Post Game Comments: tell me what's different/better

[OpIv37]

So, here we go again:

-Poor QB play
-Inability to make halftime adjustments by the coaching staff, specifically still running the ball up the middle when there is clearly no room.
-No killer instinct: the Jets tried to hand us this game with their 2 turnovers, team record amount of penalties, and Rex's stupid challenges, but we failed to capitalize
-Too many injuries and no depth to cover for them, particularly on the OL and at CB
-Too many big plays given up on D, too few made on O
-Too many third down conversions given up on D, too few made on O
-Still
-Veterans and supposed "star" players not coming through (specifically Mario Williams and CJ Spiller- Chandler sucked aside from the one TD play as well)
-After one game of being clutch, Stevie is right back to his antics with another dumb penalty (waiting for the homers to defend his stupidity because he got in Wilson's head in 3...2...1... this is football, not hockey)
-Horrendous run D- we got shredded by a no-name yet again
-The QB we passed on in the draft completely embarrassed the one we took
-0-2 in the division, 2 games and a tiebreaker behind the Fish and Pats, one game and a tiebreaker behind the jets- AFTER JUST 3 GAMES
-Too many penalties- which is embarrassing because this game was actually an improvement over the previous 2.
-Still getting crushed in TOP.

So, what exactly is different about this team? What exactly is better about this team as compared to previous teams? I had a suspicion this game would be a reality check- I wasn't completely convinced because the Jets are terrible, but my gut feeling turned out to be correct. This was a wake-up call. We continue to struggle in the division, we continue to have a LOT of the same problems that have plagued us for as long as anyone can remember. And we can't finish- when we kicked the ball away with about 4:00 left to play, I said to my dad "This is a rerun- we've seen this episode before." I'm so tired of that feeling.

The Ravens are going to embarrass us next week (and I know people are going to give me **** for saying that if we keep it close- but regardless of what I say, the goal is to win and we won't do that).

[Novacane]

Not defending them at all this week. The Jets commit 150 yds in penalties and +2 in TO and still lose. **** them. Rip away OP.

[kingJofNYC]

Our running game is much much worse than it has been in a long long time. So I guess that's something different...

[RedEyE]

The only saving grace at this point is the youth of the entire team to include coaching staff. You have to hope it gets better. But we've been hoping for so damn long that patience has run out. If improvements aren't made by week 12, I will probably be calling for heads to roll.

[OpIv37]

Not defending them at all this week. The Jets commit 150 yds in penalties and +2 in TO and still lose. **** them. Rip away OP.

I still can't understand how they gift wrapped us a field length and a half in penalties and we still only managed one TD. And that's not even accounting for the turnovers.

[OpIv37]

Our running game is much much worse than it has been in a long long time. So I guess that's something different...

Losing Levitre hurt a LOT more than people thought, especially if Urbik can't come back.

The lack of depth on this team is appalling. And what really frustrates me is that I've been saying that for at least 10 years. Even the best teams have flaws, but it's nauseating to have the same flaws for such an absurd period of time.

[MTBillsFan]

All this while Andy Levitre counts his millions in Tennessee...how much cap room do we have? I'm sick of the cash to cap bs. If they had given the money to Levitre and Byrd, I'm confident that the Bills are 3-0. The Byrd "injury" is a product not being paid.

[OpIv37]

All this while Andy Levitre counts his millions in Tennessee...how much cap room do we have? I'm sick of the cash to cap bs. If they had given the money to Levitre and Byrd, I'm confident that the Bills are 3-0. The Byrd "injury" is a product not being paid.

Quite possibly- I'll definitely give you 2-1. Better blocking means better running and less pressure on Manuel- we still only lost by one score. Levitre alone could have been the difference in this game.

[Novacane]

Our running game is much much worse than it has been in a long long time. So I guess that's something different...



Cause we run the same ****ing play time after time.

[Novacane]

All this while Andy Levitre counts his millions in Tennessee...how much cap room do we have? I'm sick of the cash to cap bs. If they had given the money to Levitre and Byrd, I'm confident that the Bills are 3-0. The Byrd "injury" is a product not being paid.


If that's the case I'm glad they didn't pay him. Any jerk that would fake an injury cause he didn't get a big contract I don't want. That's the kind of guy whose play slacks off after he gets his big payday. I agree they should of payed Levitre. I think he got to much money for a guard but if they weren't going to spend the money elsewhere who cares how much he cost.

[Buffalo Thriller]

I think you've hit the nail on this Op, our lack of depth is scary.

[kingJofNYC]

Cause we run the same ****ing play time after time.

I know, it's pretty ****ing terrible.

Losing Levitre hurt, but I don't think it would matter much in the run game with the ****ty plays they're calling. Definitely would help having Levitre in pass pro though.

[Thundering Buffalo]

As usual when it was time to steps up we **** the bed!

[OpIv37]

As usual when it was time to steps up we **** the bed!

One game. We had one game where we came through- against a mediocre out of conference opponent. Then we're back to division games, and our true colors show.

You know, Jim Kelly hung on a little too long, and when he finally retired I was glad he stepped aside. And in hindsight I feel stupid for thinking like that. The Kelly days may be as good as it ever gets for us.

[Turf]

Hackett is our biggest problem. They need to rethink this entire approach.

[lightningbolt444]

I feel like a lot of people are giving spiller a pass. He has been REALLY bad this season. While the play calling has been suspect to say the least he has danced far to much and not hit the hole as hard as last season. So far this season FJ has outplayed him by a wide margin.

[OpIv37]

I feel like a lot of people are giving spiller a pass. He has been REALLY bad this season. While the play calling has been suspect to say the least he has danced far to much and not hit the hole as hard as last season. So far this season FJ has outplayed him by a wide margin.

Agreed.

He seems to be looking for a home run every play. Some plays are busted- if he puts his head down and just runs forward, he'll gain 2-3 yards. If he dances, he'll lose 2-3. Last year, I thought he learned when to look for the hole and when to just take whatever is there, but apparently he hasn't.

On a similar note, EJ needs to learn when to give up on a play and just heave the ball as well. There were at least 3 sacks he could have avoided by putting the ball in the third row of the stands.

[Beebe's Kid]

The only saving grace at this point is the youth of the entire team to include coaching staff. You have to hope it gets better. But we've been hoping for so damn long that patience has run out. If improvements aren't made by week 12, I will probably be calling for heads to roll.
The team is always young, and heads always roll. Maybe this has something to do with our problem?

The veterans are always the ones that come on the cheap, and usually wouldn't get money elsewhere.

Just read about the people cursing Byrd. The Bills screwed the pooch on that deal. I know many of you are hurt, and you think that everybody is lying about his injury...you may be right, but why the **** would Byrd risk injury to be a part of this?

[lightningbolt444]

Agreed.

He seems to be looking for a home run every play. Some plays are busted- if he puts his head down and just runs forward, he'll gain 2-3 yards. If he dances, he'll lose 2-3. Last year, I thought he learned when to look for the hole and when to just take whatever is there, but apparently he hasn't.

On a similar note, EJ needs to learn when to give up on a play and just heave the ball as well. There were at least 3 sacks he could have avoided by putting the ball in the third row of the stands.

I agree with that as well. I still think EJ will be an ok Above average QB in the league not elite but will win us some games. However I do think he is going to take some time. If hackett is trying to protect him by the way he is calling the plays I think he is doing the exact opposite. He actually seems pretty comfortable throwing the intermediate stuff. It is the short and long passes he really struggles on.

Ej seemed to want to win it on his own at times today instead of letting a play die. It is great he wants to make things happen but he needs to pick his times when he does that a bit better.

[lightningbolt444]

The team is always young, and heads always roll. Maybe this has something to do with our problem?

The veterans are always the ones that come on the cheap, and usually wouldn't get money elsewhere.

Just read about the people cursing Byrd. The Bills screwed the pooch on that deal. I know many of you are hurt, and you think that everybody is lying about his injury...you may be right, but why the **** would Byrd risk injury to be a part of this?

Here is the thing the more I see it unfold the less I think the Bills screwed this one up. He had this injury last season. The Bills knew that and didnt want to pay him the huge money. To me that is a good move. Now they could have tied some performance bonuses in to bring the number up but still this is not an injury that happened this season it is a preexisting condition that he somehow played 16 games last season but now is refusing to play.

I would have rather seen them sign a bunch of solid vet backups with that money though instead of just letting it sit.

[OpIv37]

I agree with that as well. I still think EJ will be an ok Above average QB in the league not elite but will win us some games. However I do think he is going to take some time. If hackett is trying to protect him by the way he is calling the plays I think he is doing the exact opposite. He actually seems pretty comfortable throwing the intermediate stuff. It is the short and long passes he really struggles on.

Ej seemed to want to win it on his own at times today instead of letting a play die. It is great he wants to make things happen but he needs to pick his times when he does that a bit better.

Yeah I'm not giving up on EJ- terrible game but it was only his 3rd game, his first road game, and the first game where he really struggled. Honestly I think the coaches should have let him open it up earlier.

[psubills62]

I'll throw some thoughts in here:
1) Bad OL. Really bad. IMO, that was the main issue today. The Jets were all over the short routes, and we couldn't do anything going deep. If Manuel had better protection, we'd likely have had a little more success beyond 10 yards.

2) That said, the rest of the offensive players had a lot of issues as well. Receivers couldn't get off the line or create separation. Manuel held the ball way too often rather than throwing it away. Just a mess. Looked like practice, where guys were just way out of place, not even seeing the ball, etc.

3) The offensive philosophy is very worrisome. Usually when a team does some things offensively, teams will adjust their defenses. The offense then needs to have some counter plays. I saw nothing of that today. The Jets kept jumping the slant routes, so why didn't we run a sluggo? Manuel didn't have a lot of time, but that doesn't take too long to develop, especially when one move would leave the WR wide open. I'm very bothered by not only the lack of initial creativity in play-calling, but the absence of any counters to what was clearly a defense purely designed to stop the short passing game. Side note: I also remember hearing about how Marrone/Hackett used the screen game. I don't feel like I've seen...any screens lately, whether WR or RB. Where did they go?

4) The no-huddle bothers me as well. Not the fact that they're utilizing it - it's the way they utilize it. The absolute inflexibility on the matter. Do they really think there is no situation where a huddle might possibly be beneficial? Do they really think this is a good offense, that no changes are worth making?

5) Spiller. Maybe his issues are on the OL, maybe they're on the offensive counter plays, like I already discussed. Whatever it is...at some point, it comes down to the coaches putting him in a position to get him going, and they aren't.

6) If Gilmore was in instead of Rogers, it's hard to see the Jets scoring...at all, IMO. Also have to wonder at what point Rogers gets safety help, because he clearly can't help himself. Absolutely pathetic showing.

7) No matter how it happened, still nice to see the Bills competitive in every game. Winning is clearly much better, but competitiveness is nice to see at the beginning of the rebuilding process. Usually what we see are a bunch of injuries and then a completely pathetic team that gets blown out, and then people imagine that getting the injured players back would make a difference. In these cases, it feels like getting one or two guys might indeed put them over the winning hump. Gilmore, Hairston, etc.

8) Alonso is a revelation. Finally a good LB, even if he's not perfect. Kid is a playmaker, and that's exactly the kind of player we need on D. I really wish Marquise Goodwin was available, would like to see what he could do on ST's and on offense (outside of fumbling it). I feel like he'd be a legit weapon. Even though Robert Woods didn't have a great showing today, he's been good for a rookie. Overall, the initial feel of the draft class is decent. If that can be continued, should bolster the team enough to be able to survive the injuries like we've seen this year.

9) I hate the Jets. I hate that those schmuck coaches in New York that are complete disasters are still able to beat us.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

I feel like a lot of people are giving spiller a pass. He has been REALLY bad this season. While the play calling has been suspect to say the least he has danced far to much and not hit the hole as hard as last season. So far this season FJ has outplayed him by a wide margin.

He's reverted to rookie season Spiller. They need to dig back to what was working for him last year because if he backslides this offense is cooked.

[cookie G]

I feel like a lot of people are giving spiller a pass. He has been REALLY bad this season. While the play calling has been suspect to say the least he has danced far to much and not hit the hole as hard as last season. So far this season FJ has outplayed him by a wide margin.

In the first game against NE maybe. He said he was trying to hit a home run with each run. Last week I thought he ran pretty hard.

I felt sorry for him today. Jesus, the only time he got any yards is when he bounced it outside.

He and Freddy are 2 different players and run differently. As Jimmi pointed out last week about Freddy, he finds holes on the inside that few other RB's do. What he did on the 3rd and 1 play was something few RB's can pull off.

If they want to keep using him as some kind of inside power back, it is the biggest waste of talent since John Rauch used OJ as a blocker/reciever/decoy. Its almost like they are trying to make some type of point, using him the way they are, but I have no idea what that point is.

[BuffaloRedleg]

So, here we go again:

-Poor QB play
-Inability to make halftime adjustments by the coaching staff, specifically still running the ball up the middle when there is clearly no room.
-No killer instinct: the Jets tried to hand us this game with their 2 turnovers, team record amount of penalties, and Rex's stupid challenges, but we failed to capitalize
-Too many injuries and no depth to cover for them, particularly on the OL and at CB
-Too many big plays given up on D, too few made on O
-Too many third down conversions given up on D, too few made on O
-Still
-Veterans and supposed "star" players not coming through (specifically Mario Williams and CJ Spiller- Chandler sucked aside from the one TD play as well)
-After one game of being clutch, Stevie is right back to his antics with another dumb penalty (waiting for the homers to defend his stupidity because he got in Wilson's head in 3...2...1... this is football, not hockey)
-Horrendous run D- we got shredded by a no-name yet again
-The QB we passed on in the draft completely embarrassed the one we took
-0-2 in the division, 2 games and a tiebreaker behind the Fish and Pats, one game and a tiebreaker behind the jets- AFTER JUST 3 GAMES
-Too many penalties- which is embarrassing because this game was actually an improvement over the previous 2.
-Still getting crushed in TOP.

So, what exactly is different about this team? What exactly is better about this team as compared to previous teams? I had a suspicion this game would be a reality check- I wasn't completely convinced because the Jets are terrible, but my gut feeling turned out to be correct. This was a wake-up call. We continue to struggle in the division, we continue to have a LOT of the same problems that have plagued us for as long as anyone can remember. And we can't finish- when we kicked the ball away with about 4:00 left to play, I said to my dad "This is a rerun- we've seen this episode before." I'm so tired of that feeling.

The Ravens are going to embarrass us next week (and I know people are going to give me **** for saying that if we keep it close- but regardless of what I say, the goal is to win and we won't do that).

Listen it's not the same. New coach, new QB, fresh ideas. But that doesn't mean the results aren't the same. I don't know what the **** it is, but god damnit the results are always the same no matter who the personnel. I just don't get it, and it's such a bummer.

I think next week goes about the same as this week. I really don't think the Ravens are any good.

Moral victories are over unless it's Manuel plays great and we lose. That is the only moral victory I will allow.

[Turf]

4) The no-huddle bothers me as well. Not the fact that they're utilizing it - it's the way they utilize it. The absolute inflexibility on the matter. Do they really think there is no situation where a huddle might possibly be beneficial? Do they really think this is a good offense, that no changes are worth making?

This other than Hackett himself is very worrisome. At the end of the first half,3rd and long, you've got to be a coach. You're getting the ball back to start the 2nd half. If you don't get a first down, you have to run that 40 secs off the clock to make sure the other team can't drive back down with over a minute left. They cannot utilize the hurry up no huddle 100% of the time. We gave the Jets a FG at the end of the 1st half they shouldn't of had. Theoretically, we would have been up 20-17 had they not done this. It was just stubborn and stupid. Very concerned about the block headedness of this.

[Dr. Lecter]

The Ravens are going to embarrass us next week (and I know people are going to give me **** for saying that if we keep it close- but regardless of what I say, the goal is to win and we won't do that).

I am not usually the call you out guy - but I remembered reading this.

Can we give you **** since the Bills won?

[SquishDaFish]

:roflmao:

[OpIv37]

I am not usually the call you out guy - but I remembered reading this.

Can we give you **** since the Bills won?
I was wrong on this one definitely.

But keep in mind it was one game and we only won by 3 despite getting 5 turnovers. What happens when we don't get 5 turnovers? This is still not a good team.

[Jry44]

I was wrong on this one definitely.

But keep in mind it was one game and we only won by 3 despite getting 5 turnovers. What happens when we don't get 5 turnovers? This is still not a good team.

For once we beat a good team in a close game that we usually lose in a heart breaking fashion. Just enjoy it for once!

[Mr. Miyagi]

I was wrong on this one definitely.

But keep in mind it was one game and we only won by 3 despite getting 5 turnovers. What happens when we don't get 5 turnovers? This is still not a good team.
I can see it now.

OP: "One game exception does not make the rule...."

But we only lost two games and they were both by under one score. Glass half full vs Glass half empty.

[Dr. Lecter]

I was wrong on this one definitely.

But keep in mind it was one game and we only won by 3 despite getting 5 turnovers. What happens when we don't get 5 turnovers? This is still not a good team.

They beat the defending Super Bowl Champions.

They also ran for 203 yards against a team that had given up 224 yards in 3 games combined.

And they also held the Ravens to 24 yards rushing.

As for the "what happens if" question, you seem to despise people using that when the Bills lose. Why is it OK for you to use when the Bills win?

I think what you usually say is that it does not matter "what if" - it happened.

So yes, they won the game while getting 5 turnovers.

But they did a lot of other things right.

So keep all of that in mind too.

[psubills62]

I didn't watch the game, but I don't think people should say "Bills had 5 INT's" without mentioning that the Bills also had 3 turnovers. Still comes out to +2 in turnover margin, but that's clearly the more realistic stat to concentrate on.

And maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't the Bills get credit for getting 5 INT's?

[Meathead]

its probably still a bad team but they appear to be coming together rapidly and learning from their mistakes. they are getting contributions from some pretty low level players especially in the secondary. its still a big time work in progress but those are good signs for the future

[better days]

My thoughts on the game:

The Ralph & the Crowd in it still look GREAT on TV.

Lawson & Branch both had GOOD games............... AGAIN & helped the Bills win like I told Op they would when the Bills signed them.

Kiko is a STUD at the Mike LB position..............................I think he has proven himself Op.

Another STRONG game from Woods..........................I think he has proven himself as well Op.

EJ played better than Flacco today.

Even the most PESSIMISTIC of BILLS fans should be EXCITED about this 2-2 Bills team.

​SCREW THE 2-14 CROWD.

[Beebe's Kid]

My thoughts on the game:

The Ralph & the Crowd in it still look GREAT on TV.

Lawson & Branch both had GOOD games............... AGAIN & helped the Bills win like I told Op they would when the Bills signed them.

Kiko is a STUD at the Mike LB position..............................I think he has proven himself Op.

Another STRONG game from Woods..........................I think he has proven himself as well Op.

EJ played better than Flacco today.

Even the most PESSIMISTIC of BILLS fans should be EXCITED about this 2-2 Bills team.

​SCREW THE 2-14 CROWD.
Dude...the ellipses is three periods...not 75...dig? I mean YOU can GET THAT, right?

[better days]

They beat the defending Super Bowl Champions.

They also ran for 203 yards against a team that had given up 224 yards in 3 games combined.

And they also held the Ravens to 24 yards rushing.

As for the "what happens if" question, you seem to despise people using that when the Bills lose. Why is it OK for you to use when the Bills win?

I think what you usually say is that it does not matter "what if" - it happened.

So yes, they won the game while getting 5 turnovers.

But they did a lot of other things right.

So keep all of that in mind too.

GREAT point Dr. but I doubt Op will respond to your post.

[OpIv37]

Here's your response: 5 turnovers is extremely uncommon.

When we lose it's always "what if the Bills don't do (name some mistake the Bills make 99 times out of 100)?"

Not the same.

[psubills62]

Here's your response: 5 turnovers is extremely uncommon.

When we lose it's always "what if the Bills don't do (name some mistake the Bills make 99 times out of 100)?"

Not the same.
+2 turnover margin isn't that uncommon, though, and that is the more representative statistic.

[better days]

Here's your response: 5 turnovers is extremely uncommon.

When we lose it's always "what if the Bills don't do (name some mistake the Bills make 99 times out of 100)?"

Not the same.

SAME OLD BS from you Op. Like Dr. said, you would crucify anyone that used the what if argument against you if the Bills lose but you feel free to use it yourself when they win.

Today, the Bills had 5 picks. Against the Panthers, Mario had 4.5 sacks. This teams is finding ways to WIN.

[OpIv37]

SAME OLD BS from you Op. Like Dr. said, you would crucify anyone that used the what if argument against you if the Bills lose but you feel free to use it yourself when they win.

Today, the Bills had 5 picks. Against the Panthers, Mario had 4.5 sacks. This teams is finding ways to WIN.

They have as many losses as wins but they are finding ways to win? Same old BS from you- no objectivity.

[OpIv37]

+2 turnover margin isn't that uncommon, though, and that is the more representative statistic.

We are talking about the Bills- +2 in turnovers is pretty uncommon.

[psubills62]

We are talking about the Bills- +2 in turnovers is pretty uncommon.
+2 margin in 2 out of 4 games this year (50%).

And +1 in a 3rd game.

Average of +1 turnover margin through 4 games.

So...yeah.

[kingJofNYC]

This week they went under center to run the ball, used a TE and fullback, run game was back.

It's clear this staff is still trying to figure things out on O, they have no identity right now. They want to pass out of 11 personnel, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1RB but can't run out of that formation at all. Took them 3 weeks to get rid of their gun run scheme, but at least they trashed it. Lets what they do going forward.

[Fletch]

EJ played better than Flacco today.

Debatable.

Manuel was 4 for 13, 0 TDs, 2 INTs in the second half.

He was 10 of 22 for 167 and a 48.9 rating.

Flacco threw for 5 INTs yes, but also had 347 passing yards and 2 TDs.

I didn't see a lot of development in Manuel today. Still wildy inaccurate in the second half. We were fortunate to have been in a position to have been able to run as much as we did.

Imagine if the Ravens hadn't turned the ball over today at the end of the 4th, did you have any confidence whatsoever that if we needed to score a TD we could have to win it? I don't think anyone did at that point.

Fred Jackson carried the game offensively on his back.

And 5 INTs and we barely win?

I'm not sure this was a positive development today, particularly for a team that's used to dropping most of their games in Oct, Nov and Dec. We were fortunate, fortunate to have had the Ravens come here flat.

[kishoph]

Debatable.

Manuel was 4 for 13, 0 TDs, 2 INTs in the second half.

He was 10 of 22 for 167 and a 48.9 rating.

Flacco threw for 5 INTs yes, but also had 347 passing yards and 2 TDs.

I didn't see a lot of development in Manuel today. Still wildy inaccurate in the second half. We were fortunate to have been in a position to have been able to run as much as we did.

Imagine if the Ravens hadn't turned the ball over today at the end of the 4th, did you have any confidence whatsoever that if we needed to score a TD we could have to win it? I don't think anyone did at that point.

Fred Jackson carried the game offensively on his back.

And 5 INTs and we barely win?


I'm not sure this was a positive development today, particularly for a team that's used to dropping most of their games in Oct, Nov and Dec. We were fortunate, fortunate to have had the Ravens come here flat.

Manuel is still far from being a polished NFL QB, but some QB's take more than 4 games to become a franchise QB. There were 4 plays that can change the outlook of Manuel's second half half, the interception that went off Stevie's hands, Stevie turned before looking the ball in, Stevies fault, the 24 yd. pass to Chandler on the sideline, nice pass, nice effort by Chandler, just didn't connect. the pass to Lee Smith which would of been an easy TD, Smith trips on the 5 yd. line and the TD to Woods that was disallowed. that's 4 passes that could have been completions, 2 of them TD's, instead of 3 incompletions and an int. You just can't look at the stats and say he sucked. Manuel has a lot to learn, but he seems capable of learning and he will improve with experience.

As far as the Ravens being flat, maybe that's because the Bills defense took the air out of them.

[X-Era]

I was wrong on this one definitely.

But keep in mind it was one game and we only won by 3 despite getting 5 turnovers. What happens when we don't get 5 turnovers? This is still not a good team.And yet we've lost by a total of 10 points.

Are they a good team? They aren't a consistent team. But good teams beat the Panthers like they did and good teams beat the Ravens.

It's a mixed bag on better or same.

Better:
Manuel over Fitz
Defense
Pass rush
Turnovers
Intensity

Same:
OL- which I don't think is as bad as many do
Depth- we refuse to have solid vets as backups

Worse:
Clock management
CJ

Mixed bag. They're different. The results may be the same. Personally, I don't think they will be. But, we just don't know yet.

[Dr. Lecter]

Here's your response: 5 turnovers is extremely uncommon.

When we lose it's always "what if the Bills don't do (name some mistake the Bills make 99 times out of 100)?"

Not the same.

Bull****. It is exactly the same. The what if game sucks.

What if Lee Smith did not trip over the air?

What if Scott Chandler was coordinated enough to get a second foot down?

And here is another positive - for the first time in 5 years the Raven gave up 200 yards rushing.

Besides - they did more than create 5 turnovers. The reason WHY they created those turnovers (i.e. stuffing the run and getting pressure on Flacco) is not irrelevant.

BTW, the Bills lead the league in interceptions too with 9.

But you would loathe to give them any credit. They have a lot to work on, no doubt. But they had not beat a defending Super Bowl winner in 17 years. It is not quite as easy to dismiss the win as are doing.


It is like listening to Limbaugh talk about Obama.

[Dr. Lecter]

We are talking about the Bills- +2 in turnovers is pretty uncommon.

You could admit that it is a good point and that you were only looking at half of the information when you talked about the Bills getting 5 TOs.

[Dr. Lecter]

And another what if - what if the Bills were not missing their 3 best defensive backs?

We can play the what if game all day long

[pmoon6]

Bull****. It is exactly the same. The what if game sucks.

What if Lee Smith did not trip over the air?

What if Scott Chandler was coordinated enough to get a second foot down?

And here is another positive - for the first time in 5 years the Raven gave up 200 yards rushing.

Besides - they did more than create 5 turnovers. The reason WHY they created those turnovers (i.e. stuffing the run and getting pressure on Flacco) is not irrelevant.

BTW, the Bills lead the league in interceptions too with 9.

But you would loathe to give them any credit. They have a lot to work on, no doubt. But they had not beat a defending Super Bowl winner in 17 years. It is not quite as easy to dismiss the win as are doing.


It is like listening to Limbaugh talk about Obama.In some people's quest to be "objective" and a "realist", they lose the simple pleasure of being happy about beating a good team.

These people are not fans, they are Jason LaCanfora wannabes. They think they are auditioning for Monday Night Football. "Well Al, the Bills really suck, but they got lucky today".

That's what the Internet and message boards have given us. Posturing, pompous know-it-alls that would rather pimp their own egos and would rather have us lose so they can say "See, I was right".

[pmoon6]

Opie reminds me of a guy that used to stand on a soapbox on Main and Court when I was in High School. We used to cut class to get coffee and watch his antics. He held a newspaper and would rant about politics and the end of the world. We would ask him about the Buffalo Bills. He would say "O.J.Simpson is great, but the rest of the team doesn't belong in the NFL". Of course, now I feel bad about taunting a paranoid schizophrenic. Reading his posts are like reliving my adolescence.

[MikeInRoch]

It's really easy. The only thing that matters is if the Bills won or lost. It doesn't matter how.

Unless, of course, they won. Then it matters a GREAT DEAL how.

[better days]

They have as many losses as wins but they are finding ways to win? Same old BS from you- no objectivity.

BS Op. after 4 games and in spite of the ENTIRE STARTING Defensive backfield NOT PLAYING, the Bills are 2-2. .500 & they beat two GOOD teams to get those wins, NOT two bottom feeders.

And the two games the Bills did lose, were CLOSE games the Bills could have won with a couple more breaks.

Like I told you before, there is a lot of talent on this team & now it looks like there is GOOD Coaching as well.

[justasportsfan]

I was wrong on this one definitely.

But keep in mind it was one game and we only won by 3 despite getting 5 turnovers. What happens when we don't get 5 turnovers? This is still not a good team.

just eat your crow. this isn't the Ne's game where you said it would be a blow out but you were wrong because they won by a fg in the last second. We weren't embarassed andWE WON, Just take your beating.

[OpIv37]

Carolina is not a good team. Baltimore has played one good game all season- they got whooped by Denver, barely beat Cleveland and lost to us. And even when they whooped the Texans, they struggled to run the ball. They're the defending champs so they get the benefit of the doubt, but it still remains to be seen if they are a good team this year.

[better days]

Debatable.

Manuel was 4 for 13, 0 TDs, 2 INTs in the second half.

He was 10 of 22 for 167 and a 48.9 rating.

Flacco threw for 5 INTs yes, but also had 347 passing yards and 2 TDs.

I didn't see a lot of development in Manuel today. Still wildy inaccurate in the second half. We were fortunate to have been in a position to have been able to run as much as we did.

Imagine if the Ravens hadn't turned the ball over today at the end of the 4th, did you have any confidence whatsoever that if we needed to score a TD we could have to win it? I don't think anyone did at that point.

Fred Jackson carried the game offensively on his back.

And 5 INTs and we barely win?

I'm not sure this was a positive development today, particularly for a team that's used to dropping most of their games in Oct, Nov and Dec. We were fortunate, fortunate to have had the Ravens come here flat.

Well, the Defense came up with the 5 INTs & played a GREAT game stopping the run as well. Despite the poor numbers by EJ, he hung tough in there & did not give up. He is a LEADER which is the most important quality a QB can have.

I don't think there is any debate. while EJ did not have a good game, Flacco was TERRIBLE. MUCH WORSE than EJ. And don't forget Flacco was playing against a DEPLETED Bills secondary.

[justasportsfan]

Carolina is not a good team. Baltimore has played one good game all season- they got whooped by Denver, barely beat Cleveland and lost to us. And even when they whooped the Texans, they struggled to run the ball. They're the defending champs so they get the benefit of the doubt, but it still remains to be seen if they are a good team this year.

this is why people say you ***** just to *****. Bills win and you can't accept YOU GOT PWNED!!!!

[pmoon6]

just eat your crow. this isn't the Ne's game where you said it would be a blow out but you were wrong because they won by a fg in the last second. We weren't embarassed andWE WON, Just take your beating.We really shouldn't beat on him. His Momma takes him to the woodshed on a regular basis for using too much bandwidth on their computer. Then Mom has to use the phone to buy that new loveseat for the trailer on QVC.

[justasportsfan]

We really shouldn't beat on him.

he likes to brag that he's usually right and that he's smarter than everyone. It wasn't even close.

[better days]

Carolina is not a good team. Baltimore has played one good game all season- they got whooped by Denver, barely beat Cleveland and lost to us. And even when they whooped the Texans, they struggled to run the ball. They're the defending champs so they get the benefit of the doubt, but it still remains to be seen if they are a good team this year.

Carolina DESTROYED the Giants who are not a good team this year. Carolina is a good team, BETTER than the likes of the Giants or Redskins or Raiders or Jags or Eagles or Bucs or Cardinals.

And you can't be serious about the Ravens not being a GOOD team. RIDICULOUS!

[pmoon6]

he likes to brag that he's usually right and that he's smarter than everyone. It wasn't even close.Take it for what it's worth. Anyone that thinks he's smart, especially when they have to tell you, usually has the intelligence of an amoeba. It also guarantees that they will never learn anything new. They already think they know everything.

[Lucidvizion]

If they beat us, we suck. If we beat them, they suck.

[psubills62]

Carolina is not a good team. Baltimore has played one good game all season- they got whooped by Denver, barely beat Cleveland and lost to us. And even when they whooped the Texans, they struggled to run the ball. They're the defending champs so they get the benefit of the doubt, but it still remains to be seen if they are a good team this year.
Strange how you never brought any of this up before the Bills beat them.

This is exactly why people say you ***** just to *****. Baltimore goes from unbeatable to "remains to be seen if they are a good team this year," simply because the Bills beat them. You had all that information before yesterday's game and still declared that Buffalo had no chance of winning. The only thing that changed is that Buffalo won, so suddenly Baltimore must not be so good, right?

[psubills62]

If they beat us, we suck. If we beat them, they suck.
That is exactly the reasoning Op is using here.

[justasportsfan]

If they beat us, we suck. If we beat them, they suck.

OP logic

[pmoon6]

If they beat us, we suck. If we beat them, they suck.I laugh at some fans when they win. I had a bunch of Bronco fans over in 2006 or so. The Broncos beat us by a point and had to rush their field goal team on the field with time running out since they used all their timeouts to kick the winner.

All I heard for a week is how they whipped our ass. I never thought a one point win was an ass whippin'. But,maybe I'm behind the times.

[OpIv37]

Strange how you never brought any of this up before the Bills beat them.

This is exactly why people say you ***** just to *****. Baltimore goes from unbeatable to "remains to be seen if they are a good team this year," simply because the Bills beat them. You had all that information before yesterday's game and still declared that Buffalo had no chance of winning. The only thing that changed is that Buffalo won, so suddenly Baltimore must not be so good, right?
Actually that's not true at all. I've been saying since the summer that the Ravens won't be nearly as good this year- no shock there since they lost all those players. I certainly never said they were unbeatable- I said we wouldn't beat them and I already admitted to being wrong about that.

[OpIv37]

Carolina DESTROYED the Giants who are not a good team this year. Carolina is a good team, BETTER than the likes of the Giants or Redskins or Raiders or Jags or Eagles or Bucs or Cardinals.

And you can't be serious about the Ravens not being a GOOD team. RIDICULOUS!
Beating the Giants and being better than the 6 worst teams in the league doesn't make them good.

Ravens are 2-2 and almost lost to the Browns. They've played one good game out of 4. Only a Bills fan who has accepted mediocrity would consider that "good."

[HAMMER]

Just eat your crow and zip it for once. We won, enjoy.

[better days]

Beating the Giants and being better than the 6 worst teams in the league doesn't make them good.

Ravens are 2-2 and almost lost to the Browns. They've played one good game out of 4. Only a Bills fan who has accepted mediocrity would consider that "good."

The Browns like the Bills are 2-2 & like the Bills beat two GOOD teams to get those two wins.

It will be a TOUGH game on Thursday in Cleveland because the Browns are a GOOD team.

I said the Panthers & Ravens are good teams & not bottom feeders & that is a FACT. Neither of those teams will finish at the bottom of their division.

[pmoon6]

Just eat your crow and zip it for once. We won, enjoy.I wonder if he rolls over after he has sex with his wife or girlfriend and critiques the orgasm. "Well Honey, that was OK, but you should use a little more hip action". "I also want more tongue during the blowjob".

Of course, he could be gay.

[psubills62]

Actually that's not true at all. I've been saying since the summer that the Ravens won't be nearly as good this year- no shock there since they lost all those players. I certainly never said they were unbeatable- I said we wouldn't beat them and I already admitted to being wrong about that.
"We won't [win]" - that effectively means you believed Ravens were unbeatable for the Bills. So you can argue minutiae all you want, but the effective meaning is quite the same.

You've been saying this:


Baltimore has played one good game all season- they got whooped by Denver, barely beat Cleveland and lost to us. And even when they whooped the Texans, they struggled to run the ball.

Since the summer? Huh, that's odd, I didn't think any of that happened until the season started. You didn't bring any of it up when you were talking about how they'd embarrass us and we had no chance to win.

You admitted you were wrong, then put a bunch of qualifiers on it. If the situation was reversed and someone had guaranteed a win over the Jets or something, then a similar response would clearly just be labelled a homer response.

[pmoon6]

The Browns like the Bills are 2-2 & like the Bills beat two GOOD teams to get those two wins.

It will be a TOUGH game on Thursday in Cleveland because the Browns are a GOOD team.

I said the Panthers & Ravens are good teams & not bottom feeders & that is a FACT. Neither of those teams will finish at the bottom of their division.I worry about the Browns in Cleveland, as well.

The truth is there is not much difference between teams. Momentum or getting on a roll is big. It breeds confidence which is great for any team, especially a young one. And injuries are huge. I've said since around 2000 that the healthiest team at the end of the season usually wins. They didn't come up with the cliché "Any Given Sunday" for nothin'. Of course, they have to amend that to "Any Given Sunday, Thursday and Monday".

[justasportsfan]

I've been saying since the summer that the Ravens won't be nearly as good this year- no shock there since they lost all those players. I certainly never said they were unbeatable- I said we wouldn't beat them and I already admitted to being wrong about that.

What you said months ago doesn't count because of what you said a FEW days ago. We didn't get embarrassed. Just swallow.

[pmoon6]

What you said months ago doesn't count because of what you said a FEW days ago. We didn't get embarrassed. Just swallow.It's almost impossible for an egomaniac to swallow his pride.....or were you talking about swallowing something else?

[OpIv37]

"We won't [win]" - that effectively means you believed Ravens were unbeatable for the Bills. So you can argue minutiae all you want, but the effective meaning is quite the same.

You've been saying this:



Since the summer? Huh, that's odd, I didn't think any of that happened until the season started. You didn't bring any of it up when you were talking about how they'd embarrass us and we had no chance to win.

You admitted you were wrong, then put a bunch of qualifiers on it. If the situation was reversed and someone had guaranteed a win over the Jets or something, then a similar response would clearly just be labelled a homer response.
First, you said that I said they were "unbeatable" then when I pointed out that I never changed it, you changed it to "well I meant unbeatable for the Bills." You don't get to play word games when you are proven wrong.

Second, you seem to forget how low my opinion of this team is. Thinking the Ravens are going to beat us does NOT mean I think they are a good team.

[justasportsfan]

It's almost impossible for an egomaniac to swallow his pride.....or were you talking about swallowing something else?

just pride. I love sticking it to OP when he's wrong but the bz would be boring without him.

[pmoon6]

just pride. I love sticking it to OP when he's wrong but the bz would be boring without him.Of course. But like you said, it's fun giving him ****. We could get our commupance come Thursday night, but I hope not.

[better days]

First, you said that I said they were "unbeatable" then when I pointed out that I never changed it, you changed it to "well I meant unbeatable for the Bills." You don't get to play word games when you are proven wrong.

Second, you seem to forget how low my opinion of this team is. Thinking the Ravens are going to beat us does NOT mean I think they are a good team.

For you to not think the Ravens are a good team is just STUPID on your part. Yes they lost some players ion the off season but they added good players as well.

The Ravens will be in every game they play this year & that is the sign of a GOOD team.

[OpIv37]

For you to not think the Ravens are a good team is just STUPID on your part. Yes they lost some players ion the off season but they added good players as well.

The Ravens will be in every game they play this year & that is the sign of a GOOD team.
Lmao- they were never in the game against Denver to open the season.

And the sign of a good team is to WIN games, not just to be in every game. Only a Bills fan who has accepted mediocrity would say such nonsense.

[Dr. Lecter]

Beating the Giants and being better than the 6 worst teams in the league doesn't make them good.

Ravens are 2-2 and almost lost to the Browns. They've played one good game out of 4. Only a Bills fan who has accepted mediocrity would consider that "good."

Can you please cut the accepting mediocrity crap? You should know that is not going to work.

My God.

BTW, I already said this, but you must have missed it

Before this game the Ravens had given up 224 rushing yards in 3 games. Yesterday the Bills had 203.

Is that worth anything? Or does that also not count because of some reason you will make up?

Do the Ravens 24 rushing yards mean anything?

You are more positive about Notre Dame after they lose than you are about the Bills after then beat a good team

[OpIv37]

Of course. But like you said, it's fun giving him ****. We could get our commupance come Thursday night, but I hope not.

That would be so Buffalo- beat the Ravens then follow it up by losing to Cleveland on National TV.

[Dr. Lecter]

Lmao- they were never in the game against Denver to open the season.

And the sign of a good team is to WIN games, not just to be in every game. Only a Bills fan who has accepted mediocrity would say such nonsense.

So since the Bills won yesterday does that mean anything?

[OpIv37]

Can you please cut the accepting mediocrity crap? You should know that is not going to work.

My God.

BTW, I already said this, but you must have missed it

Before this game the Ravens had given up 224 rushing yards in 3 games. Yesterday the Bills had 203.

Is that worth anything? Or does that also not count because of some reason you will make up?

Do the Ravens 24 rushing yards mean anything?

You are more positive about Notre Dame after they lose than you are about the Bills after then beat a good team
The Ravens 24 rushing yards mean they can't run the ball and they know it. They didn't even try to run in the second half.

You can't get all excited about one game where we stopped the run against a team that has struggled to run all season when we got shredded by back up RB's in our other three games.

The Bills running for 224 yards is a good sign but they have to do it more consistently- it's the only way to take pressure off EJ and maybe win some games.

I'll quit with the mediocrity crap when people here stop defending the mediocre players and coaches who hold this team back and stop trying to make it about something other than winning.

[justasportsfan]

So since the Bills won yesterday does that mean anything?

Yeah . Mr.Knowitall got PWNED! :roflmao:

[OpIv37]

So since the Bills won yesterday does that mean anything?

They still lost as many as they've won.....

[TacklingDummy]

Carolina is not a good team. Baltimore has played one good game all season- they got whooped by Denver, barely beat Cleveland and lost to us. And even when they whooped the Texans, they struggled to run the ball. They're the defending champs so they get the benefit of the doubt, but it still remains to be seen if they are a good team this year.

They are defending champs by name only.
No Lewis, No Reed, No Boldin, No Bernard Pollard, No Paul Kruger, No Dannell Ellerbe, No Cary Williams. NO Ma’ake Kemoeatu, and No center Matt Birk.

I said before the Jets game the Bills should win their next 3 games because all 3 teams stink.

[justasportsfan]

The Ravens 24 rushing yards mean they can't run the ball and they know it. They didn't even try to run in the second half.

You can't get all excited about one game where we stopped the run against a team that has struggled to run all season when we got shredded by back up RB's in our other three games.

The Bills running for 224 yards is a good sign but they have to do it more consistently- it's the only way to take pressure off EJ and maybe win some games.

I'll quit with the mediocrity crap when people here stop defending the mediocre players and coaches who hold this team back and stop trying to make it about something other than winning.

The ravens are this, they suck, blah Blahblah but they are going to embarrass the bills. Guess you know nothing about the ravens.

[better days]

The Ravens 24 rushing yards mean they can't run the ball and they know it. They didn't even try to run in the second half.

You can't get all excited about one game where we stopped the run against a team that has struggled to run all season when we got shredded by back up RB's in our other three games.

The Bills running for 224 yards is a good sign but they have to do it more consistently- it's the only way to take pressure off EJ and maybe win some games.

I'll quit with the mediocrity crap when people here stop defending the mediocre players and coaches who hold this team back and stop trying to make it about something other than winning.

How is beating the Ravens holding them back? STUPID!!!!!!!!

[TacklingDummy]

So since the Bills won yesterday does that mean anything?

Means they are 2-2.
With better QB play they would be 4-0.
Without lucky breaks they would be 0-4.

[Dr. Lecter]

The Ravens 24 rushing yards mean they can't run the ball and they know it. They didn't even try to run in the second half.

You can't get all excited about one game where we stopped the run against a team that has struggled to run all season when we got shredded by back up RB's in our other three games.

The Bills running for 224 yards is a good sign but they have to do it more consistently- it's the only way to take pressure off EJ and maybe win some games.

I'll quit with the mediocrity crap when people here stop defending the mediocre players and coaches who hold this team back and stop trying to make it about something other than winning.

Which is exactly what you are doing today.

When they lose they suck because they lost and it is all about winning and losing.

When they win, they suck because of how they won.

That is how you sound right now.

[OpIv37]

How I sound isn't the point. The point is that this still isn't a good team.

I'll take a win however we can get it but don't delude yourselves into thinking there will be a lot more. Most of our opponents will rush for more than 24 yards and most won't commit 5 turnovers.

[Dr. Lecter]

How I sound isn't the point. The point is that this still isn't a good team.

I'll take a win however we can get it but don't delude yourselves into thinking there will be a lot more. Most of our opponents will rush for more than 24 yards and most won't commit 5 turnovers.
It is when you are spending time telling others how they sound.

The point is this team is 2-2 and showing signs of improvement. The turnovers were not all by accident. They were forcing the turnovers.

And yes, most teams will obviously rush for more than 24 yards. But that is not the point.

Do you think it is nice that this team is getting significant contributions from players like Woods, Manuel and Alonso - all rookies?

You want to know what is different and better?

That is one thing that is different and better.

[pmoon6]

Too cool that Opie has a helper. It's also fitting that he has "Dummy" in his username.

[Lucidvizion]

It is when you are spending time telling others how they sound.

The point is this team is 2-2 and showing signs of improvement. The turnovers were not all by accident. They were forcing the turnovers.

And yes, most teams will obviously rush for more than 24 yards. But that is not the point.

Do you think it is nice that this team is getting significant contributions from players like Woods, Manuel and Alonso - all rookies?

You want to know what is different and better?

That is one thing that is different and better.

It's only been 4 games, it's not a large enough sample size, blah blah blah.

[TacklingDummy]

Too cool that Opie has a helper. It's also fitting that he has "Dummy" in his username.

What's even cooler is my screen name has fit every QB since I've been here. Johnson, Losman, Edwards, Fitzpatrick, and Manuel. All Tackling Dummies.

[Dr. Lecter]

What's even cooler is my screen name has fit every QB since I've been here. Johnson, Losman, Edwards, Fitzpatrick, and Manuel. All Tackling Dummies.


Forgot Flutie, Bledsoe, AVP, Brohm and Holcomb. At least.

Although it is great that you have given up on EJ!!!!

[justasportsfan]

Forgot Flutie,:penalty:

thats a low blow thing to say about Dummy's precious.

[pmoon6]

It is when you are spending time telling others how they sound.

The point is this team is 2-2 and showing signs of improvement. The turnovers were not all by accident. They were forcing the turnovers.

And yes, most teams will obviously rush for more than 24 yards. But that is not the point.

Do you think it is nice that this team is getting significant contributions from players like Woods, Manuel and Alonso - all rookies?

You want to know what is different and better?

That is one thing that is different and better.HaHa. When the '85 Bears or the 2000 Ravens were beating opponents, they were FORCING turnovers. When the current Bills lead the league in picks and are 3rd in sacks, they're lucky.

And I take issue with Opie's psychological evaluation of Bills' Fans that actually cheer for their team are "accepting mediocrity". We see a young team that looks to be improving. Competitive in every game so far. Most of us have no illusions about the playoffs, but we can hope.

Guys like Opie and others might as well be androids. They fancy themselves analytical, logical and objective. How quaint. Too bad those kind of people lead joyless lives and die with few friends.

[pmoon6]

What's even cooler is my screen name has fit every QB since I've been here. Johnson, Losman, Edwards, Fitzpatrick, and Manuel. All Tackling Dummies.Hmmm. I believe Fitzpatrick was the least sacked QB one year, maybe two.

Kinda sucks when facts blow your negative prejudice.

[TacklingDummy]

Although it is great that you have given up on EJ!!!!Haven't given up on him yet. Just not overly impressed by him so far. He's had a few good throws each game. Right now his negative plays outnumber his positive plays. If the Bills are going to go anywhere they need EJ to live up to the hype.

[OpIv37]

First, I never said the turnovers were lucky or that the Bills weren't forcing them. I simply said we can't count on four turnovers a game.

Second, accepting mediocrity has nothing to do wih rooting for the team. I root for the team just as loud and hard on Sundays as anyone else. But I can do it without deluding myself into thinking that the team is better than they are.

Third, it's absurd to take someone's attitude about a football team that has been disappointing them for 13 years and extrapolate it to everything else in life.

[TacklingDummy]

Hmmm. I believe Fitzpatrick was the least sacked QB one year, maybe two.

Kinda sucks when facts blow your negative prejudice.

In 4 years with the Bills he was sacked 97 times.
In JP's 5 years with the Bills he was sacked 103 times.
Robosack 4 years, 110 times.
EJ 4 games, 11 sacks, on pace for 44 sacks for the season.


Yeah, facts do suck.

[TacklingDummy]

:penalty:

thats a low blow thing to say about Dummy's precious.

3 years DF, 48 sacks.
EJ is on pace to almost reach that in 1 year.

[justasportsfan]

3 years DF, 48 sacks.
EJ is on pace to almost reach that in 1 year.

how sweet. Hope you didn't cream yourself thinking about his mullet.

[pmoon6]

how sweet. Hope you didn't cream yourself thinking about his mullet.Well, the reason the Bills' have been so poor is the curse of Doug Flutie. That and the negative psychic energy field over Little Valley.

If you don't think curses are real, ask Detroit. They haven't even sniffed a championship since they traded Bobby Layne.

[pmoon6]

Yeah, facts do suck.Maybe you should change your username to just "Fact", then.

[pmoon6]

First, I never said the turnovers were lucky or that the Bills weren't forcing them. I simply said we can't count on four turnovers a game.

Second, accepting mediocrity has nothing to do wih rooting for the team. I root for the team just as loud and hard on Sundays as anyone else. But I can do it without deluding myself into thinking that the team is better than they are.

Third, it's absurd to take someone's attitude about a football team that has been disappointing them for 13 years and extrapolate it to everything else in life.I majored in "Absurd" and minored in "Sublime".

[justasportsfan]

Well, the reason the Bills' have been so poor is the curse of Doug Flutie. That and the negative psychic energy field over Little Valley.

If you don't think curses are real, ask Detroit. They haven't even sniffed a championship since they traded Bobby Layne.

it's the curse of the meddling owner.

[mysticsoto]

First, I never said the turnovers were lucky or that the Bills weren't forcing them. I simply said we can't count on four turnovers a game.

Second, accepting mediocrity has nothing to do wih rooting for the team. I root for the team just as loud and hard on Sundays as anyone else. But I can do it without deluding myself into thinking that the team is better than they are.

Third, it's absurd to take someone's attitude about a football team that has been disappointing them for 13 years and extrapolate it to everything else in life.

If you're into facts Op...the facts show that we've been in every game we've played so far down to the wire. The games we've lost, we've lost by 1 score. We have a rookie QB who despite obvious growing pains in learning, is still orders of magnitudes better than any QB we've had in...what? 15 years? We have an outstanding rookie LB who'll likely only get better, and our Dline is playing outstanding. We have multiple injuries mainly in our secondary that might have been the difference in those 2 games we lost by 1 score (Oh, I'm sorry, you probably won't like me doing what-ifs...even though you do it when it's to point out something negative).

All in all, I think those are alot of positives to look forward to...and why you should actually be happy and not the prozac popping pessimist you always are here.

[Generalissimus Gibby]

The difference, well, lets see now:

1) Last year this team does lose to the Jets by 13 to 20 like I said they would in my prediction for that game. That rout is followed by a snoozefest where the Bills collapse 45-3 like they did against San Fran last year. This year the Bills have been in every single game and haven't ever given up. They stunk it up in New York, but they had a chance to win and they had a chance to win against New England too. This year the Bills have made their share of bone headed mistakes, but none of the WTF Jesus H. Christ what the hell were you thinking dumbass mistakes that characterized the Dick and Chan years.

2) They are actually trying this year. Look, I said 6-10 this year and am standing by it because this team is too young to experience the post season, but the difference is that this year there won't be games where the whole team takes the whole damn game off.

3) They're scrappier on defense and learning on offense. I say give Jairus the Bird and sign a couple guys who want to be here.

4) They actually play like they belong in the NFL. Oh sure, there is lots of room for improvement, but I don't have the notion that we are watching an NCAA division 2 school trying to play in the NFL.

[OpIv37]

If you're into facts Op...the facts show that we've been in every game we've played so far down to the wire. The games we've lost, we've lost by 1 score. We have a rookie QB who despite obvious growing pains in learning, is still orders of magnitudes better than any QB we've had in...what? 15 years? We have an outstanding rookie LB who'll likely only get better, and our Dline is playing outstanding. We have multiple injuries mainly in our secondary that might have been the difference in those 2 games we lost by 1 score (Oh, I'm sorry, you probably won't like me doing what-ifs...even though you do it when it's to point out something negative).

All in all, I think those are alot of positives to look forward to...and why you should actually be happy and not the prozac popping pessimist you always are here.

How can you say the DL is playing outstanding? Look at the rush yards they've given up in 3 out of 4 games....

I'm happy we beat the Ravens. I'm not even close to convinced that this is a good team. We got gift-wrapped 5 turnovers but still only managed 23 points, still only won by 3 and still turned the ball over 3 times. FG's instead of touchdowns and 3 turnovers gets you losses 9 times out of 10- I shouldn't have to tell that to anyone who follows this team.

[Dr. Lecter]

How can you say the DL is playing outstanding? Look at the rush yards they've given up in 3 out of 4 games....

I'm happy we beat the Ravens. I'm not even close to convinced that this is a good team. We got gift-wrapped 5 turnovers but still only managed 23 points, still only won by 3 and still turned the ball over 3 times. FG's instead of touchdowns and 3 turnovers gets you losses 9 times out of 10- I shouldn't have to tell that to anyone who follows this team.

Gift wrapped?

Really?

Of course - they did not cause them or deserve them.

Sigh.

It is those kinds of comments that show that you are not really one to talk about others being objective.

[OpIv37]

Gift wrapped?

Really?

Of course - they did not cause them or deserve them.

Sigh.

It is those kinds of comments that show that you are not really one to talk about others being objective.

It's irrevelant if we caused them or not because we won't get five a game. You're missing the point to argue semantics.

[Dr. Lecter]

It's irrevelant if we caused them or not because we won't get five a game. You're missing the point to argue semantics.

No, I am not. I am really not. You are missing it.

Teams win games different ways all the time. One game it might be turnovers. Other games might be big plays on offense. Or it might be special teams plays.

Of course they might not get 5 turnovers all the time. But maybe they will run a punt back for a TD. Or maybe EJ hits the pass to Johnson and the Woods TD is not overturned.

But what you are doing is using the old idea that if you take away Barry Sanders long runs, then he is not a good RB.

So while you can say they won't get 5 TOs every game and be correct, what you are not doing is looking at the rest of the game and admitting things can change there too.

And yes, while you are at you are trying to do diminish every positive thing they do.

It really is no different than the homers that look at the Jets game and act like there was nothing to be concerned about in it.

You can try and act like I am blind homer or ignoring their faults (which I am not). But can you at least admit they are doing some things right this year?

And the 9 interceptions for the team 4 games into the season is pretty damn good?

[Dr. Lecter]

And it is not irrelevant if they caused them or not.

Because if their defense is causing turnovers, it is more likely to happen more often than it is if they are just purely lucking into them.

So it is not the same as them being gift wrapped.
You can try to argue that, but you would be wrong

[TacklingDummy]

I don't know what's worse, homers or liberals.
Maybe homer liberals?

[psubills62]

First, you said that I said they were "unbeatable" then when I pointed out that I never changed it, you changed it to "well I meant unbeatable for the Bills." You don't get to play word games when you are proven wrong.

Second, you seem to forget how low my opinion of this team is. Thinking the Ravens are going to beat us does NOT mean I think they are a good team.
Holy cow, you can't be serious. It wasn't changed at all. It was pretty clear what I meant from the beginning, unless you're a total idiot. A clarification is not a change, it's simply a re-statement of what I meant, since you obviously need everything spelled out for you.

It seems the only thing you can argue when you're very wrong is semantics. Blah, blah, nitpick semantics and EXACT wording until the conversation is completely disconnected from the original point. Good grief, no wonder you argue every other thread into oblivion.

[OpIv37]

No, I am not. I am really not. You are missing it.

Teams win games different ways all the time. One game it might be turnovers. Other games might be big plays on offense. Or it might be special teams plays.

Of course they might not get 5 turnovers all the time. But maybe they will run a punt back for a TD. Or maybe EJ hits the pass to Johnson and the Woods TD is not overturned.

But what you are doing is using the old idea that if you take away Barry Sanders long runs, then he is not a good RB.

So while you can say they won't get 5 TOs every game and be correct, what you are not doing is looking at the rest of the game and admitting things can change there too.

And yes, while you are at you are trying to do diminish every positive thing they do.

It really is no different than the homers that look at the Jets game and act like there was nothing to be concerned about in it.

You can try and act like I am blind homer or ignoring their faults (which I am not). But can you at least admit they are doing some things right this year?

And the 9 interceptions for the team 4 games into the season is pretty damn good?

Utter bull****. I'm not doing that at all. If we don't get the 5 turnovers, we don't win this game. I'm not saying they didn't create the turnovers or that they didn't deserve to win.

I'm saying that if they want to keep winning, they're going to have to find a way to do it without needing 5 turnovers. You seem to think they can do it- I don't see any reason to believe that they can.

"Some" is not enough.

[OpIv37]

Holy cow, you can't be serious. It wasn't changed at all. It was pretty clear what I meant from the beginning, unless you're a total idiot. A clarification is not a change, it's simply a re-statement of what I meant, since you obviously need everything spelled out for you.

It seems the only thing you can argue when you're very wrong is semantics. Blah, blah, nitpick semantics and EXACT wording until the conversation is completely disconnected from the original point. Good grief, no wonder you argue every other thread into oblivion.
WTF are you talking about?

You used semantics to make it look like I said the Ravens were a good team before we beat them, when the complete opposite is true. I've been saying they won't be nearly as good as they were last year for months.

And then when I call you out on it, you accuse ME of playing semantics? Gimme a ****ing break.

[Dr. Lecter]

Utter bull****. I'm not doing that at all. If we don't get the 5 turnovers, we don't win this game. I'm not saying they didn't create the turnovers or that they didn't deserve to win.

I'm saying that if they want to keep winning, they're going to have to find a way to do it without needing 5 turnovers. You seem to think they can do it- I don't see any reason to believe that they can.

"Some" is not enough.

But you are saying all they did was force turnovers. There was more to it than that and there was a reason they created them. And they have been creating turnovers in other games

But there are other ifs in this game too.

If Woods TD is not overturned. If Lee Smith does nor trip over air. If Manuel airs the pass out a little more to Johnson. If Chandler puts his foot on the turf and not his other foot.

So there are things they can do that are not unreasonable or that require major changes or improvements.

[OpIv37]

But you are saying all they did was force turnovers. There was more to it than that and there was a reason they created them. And they have been creating turnovers in other games

But there are other ifs in this game too.

If Woods TD is not overturned. If Lee Smith does nor trip over air. If Manuel airs the pass out a little more to Johnson. If Chandler puts his foot on the turf and not his other foot.

So there are things they can do that are not unreasonable or that require major changes or improvements.

But those are the kinds of execution mistakes the Bills have made all season- you expect them to just magically get better? I don't think Lee Smith is going to stop tripping over air- there's a reason they don't throw to him often. I don't think Chandler is going to make tiptoe sideline catches because that's not his style and never has been. I don't know if EJ is going to start airing passes out more because so far his accuracy has been inconsistent. I do know that the Bills aren't going to be able to force 5 turnovers a game because it's impossible. The NFL record was 66 by the Chargers in '61- in a 14 game season that's 4.7 a game.

[better days]

Lmao- they were never in the game against Denver to open the season.

And the sign of a good team is to WIN games, not just to be in every game. Only a Bills fan who has accepted mediocrity would say such nonsense.

VERY FEW Teams WIN EVERY game. In fact I can think of only ONE...................The 1972 Dolphins.

The sign of a GOOD team is to be in POSITION to Win & even GOOD teams on occasion lose games that aren't close.

You are the person spewing NONSENSE.

[Dr. Lecter]

I doubt Lee Smith literally keeps tripping over air.

And I have never said they will keep up the 5 TOs a game.

[better days]

They still lost as many as they've won.....

Which is TWICE as many wins as you thought they would have now,

[Novacane]

Haven't given up on him yet. Just not overly impressed by him so far. He's had a few good throws each game. Right now his negative plays outnumber his positive plays. If the Bills are going to go anywhere they need EJ to live up to the hype.



You can say that about most rookie QB that have played 4 games. The ones that turn out to be busts and the ones that end up being good.

[OpIv37]

VERY FEW Teams WIN EVERY game. In fact I can think of only ONE...................The 1972 Dolphins.

The sign of a GOOD team is to be in POSITION to Win & even GOOD teams on occasion lose games that aren't close.

You are the person spewing NONSENSE.
What a load of crap- the sign of a good team is to be in position to win every game and win more than they lose. So far, the Ravens haven't been in every game, and they haven't won every game that they've been in.

[Novacane]

It must suck to not be able to enjoy it when your team wins.

[better days]

Haven't given up on him yet. Just not overly impressed by him so far. He's had a few good throws each game. Right now his negative plays outnumber his positive plays. If the Bills are going to go anywhere they need EJ to live up to the hype.

WHAT HYPE? EJ is probably the least hyped QB EVER to be drafted in the first rnd.

[Dr. Lecter]

What a load of crap- the sign of a good team is to be in position to win every game and win more than they lose. So far, the Ravens haven't been in every game, and they haven't won every game that they've been in.

Yeah that is not true. Good teams get blown out.

I could show numerous examples if you want me to.

[OpIv37]

Yeah that is not true. Good teams get blown out.

I could show numerous examples if you want me to.

And I could show you numerous examples of teams that lost 12 games and lost 10 of them by one score or less. Were they good teams? According to better days' standard, they are. Absolute crap.

[better days]

What a load of crap- the sign of a good team is to be in position to win every game and win more than they lose. So far, the Ravens haven't been in every game, and they haven't won every game that they've been in.

This post of yours is a LOAD OF CRAP.

[Dr. Lecter]

And I could show you numerous examples of teams that lost 12 games and lost 10 of them by one score or less. Were they good teams? According to better days' standard, they are. Absolute crap.

Of course you can. I never said otherwise.

And I would not disagree with you
Besides, the Bills being "good" this year is a matter of perspective. What they need to do, whether you or I like it, is show signs of being a team that can be good.

Look at the number of rookies they are starting.

With the rookies they are starting and injuries to the DBs, being 2-2 is not a bad thing this year. Hell, I had them 0-4 at this time.

They are better than I thought and it looks like 3 rookies (Manuel, Alonso and Woods) might be a solid foundation.

[better days]

And the Sarasota Harold Tribune had another nice 11 paragraph long article about the Bills in Mondays paper.

The first sentence of that article: " Bills ROOKIE LB Kiko Alonzo and the rest of the Bills team handed Joe Flacco the WORST game of his CAREER."

Oh & on Saturday before the game the Tribune picked the Ravens over the Bills 24 -10.

[better days]

And I could show you numerous examples of teams that lost 12 games and lost 10 of them by one score or less. Were they good teams? According to better days' standard, they are. Absolute crap.

OK NAME TWO teams that lost 10 games by one score or less.

[BillsFever21]

So far we have played 3 out of our first 4 games at home. The real test will be coming up once we play 3 out of the next 4 on the road with games against the Dolphins and New Orleans. Mixed in there we have an inconsistent but talented team in the Bengals in Buffalo.

[better days]

So far we have played 3 out of our first 4 games at home. The real test will be coming up once we play 3 out of the next 4 on the road with games against the Dolphins and New Orleans. Mixed in there we have an inconsistent but talented team in the Bengals in Buffalo.

The Saints game should be interesting. Marrone facing his old boss Payton.

[better days]

Still waiting to see those two teams that lost 10 games by one score or less Op.

Is your search engine broken?

Oh, & by the way how does a team lose by LESS than one score?

[MikeInRoch]

Since it's all about wins, Op.... How many wins in a 16 game season does a team have to have to be a "good" team?

[BuffaloRedleg]

This is such a silly argument. I think everyone needs to step back and acknowledge their ridiculous biases that are getting in the way of real discussion.

There are 2 types of Bills fans and seemingly no in-between:

The fan who is so broke by the Bills last 13 years of terrible play they are unwilling to let themselves believe in the team until the actually accomplish something (like going to the playoffs). They demand tangible, undebatable results like making the playoffs and not just playing well for stretches. I don't blame you for not believing in the team, they haven't earned it. They refuse to let things like wins and solid play get in the way of their deep seated belief that the Bills will eventually blow it. They are searching for reasons to not believe in the Bills. There is nothing wrong with this view, but it sure doesn't seem like a lot of fun. These people are far more biased because they are absolutely unwavering in their search for negative things about the Bills, but well they are far more honest because they aren't lying to themselves.

The other fan is so desperate for the Bills to turn it around that they try to find positives in everything, even the losses. They are the complete opposite. They are willing to settle for intangible results, such as a good stretch of play and close wins or close losses against superior opponents. The bottom line is that they are searching for reasons to believe in the Bills. This view is not as intellectually honest as the first as clearly we have to really work hard to convince our brains that the Bills will turn it around finally, but it's far more fun to be positive than to be negative. This is supposed to be fun, right?

If only some people could stake a step back and realize how silly this all is and stop letting the lens we are looking through determine our conclusion maybe we could have an honest dicussion. Oh well, that's human nature I guess. It's no different than my Facebook feed with schlubs arguing about politics and not even listening to what the other person is saying.

[Typ0]

Good post. Be careful not to lump "all Bills fans" into your category when you really mean "bills fans on internet message boards". There is a big difference!


This is such a silly argument. I think everyone needs to step back and acknowledge their ridiculous biases that are getting in the way of real discussion.

There are 2 types of Bills fans and seemingly no in-between:

The fan who is so broke by the Bills last 13 years of terrible play they are unwilling to let themselves believe in the team until the actually accomplish something (like going to the playoffs). They demand tangible, undebatable results like making the playoffs and not just playing well for stretches. I don't blame you for not believing in the team, they haven't earned it. They refuse to let things like wins and solid play get in the way of their deep seated belief that the Bills will eventually blow it. They are searching for reasons to not believe in the Bills. There is nothing wrong with this view, but it sure doesn't seem like a lot of fun. These people are far more biased because they are absolutely unwavering in their search for negative things about the Bills, but well they are far more honest because they aren't lying to themselves.

The other fan is so desperate for the Bills to turn it around that they try to find positives in everything, even the losses. They are the complete opposite. They are willing to settle for intangible results, such as a good stretch of play and close wins or close losses against superior opponents. The bottom line is that they are searching for reasons to believe in the Bills. This view is not as intellectually honest as the first as clearly we have to really work hard to convince our brains that the Bills will turn it around finally, but it's far more fun to be positive than to be negative. This is supposed to be fun, right?

If only some people could stake a step back and realize how silly this all is and stop letting the lens we are looking through determine our conclusion maybe we could have an honest dicussion. Oh well, that's human nature I guess. It's no different than my Facebook feed with schlubs arguing about politics and not even listening to what the other person is saying.

[BuffaloRedleg]

Good post. Be careful not to lump "all Bills fans" into your category when you really mean "bills fans on internet message boards". There is a big difference!

Haha yeah I re-read it and thought I definitely over-exaggerated there just being 2 types of fans, but I think it still works for the most part. I think discussing how people's biases affect their conclusions, often without the person even knowing it, is incredibly interesting. Bills forums and many Bills fans are a case study on that.

[OpIv37]

Still waiting to see those two teams that lost 10 games by one score or less Op.

Is your search engine broken?

Oh, & by the way how does a team lose by LESS than one score?
Don't have time to do the research but that's not the point. The point is that by your definition, a 4-12 team could qualify as "good." It's utter crap and only a Bills can who has accepted mediocrity and needs to find a standard to define "good" other than winning would say such nonsense.

[OpIv37]

Since it's all about wins, Op.... How many wins in a 16 game season does a team have to have to be a "good" team?

There is no objective answer to that question but I think any reasonable person would agree that the absolute minimum standard for a "good" team would have to be more wins than losses. Better days is clearly not reasonable.

[EricStratton]

What a load of crap- the sign of a good team is to be in position to win every game and win more than they lose. So far, the Ravens haven't been in every game, and they haven't won every game that they've been in.


Weren't they leading the Denver game at the half.

[OpIv37]

Weren't they leading the Denver game at the half.

Well then how do you define "being in a position to win?" Do you have to be in a position to win at halftime? After 3 quarters? At the 2:00 warning?

[mysticsoto]

How can you say the DL is playing outstanding? Look at the rush yards they've given up in 3 out of 4 games....

I'm happy we beat the Ravens. I'm not even close to convinced that this is a good team. We got gift-wrapped 5 turnovers but still only managed 23 points, still only won by 3 and still turned the ball over 3 times. FG's instead of touchdowns and 3 turnovers gets you losses 9 times out of 10- I shouldn't have to tell that to anyone who follows this team.

I was referring to THIS past game. The DL played outstanding against the Ravens. You keep trying to downgrade what the Bills did and alluding to Flacco and the rest of the team playing bad...I dvr'ed the game and watched it again last night. The 1st half, the DL and and overall defense were outstanding. If you dvr'ed it...watch it again! The defense had lapses in the 3rd qtr, but as a counter, the offense improved somewhat in the 2nd half.

Perhaps your definition is different. The Bills are a good team...but you seem to be changing the definition of "good" to "great". I don't think anybody is arguing the Bills are a great team. Good is lower but more fitting. We are playing with 3rd and 4th stringers in our secondary and still got all those interceptions Sunday? In my book, that's pretty good...

[OpIv37]

I was referring to THIS past game. The DL played outstanding against the Ravens. You keep trying to downgrade what the Bills did and alluding to Flacco and the rest of the team playing bad...I dvr'ed the game and watched it again last night. The 1st half, the DL and and overall defense were outstanding. If you dvr'ed it...watch it again! The defense had lapses in the 3rd qtr, but as a counter, the offense improved somewhat in the 2nd half.

Perhaps your definition is different. The Bills are a good team...but you seem to be changing the definition of "good" to "great". I don't think anybody is arguing the Bills are a great team. Good is lower but more fitting. We are playing with 3rd and 4th stringers in our secondary and still got all those interceptions Sunday? In my book, that's pretty good...

The DL played well in one out of 4 games, and the one game they played well in was against a team that has struggled to run all season. Why does the one time they actually stopped the run override the 3 times they got shredded by backup RB's?

[better days]

Don't have time to do the research but that's not the point. The point is that by your definition, a 4-12 team could qualify as "good." It's utter crap and only a Bills can who has accepted mediocrity and needs to find a standard to define "good" other than winning would say such nonsense.

I HIGHLY doubt ANY 4-12 team will be in position to win the Majority of games it plays & lose 10 games by one score.

As usual you were talking out your azz.

[Dr. Lecter]

There is no objective answer to that question but I think any reasonable person would agree that the absolute minimum standard for a "good" team would have to be more wins than losses. Better days is clearly not reasonable.

Would you also then say that a bad team has more losses than wins?

[MikeInRoch]

There is no objective answer to that question but I think any reasonable person would agree that the absolute minimum standard for a "good" team would have to be more wins than losses. Better days is clearly not reasonable.

I'm asking for your opinion specifically. You have been saying that it's all about wins and losses. That's the only thing that is important. So what is the line? 9 wins? 10? 11?

[OpIv37]

I HIGHLY doubt ANY 4-12 team will be in position to win the Majority of games it plays & lose 10 games by one score.

As usual you were talking out your azz.
It doesn't matter what you doubt. The point is that your ****ty definition of a "good" team left the door open for a losing team to qualify as "good." It sets the bar horrifically low.

- - - Updated - - -


Would you also then say that a bad team has more losses than wins?

Of course.

[OpIv37]

I'm asking for your opinion specifically. You have been saying that it's all about wins and losses. That's the only thing that is important. So what is the line? 9 wins? 10? 11?

I'd probably say 10-6. The Bills were 9-7 in 2004 and I wouldn't call that a "good" team, especially with ther horrid start and the way they choked against the Steelers backups.

[pmoon6]

I keep reading "reasonable" in Opie's posts. The origin of the word "fan" is fanatic. Clearly a fanatic is not "reasonable" and why Opie is the epitome of the Anti-Fan.

Like I said before, some of you guys would rather be "right" than have your team win. Just look at some of the posts in this thread.

I rest my case.

[MikeInRoch]

I'd probably say 10-6. The Bills were 9-7 in 2004 and I wouldn't call that a "good" team, especially with ther horrid start and the way they choked against the Steelers backups.

That seems reasonable. On the average, for the last three years, about 12 teams meet that grade. I don't think anyone on this board, even the biggest homer, would suggest that this Bills team is one of the top 12 in the league.

It also means that 20 teams are "not good". I think that many people would say that is a pretty high number.

10/16 = 2.5/4. So right now the Bills are only a half game from being on pace to be "good".

[better days]

There is no objective answer to that question but I think any reasonable person would agree that the absolute minimum standard for a "good" team would have to be more wins than losses. Better days is clearly not reasonable.

Well, except things like injuries happen during a season. Also young players can improve during the season while OLD players lose their legs as the season goes on. Football is a fluid game, it is not static.

One team may start out good & be good when the Bills play them but later go down hill for one reason or another. Another team may start slow & not be good but improve as injured players get healthy & young players grasp the NFL & improve. I would hope this is what the Bills do.

When the Bills played the Cardinals & Ravens both of those teams were good. And you said the Ravens did not look good against the Texans. Well on Saturday the Sarasota Harold Tribune when talking about the upcoming game against the Bills said

the Ravens DESTROYED the Texans. And that was the main reason the Trib picked the Ravens to WIN against the Bills 24-10. I did not see that game so I don't know who is closer to the truth about it you or the Trib.

IMO, a GOOD team has to have GOOD Coaching & a QB that can WIN. As someone said before the NFL is pretty equal overall so QB & Coaching are what determines if a team is GOOD or MEDIOCRE IMO not the record.

I think a team with an 8-8 record can be called good. The Seahawks won their division a couple years ago with an 8-8 record. A 7-9 or 6-10 team can be considered to be on the cusp of being good if it has GOOD Coaching & a GOOD QB.

Both the Browns & Bills have a lot of talent, more talent than a number of teams in the NFL. The questions about both teams being Coaching & QB. Both the Bills & Browns appear to be well coached & both may have found their QB.

Hoyer, the Browns QB & Cleveland native has played very well for the Browns the last 2 weeks & Manuel has played as well as any reasonable person could expect for the Bills.

Both teams are playing GOOD football right now & IMO both can be called GOOD teams. Whoever wins on Thursday night will have beaten a GOOD team.

[OpIv37]

I absolutely did not say the Ravens looked bad against the Texans. I said they struggled to run the ball against the Texans, which is true. Look at the stats.

[justasportsfan]

whatever OP's OPINIONS on the ravens prior to this game led him to say they would embarrass us. Now that the RESULTS are in, he's changed his OPINION on the ravens. Go figure.

[OpIv37]

whatever OP's OPINIONS on the ravens prior to this game led him to say they would embarrass us. Now that the RESULTS are in, he's changed his OPINION on the ravens. Go figure.

I never changed my opinion on the Ravens. I said all off-season that they would struggle. I was wrong in thinking that they were still good enough to beat us, but I have been consisten in my opinion of them.

If you want to give me crap about being wrong on the outcome, fine, but Don't lie and try to make it seem like I changed my opinion when I didn't.

[justasportsfan]

I never changed my opinion on the Ravens. I said all off-season that they would struggle. I was wrong in thinking that they were still good enough to beat us, but I have been consisten in my opinion of them.

If you want to give me crap about being wrong on the outcome, fine, but Don't lie and try to make it seem like I changed my opinion when I didn't.


Ok, you were wrong. Therefore you know nothing about the ravens. You weren't even close.

[jdaltroy5]

Jesus, this thread needs to die in horrible fire.

The Bills won. Enjoy it.

[pmoon6]

Jesus, this thread needs to die in horrible fire.

The Bills won. Enjoy it.Yeah, we hacked on Opie enough. We could lose in Cleveland then it's his turn.

[better days]

I absolutely did not say the Ravens looked bad against the Texans. I said they struggled to run the ball against the Texans, which is true. Look at the stats.

Well, the Pats* have struggled to run the ball as well but they are 4-0.

I think both the Pats* & Ravens can be called GOOD teams.

And while the Ravens may not be as good as they were last year, News flash Op............. The Ravens WON the SUPER BOWL last year.

I think the Ravens could drop off from last year & still be considered a GOOD team.

[better days]

Yeah, we hacked on Opie enough. We could lose in Cleveland then it's his turn.

Are you kidding? Op LOVES to argue. He is enjoying this thread. He does not care if we perceive him as being wrong.

[better days]

I never changed my opinion on the Ravens. I said all off-season that they would struggle. I was wrong in thinking that they were still good enough to beat us, but I have been consisten in my opinion of them.

If you want to give me crap about being wrong on the outcome, fine, but Don't lie and try to make it seem like I changed my opinion when I didn't.

The Ravens struggled last year as well & did not get on a roll until they fired their OC Cam Cameron.

[better days]

It doesn't matter what you doubt. The point is that your ****ty definition of a "good" team left the door open for a losing team to qualify as "good." It sets the bar horrifically low.

- - - Updated - - -



Of course.

The point is as usual you were talking out your azz. You said something you could not back up......................AGAIN.

[OpIv37]

Well, the Pats* have struggled to run the ball as well but they are 4-0.

I think both the Pats* & Ravens can be called GOOD teams.

And while the Ravens may not be as good as they were last year, News flash Op............. The Ravens WON the SUPER BOWL last year.

I think the Ravens could drop off from last year & still be considered a GOOD team.

Oh come on- you spent all off- season telling me how the Pats are on the decline, Brady's old, they have no WR's, their D was never that good,etc, but now they're a good team? Make up your mind.

[pmoon6]

Are you kidding? Op LOVES to argue. He is enjoying this thread. He does not care if we perceive him as being wrong.Oh, I know. But, after 9 pages of banter, it does get a little old and repetition becomes the norm.

[better days]

Oh come on- you spent all off- season telling me how the Pats are on the decline, Brady's old, they have no WR's, their D was never that good,etc, but now they're a good team? Make up your mind.

As long as Brady is QB & Belicheck is the HC, the Pats* are a good team.

At one time they were GREAT albeit they CHEATED, now they are not great but good, clearly on the decline.

[mysticsoto]

The DL played well in one out of 4 games, and the one game they played well in was against a team that has struggled to run all season. Why does the one time they actually stopped the run override the 3 times they got shredded by backup RB's?

It's not just the run def, but also harassing the qb. Go rewatch the game. They were in Flacco's face all day, pretty much.

- So we lead the league in interceptions, but we're not a good team...
- We're in the top 10 teams w/sacks
- #1 team in tackles
- We're currently #2 in rushing, but we're not a good team...
- #2 in FGs made (and before you criticize that this is b'cse we can't score TDs, Patriots are #1 in this category)
- #4 in punting yards

We're middle of the road in lots of other categories. Again, I'm not saying we're a great team. But at the very least, you should acknowledge that we appear to be better than last year and that we appear to be moving in the right direction.

[HAMMER]

Don't have time to do the research but that's not the point. The point is that by your definition, a 4-12 team could qualify as "good." It's utter crap and only a Bills can who has accepted mediocrity and needs to find a standard to define "good" other than winning would say such nonsense.

Don't have time to do research? Yet you have time to argue with every person on this board and tell them how they should think every day of every week? Come on man.

[HAMMER]

Op will never let you people enjoy the wins, he will always tell you how you should think, his way is the only way, he knows all, we are just plebians living in his world.

[OpIv37]

We're middle of the road in lots of other categories. Again, I'm not saying we're a great team. But at the very least, you should acknowledge that we appear to be better than last year and that we appear to be moving in the right direction.

Uh huh- and this must be the 10th time I've heard this speech in the last 13 years. We win a couple of games early in the season and suddenly people think we've turned the corner....

Well, for every good stat you pulled, I could pull a bad one- rush yards given up, red zone TD%, penalties, big plays surrendered. So you can say we are headed in the right direction but I'll believe it when I see it.

[OpIv37]

Don't have time to do research? Yet you have time to argue with every person on this board and tell them how they should think every day of every week? Come on man.

I don't have time to research an obscure stat on request. That doesn't mean I don't have info to back up what I say.

[OpIv37]

Op will never let you people enjoy the wins, he will always tell you how you should think, his way is the only way, he knows all, we are just plebians living in his world.

Whether or not people enjoy wins is not up to me- if they can't enjoy a win because of something I post, that's on them.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

It's not just the run def, but also harassing the qb. Go rewatch the game. They were in Flacco's face all day, pretty much.

- So we lead the league in interceptions, but we're not a good team...
- We're in the top 10 teams w/sacks
- #1 team in tackles
- We're currently #2 in rushing, but we're not a good team...
- #2 in FGs made (and before you criticize that this is b'cse we can't score TDs, Patriots are #1 in this category)
- #4 in punting yards

You have got to be kidding me. Are you seriously bragging that we lead the league in tackles? All that means is that we've faced the most plays on defense. Punting yardage?? :rofl:

The stats that look good out of that jumble are the sacks and turnovers, which this defense is designed to generate. The rest of that are stats that get pumped up because we run a lot of plays and have a lot of plays run on us. On a per-play basis, our offense and defense are squarely middle of the pack. Which is certainly an improvement (at least on D), but it's early to be telling anyone to eat crow about the Bills.

[pmoon6]

Come on man.Maybe Opie can get a gig with the two idiots, Keyshawn Johnson and Chris Carter for a new show on ESPN. At least Opie can speak real English and he can even write!!

[pmoon6]

You have got to be kidding me. Are you seriously bragging that we lead the league in tackles? All that means is that we've faced the most plays on defense. Punting yardage?? :rofl:

The stats that look good out of that jumble are the sacks and turnovers, which this defense is designed to generate. The rest of that are stats that get pumped up because we run a lot of plays and have a lot of plays run on us. On a per-play basis, our offense and defense are squarely middle of the pack. Which is certainly an improvement (at least on D), but it's early to be telling anyone to eat crow about the Bills.Well, we already have two wins when the master prognosticators here predicted 2-14 or 4-12. I guess that means we are going to lose the rest of our games or win just two more.

[justasportsfan]

Op will never let you people enjoy the wins, he will always tell you how you should think, his way is the only way, he knows all, we are just plebians living in his world.misery loves company. He's miserable because the bills won.

[better days]

I don't have time to research an obscure stat on request. That doesn't mean I don't have info to back up what I say.

Yes it does mean you don't have info to back up what you said. If you had that info, you would not have to research it. ESPECIALLY when that info DOES NOT EXIST.

[OpIv37]

Yes it does mean you don't have info to back up what you said. If you had that info, you would not have to research it. ESPECIALLY when that info DOES NOT EXIST.

Whether the info exists or not does not change the fact that your ****ty, mediocre definition of a "good" team left open the possibility of a team with a losing record being considered "good." Pointing fingers at me won't make your definition any better.

[better days]

Whether the info exists or not does not change the fact that your ****ty, mediocre definition of a "good" team left open the possibility of a team with a losing record being considered "good." Pointing fingers at me won't make your definition any better.

Well, my definition of GOOD team may be weak, but you have not offered up a better one.

It is all semantics anyway. The only thing that really matters is that after 4 games the Bills are .500 when MANY people expected them to be 0-4.

In other words, the Bills have exceeded expectations so far which all Bills fans should be happy about.

[mysticsoto]

You have got to be kidding me. Are you seriously bragging that we lead the league in tackles? All that means is that we've faced the most plays on defense. Punting yardage?? :rofl:

The stats that look good out of that jumble are the sacks and turnovers, which this defense is designed to generate. The rest of that are stats that get pumped up because we run a lot of plays and have a lot of plays run on us. On a per-play basis, our offense and defense are squarely middle of the pack. Which is certainly an improvement (at least on D), but it's early to be telling anyone to eat crow about the Bills.

Eat crow? All people are saying is that we're really not as bad as Op is making us out to be...so far. That's it. Sacks/Ints looking great and there is room for improvement w/rookies performing well so far.

That's it. Don't read into it anymore than that...

[mysticsoto]

Uh huh- and this must be the 10th time I've heard this speech in the last 13 years. We win a couple of games early in the season and suddenly people think we've turned the corner....

Well, for every good stat you pulled, I could pull a bad one- rush yards given up, red zone TD%, penalties, big plays surrendered. So you can say we are headed in the right direction but I'll believe it when I see it.

The past has nothing to do w/the current team. Except for Ralph, there is nothing else in common with the team 13 years ago. Using that to validate your pessimistic ways is just a cheap crutch that you keep around. The current roster and coaching staff looks to be the best we've had in a long time...

[better days]

The past has nothing to do w/the current team. Except for Ralph, there is nothing else in common with the team 13 years ago. Using that to validate your pessimistic ways is just a cheap crutch that you keep around. The current roster and coaching staff looks to be the best we've had in a long time...

Well, a REASONABLE person would not put past failures on those that were not responsible for them, but then there is Op.

[OpIv37]

The past has nothing to do w/the current team. Except for Ralph, there is nothing else in common with the team 13 years ago. Using that to validate your pessimistic ways is just a cheap crutch that you keep around. The current roster and coaching staff looks to be the best we've had in a long time...

RUSS BRANDON.

And I've heard the "it looks better than it has in a long time" speech a million times too.

[OpIv37]

Well, a REASONABLE person would not put past failures on those that were not responsible for them, but then there is Op.

lmao- Buddy Nix gave us three years of **** and you guys argued with me like crazy when I suggested he wasn't part of this draft. But now, the people responsible for the past aren't responsible for the current team? Make up your mind.

Plus Ralph and most importantly RUSS BRANDON.

[OpIv37]

Well, a REASONABLE person would not put past failures on those that were not responsible for them, but then there is Op.

oh and one more thing: This is absurd. Ralph and his yes-men have been running this team like **** since it has existed. He lucked into maybe 12 good seasons out of 53. And yeah, I know- Ralph's not involved directly anymore but Russ Brandon was his right hand man through most of the last 13 years of ****. Russ has a LOT of blood on his hands.

You keep saying I'm blaming people who are not responsible, but here's the thing: Buddy Nix, Marv Levy, Russ Brandon, Tom Donahoe at GM. Chan Gailey, Dick Jauron, Mike Mularkey Gregg Williams as head coaches (not to mention the **** we had through most of the 70's and 80's).

None of them were responsible for the failures of their predecessors. But the results were the same.

You say it's different but it's not. It's unreasonable to think things will change as long as the idiots at the top are the same.

[better days]

lmao- Buddy Nix gave us three years of **** and you guys argued with me like crazy when I suggested he wasn't part of this draft. But now, the people responsible for the past aren't responsible for the current team? Make up your mind.

Plus Ralph and most importantly RUSS BRANDON.

The people from 13 years ago are NOT RESPONSIBLE for THIS team TODAY.

Nix deserves the vast majority of credit or blame whichever you choose to give him.

After this last draft I think REASONABLE people are ready to give him CREDIT for this current team.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Eat crow? All people are saying is that we're really not as bad as Op is making us out to be...so far. That's it.

No, posters are telling Op to eat crow in those exact words (Post 70).

I don't agree with Op's analysis all the time (go look at our back and forth after the New England game), but the jumping on him in this thread is goofy.


Sacks/Ints looking great and there is room for improvement w/rookies performing well so far.

And I agreed with that.

[mysticsoto]

RUSS BRANDON.

And I've heard the "it looks better than it has in a long time" speech a million times too.

Then stop listening and watch. The 1st half of the game, we looked great. The 2nd half we were a bit more shaky, but one thing that is different from previous teams is that you can't count us out anymore. It used to be that the Bills would give us hope and then disappoint us at the end of the game. In our 2 wins, we looked like we would follow that same pattern, yet these new guys fought back and won them instead. And like I said before, in our 2 losses - we lost by a score. That's it.

Personally, I look forward to EJ developing more and Gilmore returning...

[mysticsoto]

No, posters are telling Op to eat crow in those exact words (Post 70).

I don't agree with Op's analysis all the time (go look at our back and forth after the New England game), but the jumping on him in this thread is goofy.

And I agreed with that.

They're telling him to eat crow for something more specific - b'cse of him saying we would lose to the Ravens. Now that we beat the Ravens, he downgrades them and acts like they suck. Last I checked, Ray Rice was a great RB - but he implies that their running attack hasn't been great and that's why we beat them. Well no, that's not the reason we beat them. We beat them b'cse they tried to exploit the fact that we had our #1 and #2 CBs out and went w/an almost exclusive passing attack. But Aaron Williams and the rest of the defense stepped up to the plate and performed admirably. That's why we won!

[OpIv37]

For the last ****ing time- I never "downgraded" my opinion of the Ravens. I've consistently said they would struggle since the off-season.

[mysticsoto]

For the last ****ing time- I never "downgraded" my opinion of the Ravens. I've consistently said they would struggle since the off-season.

I don't have all the time in the world, but this was one of your quotes:


Our talent level is nowhere close to the Ravens or Jets D's that had success against Brady.

And I'd say our talent level is somewhere close after all...

[justasportsfan]

lmao- Buddy Nix gave us three years of **** and you guys argued with me like crazy when I suggested he wasn't part of this draft. But now, the people responsible for the past aren't responsible for the current team? Make up your mind.



For someone who thinks he's smarter than efveryone is too stupid to realize that your SUGGESTION is merely a SUGGESTION and not fact. Buddy was part of this draft . It's a FACT and not a SUGGESTION.

[pmoon6]

No, posters are telling Op to eat crow in those exact words (Post 70).

I don't agree with Op's analysis all the time (go look at our back and forth after the New England game), but the jumping on him in this thread is goofy.



And I agreed with that.Why is it goofy? We get to have a little fun at Opie's expense.

Opie gets to be the rugged individualist/realist standing alone in front of the jail thwarting the mob from taking his prisoner.

[OpIv37]

For someone who thinks he's smarter than efveryone is too stupid to realize that your SUGGESTION is merely a SUGGESTION and not fact. Buddy was part of this draft . It's a FACT and not a SUGGESTION.
You completely missed the point.

Better days just said that the people responsible for the past failures weren't responsible for the current team. But he also said that Buddy Nix- who gave us 3 years of failure and terrible coaching hires- was part of the current draft.

He can't have it both ways by saying that Nix was involved in this draft but the people responsible for past failures aren't responsible for the current team.

[OpIv37]

I don't have all the time in the world, but this was one of your quotes:



And I'd say our talent level is somewhere close after all...

Notice the use of "had"- that quote was about the PAST Ravens' Ds that shut down Brady. When talking about THIS YEAR's Ravens I have consistently said they would struggle.

You are trying to change the topic and compare the talent on this year's Bills to the prior year Jets and Ravens D's. But for the record, we still don't have the talent of those D's. Those D's didn't give up 300 yards passing to rookies in their third game or get shredded by back-up RB's three weeks in a row.

[mysticsoto]

Notice the use of "had"- that quote was about the PAST Ravens' Ds that shut down Brady. When talking about THIS YEAR's Ravens I have consistently said they would struggle.

You are trying to change the topic and compare the talent on this year's Bills to the prior year Jets and Ravens D's. But for the record, we still don't have the talent of those D's. Those D's didn't give up 300 yards passing to rookies in their third game or get shredded by back-up RB's three weeks in a row.

It would be nice if you used reality and not hyperbole when doing your pessimist act on the Bills. If there is something I can't stand is someone that keeps regurgitating bullcrap lies. For the record, we are currently in 6th place in terms of our Rush Defense. So this crap you keep saying that we are being "shredded" is just that...bullcrap.

Your next line will undoubtedly be, the Ravens' game has padded that stat. It is what it is, and it makes your line a lie...

[OpIv37]

Talk about lies:ESPN has us 27th in rush D

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/rushing/position/defense

Get your **** straight before accusing me of lies and hyperbole

[OpIv37]

NFL.com has us 27th as well
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&defensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&conference=ALL&role=OPP&season=2013&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS_PER_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=1&d-447263-n=1

So yeah, outside of one game, we've been shredded

[IlluminatusUIUC]

It would be nice if you used reality and not hyperbole when doing your pessimist act on the Bills. If there is something I can't stand is someone that keeps regurgitating bullcrap lies. For the record, we are currently in 6th place in terms of our Rush Defense. So this crap you keep saying that we are being "shredded" is just that...bullcrap.

Your next line will undoubtedly be, the Ravens' game has padded that stat. It is what it is, and it makes your line a lie...

As Op pointed out, that's "6th" as in "6th worst" = 27th overall by yardage.

[mysticsoto]

NFL.com has us 27th as well
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&defensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&conference=ALL&role=OPP&season=2013&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS_PER_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=1&d-447263-n=1

So yeah, outside of one game, we've been shredded

That's not what I see here:

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=OPP&offensiveStatisticCategory=null&defensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&season=2013&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=false&Submit=Go

[IlluminatusUIUC]

That's not what I see here:

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=OPP&offensiveStatisticCategory=null&defensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&season=2013&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=false&Submit=Go

That table is sorted by rushing yardage against. Yardage against is bad.

[OpIv37]

That's not what I see here:

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=OPP&offensiveStatisticCategory=null&defensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&season=2013&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=false&Submit=Go

You have it sorted by average yards per attempt but the HIGHER averages are at the top. For defense, the LOWER yards per attempt is better.

[mysticsoto]

That's not what I see here:

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=OPP&offensiveStatisticCategory=null&defensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&season=2013&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=false&Submit=Go

Ok, looks like Illuminatus is right. My sorting was opposite in terms of yds/game, so I'll retract my statement post. Not sure how that happened since I didn't choose to sort it...but I'll admit this was my mistake.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

The part that concerns me is that Baltimore abandoned the run early but we are still near the bottom of total yards given up. I want to see more out of this front 7 in that regard.

[better days]

As Op pointed out, that's "6th" as in "6th worst" = 27th overall by yardage.

The only stats that matter at the end of the day:

TD's scored by the Offense

TD's allowed by the Defense

Wins VS Losses

[mysticsoto]

The part that concerns me is that Baltimore abandoned the run early but we are still near the bottom of total yards given up. I want to see more out of this front 7 in that regard.

I feel like our turnovers have alot to do with giving the other team extra chances/yardage. Those, I feel, are correctable.

I think for this coming game, Cleveland's run D is going to make it tough for our banged up RBs to do much. I think alot of it is going to fall on EJ's shoulders so I hope he's ready!