bills in the market for a WR last off season before TO was dumped by Dallas?

 

What did I expect from TO? Well, how about any of the things that were mentioned after his signing (which I have reminded you of multiple times)? How about a measurable positive impact--which you, perhaps not surprisingly, have yet to describe?

 

If the Bills had a "better offense", well then, yes, everybody on the offense would have better production--even TO. Interesting you should point out Romo---note that his offense significantly improved when his team put TO out to the curb and replaced him with......that's right, a bench warmer. A scrub who "out received" TO's production the previous year (see? someone else caught all those TO passes and TDs---why is it hard for you to understand this self evident result/concept?). As soon as TO was gone, Romo passed for 1000 more yards and his percentage went up.

 

Anyway, when your looking to start a season with crappy offensive line and questionable QB depth and a crappy OC, you don't spend 6.5 million on a sunsetting WR dumped from yet another team who has no other offers. That's just common sense.

 

Our offense was bad in 2008. It got worse in 2009--not because of TO but despite TO, hence his irrelevance.

[Doc]

Hyperbole on Schonert? hahahaha. Schonert sucked as OC!---guess you missed that. And as you should recall, the consensus after the 2008 season was that the o-line sucked also. Fitzy was an improvement over TE, wasn't he?

 

Were the Bills in the market for a WR last off season before TO was dumped by Dallas?

 

What did I expect from TO? Well, how about any of the things that were mentioned after his signing (which I have reminded you of multiple times)? How about a measurable positive impact--which you, perhaps not surprisingly, have yet to describe?

 

If the Bills had a "better offense", well then, yes, everybody on the offense would have better production--even TO. Interesting you should point out Romo---note that his offense significantly improved when his team put TO out to the curb and replaced him with......that's right, a bench warmer. A scrub who "out received" TO's production the previous year (see? someone else caught all those TO passes and TDs---why is it hard for you to understand this self evident result/concept?). As soon as TO was gone, Romo passed for 1000 more yards and his percentage went up.

 

Anyway, when your looking to start a season with crappy offensive line and questionable QB depth and a crappy OC, you don't spend 6.5 million on a sunsetting WR dumped from yet another team who has no other offers. That's just common sense.

 

Our offense was bad in 2008. It got worse in 2009--not because of TO but despite TO, hence his irrelevance.

"Hyperbole" as is in "future HOF'er, Turk Schonert." Look it up. And yes he was bad. That only goes to show you how much worse AVP was, nevermind the OL and QB play (Fitz was no better than the post-concussed Edwards BTW).

 

Yes the Bills were in the market for a WR last offseason before TO was dumped by Dallas. Do you remember them interviewing Joey Galloway and the aforementioned Laveraneus Coles? I'm sure you don't.

 

You got me on Romo passing for 1000 more yards in 2009 versus 2008. I'm sure missing 3 full games in 2008 had nothing to do with that, and it was all TO, right? And despite missing those 3 games and being replaced by the dinosaur Brad Johnson, the Cowboys scored the exact same number of PPG that year, as in 2009. But keep harping on the "bench warmer."

 

I'm sorry you naively expected TO to be a one-man offense. The grownups realize that the offense was doomed to failure even before the season started, and that it had little to do with him. But if he goes, I anxiously wait to see what "bench warmer" replaces his production. Because there won't be much in FA, therefore keeping a guy who can still draw extra attention, get open consistently, and who keeps the Bills relevant, is smart, especially since the money saved won't be going anywhere else.

[Mr. WEO]

"Hyperbole" as is in "future HOF'er, Turk Schonert." Look it up. And yes he was bad. That only goes to show you how much worse AVP was, nevermind the OL and QB play (Fitz was no better than the post-concussed Edwards BTW).

 

Yes the Bills were in the market for a WR last offseason before TO was dumped by Dallas. Do you remember them interviewing Joey Galloway and the aforementioned Laveraneus Coles? I'm sure you don't.

 

You got me on Romo passing for 1000 more yards in 2009 versus 2008. I'm sure missing 3 full games in 2008 had nothing to do with that, and it was all TO, right? And despite missing those 3 games and being replaced by the dinosaur Brad Johnson, the Cowboys scored the exact same number of PPG that year, as in 2009. But keep harping on the "bench warmer."

 

I'm sorry you naively expected TO to be a one-man offense. The grownups realize that the offense was doomed to failure even before the season started, and that it had little to do with him. But if he goes, I anxiously wait to see what "bench warmer" replaces his production. Because there won't be much in FA, therefore keeping a guy who can still draw extra attention, get open consistently, and who keeps the Bills relevant, is smart, especially since the money saved won't be going anywhere else.

 

Romo missed a few games and was subbed by Johnson (who played horribly). TO was given away and was replaced for the entire season by a guy who "produced" more than TO the year before. Your comparison is pointless.

 

 

TO's "production" will be replaced by someone else on the roster---just as it was in Dallas by you know who, so don't worry your little head. Lee Evans will be the number 1 and should go back getting at least as much as TO got this year. Another receiver or receivers (Johnson?, hardy?) should be able to cobble together 800 yards of "production". Unless you think our QB situation will actually be worse next season.....

 

Never said I expected TO to be a "one man offense"---you simply made that up. In fact, I said the opposite---to what many others were saying about the signing and all the magical effects that would ripple throughout the entire offense and into the defense.

 

I don't recall you (or any other grownups) predicting that the offense was "doomed" after the TO signing. Quite the contrary, actually.

[Doc]

Romo missed a few games and was subbed by Johnson (who played horribly). TO was given away and was replaced for the entire season by a guy who "produced" more than TO the year before. Your comparison is pointless.

 

TO's "production" will be replaced by someone else on the roster---just as it was in Dallas by you know who, so don't worry your little head. Lee Evans will be the number 1 and should go back getting at least as much as TO got this year. Another receiver or receivers (Johnson?, hardy?) should be able to cobble together 800 yards of "production". Unless you think our QB situation will actually be worse next season.....

 

Never said I expected TO to be a "one man offense"---you simply made that up. In fact, I said the opposite---to what many others were saying about the signing and all the magical effects that would ripple throughout the entire offense and into the defense.

 

I don't recall you (or any other grownups) predicting that the offense was "doomed" after the TO signing. Quite the contrary, actually.

Romo missed 3 games. If you know how to extrapolate, the "1,000 yards more" is explained by that alone. Yet the team scored (which is what matters most chief, not the yards or catches) the exact same number of points, despite the horrible Brad Johnson QB'ing those 3 games. Meaning that (again, extrapolating) the Cowboys would have scored MORE in 2008 than 2009 had Romo played all 16 games. And Romo missing those 3 games, as well as the defense giving up a TD more a game on defense, is why the Cowboys didn't make the playoffs in 2008. Didn't really think that one through, didya?

 

Did I say that the offense was doomed when the Bills signed TO? Nope, I didn't consult that medium that you obviously did.

 

And I wish I had your faith that the Bills could find a "bench warmer" on the order of a Miles Austin to replace TO should he leave. If only I/it were that simple.

[Mr. WEO]

Romo missed 3 games. If you know how to extrapolate, the "1,000 yards more" is explained by that alone. Yet the team scored (which is what matters most chief, not the yards or catches) the exact same number of points, despite the horrible Brad Johnson QB'ing those 3 games. Meaning that (again, extrapolating) the Cowboys would have scored MORE in 2008 than 2009 had Romo played all 16 games. And Romo missing those 3 games, as well as the defense giving up a TD more a game on defense, is why the Cowboys didn't make the playoffs in 2008. Didn't really think that one through, didya?

 

Extrapolating 3 games into 1000 yards is a fantasy, Einstein. Romo's only put three games like that together like that in row once--in 07. He averaged 265 a game in 08 and had 6 games under 250. They won 11 games, won their division and won a playoff game----that's what matters.

 

Did I say that the offense was doomed when the Bills signed TO? Nope, I didn't consult that medium that you obviously did.

 

Well, there was this :

 

The grownups realize that the offense was doomed to failure even before the season started

 

And this:

 

 

And whatever you think about TO, as I said, he's a great player on it, stays clean off of it, and his presence makes a HUGE impact on the offense and how defenses defend the Bills now. If you can't see that, you have no business talking about football or TO.

 

And followed most recently by:

 

I'm sorry you naively expected TO to be a one-man offense.

 

Got it.

 

And I wish I had your faith that the Bills could find a "bench warmer" on the order of a Miles Austin to replace TO should he leave. If only I/it were that simple.

 

It was pretty simple for the Cowboys---they simply looked down the bench and pointed at Austin.

 

And so now Romo, a guy who you have said is a fraud ("Romo is proving to be more rockstar than QB") and would not get his team to the playoffs this year, would have put up, what, more than 4500 yards, AND taken his team to the playoffs in '08 if he played all 16 games?

 

Ask anyone if the Cowboys were better off without TO this year. Ask them if the Bills were better off with him this year. These are two very easy questions to answer without bending yourself into a pretzel.

 

Come on Doc! Give yourself some credit---you ARE that simple.

[Doc]

Extrapolating 3 games into 1000 yards is a fantasy, Einstein. Romo's only put three games like that together like that in row once--in 07. He averaged 265 a game in 08 and had 6 games under 250. They won 11 games, won their division and won a playoff game----that's what matters.

The above was obviously written with a finger in each ear, your eyes closed, and you yelling "LALALALALA, I CAN'T SEE OR HEAR YOU!"

 

Well, there was this :

 

And this:

 

And followed most recently by:

 

Got it.

Obviously you didn't. As I intimated, no one knew what the future would bring after the Bills signed TO. And it's apparent in retrospect that the moves they made doomed the offense from the start, while the injuries to, and inexperience on, the O-line only compounded the problem, to go along with Edwards' continued regression and the need for the Bills to resort to starting a career backup and Lynch's legal problems which contributed to his lackluster season. Your denial of former player and coach analysts' observations that TO was open a multitude of times and that his QB's couldn't get him the ball speaks volumes about your credibility. But I realize that you have no other choice but to claim that they don't know what they're talking about and YOU do, because that's the only way you can place most of the blame for his lower production, and the offense as a whole, on him. It's comedy at its finest!

 

And so now Romo, a guy who you have said is a fraud ("Romo is proving to be more rockstar than QB") and would not get his team to the playoffs this year, would have put up, what, more than 4500 yards, AND taken his team to the playoffs in '08 if he played all 16 games?

 

Ask anyone if the Cowboys were better off without TO this year. Ask them if the Bills were better off with him this year. These are two very easy questions to answer without bending yourself into a pretzel.

Look, obviously Cowboys fans who are irrational and/or without a clue, like you, will blame TO for 2008. The reality is what I told you. Forgetting the immaterial hypothetical about how many more yards Romo would have thrown had he played all 16 games (which is made even more immaterial since the offense scored the same number of points each year), the only thing you need to know is that the Cowboys went 1-2 with Brad Johnson starting, and one of those losses was at the hands of the 2nd worst team in the league, the Rams. I think it's fair to say that if Romo had played in that game, the Cowboys would have won it. And seeing as how they missed-out on the playoffs by a half game, that alone was what lost them the playoffs. Then when you add-in the 20th ranked scoring defense, it's pretty clear that TO had little to do with them not making the playoffs. That is, if you have any shred of credibility and/or objectivity. Which you don't.

 

Luckily for the Cowboys this past season and unrelated to TO leaving, Romo stayed healthy, the defense finished 2nd in scoring offense ("team winning"), they unearthed a gem in Austin (because the guy who they originally said they got to replace TO and for whom they traded a 1st, 3rd, 6th, and 7th, has done nothing), and the real Romo waited until the 2nd playoff game to emerge. If anything, had they kept TO, they would have been better off because Williams would have been the 3rd or 4th WR, where he belongs, or maybe even a "bench warmer."

 

The Bills without TO this year would have set records for offensive futility. So I guess you're right that they might have been better-off without him, since they could have had the worst record in the NFL and the 1st overall pick and a shot at Bradford.