Scouts Inc. Fantasy O-Line rankings

[VOR]

Can't do. I asking for this for a reason, not simply to get you to lay out your reasons first. So go ahead. I'll be right behind you.

 

Actually at Wegmans right now, I should get back when I get home late tonight.

I'll wait.

[krazykat]

I'll wait.

Read between the lines, I've already laid out in pieces what my position is.

[VOR]

Read between the lines, I've already laid out in pieces what my position is.

Okay, let me see if I can put them all together. The Bills had little talent last year and Jauron and co. suck, as does the front office. So despite this and all the injuries, 7-9 should be considered a good record for the team, right? There can be no other conclusion.

 

But the kicker is that the Bills did nothing to improve the team over the off-season, and will be lucky to avoid being swept by every AFC East team, who "improved more" than the Bills. We should be happy if the Bills have a 7-9 record again.

 

Is that it?

[krazykat]

Okay, let me see if I can put them all together. The Bills had little talent last year and Jauron and co. suck, as does the front office. So despite this and all the injuries, 7-9 should be considered a good record for the team, right? There can be no other conclusion.

 

But the kicker is that the Bills did nothing to improve the team over the off-season, and will be lucky to avoid being swept by every AFC East team, who "improved more" than the Bills. We should be happy if the Bills have a 7-9 record again.

 

Is that it?

I don't know, is it?

 

Here was the original question you posed;

 

Here's a question for you: given what transpired last year, do you think the Bills underperformed, overperformed, or did about what you expected?

 

So let's end this nonsense. You tell me what they did. I guarantee you that my answer will be deeper and more comprehensive than yours, so no fears.

 

As to the statements above, that doesn't even answer the question, A, and B, you obviously don't remember what I've been writing making me question why I even bother engaging here.

 

So get on with it, either answer your own question and quit getting distracted, or don't. If and when you do, I will give you my answer which will be a good post, I promise.

[Ramius]

I don't know, is it?

 

Here was the original question you posed;

 

Here's a question for you: given what transpired last year, do you think the Bills underperformed, overperformed, or did about what you expected?

 

So let's end this nonsense. You tell me what they did. I guarantee you that my answer will be deeper and more comprehensive than yours, so no fears.

 

As to the statements above, that doesn't even answer the question, A, and B, you obviously don't remember what I've been writing making me question why I even bother engaging here.

 

So get on with it, either answer your own question and quit getting distracted, or don't. If and when you do, I will give you my answer which will be a good post, I promise.

 

He asked you the question. If you guarantee your answer will be deeper and more thought out, then post it. If you are going to be a girl and continue to refuse to answer him, then next time dont choose to play where your dress might get dirty.

[dave mcbride]

So let's end this nonsense. You tell me what they did. I guarantee you that my answer will be deeper and more comprehensive than yours, so no fears.

No real offense intended, but why do you engage with people in this sort of tone?

[ax4782]

Okay, let me see if I can put them all together. The Bills had little talent last year and Jauron and co. suck, as does the front office. So despite this and all the injuries, 7-9 should be considered a good record for the team, right? There can be no other conclusion.

 

But the kicker is that the Bills did nothing to improve the team over the off-season, and will be lucky to avoid being swept by every AFC East team, who "improved more" than the Bills. We should be happy if the Bills have a 7-9 record again.

 

Is that it?

 

I think that was pretty close. However, I'll take a stab at answering your question in hope that the thread will keep moving forward.

 

Buffalo overperformed last year, but not because they sucked. Buffalo was playing with a significant number of players on injured reserve, and our replacements performed more than admirably. Some say that we didn't compete against good teams, or that we were lucky to be in games and the stats show that we got our asses kicked. I say that luck is a huge part of the game in football. Maybe you can't count on 6 turnovers every night, but so what? That's what happens.

 

The offense at about the level that I expected with a rookie QB coming in and the fact that there was no way the Bills were going to have the type of attack that Fairchild had learned in St. Louis. ML performed a little better than I expected for a Rookie, and the line played very well, but the receivers underperformed for a number of reasons, and with Trent still learning the game and getting a feel for the NFL speed of things, my expectations were low.

 

The D was admirable in how it handled so many losses last year. True, we didn't have a solid numerical finish, but the D kept us in a lot of games that would otherwise have been far worse than they were, particularly late in the season.

 

The fact is, for as bad as Buffalo was statistically last year, how was it that they were still in the playoff hunt, in fact in 7th place, until week 15? How on earth could a team that some consider to be such a pack of poor players who couldn't execute and couldn't discern their elbow from that @$$ some how manage to be 7-6 with three games to go and in the playoff hunt? It couldn't be that the coaching staff had anything to do with it, or the fact that we had a D performing at a level much higher than anyone could have expected. But the coaches had nothing to do with that. A lot of teams would have folded under similar circumstances. The Lions do it every year. But that wasn't true for the Bills.

 

So no, I'm one of the ones who saw a lot more from this team last season than that stats showed. Yet, many consider those stats to be the true test of a great team. Well, in many cases they are, but do you think the Patsies would have traded some of their stellar stats last season for the Super Bowl. If you look at their stats in that game, they didn't look so great. Stats don't tell the whole story about a team, but for some reason many use that as a measuring stick for success and failure.

[Sisyphean Bills]

The fact is, for as bad as Buffalo was statistically last year, how was it that they were still in the playoff hunt, in fact in 7th place, until week 15? How on earth could a team that some consider to be such a pack of poor players who couldn't execute and couldn't discern their elbow from that @$$ some how manage to be 7-6 with three games to go and in the playoff hunt? ... A lot of teams would have folded under similar circumstances. ... But that wasn't true for the Bills.

Going 0-3 down the stretch isn't folding?

 

In fact, if it wasn't for having the even more crappy Dolphins twice and a home invasion and murder/fluke win, the Bills finished the last half of the season in rather pathetic fashion, suffering some embarrassing offensive and defensive futility. Unsurprisingly, this fits the statistical standings of utter ineptness and does so much more than hope fueled claims that the Bills finished 07 "strong and on an upswing." Don't stop the "they love to play hard for Dick" slogans, though. Yes, the future is so bright I wear my shades at night.

[krazykat]

No real offense intended, but why do you engage with people in this sort of tone?

What "tone?"

 

Damn, some of you have thin skin!

 

Because I already know what I'm going to say and haven't seen anything even remotely as indepth or comprehensive coming from him yet. How's that!

 

Otherwise, how about minding your own effin busines, eh!

 

I meant it sincerely, not in any other way. Now you can quit with the looking for personality faults everytime I or another poster than you don't like states something that you and your thin skin find offensive.

 

Otherwise, if you are thinking the same, then how about you lay something out.

 

I've stated my terms. I don't have to write a damn thing if I don't feel like. How do ya like dem apples!

[krazykat]

I think that was pretty close. However, I'll take a stab at answering your question in hope that the thread will keep moving forward.

 

Buffalo overperformed last year, but not because they sucked. Buffalo was playing with a significant number of players on injured reserve, and our replacements performed more than admirably. Some say that we didn't compete against good teams, or that we were lucky to be in games and the stats show that we got our asses kicked. I say that luck is a huge part of the game in football. Maybe you can't count on 6 turnovers every night, but so what? That's what happens.

 

The offense at about the level that I expected with a rookie QB coming in and the fact that there was no way the Bills were going to have the type of attack that Fairchild had learned in St. Louis. ML performed a little better than I expected for a Rookie, and the line played very well, but the receivers underperformed for a number of reasons, and with Trent still learning the game and getting a feel for the NFL speed of things, my expectations were low.

 

The D was admirable in how it handled so many losses last year. True, we didn't have a solid numerical finish, but the D kept us in a lot of games that would otherwise have been far worse than they were, particularly late in the season.

 

The fact is, for as bad as Buffalo was statistically last year, how was it that they were still in the playoff hunt, in fact in 7th place, until week 15? How on earth could a team that some consider to be such a pack of poor players who couldn't execute and couldn't discern their elbow from that @$$ some how manage to be 7-6 with three games to go and in the playoff hunt? It couldn't be that the coaching staff had anything to do with it, or the fact that we had a D performing at a level much higher than anyone could have expected. But the coaches had nothing to do with that. A lot of teams would have folded under similar circumstances. The Lions do it every year. But that wasn't true for the Bills.

 

So no, I'm one of the ones who saw a lot more from this team last season than that stats showed. Yet, many consider those stats to be the true test of a great team. Well, in many cases they are, but do you think the Patsies would have traded some of their stellar stats last season for the Super Bowl. If you look at their stats in that game, they didn't look so great. Stats don't tell the whole story about a team, but for some reason many use that as a measuring stick for success and failure.

Very nice ax, and thank you!

 

I will send you a response on this personally unless VOR puts something forth between now and then.

 

You're a stand up guy. Or gal perhaps I suppose. LOL

 

Unfortunately I've got to continue working well into the night and early tomorrow a.m., so look for a personal mesage from me sometime on Sunday or very late tomorrow perhaps.

 

Thanks!!

[VOR]

What "tone?"

 

Damn, some of you have thin skin!

 

Because I already know what I'm going to say and haven't seen anything even remotely as indepth or comprehensive coming from him yet. How's that!

To quote Emilio Estevez' character from The Breakfast Club, "Just answer the question, Claire!"

[Sisyphean Bills]

First off, it's not a good question. Not everybody had the same expectations going into the 07 season (say in July of 07) and not everybody evaluates or weighs what happened in 07 the same way. "Did they overperform, underperform, or perform about as you expected?" The answer is all of the above. Jabari Greer and John DiGiorgio performed above expectations in no small part because who exactly was expected them to play most of the season? Jason Peters exceeded expectations, which were high, by showing he could continue to improve and become an elite player. Dockery was sold as a monster in the running game, billed to be a huge road grader and would upgrade the running game -- never happened, despite the huge outlay given him. Disappointed? Happy that we gave up fewer sacks? Both? Robert Royal and Larry Tripplett stunk it up again, which is underachieving, but that may have been expected by more than a few.

 

Then there is the QB position, where "all of the above" applies in spades. JP Losman's regression and benching was underachieving in a truly huge way. Of course, he had help, but he didn't get it done either. Then there is Trent Edwards and opinions vary on him across the spectrum. The fact is the QB position is unsettled and the Bills are still looking for a QB to settle in and establish a winning tradition in Buffalo. Even if one is high on Trent Edward's potential, saying that he performed better than expectations is both true and not answering the original question -- nobody expected him to be the starting QB going into the 07 season, so focusing on Edwards being a surprise is 20-20 hindsight and glossing over the regression and aborted development of Losman. (Are the Bills so sure fire sold on Edwards? Why'd they keep Losman when they can cut him and bring in a veteran like Culpepper, a guy that actually played at a high level in this league and might truly be a mentor to a young stud QB? Or is it simply that Losman comes cheap? How expensive are other young backup QBs anyway?)

 

One can fixate on injuries with the defense and be amazed that the Bills were able to plug young unknown (but not necessarily devoid of any talent to run to the ball whatsoever) players into their vanilla defense and say the defense over achieved. Or one can recall a defense that couldn't stop the run or the pass or get off the field. A defense that was routinely gashed and had its safeties make 234 tackles on the season.

 

Not that the wrong stats mean anything. It's only the right stats, like 7-9, that have meaning. Because 7-9 was what the Bills did in 06, too; but, in 07, they went 7-9 which should naturally exceed anyone's expectations from last July because they got a rookie QB out on the field, had ample injuries, and the players love Dick. Unfortunately, 2 of the 3 are simply hindsight and the 3rd, while known, is little more than a subjective platform to dismiss uncomfortable criticism.

 

Yet hope springs eternal. In July 08, high expectations are abundant. A rookie OC and WR are going to cure everything that was wrong with the Bills dumbed down and punchless offense. The addition of a veteran, drug-suspended, bad-ankled DT who lost his job and became expendable because of the platoon play of an 11 year grizzled veteran and a rookie; the addition of a couple of other free agents (after all, the brain trust's recent track record in FA has been so strong, right?); and, not to mention the return of a handful of guys coming out of rehab: these are all reasons why we should have high expectations -- why, in fact, we should know with near absolute certainty -- of marked, major improvement in the 08 defense.

 

After all, it can't get any worse? Right?

 

On the bright side, the Bills have a schedule that features several Sisters of the Poor. Beating the bottom feeders is what our coach has excelled at in his career.

[ax4782]

Very nice ax, and thank you!

 

I will send you a response on this personally unless VOR puts something forth between now and then.

 

You're a stand up guy. Or gal perhaps I suppose. LOL

 

Unfortunately I've got to continue working well into the night and early tomorrow a.m., so look for a personal mesage from me sometime on Sunday or very late tomorrow perhaps.

 

Thanks!!

 

Guy, and thanks, barring any sarcasm there, though my sarcasm detector didn't really go off. I also think that you are a stand up guy, or gal, whichever. You post solid responses, and back them up with statistics, that, while I don't always agree tell the whole story, at least give people something to discuss.

 

For the record, thin skin can be the going rate around here sometimes. You get used to it.

[ax4782]

First off, it's not a good question. Not everybody had the same expectations going into the 07 season (say in July of 07) and not everybody evaluates or weighs what happened in 07 the same way. "Did they overperform, underperform, or perform about as you expected?" The answer is all of the above. Jabari Greer and John DiGiorgio performed above expectations in no small part because who exactly was expected them to play most of the season? Jason Peters exceeded expectations, which were high, by showing he could continue to improve and become an elite player. Dockery was sold as a monster in the running game, billed to be a huge road grader and would upgrade the running game -- never happened, despite the huge outlay given him. Disappointed? Happy that we gave up fewer sacks? Both? Robert Royal and Larry Tripplett stunk it up again, which is underachieving, but that may have been expected by more than a few.

 

Then there is the QB position, where "all of the above" applies in spades. JP Losman's regression and benching was underachieving in a truly huge way. Of course, he had help, but he didn't get it done either. Then there is Trent Edwards and opinions vary on him across the spectrum. The fact is the QB position is unsettled and the Bills are still looking for a QB to settle in and establish a winning tradition in Buffalo. Even if one is high on Trent Edward's potential, saying that he performed better than expectations is both true and not answering the original question -- nobody expected him to be the starting QB going into the 07 season, so focusing on Edwards being a surprise is 20-20 hindsight and glossing over the regression and aborted development of Losman. (Are the Bills so sure fire sold on Edwards? Why'd they keep Losman when they can cut him and bring in a veteran like Culpepper, a guy that actually played at a high level in this league and might truly be a mentor to a young stud QB? Or is it simply that Losman comes cheap? How expensive are other young backup QBs anyway?)

 

One can fixate on injuries with the defense and be amazed that the Bills were able to plug young unknown (but not necessarily devoid of any talent to run to the ball whatsoever) players into their vanilla defense and say the defense over achieved. Or one can recall a defense that couldn't stop the run or the pass or get off the field. A defense that was routinely gashed and had its safeties make 234 tackles on the season.

 

Not that the wrong stats mean anything. It's only the right stats, like 7-9, that have meaning. Because 7-9 was what the Bills did in 06, too; but, in 07, they went 7-9 which should naturally exceed anyone's expectations from last July because they got a rookie QB out on the field, had ample injuries, and the players love Dick. Unfortunately, 2 of the 3 are simply hindsight and the 3rd, while known, is little more than a subjective platform to dismiss uncomfortable criticism.

 

Yet hope springs eternal. In July 08, high expectations are abundant. A rookie OC and WR are going to cure everything that was wrong with the Bills dumbed down and punchless offense. The addition of a veteran, drug-suspended, bad-ankled DT who lost his job and became expendable because of the platoon play of an 11 year grizzled veteran and a rookie; the addition of a couple of other free agents (after all, the brain trust's recent track record in FA has been so strong, right?); and, not to mention the return of a handful of guys coming out of rehab: these are all reasons why we should have high expectations -- why, in fact, we should know with near absolute certainty -- of marked, major improvement in the 08 defense.

 

After all, it can't get any worse? Right?

 

On the bright side, the Bills have a schedule that features several Sisters of the Poor. Beating the bottom feeders is what our coach has excelled at in his career.

 

Setting aside the sarcasm there at the end, I think you made a solid point. There are a lot of unknowns about this team and each person here evaluates the situation differently. Certainly, there is a basis for persons to go into the 08 season with relatively low expectations. However, there are reasons for viewing the season with high expectations. The only result at the end is whether one group gets to say I told you so or not. Either everyone is happy, or some say I told you so and feel as bad about the outcome as everyone else.

 

The fact is there ARE a lot of questions that this team has to answer. But that is true after every offseason with every team. There is no guarantee that NE is going to be as good next year. Odds are, they will lose a few more games than they did last season. Losing a lot of their WR corps didn't help matters and they didn't really replenish. They look to be leaning on their so-so D to help them a bit next year which could mean a down season.

 

Again, the injuries are a factor. If Buffalo can stay relatively injury free, particularly on offense, things are likely to go better. That is one of the realities in football.

 

Other than your rag on Jauron (which is starting to get rather old as he is going to sink or swim this season in terms of his job anyway) I have to agree with your premise, that there is a lot of doubt about this season. That being said, I don't necessarily think the outcome will be as terrible as you seem to surmise. But then, we are both entitled to our point of view.

[keepthefaith]

Going 0-3 down the stretch isn't folding?

 

In fact, if it wasn't for having the even more crappy Dolphins twice and a home invasion and murder/fluke win, the Bills finished the last half of the season in rather pathetic fashion, suffering some embarrassing offensive and defensive futility. Unsurprisingly, this fits the statistical standings of utter ineptness and does so much more than hope fueled claims that the Bills finished 07 "strong and on an upswing." Don't stop the "they love to play hard for Dick" slogans, though. Yes, the future is so bright I wear my shades at night.

 

Yeah, that's folding or if you look at the record last year, the Bills did not win against even average teams. The schedule had a number of weak opponents on it and they were better than the weakest of teams but never a contender to make the playoffs. '08 is another rebuilding year and the best opportuity to see what the coaching staff is or isn't made of.

[keepthefaith]

Setting aside the sarcasm there at the end, I think you made a solid point. There are a lot of unknowns about this team and each person here evaluates the situation differently. Certainly, there is a basis for persons to go into the 08 season with relatively low expectations. However, there are reasons for viewing the season with high expectations. The only result at the end is whether one group gets to say I told you so or not. Either everyone is happy, or some say I told you so and feel as bad about the outcome as everyone else.

 

The fact is there ARE a lot of questions that this team has to answer. But that is true after every offseason with every team. There is no guarantee that NE is going to be as good next year. Odds are, they will lose a few more games than they did last season. Losing a lot of their WR corps didn't help matters and they didn't really replenish. They look to be leaning on their so-so D to help them a bit next year which could mean a down season.

 

Again, the injuries are a factor. If Buffalo can stay relatively injury free, particularly on offense, things are likely to go better. That is one of the realities in football.

 

Other than your rag on Jauron (which is starting to get rather old as he is going to sink or swim this season in terms of his job anyway) I have to agree with your premise, that there is a lot of doubt about this season. That being said, I don't necessarily think the outcome will be as terrible as you seem to surmise. But then, we are both entitled to our point of view.

 

You may not like comments that question Jauron's capability as a head coach but there is simply no argumaent that can be substantiated that he is anything but average at best (and probably below average) as a head coach. His teams in Chicago, Detroit and Buffalo have rarely beat quality opponents. Don't throw the 13-3 Bears at me. I watched nearly every game that season. They were incredibly lucky and after getting a bye and home field advantage were dismantled by the wild card Eagles. Getting below average or average talent to 6 or 7 wins a year is not the same as achieving playoff wins with good talent. There are few coaches in the league with more to prove than him IMO.

[VOR]

First off, it's not a good question. Not everybody had the same expectations going into the 07 season (say in July of 07) and not everybody evaluates or weighs what happened in 07 the same way. "Did they overperform, underperform, or perform about as you expected?" The answer is all of the above. Jabari Greer and John DiGiorgio performed above expectations in no small part because who exactly was expected them to play most of the season? Jason Peters exceeded expectations, which were high, by showing he could continue to improve and become an elite player. Dockery was sold as a monster in the running game, billed to be a huge road grader and would upgrade the running game -- never happened, despite the huge outlay given him. Disappointed? Happy that we gave up fewer sacks? Both? Robert Royal and Larry Tripplett stunk it up again, which is underachieving, but that may have been expected by more than a few.

 

Then there is the QB position, where "all of the above" applies in spades. JP Losman's regression and benching was underachieving in a truly huge way. Of course, he had help, but he didn't get it done either. Then there is Trent Edwards and opinions vary on him across the spectrum. The fact is the QB position is unsettled and the Bills are still looking for a QB to settle in and establish a winning tradition in Buffalo. Even if one is high on Trent Edward's potential, saying that he performed better than expectations is both true and not answering the original question -- nobody expected him to be the starting QB going into the 07 season, so focusing on Edwards being a surprise is 20-20 hindsight and glossing over the regression and aborted development of Losman. (Are the Bills so sure fire sold on Edwards? Why'd they keep Losman when they can cut him and bring in a veteran like Culpepper, a guy that actually played at a high level in this league and might truly be a mentor to a young stud QB? Or is it simply that Losman comes cheap? How expensive are other young backup QBs anyway?)

 

One can fixate on injuries with the defense and be amazed that the Bills were able to plug young unknown (but not necessarily devoid of any talent to run to the ball whatsoever) players into their vanilla defense and say the defense over achieved. Or one can recall a defense that couldn't stop the run or the pass or get off the field. A defense that was routinely gashed and had its safeties make 234 tackles on the season.

 

Not that the wrong stats mean anything. It's only the right stats, like 7-9, that have meaning. Because 7-9 was what the Bills did in 06, too; but, in 07, they went 7-9 which should naturally exceed anyone's expectations from last July because they got a rookie QB out on the field, had ample injuries, and the players love Dick. Unfortunately, 2 of the 3 are simply hindsight and the 3rd, while known, is little more than a subjective platform to dismiss uncomfortable criticism.

 

Yet hope springs eternal. In July 08, high expectations are abundant. A rookie OC and WR are going to cure everything that was wrong with the Bills dumbed down and punchless offense. The addition of a veteran, drug-suspended, bad-ankled DT who lost his job and became expendable because of the platoon play of an 11 year grizzled veteran and a rookie; the addition of a couple of other free agents (after all, the brain trust's recent track record in FA has been so strong, right?); and, not to mention the return of a handful of guys coming out of rehab: these are all reasons why we should have high expectations -- why, in fact, we should know with near absolute certainty -- of marked, major improvement in the 08 defense.

 

After all, it can't get any worse? Right?

 

On the bright side, the Bills have a schedule that features several Sisters of the Poor. Beating the bottom feeders is what our coach has excelled at in his career.

Well since you at least answered the question and it doesn't appear krazykat will, I'll respond. The question wasn't meant to ask how individual players performed, but whether, given the expectations and then what transpired, did the team perform better, worse, or the same as you would have thought. My opinion is that given the problems on offense, from Fairchild, to no real #2 WR, to a rookie QB and RB, to the injuries on defense, to Kevin Everett's injury, the Bills overperformed. That's why I think that replacing Fairchild (who at least is saying the right things), having a real #2 prospect in Hardy, Edwards and Lynch no longer being rookies, and the additions on defense and getting injured players back, not to mention the easier schedule (you can only play the schedule you're given), that the Bills will do a better than 7-9. My guesstimate is 10-6. Again assuming a rash of injuries doesn't hit again.

[dave mcbride]

Guy, and thanks, barring any sarcasm there, though my sarcasm detector didn't really go off. I also think that you are a stand up guy, or gal, whichever. You post solid responses, and back them up with statistics, that, while I don't always agree tell the whole story, at least give people something to discuss.

 

For the record, thin skin can be the going rate around here sometimes. You get used to it.

Thin skin?!? How about the basic courtesy of not pairing every statistically-based claim (some interesting and revealing; some not) with a personal insult? (This isn't directed at you, of course.)

 

I mean, why do people need to feel that "free discussion" encompasses taunting, score settling, and know-it-all-ism? It ain't much fun, and makes reading the board a depressing exercise, particularly when a genuinely good discussion lies underneath all the froth. Most of the tough but knowledgeable posters here -- i.e., Badolbilz -- may get prickly and harsh at times, but they are at least able to display a level of warmth and humor pretty regularly. That's all I'm asking for, I guess.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Setting aside the sarcasm there at the end, I think you made a solid point. There are a lot of unknowns about this team and each person here evaluates the situation differently. Certainly, there is a basis for persons to go into the 08 season with relatively low expectations. However, there are reasons for viewing the season with high expectations. The only result at the end is whether one group gets to say I told you so or not. Either everyone is happy, or some say I told you so and feel as bad about the outcome as everyone else.

 

The fact is there ARE a lot of questions that this team has to answer. But that is true after every offseason with every team. There is no guarantee that NE is going to be as good next year. Odds are, they will lose a few more games than they did last season. Losing a lot of their WR corps didn't help matters and they didn't really replenish. They look to be leaning on their so-so D to help them a bit next year which could mean a down season.

 

Again, the injuries are a factor. If Buffalo can stay relatively injury free, particularly on offense, things are likely to go better. That is one of the realities in football.

 

Other than your rag on Jauron (which is starting to get rather old as he is going to sink or swim this season in terms of his job anyway) I have to agree with your premise, that there is a lot of doubt about this season. That being said, I don't necessarily think the outcome will be as terrible as you seem to surmise. But then, we are both entitled to our point of view.

That is a decent level headed response, except for the last paragraph where you again presume to know what I think. Your dogging defense of Jauron by ad hominem attacks against me do nothing to change my view that Jauron is, at his very best, a very average NFL head coach. He has his good qualities: he's stand up; he's a good teacher; he goes to bat for his players; he doesn't overreact; he gets along very well with the people he works with both up and down the ladder. But he has some serious deficiencies: his teams don't win enough (which should be a major part of any evaluation in this business); he can't beat quality competition (call it sarcasm, but it is a fact -- 0.189 lifetime against playoff teams); he's not a good game day coach; his strategy is simple and unimaginative, amounting to taking the air out of the ball; he's an imitator not an innovator; he has never shown he can build a team (whether you believe he is just a bystander or not); his coaching hires, particularly on offense, have been atrocious (which begs the question, is it really the OCs that are always 100% at fault or is there some other common thread?); he also can't seem to ever keep his teams very healthy (maybe it is also just coincidence, of course, but his Bears teams had plenty of injury stories too -- although having Chris Chandler run a QB sneak had to be one of the top 10 dumbest coaching decisions that I've ever seen).

 

But, to answer you honestly: I think Dick Jauron is an average NFL head coach. Nothing more and nothing less. I do see that he has his good qualities, just like most everyone brings some good qualities to their vocation. I hope that he can learn on the job and correct some of his other deficiencies, but this off-season smacked an awful lot to me of business-as-usual for the same old Buffalo Bills. So, yes, Dick Jauron has a thing or two to prove. Further, I'm not really convinced that he has just one more season to prove himself at this point. A ton of things could happen that would allow him to eel off any metaphorical hook and given that the GM position has been done away with, it would require the 4-headed hydra GM to agree that Dick was not performing and that a change had to happen after only 3 years in.

 

As far as 08, I don't expect the Bills to make the playoffs. The AFC has too many excellent teams for the Bills to crack the top 6. It could happen if all the bounces go their way, but that seems like betting against the odds. The Bills will have their problems in 08, whatever those issues turn out to be. I expect more of the same, with some players not stepping up while other players improve. Frankly, nothing would surprise me. I could see the wheels falling off and this team going 3-13. I could also see a lot of things going the Bills way and they make the 6th seed in the playoffs to get hammered by a more talented team. So, I fundamentally agree that neither high nor low expectations are necessarily completely wrong and grounds to call other fans morons and idiots.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Well since you at least answered the question and it doesn't appear krazykat will, I'll respond. The question wasn't meant to ask how individual players performed, but whether, given the expectations and then what transpired, did the team perform better, worse, or the same as you would have thought. My opinion is that given the problems on offense, from Fairchild, to no real #2 WR, to a rookie QB and RB, to the injuries on defense, to Kevin Everett's injury, the Bills overperformed. That's why I think that replacing Fairchild (who at least is saying the right things), having a real #2 prospect in Hardy, Edwards and Lynch no longer being rookies, and the additions on defense and getting injured players back, not to mention the easier schedule (you can only play the schedule you're given), that the Bills will do a better than 7-9. My guesstimate is 10-6. Again assuming a rash of injuries doesn't hit again.

I understand that postmortem evaluation of the 07 season and how the changes made this off-season, assuming they pan out, can lend themselves to optimism. The 7-9 and 17 on IR stat lines support that take and that's all good.

 

On the other hand and just to brief the other view slightly, the Bills went 0-3 to close out the season and their offense was horrible. They went 3-5 in the second half of the season with 2 of those wins against a deflated, demoralized, and disastrous Dolphins punching bag. That leaves 1 win in the last half of the season against a quality opponent.

 

The only win against a playoff team came on a last second kick against a Redskins team that had had their best player murdered that week. Then there were the brutal blowouts against quality opponents that just bent the Bills over on both sides of the ball and simply had their way with them. Then there were the games where the strategic philosophy backfired with Denver and Dallas winning the game in the last minute.

 

Sure there was a game against the Bengals and the Dolphins (teams with pathetic defenses and internal squabbling) where the Bills gave the impression of being a more complete team; but, the point is that the progression just wasn't there. Over the course of the season, the Bills kept showing up for games but the same mistakes kept getting made too. There are a lot of questions and a lot of the answers have yet to show up on the playing field.

 

PS: It's fine to say that Trent Edwards had a lot of poise and looked like a promising rookie in 07. On the other hand, it is also true that the Bills offense sucked hard, sucked in a record-setting bad way. Any aspirations of a quality playoff season in 08 are linked in no small part to Mr. Edwards and his development. So, yes, setting aside the hype (I listen to NFL radio and hear all the backslapping on how Edwards took the NFL by storm last year too, but that doesn't jive completely with stats like points and watching the games), to be a playoff team, the Bills will need a ton more production out of the QB position than Edwards gave them last year. While we can be hopeful, I don't see how anyone can say it is a given with a straight face at this point.

 

PPS: And so as not to be QB and offense myopic, I'll mention that the defense has to improve greatly to be a quality playoff contending team. They sucked against the run. I can't remember how many times receivers were totally wide open in the secondary with no defender within 10 yards, or the missed tackles, or being pancaked, or being totally out of position, or taking terrible pursuit angles... They couldn't generate much/any QB pressure most of the time. Not saying there were no excuses, but clearly the defense must get much, much better to compete with the big boys ... or even the average boys with a little meat on their bones.