Woody Time

[Fletch]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/10/21/week-seven-power-rankings-4/

PFT has us 14th in their power rankings.

[Dr. Lecter]

That's a little high, but really in this league the teams they would rank from about 13-23 are pretty even and it's a crapshoot with all of them

[Generalissimus Gibby]

I never bought into "power rankings."

[better days]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/10/21/week-seven-power-rankings-4/

PFT has us 14th in their power rankings.

Not bad for a team you said would only win 3 games.

[Historian]

I agree.

I think we're better than KC.

[Dr. Lecter]

Not bad for a team you said would only win 3 games.

When they win -1 of their remaining games, he will still be correct

[DynaPaul]

If we lose this week we'll probably drop down 6 spots. The Cowboys are rated too high. I saw that their opponents this year were 15 - 23 and plus, you know, they're the Cowboys and will probably go down in the 1st round of the playoffs anyway. On Sirius/XM radio they are more than happy to gush about them though.

[better days]

If we lose this week we'll probably drop down 6 spots. The Cowboys are rated too high. I saw that their opponents this year were 15 - 23 and plus, you know, they're the Cowboys and will probably go down in the 1st round of the playoffs anyway. On Sirius/XM radio they are more than happy to gush about them though.

I think it is more likely that the Cowboys miss the playoffs because of a loss in the last regular season game

[Ed]

The Bills have a winning record and a high SOS and SOV. No reason for them to not be in the middle of the pack until they prove otherwise.

Who should be ahead of them right now? Maybe the Steelers and Chiefs, but that's about it.

Plenty of teams with flaws/concerns right now.

[YardRat]

Not bad for a team you said would only win 3 games.


When they win -1 of their remaining games, he will still be correct

Cutler gift-wrapped the Chicago game, Miami sucks and didn't have Moreno, Detroit's skill players didn't even play, and beating Minnesota by 1 might as well be a loss, so the team is still really 0-7.

Dumbasses.

[YardRat]

Oh, and power rankings are worthless, I don't care if they have us at #1 or #32.

[trapezeus]

Cutler gift-wrapped the Chicago game, Miami sucks and didn't have Moreno, Detroit's skill players didn't even play, and beating Minnesota by 1 might as well be a loss, so the team is still really 0-7.

Dumbasses.

yardrat, i never knew you were the third fletch handle.

[YardRat]

yardrat, i never knew you were the third fletch handle.

Shhhhhh....it's a secret.

[Dr. Lecter]

yardrat, i never knew you were the third fletch handle.

That's pretty rude to Fletch...........

[ublinkwescore]

The niners are still better than us too... but there are some teams that should have been lower than us too...

[pmoon6]

"Power Rankings"

Bwahahahahahahahahaha.

[Generalissimus Gibby]

When they win -1 of their remaining games, he will still be correct

I say we give back the Vikings game.

[Fletch]

When they win -1 of their remaining games, he will still be correct

Funny how a lie becomes the truth, isn't it.

And better days of all people, can't you at least pick someone with some ***** credibility?

I've consistently maintained a 5-11 plus/minus a game.

[Fletch]

Cutler gift-wrapped the Chicago game, Miami sucks and didn't have Moreno, Detroit's skill players didn't even play, and beating Minnesota by 1 might as well be a loss, so the team is still really 0-7.

Dumbasses.

You have a pretty good memory for a dumbass.

All true however.

It's funny, people like you are simply too stupid to ever address honestly the fact that beating a team with Tate, George Winn as RB, and then a bunch of third-rate WRs really isn't much of a feat. Except in your world of course, where it's the same as beating the Lions full strength. It only matters when we have injuries, then you'll sit there and ball your bloodshot eyes out into your milk and cry up a river.

But we're good, and playoff material.

Sometimes the wit here is just so high profile.

[Meathead]

take away the games this team won and they are winless

[YardRat]

You have a pretty good memory for a dumbass.

All true however.

It's funny, people like you are simply too stupid to ever address honestly the fact that beating a team with Tate, George Winn as RB, and then a bunch of third-rate WRs really isn't much of a feat. Except in your world of course, where it's the same as beating the Lions full strength. It only matters when we have injuries, then you'll sit there and ball your bloodshot eyes out into your milk and cry up a river.

But we're good, and playoff material.

Sometimes the wit here is just so high profile.

What you fail to be able to comprehend (one of the things, anyway, obviously of many) is at the end of the day the only thing that matters is the end result. A 'W' is a 'W', and an 'L' an 'L', and all of the rationalization and justification that you try to cloak the bottom line in matters very little. Nobody cares that the 2011 NY Giants lost 5 of 6 mid-season, only had a 9-7 record, only beat one team with a winning record, 'only' beat lowly teams like Buffalo (3 pts) and Miami (3 pts) by the slimmest of margins, and got swept by a 5-11 Redskin team. They only care that the Giants won the Super Bowl, and everything else is irrelevant.

You don't get 2 'W's for beating a New England, anymore than you get a half 'W' for beating Detroit without a healthy Bell or Megatron, or a quarter 'W' for beating Minnesota by only a point.

Scoreboard. Deal with it.

[Fletch]

What you fail to be able to comprehend (one of the things, anyway, obviously of many) is at the end of the day the only thing that matters is the end result. A 'W' is a 'W', and an 'L' an 'L', and all of the rationalization and justification that you try to cloak the bottom line in matters very little. Nobody cares that the 2011 NY Giants lost 5 of 6 mid-season, only had a 9-7 record, only beat one team with a winning record, 'only' beat lowly teams like Buffalo (3 pts) and Miami (3 pts) by the slimmest of margins, and got swept by a 5-11 Redskin team. They only care that the Giants won the Super Bowl, and everything else is irrelevant.

You don't get 2 'W's for beating a New England, anymore than you get a half 'W' for beating Detroit without a healthy Bell or Megatron, or a quarter 'W' for beating Minnesota by only a point.

Scoreboard. Deal with it.

LMAO

Except for all of our last seasons where people like you are crying like a girl because we lost x number of games by 3 points or less.

You guys are hilarious, you're so all over the map that you can't even be honest with what you say from week to week much less from season to season.

[Fletch]

take away the games this team won and they are winless

Oh, we won 'em, but using the way we won them as a basis for predicting future outcomes if for idiots and fools.

There seems to be no shortage of either here.

The rest of the amusement comes from watching those same idiots and fools that bawled like girls about losing games last year by 3 or less not citing how close they were, like having to go to OT against Chicago and winning on the very last play against Minnesota which could very well be the worst team in the league now.

Only someone with an exceedingly low IQ would consider that impressive.

[BertSquirtgum]

Feltch sucks at life.

[YardRat]

LOL...you're sooooo *****y after a win.

[pmoon6]

Feltch sucks at life.He suffers from a malady that seems to permeate these boards.

The over analysis of a simple game and his need to be the "smartest" guy on the block.

That and his overwhelming negativity does indeed put him in the category of "loser".

That and the obvious. The need to comment on a game he never played.

It sucks that he suffered such a severe psychological blow so early in life.

Being picked last for dodgeball and being the first out of the game takes it's toll. The only thing left is to retreat into cyberspace and his make believe world where he can TRY to be good at something.

But, I prefer your analysis. Short, concise and articulate as opposed to my wordy evaluation.

[swiper]

Bills stole a couple of games.

And these rankings? The Bills should not be ranked above Pittsburgh, Cleveland, KC, NO, ...

[better days]

Oh, we won 'em, but using the way we won them as a basis for predicting future outcomes if for idiots and fools.

There seems to be no shortage of either here.

The rest of the amusement comes from watching those same idiots and fools that bawled like girls about losing games last year by 3 or less not citing how close they were, like having to go to OT against Chicago and winning on the very last play against Minnesota which could very well be the worst team in the league now.

Only someone with an exceedingly low IQ would consider that impressive.

Only an idiot & fool would have predicted the Bills were only going to win 3-4 games this year.

[Fletch]

Only an idiot & fool would have predicted the Bills were only going to win 3-4 games this year.

So typical here, saying things often enough that they become the truth. At least have the decency to allow me what I actually said.

5 +/- 1

Once Orton went in I said add 1-3 wins but likely 1 or 2 for maybe as good as 8-8. But I'm still seeing 6-10 here. You guys are going to look like the annual fools at the BZ fool convention that you always do when we go 1-8, 2-7, or at best 3-6 over the next nine games. Then what, you can sidetrack the conversations, if we can even call most of these threads taht, and call me a douchebag all you want, it's not going to change the reality.

That while everyone was talking playoffs. This is so typical, you and others take 4-3, mostly by ridiculous circumstances that others accurately see as having happened to us in games 1-7 when they could very well have happened in any other few games in a string or not at any point during the season, and do for most teams, and then assuming that we're going to continue to win 8 games in that manner. Honestly, it really doesn't get more idiotic than that.

It's really simple, you don't win many games by only scoring 17 or even 20 points, you just don't. Any person with an IQ above 100 and a remote football knowledge should be able to figure that out. Now we have Spiller out for the year, which is debatable as to how much of a loss that really is if it's a loss at all, but losing Jackson, our second leading reception and third yardage receiver, definitely is. The fools there are those on the team and off it that really thought that at 33 it was even remotely likely that he would make it through the season in one piece and even come close to putting up full-time production. Horrible planning and foolish belief and faith that that even had a decent chance of occurring.

What's funny is that if we had picked up this Phillip Tanner guy as an undrafted free agent, no doubt one of you or someone else would have posted that same video that I did and seriously, not jokingly, made optimistic comments about him. We've all been treated to how good Brown is despite hardly having played in the NFL or college for that matter, now everyone's backtracking and not admitting it in the earlier discussions of our "elite RBs" including Dixon and Brown.

As to a win, LOL, yeah, wake me when we win 9 or more games. Sorry, I'm with you guys there, I can't get excited over a win over **** Minnesota, "powered" by Bridgewater who hadn't even thrown an NFL TD until he did so against our "elite D," at home, in a game where we should have romped with Manuel in and Dixon running the ball much less with Orton in there. Yet, it took every second of the game to avoid a loss.

If that had been any one of 8 of our nine other remaining opponents it would have been an embarrassing loss.

As to YardRat, he's made a second career out of sucking himself off while following me around calling me names. Apparently the thinks that his wang is a straw.

[Ginger Vitis]

Felch saying the Bills will go anywhere from 6-10 to 8-8 is typical of his cowardly act of being terrified and avoiding being wrong at all costs which he still manages to be wrong on a daily basis

[Dr. Lecter]

You have a pretty good memory for a dumbass.

All true however.

It's funny, people like you are simply too stupid to ever address honestly the fact that beating a team with Tate, George Winn as RB, and then a bunch of third-rate WRs really isn't much of a feat. Except in your world of course, where it's the same as beating the Lions full strength. It only matters when we have injuries, then you'll sit there and ball your bloodshot eyes out into your milk and cry up a river.

But we're good, and playoff material.

Sometimes the wit here is just so high profile.

It's funny when you make things up that other people did not say.

It's also funny when you refuse to give any player on this team any credit for anything they do.
Are they playoff material? Probably not.

Are they a bottom 5 team in the NFL?

Nope.

Is the defense horrible? Nope.

[Dr. Lecter]

Oh, we won 'em, but using the way we won them as a basis for predicting future outcomes if for idiots and fools.

There seems to be no shortage of either here.

The rest of the amusement comes from watching those same idiots and fools that bawled like girls about losing games last year by 3 or less not citing how close they were, like having to go to OT against Chicago and winning on the very last play against Minnesota which could very well be the worst team in the league now.

Only someone with an exceedingly low IQ would consider that impressive.

FWIW, please remember this post the next time somebody calls you a name or says something to you that you don't like.

Meathead has never gone after you.

But I'm sure that you won't acknowledge that and will twist this into being somebody else's fault.

It's much easier to tell us how stupid we all are.

[Fletch]

It's funny when you make things up that other people did not say.

It's also funny when you refuse to give any player on this team any credit for anything they do.
Are they playoff material? Probably not.

Are they a bottom 5 team in the NFL?

Nope.

Is the defense horrible? Nope.

Which players haven't I given credit to? The only ones I see worthy of much credit right now, besides linemen, are Jackson, for playing his heart out at the age of 33 to carry the offensive backfield for this strategically challenged front office, Watkins for playing well as a rookie, again, while facing an impossible battle to live up to the absurd expectations placed on him as a rookie drafted the way he was, and that's about it on offense. What, Orton, for throwing for 900 yards but only managing to log 5 TDs, once on an extremely short field.

Who else on offense deserves credit for playing even average football?

I'm not the one that started threads about our "elite RBs" that can't even play average football. Or our "Best WRs in the league" that can't even play average football, even under Orton. So far Orton's nothing but a lot of yards and no more points than Manuel.

On defense you guys yourselves are a revolving door of opinions. We have an "elite D" but for some reason we can't stop any good QBs from throwing well unless they make mistakes. Tannehill had a good game, Fitzpatrick did more than he should have been allowed to do. Brady lit us up. Bridgewater popped his cherry against us and nearly won them, one of the ****tiest teams in the league, the game. Rivers had a great game without significant rushing support and won them that one. Even Stafford picked us apart with only one WR that you'd ever heard of on the field.

So who's good then on our D?

I never said we're a bottom 5 D. Talk about making **** up. I'm merely contesting that we're not a top-ranked D. It's funny, two weeks ago we were a #1 and "elite" D according to everyone here. Now we're a top 5 D. Pretty soon it's going to be top-10 and then average D, which might be about right rushing, but not passing. Passing this D sucks just like it did last year. Oh yeah, lots of sacks and INTs, but apparently here people still haven't caught on that sacks and INTs do not a D make. Does that equate to intelligence in your book, not being able to figure that out?

We're on pace to allow almost as many passing TDs as we did last season and we still have to face three of the best passing offenses in the league that could potentially and easily put up 10 passing TDs against, easily, maybe more, if our game against NE was any indication. The rest aren't bad either. KC is solid, Cleveland is as good a passing team and much more efficient than we are.

You guys offer no substance. You talk about how stats don't matter, then you go straight to the stat sites to justify your opinions. Then when someone such as myself lays out a solid argument that doesn't make you smile all of a sudden stats are useless.

You completely ignore which RBs it is that we've shut down. I mean really, look at some of them and their histories and then come to your own conclusions. Donald Brown blows. George Winn? Really? Alfred Blue?

We'll see. I'm just saying that a lot of this is unfounded hype. Many here are going to be disappointed and you're setting yourselves up for it. Again.

On defense all we heard about was Spikes, Spikes, Spikes in the preseason. He's not even on the field, just like I told you he wouldn't be when everyone argued that point, for half the snaps. It's not about me being right, but dammit, consider why. You can't continually just talk and have your opinions completely invalidated at the end of the season and expect people to take you seriously, especially when your posts are laden with name-calling and other childish nonsense.

Where's the substance?

Mario's playing great? How come we can't stop good QBs then from throwing against us? So far we've stopped Bridgewater, but not from allowing him to log his first NFL TD, Tannehill for one half, and Stafford with one receiving weapon total on offense. Cutler threw for 341 yards. Brady lit us up too but just didn't make the same mistakes. Rivers played a very good game with limited weapons too. Fitzpatrick made his usual mistakes but put up more yards than Rivers. Tannehill put up 200 yards passing in the 2nd half, and he doesn't even have anything close to top 20 receiving talent over there. Maimi's top WR is ranked 36th.

These things matter.

So who am I supposed to give credit for for stopping nothing RBs but failing to stop even average QBs?

Is it all about sacks and INTs? Sadly, for some here yeah, it is, and strangely it's the same people telling everyone that stats don't matter otherwise.

I said at the beginning of the season that our secondary is below average, oddly people are finally coming around to seeing that. I said that our LBs weren't any good against the pass. Has that been more validated or invalidated?

So who should I give credit to on D for stopping nothing RBs but being incapable of defending the pass? More importantly, what should I and we look forward to as the season progresses?

We face a very good rushing game in NY that tore us up last season. If we can hold them down then maybe I'll take a step towards being impressed. Also, let's see what happens with a pretty sorry Geno Smith too. No one's going to argue that he's any good and according to everyone here he sucks. I won't disagree with that.

I give Kyle Williams all the credit in the world and always have. Hughes seems to show up more than anyone after him. Dareus and Mario both seem to show up when they decide to. I'm not impressed since we put much more into them but Williams and Hughes are playing better. As to the rest, again, answer the questions and tell me why any should impress me. I don't see a single above average DB on our roster, just as I said prior to the season when almost everyone argued against me. Same for our LBs.

[Fletch]

FWIW, please remember this post the next time somebody calls you a name or says something to you that you don't like.

Meathead has never gone after you.

But I'm sure that you won't acknowledge that and will twist this into being somebody else's fault.

It's much easier to tell us how stupid we all are.

I try to avoid categorizations. I don't believe I've ever gone after Meathead either. I only "go after" those that go after me and almost exclusively in the same threads and in direct response. Don't like it, then talk to them.

Many posters here, despite differing opinions, know how to engage in discussion without limiting themselves to single sentences without any substance whatsoever and almost exclusively using personal attacks.

As to stupidity, as Forrest Gump's mother used to say, Stupid is as stupid does, or in our case stupid is as stupid says.

It's hardly intelligent to not pick up on something, crow about an "elite" unit, and then by season's end having to explain why we're ranked below average. Sorry, there just isn't. This notion that everyone here is just as intelligent and analytically savvy, may be a popular opinion, but it's also wrong.

[Generalissimus Gibby]

Funny how a lie becomes the truth, isn't it.

And better days of all people, can't you at least pick someone with some ***** credibility?

I've consistently maintained a 5-11 plus/minus a game.

and if we beat the Jets, Chiefs, Fish, Jets, and Browns can we trust that you will fade away? Also, what happens if miracles --which are not banned, just see the Royals -- happen and we sneak into the playoffs? Do you fade away like a fart in the wind only to revisit us when we lose out? Are you a Bills fan or just one of your own opinion? Seems kinda strange to me, but to each his own I guess.

[feldspar]

Which players haven't I given credit to? The only ones I see worthy of much credit right now, besides linemen, are Jackson, for playing his heart out at the age of 33 to carry the offensive backfield for this strategically challenged front office, Watkins for playing well as a rookie, again, while facing an impossible battle to live up to the absurd expectations placed on him as a rookie drafted the way he was, and that's about it on offense. What, Orton, for throwing for 900 yards but only managing to log 5 TDs, once on an extremely short field.

Who else on offense deserves credit for playing even average football?

I'm not the one that started threads about our "elite RBs" that can't even play average football. Or our "Best WRs in the league" that can't even play average football, even under Orton. So far Orton's nothing but a lot of yards and no more points than Manuel.

On defense you guys yourselves are a revolving door of opinions. We have an "elite D" but for some reason we can't stop any good QBs from throwing well unless they make mistakes. Tannehill had a good game, Fitzpatrick did more than he should have been allowed to do. Brady lit us up. Bridgewater popped his cherry against us and nearly won them, one of the ****tiest teams in the league, the game. Rivers had a great game without significant rushing support and won them that one. Even Stafford picked us apart with only one WR that you'd ever heard of on the field.

So who's good then on our D?

I never said we're a bottom 5 D. Talk about making **** up. I'm merely contesting that we're not a top-ranked D. It's funny, two weeks ago we were a #1 and "elite" D according to everyone here. Now we're a top 5 D. Pretty soon it's going to be top-10 and then average D, which might be about right rushing, but not passing. Passing this D sucks just like it did last year. Oh yeah, lots of sacks and INTs, but apparently here people still haven't caught on that sacks and INTs do not a D make. Does that equate to intelligence in your book, not being able to figure that out?

We're on pace to allow almost as many passing TDs as we did last season and we still have to face three of the best passing offenses in the league that could potentially and easily put up 10 passing TDs against, easily, maybe more, if our game against NE was any indication. The rest aren't bad either. KC is solid, Cleveland is as good a passing team and much more efficient than we are.

You guys offer no substance. You talk about how stats don't matter, then you go straight to the stat sites to justify your opinions. Then when someone such as myself lays out a solid argument that doesn't make you smile all of a sudden stats are useless.

You completely ignore which RBs it is that we've shut down. I mean really, look at some of them and their histories and then come to your own conclusions. Donald Brown blows. George Winn? Really? Alfred Blue?

We'll see. I'm just saying that a lot of this is unfounded hype. Many here are going to be disappointed and you're setting yourselves up for it. Again.

On defense all we heard about was Spikes, Spikes, Spikes in the preseason. He's not even on the field, just like I told you he wouldn't be when everyone argued that point, for half the snaps. It's not about me being right, but dammit, consider why. You can't continually just talk and have your opinions completely invalidated at the end of the season and expect people to take you seriously, especially when your posts are laden with name-calling and other childish nonsense.

Where's the substance?

Mario's playing great? How come we can't stop good QBs then from throwing against us? So far we've stopped Bridgewater, but not from allowing him to log his first NFL TD, Tannehill for one half, and Stafford with one receiving weapon total on offense. Cutler threw for 341 yards. Brady lit us up too but just didn't make the same mistakes. Rivers played a very good game with limited weapons too. Fitzpatrick made his usual mistakes but put up more yards than Rivers. Tannehill put up 200 yards passing in the 2nd half, and he doesn't even have anything close to top 20 receiving talent over there. Maimi's top WR is ranked 36th.

These things matter.

So who am I supposed to give credit for for stopping nothing RBs but failing to stop even average QBs?

Is it all about sacks and INTs? Sadly, for some here yeah, it is, and strangely it's the same people telling everyone that stats don't matter otherwise.

I said at the beginning of the season that our secondary is below average, oddly people are finally coming around to seeing that. I said that our LBs weren't any good against the pass. Has that been more validated or invalidated?

So who should I give credit to on D for stopping nothing RBs but being incapable of defending the pass? More importantly, what should I and we look forward to as the season progresses?

We face a very good rushing game in NY that tore us up last season. If we can hold them down then maybe I'll take a step towards being impressed. Also, let's see what happens with a pretty sorry Geno Smith too. No one's going to argue that he's any good and according to everyone here he sucks. I won't disagree with that.

I give Kyle Williams all the credit in the world and always have. Hughes seems to show up more than anyone after him. Dareus and Mario both seem to show up when they decide to. I'm not impressed since we put much more into them but Williams and Hughes are playing better. As to the rest, again, answer the questions and tell me why any should impress me. I don't see a single above average DB on our roster, just as I said prior to the season when almost everyone argued against me. Same for our LBs.

Who actually reads these short pamphlet posts?

Anybody?

[Fletch]

and if we beat the Jets, Chiefs, Fish, Jets, and Browns can we trust that you will fade away? Also, what happens if miracles --which are not banned, just see the Royals -- happen and we sneak into the playoffs? Do you fade away like a fart in the wind only to revisit us when we lose out? Are you a Bills fan or just one of your own opinion? Seems kinda strange to me, but to each his own I guess.

If if then, maybe, blah blah blah

If you have something to contribute to the discussion do so, but how about stopping with the bull****.

[Fletch]

Who actually reads these short pamphlet posts?

Anybody?

I was responding to Lechter, if he doesn't want to respond then it's his prerogative. But at least I had the decency to answer his questions.

Sorry, but some things in life just can't be summed up in 4 second sound bites so as not to overload your pea brain.

At least a number of us here actually take the time to attempt to engage in good discussions.

Was there something in there that caused your menstral cycle to start early? I guess I'm at a complete loss why so many people here masquerading as people with a clue just complain about other peoples' posts when they don't bother to read them, when they aren't engaged in the discussion and clearly don't want to be, but feel compelled to piss and moan like a woman on the rag incessantly.

And then you say I'm the one with the problem. Right.

Like I said, many people here make this place clinically certifiable and it's posts like yours that contribute.

You know what, if you aren't interested in engaging, here's a thought, ****ing don't. I realize that's a little too rough to piece together for someone with an IQ below 100.

[feldspar]

I was responding to Lechter, if he doesn't want to respond then it's his prerogative. But at least I had the decency to answer his questions.

Sorry, but some things in life just can't be summed up in 4 second sound bites so as not to overload your pea brain.

At least a number of us here actually take the time to attempt to engage in good discussions.

Was there something in there that caused your menstral cycle to start early? I guess I'm at a complete loss why so many people here masquerading as people with a clue just complain about other peoples' posts when they don't bother to read them, when they aren't engaged in the discussion and clearly don't want to be, but feel compelled to piss and moan like a woman on the rag incessantly.

And then you say I'm the one with the problem. Right.

Like I said, many people here make this place clinically certifiable and it's posts like yours that contribute.

You know what, if you aren't interested in engaging, here's a thought, ****ing don't. I realize that's a little too rough to piece together for someone with an IQ below 100.

I did not read this...just to let you know.

[better days]

So typical here, saying things often enough that they become the truth. At least have the decency to allow me what I actually said.

5 +/- 1

Once Orton went in I said add 1-3 wins but likely 1 or 2 for maybe as good as 8-8. But I'm still seeing 6-10 here. You guys are going to look like the annual fools at the BZ fool convention that you always do when we go 1-8, 2-7, or at best 3-6 over the next nine games. Then what, you can sidetrack the conversations, if we can even call most of these threads taht, and call me a douchebag all you want, it's not going to change the reality.

That while everyone was talking playoffs. This is so typical, you and others take 4-3, mostly by ridiculous circumstances that others accurately see as having happened to us in games 1-7 when they could very well have happened in any other few games in a string or not at any point during the season, and do for most teams, and then assuming that we're going to continue to win 8 games in that manner. Honestly, it really doesn't get more idiotic than that.

It's really simple, you don't win many games by only scoring 17 or even 20 points, you just don't. Any person with an IQ above 100 and a remote football knowledge should be able to figure that out. Now we have Spiller out for the year, which is debatable as to how much of a loss that really is if it's a loss at all, but losing Jackson, our second leading reception and third yardage receiver, definitely is. The fools there are those on the team and off it that really thought that at 33 it was even remotely likely that he would make it through the season in one piece and even come close to putting up full-time production. Horrible planning and foolish belief and faith that that even had a decent chance of occurring.

What's funny is that if we had picked up this Phillip Tanner guy as an undrafted free agent, no doubt one of you or someone else would have posted that same video that I did and seriously, not jokingly, made optimistic comments about him. We've all been treated to how good Brown is despite hardly having played in the NFL or college for that matter, now everyone's backtracking and not admitting it in the earlier discussions of our "elite RBs" including Dixon and Brown.

As to a win, LOL, yeah, wake me when we win 9 or more games. Sorry, I'm with you guys there, I can't get excited over a win over **** Minnesota, "powered" by Bridgewater who hadn't even thrown an NFL TD until he did so against our "elite D," at home, in a game where we should have romped with Manuel in and Dixon running the ball much less with Orton in there. Yet, it took every second of the game to avoid a loss.

If that had been any one of 8 of our nine other remaining opponents it would have been an embarrassing loss.

As to YardRat, he's made a second career out of sucking himself off while following me around calling me names. Apparently the thinks that his wang is a straw.

Actually fletch, you are not the only person on this board that predicted the Bills would win 3-4 games.

You have company, there are a few IDIOTS on this board.

[pmoon6]

Who actually reads these short pamphlet posts?

Anybody?No, I just look at who posted it and see "Blah..blah...blah."

Is that the autocensor or is my mind just boiling down his drivel to the lowest common denominator?

[YardRat]

As to YardRat, he's made a second career out of sucking himself off while following me around calling me names. Apparently the thinks that his wang is a straw.

I'm part Irish, so sucking myself off was a no-go pretty much right from the start.

[pmoon6]

I'm part Irish, so sucking myself off was a no-go pretty much right from the start.Well, you have to defer to Fletch's expertise.

It's obvious he has hjs **** in his mouth every time he posts.

The only question is does he swallow or just give himself a facial?

[feldspar]

No, I just look at who posted it and see "Blah..blah...blah."

Is that the autocensor or is my mind just boiling down his drivel to the lowest common denominator?

That depends on who you ask. Some would suggest that it's just a reflection of your deep-seated issues and failure to face reality...or maybe you are just too stupid to understand the way things work. Others would offer that people that take this aforementioned attitude are douchebags. I fall into the latter category.