Anyone nervous about the monday nighter?

[JD]

Anderson could put up some healthy numbers on us :honda:

[T-Long]

nah, not nervous at all. The Browns are at home. If this was in Giants stadium, it wouldn't have the same result.

[THE END OF ALL DAYS]

DA is having one good game against a team due to loose.. and at home with his job on the line.
I think he'll come back down to earth after tonight and start playing like the earlier part of the season

[THE END OF ALL DAYS]

see... brownies run back the pick... the giants were due to loose.

[Luisito23]

This just adds to the prove that every single team in the NFL (no matter how great) has a bad game every now and then...If only Buffalo fans realize this as well, this place will be much better off.

[Goobylal]

Giants came in way overconfident. And if anything, hopefully Tony G is watching the Giants and saying "playing for Buffalo might not be so bad."

[OpIv37]

This just adds to the prove that every single team in the NFL (no matter how great) has a bad game every now and then...If only Buffalo fans realize this as well, this place will be much better off.

we didn't have one bad game. We had FOUR bad games. Fortunately, 3 of them were against teams that either sucked or were injured.

This Browns game made me nervous ever since the schedule came out because the Bills play like **** when the pressure is on. The Cards showed the Browns how to beat us and I think it's going to be another long night.

[Dr. Lecter]

we didn't have one bad game. We had FOUR bad games. Fortunately, 3 of them were against teams that either sucked or were injured.



That is simply not true.

Are you saying Jacksonville or Seattle was a bad game? I am not sure which one a logical person could say was bad. The Bills dominated Seattle and shut down Taylor and Jones-Drew against the Jaguars. If you say it is a bad game, you are must being trying to live up to your "negative" reputation and are not looking at the games objectively.

As for the other two games, the Rams beat Washington this week and Raiders have kept many games close. (including San Diego) Not to mention the Bills beat the Rams by 17. Yes, it took the full game to do so, but in the end it was not close. Perhaps, those teams are not as horrible as you project them to be.

You are only thinking the Bills play a good game if they dominate for four quarters and win by 20+. That simply does not happen in the NFL very often, especially to young teams.

You are setting the bar way too high for a good game. They are 4-1 and you are ripping them apart as if they are 1-4.

Can you give them any credit at all? Or is it time to blow up the team (i.e. Dump Trent, Lynch, Evans, and the rest) and start anew? Clearly in your eyes they are not good enough.

In the grand scheme, the goal is to win. Winning big is nice, but it does not always happen. Good teams lose games. Hell, the Giants are getting blown out by the Browns. If the Bills did that you would go nuts. Do you think the Giants are bad? Is Dallas bad? The Redskins?

If you micro-analyze every team and every game like you do the Bills, you will see that even the top teams have imperfections.

Maybe, just maybe, those teams appear to "suck" because the Bills are better than they were that week.

Of course you also assume that the Browns can beat the Bills the same way and that it will work as well with no adjustements.

Being critical is one thing; but giving no credit and being constant doom and gloom and negative is another. DiscoTrish would be proud.

To summarize: Saying the Bills played "bad" against Jacksonville is without merit.

Here are somebody's post game comments:

Here we go again. It's the same tired old script that we've seen the last two years. The Bills are in a close game against a quality opponent. They get a small lead, become conservative on offense and go dormant. Meanwhile, the D spends too much time on the field and eventually gives up a big play. It comes down to either one last desperate attempt to score, or one last defensive stand for a team that does not respond well to pressure. Everything was exactly the same.

Except for the outcome.

The Bills went into a hostile environment against a tough defense in oppressive conditions. The offense- save for an excellent first drive- didn't play well. The D couldn't get off the field in the third quarter. Special teams were only "special" in the short bus sense.

But, somehow the Bills won. They showed signs of being a good team. Rookies and role players contributed. Some of the stars didn't play well but came through when it was needed the most.

And we came away with a crucial conference victory on a tough afternoon.

-The Bills actually resembled a good team. When the stars like Evans and Parrish struggled, role players came through and picked up the slack. That allowed Evans and Parrish to come through with big plays at the end of the game. I need to see more from this team before I'm ready to declare them "good", but that is the exact formula that good teams use to win.

-Two games don't erase two years, but for the first time since the post-Donahoe house-cleaning, I'm gaining confidence in this coaching staff.

-This team is starting to look good, yet most of the team is still young and many of the players have not reached their prime. They're only going to get better (barring injury, of course). Again, I'm not 100% convinced, but there are signs that, just maybe, the FO finally got it right.

So, is that guy way off base on his opinion of the Jags game? Because he made it sound like they did not play bad.

[Mr. Pink]

I thoroughly enjoyed watching Eric Wright go "Primetime" to seal the deal.

[jamze132]

:popcorn:

[OpIv37]

That is simply not true.

Are you saying Jacksonville or Seattle was a bad game? I am not sure which one a logical person could say was bad. The Bills dominated Seattle and shut down Taylor and Jones-Drew against the Jaguars. If you say it is a bad game, you are must being trying to live up to your "negative" reputation and are not looking at the games objectively.

As for the other two games, the Rams beat Washington this week and Raiders have kept many games close. (including San Diego) Not to mention the Bills beat the Rams by 17. Yes, it took the full game to do so, but in the end it was not close. Perhaps, those teams are not as horrible as you project them to be.

You are only thinking the Bills play a good game if they dominate for four quarters and win by 20+. That simply does not happen in the NFL very often, especially to young teams.

You are setting the bar way too high for a good game. They are 4-1 and you are ripping them apart as if they are 1-4.

Can you give them any credit at all? Or is it time to blow up the team (i.e. Dump Trent, Lynch, Evans, and the rest) and start anew? Clearly in your eyes they are not good enough.

In the grand scheme, the goal is to win. Winning big is nice, but it does not always happen. Good teams lose games. Hell, the Giants are getting blown out by the Browns. If the Bills did that you would go nuts. Do you think the Giants are bad? Is Dallas bad? The Redskins?

If you micro-analyze every team and every game like you do the Bills, you will see that even the top teams have imperfections.

Maybe, just maybe, those teams appear to "suck" because the Bills are better than they were that week.

Of course you also assume that the Browns can beat the Bills the same way and that it will work as well with no adjustements.

Being critical is one thing; but giving no credit and being constant doom and gloom and negative is another. DiscoTrish would be proud.

To summarize: Saying the Bills played "bad" against Jacksonville is without merit.

Here are somebody's post game comments:

Here we go again. It's the same tired old script that we've seen the last two years. The Bills are in a close game against a quality opponent. They get a small lead, become conservative on offense and go dormant. Meanwhile, the D spends too much time on the field and eventually gives up a big play. It comes down to either one last desperate attempt to score, or one last defensive stand for a team that does not respond well to pressure. Everything was exactly the same.

Except for the outcome.

The Bills went into a hostile environment against a tough defense in oppressive conditions. The offense- save for an excellent first drive- didn't play well. The D couldn't get off the field in the third quarter. Special teams were only "special" in the short bus sense.

But, somehow the Bills won. They showed signs of being a good team. Rookies and role players contributed. Some of the stars didn't play well but came through when it was needed the most.

And we came away with a crucial conference victory on a tough afternoon.

-The Bills actually resembled a good team. When the stars like Evans and Parrish struggled, role players came through and picked up the slack. That allowed Evans and Parrish to come through with big plays at the end of the game. I need to see more from this team before I'm ready to declare them "good", but that is the exact formula that good teams use to win.

-Two games don't erase two years, but for the first time since the post-Donahoe house-cleaning, I'm gaining confidence in this coaching staff.

-This team is starting to look good, yet most of the team is still young and many of the players have not reached their prime. They're only going to get better (barring injury, of course). Again, I'm not 100% convinced, but there are signs that, just maybe, the FO finally got it right.

So, is that guy way off base on his opinion of the Jags game? Because he made it sound like they did not play bad.

For once, I'm not in the mood to argue so let's say I give you the Jags game. That still means we played 2 good games (Sea and Jax) and 3 bad games. We just happened to come away with wins because St. Louis and Oakland both suck.

You're so obsessed with giving credit that you can't see the larger picture. We can't play like we played the last 3 games and beat the Chargers or any AFCE team.

[THATHURMANATOR]

we didn't have one bad game. We had FOUR bad games. Fortunately, 3 of them were against teams that either sucked or were injured.

This Browns game made me nervous ever since the schedule came out because the Bills play like **** when the pressure is on. The Cards showed the Browns how to beat us and I think it's going to be another long night.
Did you dicks have to get him started? :ill:

[OpIv37]

Did you dicks have to get him started? :ill:


Still think I'm "wrong" about the Browns being able to beat us on Monday night? They just dismantled a far better team than us on Monday night.

[Dr. Lecter]

Nobody has said that they are not able to. Of course the Bills could win the game too.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Still think I'm "wrong" about the Browns being able to beat us on Monday night? They just dismantled a far better team than us on Monday night.
You are something man. I never said the Brown's couldn't beat us. Any team can beat any team on any day. My point was that a Monday night home crowd is an advantage for the Bills.

[OpIv37]

Nobody has said that they are not able to. Of course the Bills could win the game too.

But we won't.

Wait, let me modify that before justa comes in and argues semantics and the use of definitives.

It's unlikely that the Bills will win this game. They ran a similar passing attack to what the Cards used to beat us and they showed they could perform well under the microscope on Monday night. The Bills have yet to prove they can shut down that type of passing attack or play well under the pressure of a Monday night game. Records aside, as of right now, the smart money's on the Browns.

[OpIv37]

You are something man. I never said the Brown's couldn't beat us. Any team can beat any team on any day. My point was that a Monday night home crowd is an advantage for the Bills.

Monday night games are NEVER an advantage for the Bills until they prove they can win one.

Why would you consider a situation to be an advantage when the Bills have never proven they can win in that situation? It's completely illogical.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Monday night games are NEVER an advantage for the Bills until they prove they can win one.

Why would you consider a situation to be an advantage when the Bills have never proven they can win in that situation? It's completely illogical.
How bout this, it is better to be home than in Cleveland :idunno:

[Dr. Lecter]

But we won't.

Wait, let me modify that before justa comes in and argues semantics and the use of definitives.

It's unlikely that the Bills will win this game. They ran a similar passing attack to what the Cards used to beat us and they showed they could perform well under the microscope on Monday night. The Bills have yet to prove they can shut down that type of passing attack or play well under the pressure of a Monday night game. Records aside, as of right now, the smart money's on the Browns.

Just like the Bills would not beat Seattle or Jacksonville? Both were games that were impossible for the Bills to win, correct?

You never give this teamany credit. At all. For anything.

[RockStar36]

I'm not worried.

The Browns are going to kill them. The Bills always lose in primetime. I'm so embarrassed to be a Bills fan. WWWAAAAHHHHH.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Just like the Bills would not beat Seattle or Jacksonville? Both were games that were impossible for the Bills to win, correct?

You never give this teamany credit. At all. For anything.
Seriously he licks other teams balls hard though for some reason.

[Jan Reimers]

Monday night games are NEVER an advantage for the Bills until they prove they can win one.

Why would you consider a situation to be an advantage when the Bills have never proven they can win in that situation? It's completely illogical.
We have lost Monday night games in the past, ergo we will continue to lose them now and in the future.

That may be "logical" to you, but this is a new team and a new season, and things change rapidly in the world of sports.

[Historian]

No.

Cleveland stinks...despite what happened yesterday.

[OpIv37]

How bout this, it is better to be home than in Cleveland :idunno:

I'll agree with that. It's always better to be at home.

But for the Bills, it's never good to be in a night game, regardless of where it is. Fortunately, we don't have any road night games this year, unless we get burned by "flex scheduling" again.

[OpIv37]

We have lost Monday night games in the past, ergo we will continue to lose them now and in the future.

That may be "logical" to you, but this is a new team and a new season, and things change rapidly in the world of sports.

You are completely discounting how similar this team is to the team that LOST two Monday night games last year, which is extremely illogical.

I believe things when they are proven because that is logical. You believe the Bills can win based on, well, I'm not really sure what you're basing it on.

[OpIv37]

Just like the Bills would not beat Seattle or Jacksonville? Both were games that were impossible for the Bills to win, correct?

You never give this teamany credit. At all. For anything.

I overestimated Seattle, just like everyone else. No one could have foreseen all the injuries or them being that bad.

I haven't been too hard on the Jacksonville game because being on the road in that heat was a tough scenario in which the Bills pulled out a win. But it was far from a good performance.

I've given this team plenty of credit. Go back and read my post-game reviews.

[Dr. Lecter]

I overestimated Seattle, just like everyone else. No one could have foreseen all the injuries or them being that bad.

I haven't been too hard on the Jacksonville game because being on the road in that heat was a tough scenario in which the Bills pulled out a win. But it was far from a good performance.

I've given this team plenty of credit. Go back and read my post-game reviews.

And yet you now act like they are terrible with no chance of winning more than 2 or 3 more games.

I agree that there are overly optimistic homers on this board. You don't need to counter them all by yourself.

And beating the Jags on the road in the heat makes it a good performance. You must give the other teams some credit too. It is not only the Bills bad play that causes trouble, but other teams good play.

[BlackMetalNinja]

So we're 4-1, Cleveland is 2-3, and somehow they're clearly better than us? Why don't other teams get scrutinized the same way you tear apart Buffalo?

[mybills]

That is simply not true.

Are you saying Jacksonville or Seattle was a bad game? I am not sure which one a logical person could say was bad. The Bills dominated Seattle and shut down Taylor and Jones-Drew against the Jaguars. If you say it is a bad game, you are must being trying to live up to your "negative" reputation and are not looking at the games objectively.

As for the other two games, the Rams beat Washington this week and Raiders have kept many games close. (including San Diego) Not to mention the Bills beat the Rams by 17. Yes, it took the full game to do so, but in the end it was not close. Perhaps, those teams are not as horrible as you project them to be.

You are only thinking the Bills play a good game if they dominate for four quarters and win by 20+. That simply does not happen in the NFL very often, especially to young teams.

You are setting the bar way too high for a good game. They are 4-1 and you are ripping them apart as if they are 1-4.

Can you give them any credit at all? Or is it time to blow up the team (i.e. Dump Trent, Lynch, Evans, and the rest) and start anew? Clearly in your eyes they are not good enough.

In the grand scheme, the goal is to win. Winning big is nice, but it does not always happen. Good teams lose games. Hell, the Giants are getting blown out by the Browns. If the Bills did that you would go nuts. Do you think the Giants are bad? Is Dallas bad? The Redskins?

If you micro-analyze every team and every game like you do the Bills, you will see that even the top teams have imperfections.

Maybe, just maybe, those teams appear to "suck" because the Bills are better than they were that week.

Of course you also assume that the Browns can beat the Bills the same way and that it will work as well with no adjustements.

Being critical is one thing; but giving no credit and being constant doom and gloom and negative is another. DiscoTrish would be proud.

To summarize: Saying the Bills played "bad" against Jacksonville is without merit.

Here are somebody's post game comments:

Here we go again. It's the same tired old script that we've seen the last two years. The Bills are in a close game against a quality opponent. They get a small lead, become conservative on offense and go dormant. Meanwhile, the D spends too much time on the field and eventually gives up a big play. It comes down to either one last desperate attempt to score, or one last defensive stand for a team that does not respond well to pressure. Everything was exactly the same.

Except for the outcome.

The Bills went into a hostile environment against a tough defense in oppressive conditions. The offense- save for an excellent first drive- didn't play well. The D couldn't get off the field in the third quarter. Special teams were only "special" in the short bus sense.

But, somehow the Bills won. They showed signs of being a good team. Rookies and role players contributed. Some of the stars didn't play well but came through when it was needed the most.

And we came away with a crucial conference victory on a tough afternoon.

-The Bills actually resembled a good team. When the stars like Evans and Parrish struggled, role players came through and picked up the slack. That allowed Evans and Parrish to come through with big plays at the end of the game. I need to see more from this team before I'm ready to declare them "good", but that is the exact formula that good teams use to win.

-Two games don't erase two years, but for the first time since the post-Donahoe house-cleaning, I'm gaining confidence in this coaching staff.

-This team is starting to look good, yet most of the team is still young and many of the players have not reached their prime. They're only going to get better (barring injury, of course). Again, I'm not 100% convinced, but there are signs that, just maybe, the FO finally got it right.

So, is that guy way off base on his opinion of the Jags game? Because he made it sound like they did not play bad.
best post ever :10: :bf1:

[billsburgh]

But we won't.

Wait, let me modify that before justa comes in and argues semantics and the use of definitives.

It's unlikely that the Bills will win this game. They ran a similar passing attack to what the Cards used to beat us and they showed they could perform well under the microscope on Monday night. The Bills have yet to prove they can shut down that type of passing attack or play well under the pressure of a Monday night game. Records aside, as of right now, the smart money's on the Browns.
just like you said that NE was going to beat San Diego was reality

[Mr. Pink]

I will say two things on the actual topic... but they're both if's...

IF JJ comes off the PUP for the game and KII is healthy the Bills will have a very difficult time stopping the Browns offense. Stallworth being back alone showed some of what they can do when they have more than one WR threat.

IF both guys aren't healthy or playing for the game, then Buffalo, have a very legitimate shot of winning the game...unless they fade under the monday night lights.

If they played tomorrow I'd say Buffalo would be favored by between 4-6 points.

[justasportsfan]

Still think I'm "wrong" about the Browns being able to beat us on Monday night? They just dismantled a far better team than us on Monday night.

Look at OP talk about I told you so just because they beat the giants means we can't beat them.
YOu are not "wrong" but don't act like you are "right" either . We haven't played yet.

YOU WERE WRONG about the pats and SD game after you talked like there was no way the chargers could beat the pats.

[justasportsfan]

I believe things when they are proven because that is logical. You believe the Bills can win based on, well, I'm not really sure what you're basing it on.


wth are you talking about? You pretend to be the expert of whats logical and what isn't. What is realistic and what isn't. If that is so then why do I own your logic or realism?

[Pinkerton Security]

to be honest, ya. we all should be. they just played a complete football game, something we have yet to do since week 1.

[justasportsfan]

we should never take any team lightly. Seems to me OP takes the bills lightly though.

[OpIv37]

And yet you now act like they are terrible with no chance of winning more than 2 or 3 more games.

I agree that there are overly optimistic homers on this board. You don't need to counter them all by yourself.

And beating the Jags on the road in the heat makes it a good performance. You must give the other teams some credit too. It is not only the Bills bad play that causes trouble, but other teams good play.

here's the problem with giving the other teams credit: we have to play teams that are going to be playing at or above Jacksonville's level, and we will have to beat them. So, if we simply say "it was close because Jacksonville played well", then we take the responsibility off of Buffalo. Buffalo is going to face a lot of teams who will be playing well, and they'll have to play better to win.

[OpIv37]

So we're 4-1, Cleveland is 2-3, and somehow they're clearly better than us? Why don't other teams get scrutinized the same way you tear apart Buffalo?

Define "better".

Look at the game they play. Look at how they match up against our players. Plus, we have the night game factor working against us.

What happened to "any given Sunday"? Oh, right, that only applies when the Bills are the underdogs.

[zone]

You are completely discounting how similar this team is to the team that LOST two Monday night games last year, which is extremely illogical.

I believe things when they are proven because that is logical. You believe the Bills can win based on, well, I'm not really sure what you're basing it on.
Things do not stay the same year in and year out, this team is not the same team that had 17 players on IR last year. How could it be?

[OpIv37]

Things do not stay the same year in and year out, this team is not the same team that had 17 players on IR last year. How could it be?

Every starter on offense is the SAME.
On D, 8 of the 11 starters are the SAME, but 2 were on IR, so realistically 6 of 11 are the same.

That means 17 of 22 starters are the SAME. All the coaches are the same except Schonert.

There are a lot more similarities than differences between this year's team and last year's team, but for some reason people don't want to acknowledge it.

[zone]

Every starter on offense is the SAME.
On D, 8 of the 11 starters are the SAME, but 2 were on IR, so realistically 6 of 11 are the same.

That means 17 of 22 starters are the SAME. All the coaches are the same except Schonert.

There are a lot more similarities than differences between this year's team and last year's team, but for some reason people don't want to acknowledge it.
So you think this is the same offense? We are 18th in total offense, 14th in total points, and 10th in points per game.

This is no where near the same offense.

So roughly half of the defense is the same and this D ranked 9th.

Ohh and there is the little fact that we are 4-1 and in first place.

We are no where near the same team as years past.

[Pinkerton Security]

Every starter on offense is the SAME.
On D, 8 of the 11 starters are the SAME, but 2 were on IR, so realistically 6 of 11 are the same.

That means 17 of 22 starters are the SAME. All the coaches are the same except Schonert.

There are a lot more similarities than differences between this year's team and last year's team, but for some reason people don't want to acknowledge it.

here's one glaring dissimilarity, if that is a word, for the first 5 games of the year:

2007: 1-4
2008: 4-1

I understand you want us to play complete games. But for being such a "realist", your expectations are UNBELIEVABLY unrealistic, as is evidenced by the craziness of the NFL this year. Teams NEVER play well all the time, but the ones that manage to play well when it matters, those are the ones that do well.

[OpIv37]

So you think this is the same offense? We are 18th in total offense, 14th in total points, and 10th in points per game.

This is no where near the same offense.

So roughly half of the defense is the same and this D ranked 9th.

Ohh and there is the little fact that we are 4-1 and in first place.

We are no where near the same team as years past.

Wrong.

Monday night games have to do with the pressure of more people watching. What have these players done to make you think that they're better at performing in that situation that what they showed last year? With the possible exception of Mitchell, none of these guys are used to being in the spotlight. To be fair, they haven't been given the opportunity yet this year, but until they prove they can do it, we have no reason to believe that they can.

On top of that, did you see what the Cards did to that 9th ranked D? Cleveland can run the same type of plays and will most likely do the same thing. They just proved they can do it under the spotlight of a Monday night game against the defending Super Bowl champs.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Define "better".

Look at the game they play. Look at how they match up against our players. Plus, we have the night game factor working against us.

What happened to "any given Sunday"? Oh, right, that only applies when the Bills are the underdogs.I certainly didn't say they couldn't beat us. I asked you why they are clearly better than us in your opinion. I, unlike you, don't seem to think most of the games are foregone conclusions before they're ever played, especially several weeks before they are played.

[OpIv37]

here's one glaring dissimilarity, if that is a word, for the first 5 games of the year:

2007: 1-4
2008: 4-1

I understand you want us to play complete games. But for being such a "realist", your expectations are UNBELIEVABLY unrealistic, as is evidenced by the craziness of the NFL this year. Teams NEVER play well all the time, but the ones that manage to play well when it matters, those are the ones that do well.

See previous post:


Wrong.

Monday night games have to do with the pressure of more people watching. What have these players done to make you think that they're better at performing in that situation that what they showed last year? With the possible exception of Mitchell, none of these guys are used to being in the spotlight. To be fair, they haven't been given the opportunity yet this year, but until they prove they can do it, we have no reason to believe that they can.

On top of that, did you see what the Cards did to that 9th ranked D? Cleveland can run the same type of plays and will most likely do the same thing. They just proved they can do it under the spotlight of a Monday night game against the defending Super Bowl champs.

It mattered against the Cards and we didn't play well at all.

[Pinkerton Security]

See previous post:



It mattered against the Cards and we didn't play well at all.

you're right about the cards game. we sucked, no matter who the QB was. But again, teams simply do not play well all the time. it doesnt mean we arent good just because we played one poor game.

[justasportsfan]

IN OPs world , the bills will never win a night game. It can't happen vs. the browns and it can't happen ever. Every team can get over a hump but the bills won't.

[OpIv37]

I certainly didn't say they couldn't beat us. I asked you why they are clearly better than us in your opinion. I, unlike you, don't seem to think most of the games are foregone conclusions before they're ever played, especially several weeks before they are played.

Again, define "better".

Will they have a better record than us, or better offensive or defensive statistics at the end of the year? Probably not.

When we're actually on the field, and they're matching their offense up against our defense, I think their offense is better than our D. They showed why last night, we showed why against the Cardinals.

Remember, this is practically the same O the Browns had last year that was excellent. They have a few bad games and everyone immediately writes them off, meanwhile the Bills have a few bad games and everyone says "well you can't dominate another team for a full 4 quarters." Hmmm.....

[OpIv37]

you're right about the cards game. we sucked, no matter who the QB was. But again, teams simply do not play well all the time. it doesnt mean we arent good just because we played one poor game.

I think we played 3 poor games, arguably 4.

The question becomes this: do we play well enough to beat teams like SD, NE, NYJ or even Cleveland and Miami? I don't think we do. When we played Oakland we really had 1 good quarter. When we played St. Louis, we had one good half. I don't think that's playing well enough of the time to beat better teams.

[justasportsfan]

Don't you guys wonder that OP was mum about last nights game? He didn't pick the browns to beat the giants and then now uses that game to talk about how the browns will beat us based on last nights game?

[justasportsfan]

I think we played 3 poor games, arguably 4.

The question becomes this: do we play well enough to beat teams like SD, NE, NYJ or even Cleveland and Miami? I don't think we do. When we played Oakland we really had 1 good quarter. When we played St. Louis, we had one good half. I don't think that's playing well enough of the time to beat better teams.

based on your logic, the chargers showed us how to beat a NE team without Brady. How come that logic only applies when talking about teams having tape on us when we played the cards?

[OpIv37]

Don't you guys wonder that OP was mum about last nights game? He didn't pick the browns to beat the giants and then now uses that game to talk about how the browns will beat us based on last nights game?

I didn't even attempt to pick that game. You're really stretching on this one. I'm saying the same thing about the Browns now that I said before the game. What are we supposed to do- just IGNORE the fact that the Browns whooped a great football team last night? You're not making any sense.

[Pinkerton Security]

I think we played 3 poor games, arguably 4.

The question becomes this: do we play well enough to beat teams like SD, NE, NYJ or even Cleveland and Miami? I don't think we do. When we played Oakland we really had 1 good quarter. When we played St. Louis, we had one good half. I don't think that's playing well enough of the time to beat better teams.

and know what the beauty of it is? Its that neither you or I nor anyone else in the world knows. If I had to guess, it say we lose to one or two of those teams you mentioned and win the rest. But we DONT KNOW.

And also, do you really think Jax and Oakland are THAT much worse than any of those teams you mentioned? Again, I agree that we need to play more complete games, but no matter what you say it IS realistic for us to win a decent portion of those games you mentioned.

[OpIv37]

based on your logic, the chargers showed us how to beat a NE team without Brady. How come that logic only applies when talking about teams having tape on us when we played the cards?

The Jets showed how to rip the Cardinals the week before we played them. Where did that get us? The Jags had a bad OL but still managed to shut down Stroud and run the ball.

The reason the logic doesn't apply is because this team has yet to show the ability to take advantage of another team's weakness.

[zone]

To be fair, they haven't been given the opportunity yet this year, but until they prove they can do it, we have no reason to believe that they can.


Well it depends on how you look at it. To me I have no reason to believe that they can't.

You are a glass is half empty type of guy.

[zone]

I think we played 3 poor games, arguably 4.



There is no such thing as a poor win.

[OpIv37]

Well it depends on how you look at it. To me I have no reason to believe that they can't.

You are a glass is half empty type of guy.

They've proven that they can't TWICE last year. The only way you can say you have no reason to believe that they can't is if you totally dismiss past performance as an indicator, which is illogical.

[OpIv37]

There is no such thing as a poor win.

That's true on gameday.

But as Sunday afternoon becomes Monday morning, you have to stop and think about how the team's performance relates to the next team on the schedule, or the team after that. And that's certainly reason for concern.

[justasportsfan]

I didn't even attempt to pick that game. You're really stretching on this one. I'm saying the same thing about the Browns now that I said before the game. What are we supposed to do- just IGNORE the fact that the Browns whooped a great football team last night? You're not making any sense.
excactly, because you would've picked the giants if you were realistic ,you would've been wrong and it would've proven that teams can beat anyone except when it comes to the bills.

In your world the bills can't beat anyone , we can't beat the browns but the browns can beat the mighty giants. :shakeno:

[justasportsfan]

The Jets showed how to rip the Cardinals the week before we played them. Where did that get us? The Jags had a bad OL but still managed to shut down Stroud and run the ball.

The reason the logic doesn't apply is because this team has yet to show the ability to take advantage of another team's weakness.
the cards had a bad game just like the giants had a bad game but in your world the browns can't have a bad game vs. the bills. Anything good can happen to other teams except for the bills. We get it!

stop with your logic talk. I was right more than you were in picking the sd, jets and miami game. Your logic got you one game right out of 3. :rolleyes:

[OpIv37]

excactly, because you would've picked the giants if you were realistic ,you would've been wrong and it would've proven that teams can beat anyone except when it comes to the bills.

In your world the bills can't beat anyone , we can't beat the browns but the browns can beat the mighty giants. :shakeno:

First, this is all conjecture over who I would have picked, so your whole statement is based on an assumption and not a reality.

Second, based on how the Bills played against Arizona, no, I don't think the Bills can beat anyone. Neither should you or anyone else.

Third, I've made a good case for why the Bills will lose to the Browns. I haven't heard a good case the other way- just a bunch of crap about how our O and D rankings are better than theirs. But, if the Browns can beat the Giants, certainly they can beat the Bills, right? Oh wait, nevermind. Let's just ignore that because it supports my point and not yours.

[OpIv37]

the cards had a bad game just like the giants had a bad game but in your world the browns can't have a bad game vs. the bills. Anything good can happen to other teams except for the bills. We get it!

stop with your logic talk. I was right more than you were in picking the sd, jets and miami game. Your logic got you one game right out of 3. :rolleyes:

if we have to hope for the other team to have a bad game in order to win, then expecting a win is by definition unrealistic.

[zone]

They've proven that they can't TWICE last year. The only way you can say you have no reason to believe that they can't is if you totally dismiss past performance as an indicator, which is illogical.
With that logic the Pats should have won, since they won all 16 games last year. The Falcons should have lost, the Cowboys should have won.

Last year was last year, give it up. We had a offensive coordinator who couldn't call his way out of a phone booth and a defensive that was more banged up then Tina Turner.

[tat2dmike77]

This just adds to the prove that every single team in the NFL (no matter how great) has a bad game every now and then...If only Buffalo fans realize this as well, this place will be much better off.

You can't tell people here that. Everyone here is an expert and they know everything about football. I mean look at the cowboys they suck they lost 2 games so do the giants after last night they suck big time. The pats well they suck as well. Everyone sucks that has a bad game.

Being 4-1 is not good enough for people around here. I guess i'm in the minority when i think 4-1 is a good record. No wait i have accepted mediocrocy from this team and i am to blind to see that this team sucks.

[OpIv37]

With that logic the Pats should have won, since they won all 16 games last year. The Falcons should have lost, the Cowboys should have won.

Last year was last year, give it up. We had a offensive coordinator who couldn't call his way out of a phone booth and a defensive that was more banged up then Tina Turner.

I never said it was a perfect indicator. But at the moment it's the only indicator we have. And I'd rather use an imperfect indicator as a basis for my opinion than nothing at all.

Like I said, I'll believe they can do it when they prove they can do it. Until then, it's just baseless hope.

[OpIv37]

You can't tell people here that. Everyone here is an expert and they know everything about football. I mean look at the cowboys they suck they lost 2 games so do the giants after last night they suck big time. The pats well they suck as well. Everyone sucks that has a bad game.

Being 4-1 is not good enough for people around here. I guess i'm in the minority when i think 4-1 is a good record. No wait i have accepted mediocrocy from this team and i am to blind to see that this team sucks.

short sighted.

4-1 IS a good record.

But you have to take the next step.

Is the way we played in those 5 games good enough to beat the upcoming teams on our schedule? It's not. We've been playing like ****. So enjoy your 4-1 while it lasts because it won't be like that for long.

[justasportsfan]

First, this is all conjecture over who I would have picked, so your whole statement is based on an assumption and not a reality.

Second, based on how the Bills played against Arizona, no, I don't think the Bills can beat anyone. Neither should you or anyone else. .so you're telling us you would've picked the browns? If you did either you're lying or you have ZERO logic or have screwed up realism.


Third, I've made a good case for why the Bills will lose to the Browns. I haven't heard a good case the other way- just a bunch of crap about how our O and D rankings are better than theirs. But, if the Browns can beat the Giants, certainly they can beat the Bills, right? Oh wait, nevermind. Let's just ignore that because it supports my point and not yours.

again, you only got one game right out of 3. The results supported my point , my logic and my realism more than it did yours.

You talked like the chargers had no chance of beating the Pats. Well you WERE WRONG!!!! Now you're talking like we have no chance to beat the browns. we shall see.

[Dr. Lecter]

Every starter on offense is the SAME.
On D, 8 of the 11 starters are the SAME, but 2 were on IR, so realistically 6 of 11 are the same.

That means 17 of 22 starters are the SAME. All the coaches are the same except Schonert.

There are a lot more similarities than differences between this year's team and last year's team, but for some reason people don't want to acknowledge it.

I would say that Trent and Lynch are not the same players they were last year.

But I know that rookies are not better with experience.

I also think that Schonert is much better than Fairchild, although I am sure you might disagree.

[Pinkerton Security]

First, this is all conjecture over who I would have picked, so your whole statement is based on an assumption and not a reality.

Second, based on how the Bills played against Arizona, no, I don't think the Bills can beat anyone. Neither should you or anyone else.

Third, I've made a good case for why the Bills will lose to the Browns. I haven't heard a good case the other way- just a bunch of crap about how our O and D rankings are better than theirs. But, if the Browns can beat the Giants, certainly they can beat the Bills, right? Oh wait, nevermind. Let's just ignore that because it supports my point and not yours.

so because of the AZ game, we cant beat ANYONE. not a single team in the NFL.

talk about being unrealistic.

And as far as the Browns, they have played atrociously in all facets of the game this year, EXCEPT the Giants game. So how should they be favored when we have had some good games and one very bad one, where they have had lots of pretty darn bad ones and one good one?

[justasportsfan]

With that logic the Pats should have won, since they won all 16 games last year. The Falcons should have lost, the Cowboys should have won.

Last year was last year, give it up. We had a offensive coordinator who couldn't call his way out of a phone booth and a defensive that was more banged up then Tina Turner.
OP's forgetting one important thing. The PAts are a different team. They don't have brady yet he uses the past to make a point. Anyways HE WAS WRONG in doing so.

He uses the past as long as it fits his argument. The results have PROVEN that the past doesn't matter. The Pats vs. SD was proof. Hell if you asked him if wheter we'd be 4-1 by the bye week, he'd say that we're crazy based on the bills last year peformance.

Based on last year the browns should never be in the botton of the league in O.

[Dr. Lecter]

short sighted.

4-1 IS a good record.

But you have to take the next step.

Is the way we played in those 5 games good enough to beat the upcoming teams on our schedule? It's not. We've been playing like ****. So enjoy your 4-1 while it lasts because it won't be like that for long.

That is assuming that the Chargers play well which they do not always do.

[OpIv37]

so because of the AZ game, we cant beat ANYONE. not a single team in the NFL.

talk about being unrealistic.

And as far as the Browns, they have played atrociously in all facets of the game this year, EXCEPT the Giants game. So how should they be favored when we have had some good games and one very bad one, where they have had lots of pretty darn bad ones and one good one?

I had the Browns to beat the Bills since the schedule came out, so it has nothing to do with last night's game.

The Browns still have a strong offense that plays similarly to Arizona's. Our D does NOT match up well with that style. Combine that with the night game factor, and we have a potential disaster on our hands.

And btw, we did not have "some" good games. We had one good game, against Seattle. I'll call the Jax game neutral and say we had 3 bad ones. Granted we won, but we played like **** for at least half the game in those 2 wins.

[tat2dmike77]

we didn't have one bad game. We had FOUR bad games. Fortunately, 3 of them were against teams that either sucked or were injured.

This Browns game made me nervous ever since the schedule came out because the Bills play like **** when the pressure is on. The Cards showed the Browns how to beat us and I think it's going to be another long night.


For once, I'm not in the mood to argue so let's say I give you the Jags game. That still means we played 2 good games (Sea and Jax) and 3 bad games. We just happened to come away with wins because St. Louis and Oakland both suck.

You're so obsessed with giving credit that you can't see the larger picture. We can't play like we played the last 3 games and beat the Chargers or any AFCE team.


Still think I'm "wrong" about the Browns being able to beat us on Monday night? They just dismantled a far better team than us on Monday night.


But we won't.

Wait, let me modify that before justa comes in and argues semantics and the use of definitives.

It's unlikely that the Bills will win this game. They ran a similar passing attack to what the Cards used to beat us and they showed they could perform well under the microscope on Monday night. The Bills have yet to prove they can shut down that type of passing attack or play well under the pressure of a Monday night game. Records aside, as of right now, the smart money's on the Browns.


Monday night games are NEVER an advantage for the Bills until they prove they can win one.

Why would you consider a situation to be an advantage when the Bills have never proven they can win in that situation? It's completely illogical.


I'll agree with that. It's always better to be at home.

But for the Bills, it's never good to be in a night game, regardless of where it is. Fortunately, we don't have any road night games this year, unless we get burned by "flex scheduling" again.


You are completely discounting how similar this team is to the team that LOST two Monday night games last year, which is extremely illogical.

I believe things when they are proven because that is logical. You believe the Bills can win based on, well, I'm not really sure what you're basing it on.


I overestimated Seattle, just like everyone else. No one could have foreseen all the injuries or them being that bad.

I haven't been too hard on the Jacksonville game because being on the road in that heat was a tough scenario in which the Bills pulled out a win. But it was far from a good performance.

I've given this team plenty of credit. Go back and read my post-game reviews.


here's the problem with giving the other teams credit: we have to play teams that are going to be playing at or above Jacksonville's level, and we will have to beat them. So, if we simply say "it was close because Jacksonville played well", then we take the responsibility off of Buffalo. Buffalo is going to face a lot of teams who will be playing well, and they'll have to play better to win.


Define "better".

Look at the game they play. Look at how they match up against our players. Plus, we have the night game factor working against us.

What happened to "any given Sunday"? Oh, right, that only applies when the Bills are the underdogs.


Every starter on offense is the SAME.
On D, 8 of the 11 starters are the SAME, but 2 were on IR, so realistically 6 of 11 are the same.

That means 17 of 22 starters are the SAME. All the coaches are the same except Schonert.

There are a lot more similarities than differences between this year's team and last year's team, but for some reason people don't want to acknowledge it.

I got sick of quoting with your replys OP. Now i don't care about your opinion i still say if the Bills won the super bowl you wold still find something to complain about. I think you may be one of those people who are only happy if you have something to complain about.

But my point is this. OP dude your *****ing has surpassed FTP level of *****ing. Seriously dude we get it your standards are unbelievable. It's like you just sit and wait and once the Bills fumble or throw a pick or have a bad quarter you come running telling us how the team sucks.

You're a fan that is always expecting the worst and never hoping for the best. I use the term fan loosely because you seem to hate this team with a passion. You rip apart consistantly but then give credit to every other team in the league. By your standards Dallas, NE, Wash and of course the NYG all suck and they should pack it in. The only true team out there is Tenn because they have yet to loose. But then again they have not been winning by 20+ points either so i guess they almost suck.

I've learned to look past your complaining as i think you get a kick out of pissing people off here. But come on dude it's old i mean if someone gave you a pink ferrrai would you ***** about it being pink? Lighten up a little

[OpIv37]

I got sick of quoting with your replys OP. Now i don't care about your opinion i still say if the Bills won the super bowl you wold still find something to complain about. I think you may be one of those people who are only happy if you have something to complain about.

But my point is this. OP dude your *****ing has surpassed FTP level of *****ing. Seriously dude we get it your standards are unbelievable. It's like you just sit and wait and once the Bills fumble or throw a pick or have a bad quarter you come running telling us how the team sucks.

You're a fan that is always expecting the worst and never hoping for the best. I use the term fan loosely because you seem to hate this team with a passion. You rip apart consistantly but then give credit to every other team in the league. By your standards Dallas, NE, Wash and of course the NYG all suck and they should pack it in. The only true team out there is Tenn because they have yet to loose. But then again they have not been winning by 20+ points either so i guess they almost suck.

I've learned to look past your complaining as i think you get a kick out of pissing people off here. But come on dude it's old i mean if someone gave you a pink ferrrai would you ***** about it being pink? Lighten up a little

I'm through debating my tone and attitude. If you want to debate why you think I'm wrong about the Browns beating the Bills, I will be more than happy to respond. But all this post does is attack the way I post instead of the content of the post and it doesn't address the topic of the thread.

[Pinkerton Security]

I had the Browns to beat the Bills since the schedule came out, so it has nothing to do with last night's game.

The Browns still have a strong offense that plays similarly to Arizona's. Our D does NOT match up well with that style. Combine that with the night game factor, and we have a potential disaster on our hands.

And btw, we did not have "some" good games. We had one good game, against Seattle. I'll call the Jax game neutral and say we had 3 bad ones. Granted we won, but we played like **** for at least half the game in those 2 wins.

Well i guess there's just no changing your mind that apparently we havent played well since week 1 year, so im done. I think we found a way to win, and thats what matters more than how many quarters we put together, and you wont change my mind on that so dont bother, just as i wont bother challenging your opinions.

[OpIv37]

Well i guess there's just no changing your mind that apparently we havent played well since week 1 year, so im done. I think we found a way to win, and thats what matters more than how many quarters we put together, and you wont change my mind on that so dont bother, just as i wont bother challenging your opinions.

how many quarters we put together WILL matter against the upcoming teams on our schedule because they're better than the teams we beat. The "way to win" we found was to struggle through most of the game then turn it on at the last possible second. That doesn't work against good teams, as you saw in Arizona.

That's all I'm trying to say.

[zone]

The fact of the matter is basing assessments about teams on prior years is flawed. See NE, Indy, Atlanta, Seattle, Buffalo, etc.

[tat2dmike77]

I'm through debating my tone and attitude. If you want to debate why you think I'm wrong about the Browns beating the Bills, I will be more than happy to respond. But all this post does is attack the way I post instead of the content of the post and it doesn't address the topic of the thread.

So your saying you can see the future and you know for a fact that browns will beat the bills on NOV 17th. A game that is a little more then a month away you are already saying the Bills will loose.

What i want to know is why? Because the Browns beat the Giants and the Bengals? What threat do the Browns have on offense. Derrick Anderson he has been playing like crap and last night he had one good game. Does this mean he will continue to light it up against the league? Maybe or maybe not.

Anderson came out and did what competitor should do. He put it all on the line against the G-men. If he played bad lst night i know that he would be on the bench next sunday. So he came out and said this is my job and i have nothing to loose so he layed it all out. The browns still have no run game thier secondary is still a joke. Manning played bad last night plain and simple. Actually the whole team played horrible. But you are ready to give the cleveland the win based on one game and what they did last year. Well talking about last year and .50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

How do you know that the Bills have not made major adjustments during the past two weeks. They may come out and beat SD this week and go on anther win streak. I'm sure the coaching staff got on this team and the leaders of the team stepped up as well in the locker room.

This is what people are talking about. You are giving all the credit in the world to cleveland who is 2-3 but none to Buffalo.

[justasportsfan]

if everything was based on the year before like OP likes to use for his arguments , then the giants had no business winning the sb last year.

[tat2dmike77]

if everything was based on the year before like OP likes to use for his arguments , then the giants had no business winning the sb last year.

The browns also had no business winning 10 games last year and the lolphins have no business winning 2 games so far this year. The rays have no business being in the ALCS right now either.

[OpIv37]

So your saying you can see the future and you know for a fact that browns will beat the bills on NOV 17th. A game that is a little more then a month away you are already saying the Bills will loose.

What i want to know is why? Because the Browns beat the Giants and the Bengals? What threat do the Browns have on offense. Derrick Anderson he has been playing like crap and last night he had one good game. Does this mean he will continue to light it up against the league? Maybe or maybe not.

Anderson came out and did what competitor should do. He put it all on the line against the G-men. If he played bad lst night i know that he would be on the bench next sunday. So he came out and said this is my job and i have nothing to loose so he layed it all out. The browns still have no run game thier secondary is still a joke. Manning played bad last night plain and simple. Actually the whole team played horrible. But you are ready to give the cleveland the win based on one game and what they did last year. Well talking about last year and .50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

How do you know that the Bills have not made major adjustments during the past two weeks. They may come out and beat SD this week and go on anther win streak. I'm sure the coaching staff got on this team and the leaders of the team stepped up as well in the locker room.

This is what people are talking about. You are giving all the credit in the world to cleveland who is 2-3 but none to Buffalo.

Obviously I can't see the future. I'm stating my opinion of what will happen during that game and making a case as to why.

I'm giving credit to Cleveland based on 1 game, how they played last year, and how horrible the Bills played against the cards (and Raiders and Rams, for that matter). I think they will use the pass to set up the run, and as far as their secondary sucking, I don't really think it matters because, like the Cards game, our O is barely going to be on the field.

I don't know what kind of adjustments the Bills did or didn't make. I do know that they were completely outclassed by Arizona and it would take a LOT of adjusting to improve on that mess. They've also consistently struggled with basics like blocking and tackling, so step 1 is to improve in those areas.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Again, define "better".

Will they have a better record than us, or better offensive or defensive statistics at the end of the year? Probably not.

When we're actually on the field, and they're matching their offense up against our defense, I think their offense is better than our D. They showed why last night, we showed why against the Cardinals.

Remember, this is practically the same O the Browns had last year that was excellent. They have a few bad games and everyone immediately writes them off, meanwhile the Bills have a few bad games and everyone says "well you can't dominate another team for a full 4 quarters." Hmmm.....So they had a few bad games and you can't write them off... we, in your words, had a few bad games, and should fully be written off. Yup, I got it now, thanks for clarifying.

[OpIv37]

So they had a few bad games and you can't write them off... we, in your words, had a few bad games, and should fully be written off. Yup, I got it now, thanks for clarifying.

But you already wrote off Cleveland. Why can't we write off the Bills?

I think you're the one who needs to clarify.

[Lexwhat]

But we won't.

Wait, let me modify that before justa comes in and argues semantics and the use of definitives.

It's unlikely that the Bills will win this game. They ran a similar passing attack to what the Cards used to beat us and they showed they could perform well under the microscope on Monday night. The Bills have yet to prove they can shut down that type of passing attack or play well under the pressure of a Monday night game. Records aside, as of right now, the smart money's on the Browns.
OP, I usually agree with you on a lot of things, but there's also a flip side to this.

Our team is young, and most haven't played in any playoff games. I think a high-pressure national game will be good for us this year if we end up making the playoffs.

Playoff games are obviously high-pressure, and a MNF game certainly can't hurt.

[BlackMetalNinja]

But you already wrote off Cleveland. Why can't we write off the Bills?

I think you're the one who needs to clarify.Where did I once write off Cleveland? Where did I once say they can't beat Buffalo. For one always claiming others are putting words in your mouth, you do it pretty well yourself. My point is that Cleveland had one good game after 4 mediocre or flat out poor ones, and all the sudden they are just as good as last year's team? Yet the Bills come out and win two games that nobody expects them to win, win 2 more against teams they should beat, and while it may not have been beautiful, they got the job done... and then lose to a team that I view as pretty much on the same level as them by playing poorly on the road. And now despite their 4-1 record, they are last year's team too?

Cleveland's offense did NOTHING before last night this season and yet after lighting it up for one game, you'll have us believe that Buffalo can't possibly hope to contain them? They were averaging under 12 points a game as a team going into last night... They had 4 offensive TDs in their first 4 games... yet the Bills defense won't have a chance against them? Hell, throw in last night's game and they're still 28th in the league in offensive stats.

[OpIv37]

OP, I usually agree with you on a lot of things, but there's also a flip side to this.

Our team is young, and most haven't played in any playoff games. I think a high-pressure national game will be good for us this year if we end up making the playoffs.

Playoff games are obviously high-pressure, and a MNF game certainly can't hurt.

Well, obviously the team will have to learn to play under pressure at some point.

I'm just sick of getting destroyed in night games in front of the whole country- the loss to Miami a few years back, the 38-5 debacle against the Chiefs, the loss to Denver in the Saturday game (I was at that one), the epic collapse against Dallas, and several embarrassing defeats at the hands of NE over the last few years. The list goes on and on....

[Lexwhat]

Well, obviously the team will have to learn to play under pressure at some point.

I'm just sick of getting destroyed in night games in front of the whole country- the loss to Miami a few years back, the 38-5 debacle against the Chiefs, the loss to Denver in the Saturday game (I was at that one), the epic collapse against Dallas, and several embarrassing defeats at the hands of NE over the last few years. The list goes on and on....

I've thought about that too, but I think this year will be different.

In Trent I trust.

[OpIv37]

Where did I once write off Cleveland? Where did I once say they can't beat Buffalo. For one always claiming others are putting words in your mouth, you do it pretty well yourself. My point is that Cleveland had one good game after 4 mediocre or flat out poor ones, and all the sudden they are just as good as last year's team? Yet the Bills come out and win two games that nobody expects them to win, win 2 more against teams they should beat, and while it may not have been beautiful, they got the job done... and then lose to a team that I view as pretty much on the same level as them by playing poorly on the road. And now despite their 4-1 record, they are last year's team too?

Cleveland's offense did NOTHING before last night this season and yet after lighting it up for one game, you'll have us believe that Buffalo can't possibly hope to contain them? They were averaging under 12 points a game as a team going into last night... They had 4 offensive TDs in their first 4 games... yet the Bills defense won't have a chance against them? Hell, throw in last night's game and they're still 28th in the league in offensive stats.

I didn't ever think Buffalo could contain them, even before last night's game. Never mind the fact that Cleveland played Dallas, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Cincy before last night- all those teams except Cincy have great D's and their QB was coming off an injury. Last night's game proved what I was already saying: their O can still get it done.

What passing attack has our D shut down this year? Seattle had no healthy receivers, Jacksonville is a run-oriented team, Oakland is a run-ONLY team and St. Louis just sucks. The ONLY passing game we played was the Cards and they lit us up.

Look at the passing offenses of the teams we beat:

20 Jacksonville Jaguars
28 St. Louis Rams
29 Oakland Raiders
31 Seattle Seahawks

The only one in the top 20 is Jacksonville, and the other 3 are 28 or below. And we BARELY beat 3 of them. All our D proved was that they look good against teams that can't pass. Yet, somehow because our record looks good on paper, that means we can beat Cleveland? Please.

[JD]

I almost regret starting this thread, holy ****

[Mad Bomber]

I almost regret starting this thread, holy ****
You should be negged into oblivion for this.

[BlackMetalNinja]

I didn't ever think Buffalo could contain them, even before last night's game. Never mind the fact that Cleveland played Dallas, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Cincy before last night- all those teams except Cincy have great D's and their QB was coming off an injury. Last night's game proved what I was already saying: their O can still get it done.

What passing attack has our D shut down this year? Seattle had no healthy receivers, Jacksonville is a run-oriented team, Oakland is a run-ONLY team and St. Louis just sucks. The ONLY passing game we played was the Cards and they lit us up.

Look at the passing offenses of the teams we beat:

20 Jacksonville Jaguars
28 St. Louis Rams
29 Oakland Raiders
31 Seattle Seahawks

The only one in the top 20 is Jacksonville, and the other 3 are 28 or below. And we BARELY beat 3 of them. All our D proved was that they look good against teams that can't pass. Yet, somehow because our record looks good on paper, that means we can beat Cleveland? Please.You conveniently neglected this team:

26 Cleveland Browns

[OpIv37]

You conveniently neglected this team:

26 Cleveland Browns

I neglected it for damn good reason and I mentioned that reason: the defenses that Cleveland played. They got beat by good D's, we barely beat weak O's.

[Mr. Pink]

You conveniently neglected this team:

26 Cleveland Browns

I could help OP with why this is, but what fun would that be? :rofl:

[BlackMetalNinja]

I could help OP with why this is, but what fun would that be? :rofl:Go for it, I'm done with him. The only thing he'll ever be convinced of is that Buffalo is the worst 4-1 team in history and we're doomed to fall apart no matter what. The hilarious part is I never even made a comment one way or the other as to who was a better team, simply the fact that the Browns beating us is NOT a foregone conclusion no matter how much he thinks it is.

[Dr. Lecter]

I neglected it for damn good reason and I mentioned that reason: the defenses that Cleveland played. They got beat by good D's, we barely beat weak O's.

Like the Bengals?

[OpIv37]

Like the Bengals?

Like the Steelers, Ravens and Dallas. And the Giants aren't too bad either.

You got a 20%. Needs more effort.

[OpIv37]

Go for it, I'm done with him. The only thing he'll ever be convinced of is that Buffalo is the worst 4-1 team in history and we're doomed to fall apart no matter what. The hilarious part is I never even made a comment one way or the other as to who was a better team, simply the fact that the Browns beating us is NOT a foregone conclusion no matter how much he thinks it is.

Nothing's a forgone conclusion in the NFL. You just stated the obvious.

But like I said at the start of this, the smart money's on the Browns.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Nothing's a forgone conclusion in the NFL. You just stated the obvious.

But like I said at the start of this, the smart money's on the Browns.Yup, and the smart money was on the Giants last night... and the smart money was on the Patriots on Sunday night, and the smart money was on the Redskins, Dolphins, Broncos and Cowboys on Sunday too.

[Dr. Lecter]

Like the Steelers, Ravens and Dallas. And the Giants aren't too bad either.

You got a 20%. Needs more effort.

So you can give up on the Bills defense after one bad showing, but not on the Browns offense?

You get a 20% on the Bills defense blowing goats. Need more effort.

[Mr. Pink]

Go for it, I'm done with him. The only thing he'll ever be convinced of is that Buffalo is the worst 4-1 team in history and we're doomed to fall apart no matter what. The hilarious part is I never even made a comment one way or the other as to who was a better team, simply the fact that the Browns beating us is NOT a foregone conclusion no matter how much he thinks it is.


The Browns offense has looked so pathetic until last night because....

DA was still recovering from a concussion he received in the 3rd preseason game.
Jamal Lewis still isn't 100%
Bralyon missed a bunch of training camp with an injury
Stallworth played 0 downs in the first 4 weeks
Syndric Steptoe was the number 2 WR for the first four weeks
No Joe Jurevicius
No Josh Cribbs in week 1

You do that to any team in the league and they'd have a record very similar to Cleveland's.

Notice I don't throw out the "well they played good teams" angle...because it's a bs copout excuse. You have to play the hand you're dealt and do as best as you can with it.

Now they have to deal with no KII for an undetermined amount of time but Heiden is adequate at the position, nothing special though.

If the Bills played the Browns week 1, they woulda mopped the floor with them. If they played tomorrow Buffalo would be favored by 4-6. In a month from now who knows? Depends on injuries.

But to just assume or think Cleveland is the team you saw in the first 4 weeks and last night was a mirage is very short sighted. The offense you saw last night is like the offense they ran last year. Guys are starting to get healthy and you see the results.

[OpIv37]

Yup, and the smart money was on the Giants last night... and the smart money was on the Patriots on Sunday night, and the smart money was on the Redskins, Dolphins, Broncos and Cowboys on Sunday too.

well, you're wrong because the Bills will be favored in this game. The smart money's still on the Browns.

[Mr. Pink]

Oh yeah what percentage do I get for my post?

[zone]

Well good news Op you have a 50% chance of being right.

Any team can have a bad game and lose any team can have a good game and win.

The fact of the matter is we have won 4 and I don't care how bad you think we looked, the only thing that matters is we have the W and if we continue to get them, I would be happy to ride those ugly wins into the playoffs.

[OpIv37]

Well good news Op you have a 50% chance of being right.

Any team can have a bad game and lose any team can have a good game and win.

The fact of the matter is we have won 4 and I don't care how bad you think we looked, the only thing that matters is we have the W and if we continue to get them, I would be happy to ride those ugly wins into the playoffs.

that's my fear: that if we keep playing like crap we won't be able to win ugly or at all.

[OpIv37]

Oh yeah what percentage do I get for my post?

93%. I disagree with you about the opponents because I have a feeling that if they Browns opened against St. Louis, Seattle, Cincy and Houston their offensive production would be a lot better.

Other than that, very good points.

[tat2dmike77]

93%. I disagree with you about the opponents because I have a feeling that if they Browns opened against St. Louis, Seattle, Cincy and Houston their offensive production would be a lot better.

Other than that, very good points.


Oh yeah what percentage do I get for my post?

Oh come on OP if that was a Bills fan pointing out all those injuries you would say those are excuses and if this were a playoff team they would be able to overcome those injuries.

[JD]

You should be negged into oblivion for this.
:sadwalk:
Sorry sir