i will go on record as saying... [Archive] - BillsZone.com

Goobylal

07-10-2004, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by Tatonka
i love our new coaching staff.

win or lose in their first season.

TD and Modrack have really put together an outstanding group and they should net us at least 2 more wins at a minimum.

the way i see it.. coaching cost us at least 2-4 games last year.. and was close to costing us a couple more.

just thought i would add that.
I think that better coaching could have won the team at least 2 more games last year. However when you look at last year, the Bills lost 4 games by 4 or fewer points, and all of them were after Moulds got hurt and was either out or ineffective. I'd say that Moulds' presence is worth at least 4 points, meaning the Bills could have been 10-6 with just a healthy Moulds. If the Bills stay relatively healthy, they should do well this year.

Schobel94

07-10-2004, 10:15 PM

Every game we lost was by coaching. Not in specific on-field coaching mistakes, but by the philosiphy, mostly on offense obviously, of our dumb coaches. It cannot be that our personel was that bad, look at the Pats, they didn't have a stellar offense, 17th, but they got done what needed to be done and were very clutch. You can't tell me they have better players, becuase they don't. It's all in the coaching and chemistry (which is largely infuenced by coaching) of the team.

ScottLawrence

07-10-2004, 10:37 PM

ryjam282

07-11-2004, 08:49 AM

I agree T, I am looking forward to this season and I really can't wait to see what McNally has done with this offensive line. Our O line is a bunch of gigantic men and they should dominate and I hope McNally can finally help them reach there potential.

Goobylal

07-11-2004, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by ScottLawrence
Don't get too optomistic....

We still have Bledsoe.:rolleyes:
Yep, who only 2 years ago set many Bills single-season passing records, with less talent and nowhere near as good coaching as he'll have this year. It's obviously going to suck.

saviorbledsoe

07-11-2004, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by ScottLawrence
Don't get too optomistic....

We still have Bledsoe.:rolleyes:

Learn how to spell before you put someone else down.

TypicalBill

07-11-2004, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by Tatonka
i love our new coaching staff.

win or lose in their first season.

TD and Modrack have really put together an outstanding group and they should net us at least 2 more wins at a minimum.

the way i see it.. coaching cost us at least 2-4 games last year.. and was close to costing us a couple more.

just thought i would add that.

Ditto , gotta love what the coaches have done so far.

Originally posted by ScottLawrence
Don't get too optomistic....

We still have Bledsoe.:rolleyes:

I think he's gonna turn things around this year, better Oline play, better wideouts, a more consistent and deeper backfield. MOST OF ALL BETTER COACHING.

Even if he doesn't (which i highly doubt as long as the team is relatively healthy) i feel comfortable having JP for the future.

We're set guys, not many weaknesses on this team!

JJamezz

07-11-2004, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by Schobel94
Every game we lost was by coaching. Not in specific on-field coaching mistakes, but by the philosiphy, mostly on offense obviously

:hi5:

Originally posted by TigerJ
As I've said before, there hasn't been an obvious blunder by this coaching staff yet. You couldn't say that by this time in the Gregg Williams reign.

You couldn't say that after his FIRST press conference...

Mr. Cynical

07-11-2004, 04:05 PM

I'm still keeping my expectations in check....7-9 (maybe 8-8). Still too many question marks that won't be answered until a few games into the season.

And I'm not gonna touch Scott's comment to avoid scratching the scab off an already old, old wound....even though I do agree with him. :)

Kramer

07-11-2004, 04:19 PM

bledslow

07-11-2004, 04:58 PM

coaching is nice and all but its the players that have to actually execute, and the pats do have better players on both side of the ball OVERALL- bills dont have any pass rush at all on defense compared to colvin(assuming healthy) mcginest,vrabel,and big richard s. even jarvis green had 3 sacks in the indy playff game. -bruschi had a better year then the very overrated spikes.

hoch was dam good filling in for the departed woody,and opened up many holes.o-line will not be a problem-

green n warren was fabulous filling in for the departed big ted and went 7-1 (6-1?) while ted was hurt watching from the sidelines.

now with dillon not having to worry about 8 men in a box everytime,he will be more lethal then ever- il will without a doubt take the combination of brown,givens(barely played the first half of the season,but had a solid second half of season and playoff/super bowl),branch,and patten -over moulds,reed(disappointment last season),evans(nothing but potential) and some other guy. those pats receivers got intangibles and have proven it in the biggest games.

a healthy moulds would not have won the bills 10 games,thats insane.drew is still a lousy qb more times then not. many teams have really good players that were banged up(like the pats).bills were not the only one.

moulds last 3 healthy games the bills almost lost,but buf barely squeaked out a victory over the once again non-playoffs cincinnati bungals.

buf will finish up this year with 7-8 wins

man i just did some serious schooling

saviorbledsoe

07-11-2004, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by bledslow
coaching is nice and all but its the players that have to actually execute, and the pats do have better players on both side of the ball OVERALL- bills dont have any pass rush at all on defense compared to colvin(assuming healthy) mcginest,vrabel,and big richard s. even jarvis green had 3 sacks in the indy playff game. -bruschi had a better year then the very overrated spikes.

hoch was dam good filling in for the departed woody,and opened up many holes.o-line will not be a problem-

green n warren was fabulous filling in for the departed big ted and went 7-1 (6-1?) while ted was hurt watching from the sidelines.

now with dillon not having to worry about 8 men in a box everytime,he will be more lethal then ever- il will without a doubt take the combination of brown,givens(barely played the first half of the season,but had a solid second half of season and playoff/super bowl),branch,and patten -over moulds,reed(disappointment last season),evans(nothing but potential) and some other guy. those pats receivers got intangibles and have proven it in the biggest games.

a healthy moulds would not have won the bills 10 games,thats insane.drew is still a lousy qb more times then not. many teams have really good players that were banged up(like the pats).bills were not the only one.

moulds last 3 healthy games the bills almost lost,but buf barely squeaked out a victory over the once again non-playoffs cincinnati bungals.

buf will finish up this year with 7-8 wins

man i just did some serious schooling

keep smoking

Charlieguide

07-11-2004, 09:11 PM

OK, where to start?

The first mistake GW made, in my book, was changing the defense. You don't tear apart one of the best in the biz, you find a way to tweak it.

Moulds' injury should not have cost the team as much as it did. TD and the coaches set that up by releasing key threats (Price, et al) and not having diversity on offense.

I agree that coaching lost us plenty of games. KG looked brilliant early in both seasons, but failed to evolve when D's caught on. I still can't get over Gilbride's reliance on the pass when they had Henry turning out 4.5 ypc in some games . . . even when ball control/clock killing was clearly the answer.

Bledsoe is not the problem. He has the same challenge that Kelly, Favre, Warner, and the like have displayed over the years: he has too much confidence that he can make it happen. He IS capable of that, in the right system and with the right cast. (remember when they tried to make Kelly huddle?) For years, Drew's coaches have placed him in bad situations, relied on him too much. Look what happened when Brady took over in NE: they changed their system!!!! That's why they won, not because Brady can throw! Put Bledsoe in that offense, and you'll be dominant!

:phew:

I like the coaching and player acquisitions as they stand on paper . . . but we've been there before. I've been an optimist for a long time, but it's taken its toll. I think I'll sit back and watch this season unfold with as much of an academic view as possible. Which is to say, I hope I don't throw any beer cans at the TV.

Philagape

07-11-2004, 09:58 PM

Let's look at the reasons the offense sucked last year (in no particular order):

* Coaching.
Solution: The antichrist and his false prophet are gone.

* Moulds' injury.
Solution: He's healthy.

* No deep threat.
Solution: Lee Evans (and a healthy Moulds).

* Interior O-line sucked.
Solution: Remains to be seen. LG and C are still shaky.

* Drew sucked at times.
Solution: Remains to be seen, although he is unquestionably in a better situation than last year.

So that's 3 out of 5 problems solved, plus the addition of McGahee. The defense should be as good if not better, so I think it's clear, considering how many close losses we had, that we'll earn considerably more victories (barring more key injuries). Anything less than a playoff berth is underachieving.

HenryRules

07-11-2004, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Philagape
Let's look at the reasons the offense sucked last year (in no particular order):

* Coaching.
Solution: The antichrist and his false prophet are gone.

Let's see them in game action before judging them as an improvement. Offseason they've looked great and I like Mularkey et al so far, but I want to see them coach when it counts before calling it an improvement.

* Moulds' injury.
Solution: He's healthy.

Injuries always happen and I don't think we've done anything to address the depth issue on offense except add two players that haven't played a down in the NFL. I guarantee that one of the following will get injured this year: Bledsoe, Henry, Moulds, Reed, or Teague. We have no one with proven talent to take over for any of those. Teague may be bad, but I think the people behind him hardly even belong on an NFL roster.

* No deep threat.
Solution: Lee Evans (and a healthy Moulds).

This is a huge question mark. Until he plays a game, how can you say he's the solution.

* Drew sucked at times.
Solution: Remains to be seen, although he is unquestionably in a better situation than last year.

He's surrounded with better talent, but confidence-wise, he can't be anywhere close to how he was at the start of last year. He has problems with making quick decisions already - toss in some hesitancy due to lacking confidence and the effect snowballs (as we saw while last season progressed).

Other than crossing our fingers and praying that 3 rookies (Mularkey, Clements, and Evans) all step up and act like vets, I don't think we've done much to improve our offense at all.

HenryRules

07-11-2004, 10:26 PM

Originally posted by Charlieguide
The first mistake GW made, in my book, was changing the defense. You don't tear apart one of the best in the biz, you find a way to tweak it.

I mostly agree with everything else that you said, but I really take issue with the above statement.

1 - You're a former DC who gets hired for a HC position. Obviously what you were doing before got you the job, so you keep doing it.

2 - We didn't have the cap room to keep some of the key players on the pre-Williams defense. We were forced to start rebuilding our defense that offseason, so why not rebuild it in the style that got the coaches hired?

3 - Our defense last year performed similarly to our defense pre-Williams, I'd say what he did on defense was a success.

justasportsfan

07-12-2004, 07:24 AM

Originally posted by bledslow
coaching is nice and all but its the players that have to actually execute, and the pats do have better players on both side of the ball OVERALL- bills dont have any pass rush at all on defense compared to colvin(assuming healthy) mcginest,vrabel,and big richard s. even jarvis green had 3 sacks in the indy playff game. -bruschi had a better year then the very overrated spikes.

hoch was dam good filling in for the departed woody,and opened up many holes.o-line will not be a problem-

green n warren was fabulous filling in for the departed big ted and went 7-1 (6-1?) while ted was hurt watching from the sidelines.

now with dillon not having to worry about 8 men in a box everytime,he will be more lethal then ever- il will without a doubt take the combination of brown,givens(barely played the first half of the season,but had a solid second half of season and playoff/super bowl),branch,and patten -over moulds,reed(disappointment last season),evans(nothing but potential) and some other guy. those pats receivers got intangibles and have proven it in the biggest games.

How did the Pats get into this conversation?
man i just did some serious schooling All you did was talk about last year. You do need to stay in school however.

Goobylal

07-12-2004, 11:02 AM

The Pats are proof-positive that coaching can take the avilable talent you have and go far with it. The Patriots do NOT have the best talent in the NFL. They do however have the best coaches and a lot of luck (or shall I say "divine intervention?"), which is why they can say, lose Woody, Seymour, Colvin, etc. and not miss a beat.

Throne Logic

07-12-2004, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by HenryRules
He's surrounded with better talent, but confidence-wise, he can't be anywhere close to how he was at the start of last year. He has problems with making quick decisions already - toss in some hesitancy due to lacking confidence and the effect snowballs (as we saw while last season progressed).

Other than crossing our fingers and praying that 3 rookies (Mularkey, Clements, and Evans) all step up and act like vets, I don't think we've done much to improve our offense at all.

Mularky could run the exact same offense as last year. All he has to do is hand the ball off on a few more downs, particularly 3rd and short, and he'll be considered a friggin' genius.

Toss in a consistant dump-off option for Drew Bledsoe, and Mularkey will be the second coming of Levy in Buffalo.

The single most frustrating fact throughout last season was that a monkey with a dart board could have called a more effective offensive game.

Goobylal

07-12-2004, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by Throne Logic
Mularky could run the exact same offense as last year. All he has to do is hand the ball off on a few more downs, particularly 3rd and short, and he'll be considered a friggin' genius.

Toss in a consistant dump-off option for Drew Bledsoe, and Mularkey will be the second coming of Levy in Buffalo.

The single most frustrating fact throughout last season was that a monkey with a dart board could have called a more effective offensive game.
I'd submit that just a healthy Moulds could have given the Bills a 10-6 season last year. Now that may be an exonerration of Gilbride, but his failure to do anything different after Moulds went down showed he's more a liability than anything else. I think better coaches could have gotten the Bills an 8-8 record with what the injuries that happened and the interior of the O-line being so bad.

Throne Logic

07-12-2004, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by HenryRules
Our defense last year performed similarly to our defense pre-Williams, I'd say what he did on defense was a success.

I agree that Williams / Grey installed a good defensive scheme. However, they were not dominant.

On paper, they were great in many of the stat columns. But they were LAST in takeaways. They had consistent problems with pressuring QB's. The most glaring problem I noticed was the inablility to stop an opposing offense when it mattered the most. They would hold a team down until somewhere in the second half when momentum was on the line, at which time the D would crumble and reliquish a big score. The great defenses come through in those moments and come up with a big stop or even a takeaway.

Now, that being said, I do believe our useless offense had some effect on this. Teams were more apt to take fewer risks when they were never more than a single score behind or were in the lead. This leads to turnovers. Plus, our offense turning the ball over to setup the opposition with great field position didn't help all that much either.

I look forward to a balanced offense this year. Even if they still struggle, at least opposing teams will have to play a bit more honestly. We should get a better idea of how good our defense really is.

Throne Logic

07-12-2004, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Goobylal
I'd submit that just a healthy Moulds could have given the Bills a 10-6 season last year. Now that may be an exonerration of Gilbride, but his failure to do anything different after Moulds went down showed he's more a liability than anything else. I think better coaches could have gotten the Bills an 8-8 record with what the injuries that happened and the interior of the O-line being so bad.

Ah, but I would counter by saying that the blocking schemes installed by the inexperienced / stubborn O coaches had something to do with the interior line issues.

Besides, don't you think that Buffalo might have done better had Gilbride called a run on at least a few of those first 80 3rd and short situations? I mean really, it doesn't get any more predictable than that. Never mind that it's generally considered to be more wise to run on 3rd and short, especially when your receiving corp is hurt / struggling and you have an RB averaging 4+ yards per carry. Absurd just isn't a strong enough word.

Here's a cross sport analogy for you: Take Pedro Martinez, for example. He's got a killer fast ball that get's most folks even when they know it's coming. Now, imagine how effective Pedro would be if he always, with absolutely no exception, threw his 82 mph change-up right down the pike on an 0-2 count. If he did that 80 times in a row, he'd be lit up all the time and soon become a laughing stock. That's Kevin Gilbride.

Tatonka

07-12-2004, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by Throne Logic
Here's a cross sport analogy for you: Take Pedro Martinez, for example. He's got a killer fast ball that get's most folks even when they know it's coming. Now, imagine how effective Pedro would be if he always, with absolutely no exception, threw his 82 mph change-up right down the pike on an 0-2 count. If he did that 80 times in a row, he'd be lit up all the time and soon become a laughing stock. That's Kevin Gilbride.

ooo.. that was a very good analogy.

HenryRules

07-12-2004, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by Throne Logic
I agree that Williams / Grey installed a good defensive scheme. However, they were not dominant.

On paper, they were great in many of the stat columns. But they were LAST in takeaways. They had consistent problems with pressuring QB's. The most glaring problem I noticed was the inablility to stop an opposing offense when it mattered the most. They would hold a team down until somewhere in the second half when momentum was on the line, at which time the D would crumble and reliquish a big score. The great defenses come through in those moments and come up with a big stop or even a takeaway.

Now, that being said, I do believe our useless offense had some effect on this. Teams were more apt to take fewer risks when they were never more than a single score behind or were in the lead. This leads to turnovers. Plus, our offense turning the ball over to setup the opposition with great field position didn't help all that much either.

I look forward to a balanced offense this year. Even if they still struggle, at least opposing teams will have to play a bit more honestly. We should get a better idea of how good our defense really is.

I don't think our defense was great - I think we were a good defense last year (around #8-10 in the league).

By the same token, I don't think the defense in Wade's tenure was much different. Wade's D didn't get many turnovers - they were a bit better on third downs I think. I still think that our defense last year performance-wise (not stat-wise) was comparable to our defense pre-Williams.

(Also, I disagree that our offense played a part in our defenses struggles - I think it was more a lack of depth on our D that did us in - the majority of the players in our front-7 played every down and I think that's what cost us at the end of the games).

HenryRules

07-12-2004, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by Throne Logic
Mularky could run the exact same offense as last year. All he has to do is hand the ball off on a few more downs, particularly 3rd and short, and he'll be considered a friggin' genius.

Toss in a consistant dump-off option for Drew Bledsoe, and Mularkey will be the second coming of Levy in Buffalo.

The single most frustrating fact throughout last season was that a monkey with a dart board could have called a more effective offensive game.

It seems to me that after each of the last 3 or 4 OC's we've had in Buffalo, the cry has been "any person with the intelligence to speak in complete sentences can be better than the last guy." However, we haven't noticed a significant improvement.

Gilbride, Sheppard, and Pendry - none of them did anything IMO (I think I'm missing someone between Pendry and Sheppard, but I can't think of who).

The_Philster

07-12-2004, 07:37 PM

Originally posted by HenryRules
Gilbride, Sheppard, and Pendry - none of them did anything IMO (I think I'm missing someone between Pendry and Sheppard, but I can't think of who).

No...it's been Bresnahan, Henning (97...who could forget the 2 TE sets with no strength at TE), Pendry, Sheppard, and Gilbride

HenryRules

07-12-2004, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by The_Philster
No...it's been Bresnahan, Henning (97...who could forget the 2 TE sets with no strength at TE), Pendry, Sheppard, and Gilbride

Wow ... the futility goes back further than I remembered ... maybe I was supressing something.

ScottLawrence

07-12-2004, 10:24 PM

Im trying to get OPTIMISTIC for the season but, the fact that Bledsoe hasn't had a winning season since 1996 comes to my mind.

I love our roster, and so far I love the coaches but, I am still very worried that Bledsoe will not be able to get it done for us.

I hope im wrong when its all said and done.

Voltron

07-12-2004, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by HenryRules
(Also, I disagree that our offense played a part in our defenses struggles - I think it was more a lack of depth on our D that did us in - the majority of the players in our front-7 played every down and I think that's what cost us at the end of the games).

You just proved your own point wrong. The woeful performance of the Offense kept the D on the field WAY to long and they got tired in the second half. More or less the O did not pull their weight and no matter how good you D is they can't play 60% to 70% of the time and be expected to hold off teams like the Pats and KC.

Voltron

07-12-2004, 11:19 PM

Originally posted by ScottLawrence
Im trying to get OPTIMISTIC for the season but, the fact that Bledsoe hasn't had a winning season since 1996 comes to my mind.

I love our roster, and so far I love the coaches but, I am still very worried that Bledsoe will not be able to get it done for us.

I hope im wrong when its all said and done.

Wow we are so on the same page :woot:

I totally agree!!!! :up:

Great post ;)

Goobylal

07-13-2004, 07:09 AM

Originally posted by ScottLawrence
Im trying to get OPTIMISTIC for the season but, the fact that Bledsoe hasn't had a winning season since 1996 comes to my mind.

I love our roster, and so far I love the coaches but, I am still very worried that Bledsoe will not be able to get it done for us.
That's the point: Bledsoe should not HAVE to be relied upon to get it done by himself. Give him the Patriots' defense, ST's, and OC, and he has 2 rings himself. Hopefully he had something similar with the Bills this year.

HenryRules

07-13-2004, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Voltron
You just proved your own point wrong. The woeful performance of the Offense kept the D on the field WAY to long and they got tired in the second half. More or less the O did not pull their weight and no matter how good you D is they can't play 60% to 70% of the time and be expected to hold off teams like the Pats and KC.

It wasn't just the Pats and KC that beat the Bills D - we never had key stops at the end of the game - like against Houston.

You can say that it was the offense's fault, I disagree and think it was due to a lack of depth - to say it's proving my own point wrong is ridiculous.

If we had better depth, would we have made the stops in the 4th - I think yes.

If we didn't have better depth and our offense kept the other team off the field more - I don't think that would have made that big of a difference. To pick a specific example - against Houston, our offense controlled the TOP more than they did. However, our D still allowed their O two huge clock-churning drives either at the start of the 4th quarter or end of the third. We only ended up getting the ball twice in that 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Did our D play well that game? Overall, yes. But it was one of those games where they couldn't come up with the key stop.

justasportsfan

07-13-2004, 08:37 AM

Originally posted by HenryRules
It wasn't just the Pats and KC that beat the Bills D - we never had key stops at the end of the game - like against Houston.

You can say that it was the offense's fault, I disagree and think it was due to a lack of depth - to say it's proving my own point wrong is ridiculous.

If we had better depth, would we have made the stops in the 4th - I think yes.

If we didn't have better depth and our offense kept the other team off the field more - I don't think that would have made that big of a difference. To pick a specific example - against Houston, our offense controlled the TOP more than they did. However, our D still allowed their O two huge clock-churning drives either at the start of the 4th quarter or end of the third. We only ended up getting the ball twice in that 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Did our D play well that game? Overall, yes. But it was one of those games where they couldn't come up with the key stop.

If you and I were in a boxing match and we were of the same calibre but you were not allowed to hit back but only defend yourself.......Guess who will eventually be worn out and beaten?

The Miami game was a perfect example. They were able to run Ricky 44 times because our O was either turning the ball over or going 3 and out. Ricky had only a 3.2(?) ypc.

I disagree, unless you have an O as potent as the K-gun of the 90's where we didn't care how little time we took off the clock as long as we were scoring, your D will eventually expire.

Voltron

07-13-2004, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by justasportsfan
If you and I were in a boxing match and we were of the same calibre but you were not allowed to hit back but only defend yourself.......Guess who will eventually be worn out and beaten?

The Miami game was a perfect example. They were able to run Ricky 44 times because our O was either turning the ball over or going 3 and out. Ricky had only a 3.2(?) ypc.

I disagree, unless you have an O as potent as the K-gun of the 90's where we didn't care how little time we took off the clock as long as we were scoring, your D will eventually expire.

:up:

Exactly! In the Salary capped NFL you can't afford to have your depth as good as your starters. It is impossible! Do you get lucky with some rookies? Yeah on occasion but you have to keep your O on the field to control the clock so your D can get some rest. It is a no brainer.

HenryRules

07-13-2004, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by Voltron
:up:

Exactly! In the Salary capped NFL you can't afford to have your depth as good as your starters. It is impossible! Do you get lucky with some rookies? Yeah on occasion but you have to keep your O on the field to control the clock so your D can get some rest. It is a no brainer.

You don't have to have depth as good as your starters - lots of teams use effective situational substitutions (Pats and Titans are 2 that come to mind). It is not impossible to have depth in this era - it's just that the Bills haven't done it recently.

HenryRules

07-13-2004, 05:55 PM

LVGrown

07-14-2004, 01:47 AM

First Off I am so pissed because I just typed this big ass GO BILLS post and my computer froze up and I lost everything ... GRRRRR! ANYWAY here is what i remember of it.

I really wanted to start this post off saying ... I LOVE THE BILLS and will go through hell and back with them year after year. 12 years later at 23 I am still rooting for them like every game is the Super Bowl. (By the way guys, one year it will happen and can you just imagine the feeling??!!??)

This post is towards my fellow optismitic homies that even after a 3-13 season continue to hollar Super Bowl bound year after year, God cant't ignore us forever! Last season was without a doubt the most dissapointing season ever. Hell the sorry ass Pats won the bowl ... is it just me or would you rather see the NFC win? Damn AFC East teams gotta keep being bad ass! Anyway how can we not be excited, if not for this year, but for the future ... Losman, Mcgahee, Evans!!!!! Hehehe, does the rest of the east even know whats in store for them, if they thought Kelly, Thomas and Reed were bad just wait. Less then two months until regular season is on and I just wanted to vent about how excited I am and that I will be at both the Oakland and San Fran games screaming my head off and this long ass thread seemed appropriate. So good luck guys! Can't wait to see you at next years games!

So with all this I will sorda stay on topic AND GO ON RECORD SAYING ... the Phins, Pats, Jets and for the hell of it COLTS suck Buffalo ASS!

Erin Bills in '04

MDFINFAN

07-14-2004, 10:20 AM

Tatonka

07-14-2004, 11:28 AM

the O cant show up less than it did last year.. so anything really is an improvement.

justasportsfan

07-14-2004, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by MDFINFAN
This could come back to haunt you TaTonka, but with your D coaching staff pretty much in tack, you may really enjoy this year. I think you guys have the same outlook as us, will the O show up this year? Just like the fins replacing Norv w/ a rookie OC or getting Boston, that too could come back to haunt you. It's the same case as finfans saying ,anything was better than your OL last year.