ESPN says that the pats beat the Bills on paper

[ublinkwescore]

I think Michael Irvin might have got some of ESPN's so called football experts hooked on some illegal substances or something.

[WG]

I think we're all under-rating the Pats b/c they're on a 4 game skid. They lost to four outstanding teams.

While our record is better, who have we proven that we can beat? A bunch of 2-5 teams. Big deal. Miami wasn't nearly as good as they had been up until the Fiedler, Chambers, Gadsen injuries and Lucas literally gave us the ball over and over again. Those were not forced TOs. They were gifts. Clements made a nice grab for one, but that was it. Miami held us to 16 offensive points. That won't be enough to win any games at all for the rest of the season except for perhaps against Cincy.

But struggling to beat Minnesota, Detroit, Houston, and Chicago shouldn't impress too many people, yet it does.

If we're any good at all, then we should be able to handle the Pats. But if we can't beat the teams that will make the playoffs, how on earth can we expect to make the playoffs, and if by chance we do, then how can we expect to win. All we do is throw. The rushing game shows up less than half the time thanks to the creative Kevin Gilbride and our D is non-existent except vs. teams like Detroit and Miami w/ no talent on the field.

This game is a must win if the Bills are to remain a contender this year. MO.

[Halbert]

Unfortunately it's even more of a must win for NE. The last thing they want to do is fall even farther in the division, especially to the team that now has their former franchise QB. The Bills are getting accolades in the media while the Pats are getting disrespect. So now it's also about simple pride and we know what they can do when they play as a team with passion. They will be tripley (is that a word?) motivated and the Bills appear ripe for a stinker. I see them playing their best game in over a month and stealing a win at the Ralph.

[Cntrygal]

Originally posted by Halbert
I see them playing their best game in over a month and stealing a win at the Ralph.

I really hope you're wrong. :( I think it's going to be a stressful game....... my poor heart.....

[casdhf]

Originally posted by Halbert
I see them playing their best game in over a month and stealing a win at the Ralph.

:punchu:

If you're right..... I'm calling up that dolfellon fan :D

[Buffarama]

This is the type of game for NE when the old Bills used to rise up and "circle the wagons" so to speak. If NE can't get it up for this one, they are impotent.
The Bills can win this game, but they will have to be as focused and desparate as NE.
It's going to be almost a playoff atmosphere.

[Novacane]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


While our record is better, who have we proven that we can beat? A bunch of 2-5 teams. Big deal. Miami wasn't nearly as good as they had been up until the Fiedler, Chambers, Gadsen injuries and Lucas literally gave us the ball over and over again. Those were not forced TOs. They were gifts.







Sounds like WCoastFin.

[clumping platelets]

Wys closet fins fan?? ;)

[Captain gameboy]

I think this is the big test we have been looing for. I, too, have been pretty unimpressed with the performances of seemingly tough teams against us. I believe familiarity with our defense and a near desperate situation will make the Pats play as well as they are capable. We are still a very young team with a key CB out.
I don't buy into the emotional motivation stuff. These are professionals and are motivated every week. NE isn't as good as their first three games had us believe, and we are not world beaters by any stretch. Should be a very interesting game.

[Novacane]

As long as they keep winning I am happy. I think it's ridiculas to say it does not mean anything because they did not blow teams out. What will you say if the Bills beat NE 21-20 wys. Big deal? They just barely beat them?

[Novacane]

Originally posted by gameboy
I, too, have been pretty unimpressed with the performances of seemingly tough teams against us. .



Don't you give the Bills credit for causing those performances?

[Phins054]

ESPN says that the pats beat the Bills on paper...

As Chris Berman would say..."THATS why they play the games..."

[Ingtar33]

Quick Question... Who has NE beat?
4-3 Pittsburgh
2-5 Jets
4-4 Chiefs

No world beaters here

BTW: did you know that the undefeated '72 Dolphins beat only 2 teams with a winning record that year? The reason why you never here about that is because no one cares about the quality of your wins in the NFL. Those old b@stards in Miami still pop open a bottle of champagne every year, even though they may have played the easiest schedule in the history of the NFL. In the grand scheme of things any team can beat anyone in the NFL... this isn't collage football where you can argue that wins of Rutgers or UB mean nothing. On any given Sunday any team can win (except maybe cinci). There is no reason for the Bills to apologize for any win they’ve got, those SOBs in Miami sure don’t. In the grand scheme of things all that matters in the end is if you win the last game of the season, and wins against poor teams just helps us all to that goal.

[Earthquake Enyart]

Every time I see those 72 Dolphins in a boat popping their champagne, I want to hit it with a mortar.

EE :rocket: 72 fins

[WG]

B2R46,

"Sounds like WCoastFin."

Maybe, but it's the truth! You, etal., keep trying to make this a personal thing between you and me. I'm just calling it the way it is. It's interesting that you don't dispute those things, you merely dis them.

"As long as they keep winning I am happy. I think it's ridiculas to say it does not mean anything because they did not blow teams out. What will you say if the Bills beat NE 21-20 wys. Big deal? They just barely beat them?"

Again, that's the difference between you and me. You're happy w/ squeaker wins, ALL of which could easily have been losses, to teams like Detroit (2-14 last year, 2-5 this), Houston (2-5 this year, DNE last), Minnesota (5-11 last year, 2-5 this), Miami w/ a totally depleted D that if they had had likely would have beat us and our mighty, mighty 16 offensive points. I'm not happy w/ those wins when we lose to mediocre teams like the Raiders and crap teams like the Jets.

I'd like to see us play the kind of football that takes teams to the playoffs and wins games there. You cannot deny that we are simply not doing that. Say what you will about me and call me names and make insinuations, but the truth of the matter is that we are a 5-3 team that could very easily have been 2-6. Easily. I mean think about it. We should have absolutely dusted Detroit last week at home and their pitiful D but we could only amass 24 points. If we play the same way this Sunday as we did last week, do you really think we'll score 24? I don't. I think we'd be lucky to get 17. Do you think the Pats will score at least 20 against us? Oh, I do. Everyone else has except for Miami w/ no offense other than Williams and Detroit last week w/ a rookie QB. Surely, it's highly unlikely, 1 in 8 odds based on game occurrences, that we'll benefit from turnovers.

The Pats are better than their 3-4 record no doubt. They just lost to four teams, any of which could make the Superbowl this year. We just barely beat Detroit. Two of our other wins have come against teams that are no better than Detroit, and again, we barely won both of those never having beaten a 2-5 team by more than 7 points and usually in O/T or w/ the game going right down to the wire.

If that impresses you, then you are correct. I'm not happy b/c they "keep winning." I would rather see us fixing things that are going to help us win next season. Instead, Gilbride is on a mad trend of throwing the ball more than 2/3 of the time. Here's a question for ya, name the last time that a team, any team, went to the Super Bowl w/ an offense that threw the ball 2/3 or more of the time? That should provide you w/ a good activity for a while. :D

What are you going to say if we lose to the Chiefs by 4, the Jets again, the Packers by 10, and struggle v. S.D., Miami, and maybe even Cincy. Are you still going to say we're awesome or what will have changed?

Meanwhile, if we beat the Pats by 1, great. I'm happy insofar as that goes. Would I run to a bookie and lay ten grand that we even have a shot at winning the SB w/ odds? I'm tellin' ya, even if we do make the playoffs, we don't stand a chance this year in them. With a favorable matchup at home, perhaps we'd win a game. But that would be it. We simply do not have the team to compete v. playoff caliber teams the way we're playing now.

Changes that are critical is for Gilbride to start running Henry. If he can't hang onto the ball, then that's simply too bad and an issue that we have to deal with at that time and at face value. But simply keeping Henry in the game and not giving him the ball b/c we're afraid of his fumbling isn't helping the team. Maybe for winning this year, but who cares. Then next year we're in the same rut possibly. What's gonna cause Henry to stop fumbling? It's Henry! Not Gilbride. Otherwise, Henry runs fine and Gilbride may not look like a genious or be the O.C. when Drew breaks some huge records, but at least our O will/should be performing much better.

As far as the D goes, if you really think it's improved, I would suggest that this weekend will be a good test. It's funny how fans say they've improved against two teams that simply don't have good offenses. Miami did, but that was before we played them. Theirs was horrible and would likely finish near the bottom of the league if they played that way each week. We didn't force many TOs in that Miami game. Lucas often had TONS of time in his pocket. Perhaps his WRs, Baker, Ward, and McKnight, were so bad that even against sketchy CBs such as Watson, they struggled. I'd say that was more it than the notion that all of a sudden Watson has turned into a probowl player overnight w/o any other provocation whatsoever. Wouldn't you? I suppose not.

Allow me to simplify the analogy if you will. Suppose a bad NFL player, CB for example, gets cut b/c he sucks. Then he joins a semi-pro league or a flag league and is absolutely fantastic. Does that mean that all of a sudden he's capable of playing well at the NFL level? Of course it doesn't. So why does Watson get credit all of a sudden while covering guys like Baker in Miami who hadn't even caught an NFL pass? Or very mediocre WRs such as Schroeder or Crowell w/ a rookie QB who didn't play very well and certainly wasn't very accurate?

I agree, he played much better seemingly, but let's see if he can do that vs. some decent WRs w/ a good QB who's got some experience. Otherwise, this delusion that our D has improved is largely that. A delusion. We've simply benefitted from having played an injury depleted offense and a poor offense back-to-back. Unfortunately we're gonna find that out this Sunday.

I can tell you this, if Gilbride plays into the Pats' hands and passes most of the time as we have, I seriously question whether we can even hang close in this game. I see the Pat D doing exactly what the Miami D did. Holding us to under 20.

That is of course unless we can get Henry moving, and by that I don't mean for 3 runs for 47 yards and then another 14 carries for 18 yards. I mean if he gets the ball 25 or more times and has near or greater than 100 yards. I'll make a prediction: If Henry gets more than 25 carries and has at least 90 yards, the Bills win. Barring fumbles returned for TDs by Henry. If not, if he only gets 15 carries and has 60 yards, I'll step out and say we're not only gonna lose, but that this will be Drew's first horrible game all season and we'll lose by at least 7.

[clumping platelets]

:dizzy:

Can we get the Cliff Notes on that post??

:ontome:

[WG]

'72 Phins

HELLO!!! 32 YEARS ago!!!


Ingtar,

I hear ya, but we couldn't even beat the Jets. I will say that N.E. isn't great, but a 10-6 team however. We surely haven't even come close to beating a team the caliber of the ones that they lost to however. And don't forget, we play K.C., G.B., Miami again, and S.D. Do you think we have a great chance of beating those teams if healthy? I think K.C. would outscore us although they wouldn't prevent us from getting at least 30. G.B. is far more balanced all the way around. Miami, w/ a healthy passing game, the game would be much closer at minimum. I certainly think that even in the cold up here that they would score more than the 16 offensive points that we got down there in the nice weather. And S.D., I think Tomlinson would have 200 rushing yards against us easily and still think he will when we play them, and their D would play us tough.

N.E. got a bad scheduling break and a couple of bad breaks otherwise. They lost to Denver, but so did we. They kept Denver to fewer points than we did.

Meanwhile, if the Pats had had the luxury of playing our schedule, I dare say that would have killed Detroit, Minnesota, Houston, and Chicago and likely would have also been 5-3 or perhaps even 6-2 or 7-1. The Pats are better than every single team that we've played other than Denver whom we lost to as well.

Everyone ballyhooed the Raiders as I was saying they'd drop around half of their remaining games when they were 4-0. Guess I was wrong, so far they're on a three game losing skid against OK teams, but not great other than S.D. Now their players are pissing and moaning inside the team's circles.

Meanwhile, if we had the Pats schedule to date, I dare say we'd have lost to the following:

K.C., S.D., G.B., Denver, and perhaps even Miami at full strength as the Pats had to play them and/or Pittsburgh. So we could have been 2-5 while they were say 6-2. It's all been schedule thus far. We've had an easy one that is voracious after our bye week. They've had a voracious one that eases up w/ only 2 teams above .500 remaining after us. We're not particularly a .500 team. We're, IMO, a 6-10 team that has benefitted from a prolific passing game, injuries to other teams, and an easy schedule. Of N.E.'s last 8 games after us, I see them taking at least 5 of them possibly 6. So if they beat us, 6 games vs. a very easy schedule, will get them to 10-6.

[Voltron]

I know CP I stoped reading after the 5th paragraph! Please stop with the novels Wys!

[ublinkwescore]

I should get extra Zonebucks for every novel that wys posts on my threads.

[ublinkwescore]

New England isn't going to finish at 10-6. I'd say best case scenario for them is a hard fought 9-7 campaign (I doubt the likelyhood of that a little too). Teams have them figured out. I hope they beat the raiders though when the play them to keep the raiders down so that we'll have homefield over them.

[WCoastFin]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
I think we're all under-rating the Pats b/c they're on a 4 game skid. They lost to four outstanding teams.

While our record is better, who have we proven that we can beat? A bunch of 2-5 teams. Big deal. Miami wasn't nearly as good as they had been up until the Fiedler, Chambers, Gadsen injuries and Lucas literally gave us the ball over and over again. Those were not forced TOs. They were gifts. Clements made a nice grab for one, but that was it. Miami held us to 16 offensive points. That won't be enough to win any games at all for the rest of the season except for perhaps against Cincy.

But struggling to beat Minnesota, Detroit, Houston, and Chicago shouldn't impress too many people, yet it does.

If we're any good at all, then we should be able to handle the Pats. But if we can't beat the teams that will make the playoffs, how on earth can we expect to make the playoffs, and if by chance we do, then how can we expect to win. All we do is throw. The rushing game shows up less than half the time thanks to the creative Kevin Gilbride and our D is non-existent except vs. teams like Detroit and Miami w/ no talent on the field.

This game is a must win if the Bills are to remain a contender this year. MO.


Cmon now! I say this stuff all week and you get credit for it! ....well Im glad you can face reality....

[Novacane]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
B2R46,



Maybe, but it's the truth! You, etal., keep trying to make this a personal thing between you and me. I'm just calling it the way it is. It's interesting that you don't dispute those things, you merely dis them.





What are you talking about? I can think your opinion is wrong. Thats not trying to make anything personal.

And who is etal.,?

[Kelly The Dog]

"Allow me to simplify the analogy if you will. Suppose a bad NFL player, CB for example, gets cut b/c he sucks. Then he joins a semi-pro league or a flag league and is absolutely fantastic. Does that mean that all of a sudden he's capable of playing well at the NFL level? Of course it doesn't. So why does Watson get credit all of a sudden while covering guys like Baker in Miami who hadn't even caught an NFL pass? Or very mediocre WRs such as Schroeder or Crowell w/ a rookie QB who didn't play very well and certainly wasn't very accurate?"

Okay, wys, how about because Watson did a better job shutting down Randy Moss than Clements or Winfield did. How about beause Watson did a MUCH better job shutting down Rice and Brown than Winfield or Clements did. Or Chrebet. How come Watson didnt get burnt by Marty Booker either. And gave up a bunch of short passes to Rod Smith but no scores or long ones. He has played all year against the better receivers and has done quite admirably.

[Novacane]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


.

N.E. got a bad scheduling break and a couple of bad breaks otherwise. They lost to Denver, but so did we. They kept Denver to fewer points than we did.

.

And we scored 7 more points against Denver than they did.
They kept Denver to 4 less points than us. Take away TH fumble and we give up less points than them They also lost to them by 8. We only lost by 5. They also had Denver at home. We had them on the road. They also won the TO battle with Denver 2-0 and still lost by 8. We lost the TO battle 1-0 and still only lost by 5?

[Novacane]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


Here's a question for ya, name the last time that a team, any team, went to the Super Bowl w/ an offense that threw the ball 2/3 or more of the time? That should provide you w/ a good activity for a while. :D


.


Last years Rams:nana:

[Novacane]

Originally posted by Ingtar33
Quick Question... Who has NE beat?
4-3 Pittsburgh
2-5 Jets
4-4 Chiefs



And Pittsburgh was playing horrible to start the season. They are better now. NE got a break and caught them at a bad time.

They had to go to OT to beat KC........does that diminish the win because they barely beat them?



Ingtar is right. Their wins are no more impressive than the Bills wins.

[Captain gameboy]

Originally posted by BledsoeTOreedfor6




Don't you give the Bills credit for causing those performances?

The Bills defended the run well in the second half of the Miami game. In doing so, they took a big chance-Wire was not a pass defense safety that half. Lucas was brutal. Bad decisions on some plays and brutal throws on others. His performance was not 100% due to the Bills D. Joey was held in by by the Lions coaching staff. They didn't take some chances that they will when he is more experienced. Bottom line-the Bills won, but we have a lot to learn, and a few players to replace on the defensive side.

[ublinkwescore]

Every time I see those 72 Dolphins in a boat popping their champagne, I want to hit it with a mortar.

- EE

How about a potato gun? that would be fun too.

Or you could get some SCUBA gear, and swim under the boat with a waterproof drill, and then as soon as the boat sinks, start throwing some bloody meat out there to attract some sharks.

[ublinkwescore]

That record won't stand for ever, but our four superbowls in four years will.

[WG]

Easy there B2R46,

"What are you talking about? I can think your opinion is wrong. Thats not trying to make anything personal."

"I think it's ridiculas to say it does not mean anything because they did not blow teams out. What will you say if the Bills beat NE 21-20 wys. Big deal? They just barely beat them?"

It was partly TiC. But that statement above is not based on the facts. It's based on "What-Ifs!" If a team routinely beats the scrubs of the leagues such that games could have easily gone either way, while another loses 4 games to four of the best teams in the league and their records reflect that, it does not necessarily mean that the team w/ the better record is the better team.

Honestly, if you really think that we'd be 5-3 after playing N.E.'s schedule you'd have to be high. We'll see though. B/c our schedule is as tough as their is from here on out. So by your and others' theories, we should easily be able to go 5-3 the rest of the way starting this Sunday.

I wouldn't wager your ZBs on that! ;)


Kelly,

You're right and the rest of the sports media was and is blind. Watson's the man. He's been awesome at everything he's done since he's been in the league. We got a real steal getting him for a 4th round pick. :rolleyes:

Let's see how wonderful your boy does this Sunday, eh. And you're totally not correct on all that. As a matter of fact, he got burned by every single one of those WRs that you mentioned at least once except for Chrebet that I saw. Then again, the Jets passing game was a little off that day. Whether Winfield and Clements are playing good ball has absolutely nothing to do with Watson.


ublink,

"New England isn't going to finish at 10-6. I'd say best case scenario for them is a hard fought 9-7 campaign (I doubt the likelyhood of that a little too). Teams have them figured out. I hope they beat the raiders though when the play them to keep the raiders down so that we'll have homefield over them."

The only teams that "have them figured out" are G.B., S.D., Miami (not w/ Lucas, Ward, and Baker either), and Denver. Every single one of those teams will in all liklihood win their divisions or in the case of the AFCW be 1st and 2nd.

If the Pats beat us on Sunday, they're 4-4 and all they need to do is to go 6-2 v. the cakewalk schedule that they have. Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota, the Jets, and Tennessee all have little chance v. N.E. If they beat us in Buffalo, then likely they can do it again in N.E. We are not as good as many of us think. Their only other game vs. a team that has a solid QB, good rushing game, and a good defense is Miami and they play Miami up in N.E. this time. If Lucas is still starting by then and Chambers or some other key player is out, I'd wager my bucks on N.E.

So I can easily see them hitting 6-2 their last 8, if they beat us this weekend. If not, then I agree, 9-7 is likely.

[WCoastFin]

Originally posted by ublinkwescore
That record won't stand for ever, but our four superbowls in four years will.

I think it will....I dont think theres ever been such a dominating team...heck, I dont think that even if you put the best Bills All-Time they would go undefeated! ....the only ones I think would possibly break it would probably be the Dolphins themselves...I dunno maybe its a Dolphin thang!:gossip:

[WG]

B2R46,

"Last years Rams :nana:"

You're pretty proud of yourself, huh?

Too bad that the Rams weren't MUCH more balanced that that. Not to mention that they had a D which we don't.

Nonetheless, even the pass-happy Rams, who got TOTALLY STUFFED in trying to win the SB passing, OH, by-the-way, only passed about 60% of the time last season. We've passed

~80% in the Vikes game, ~75% in the Denver game, ~80% in the Oakland game, ~70% in the Detroit game last week.

So argue away. I presume that you're happy to see Drew put up the ball 40-50 times a game then and happen to think that that's the way to get to the Big Dance and win it. Why is it so difficult for you and others to simply agree and realize that based on long standing NFL principles, that teams that only throw just don't do that well in terms of championships and winning in the playoffs?

I don't get it. You're banging your head against a wall, presumably just so that you don't have to admit that I'm right.

We'll see as time goes on. But while everyone's talking about passing records and looking to the record books for satisfaction, I'm hoping that we can resolve all of the many very critical issues that we have this season so that we don't have them haning around our necks next season.

;)

[Shiny Chicken]

Wys wys wys wys... I agree with you a lot of the time... even when you have the minority opinion... I was with you on the RJ/DF issue... but I've been having trouble agreeing with you at all this season. Yes , all we've beaten is a bunch of 2-5 teams. But who have we lost to? NY, Oakland and Denver. The Jets game no longer counts, in my view. The Bills have clearly matured a lot since that game. Denver they held close and came close to beating and Oakland they were beating with 10 minutes left in the gaem before they let it slip.

Our D is getting better. Everyone talks about how crippled the Doplphins O was when we playe them. Their passing game was cripled.. but what was wrong with their running game. Our supposedly weak D slowed him down considerably. And he did try to run, and it's not like we weren't covering the pass.

Then there's Detroit. Yeah, it would have been nice to beat them by 14+ points, but we didn't, but you know what, I really don't care. We won. And even after Henry's fumble at the 5, I knew we were going to win. Last season, or even earlier in the year, I would have been afraid... very afraid... but I still had no doubt we would win. Buffalo didn't used to know how to win. Now they do, and now they are. So wys, I think you're flat out wrong dude... and this is not because I'm an outrageous optimist, I usually consider myself a realist.

And wys... any time you find WCFin afreeing with you... ummm... you're in trouble....

[Shiny Chicken]

You spend too much time going back to history and saying "well teams have had to do this and this and this in order to win, but Buffalo is doing that and that and that" Pay attention to what's going on now... they're winning. I think they're also going to win and Sunday. I think thety're going to beat the Chiefs as well. I think the Chiefs D will have way too much trouble stopping our offense, and I think ours will do a better job at stopping them.

So what are you gonna say when we're 7-3 and own the division?

[Novacane]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


We'll see as time goes on. But while everyone's talking about passing records and looking to the record books for satisfaction, I'm hoping that we can resolve all of the many very critical issues that we have this season so that we don't have them haning around our necks next season.

;)



Why are you so worried about next years season when this season is only half over and we are right in the thick of the battle for the AFC east?

[Kelly The Dog]

Posted by wys...
"Kelly,

You're right and the rest of the sports media was and is blind. Watson's the man. He's been awesome at everything he's done since he's been in the league. We got a real steal getting him for a 4th round pick. :rolleyes:

Let's see how wonderful your boy does this Sunday, eh. And you're totally not correct on all that. As a matter of fact, he got burned by every single one of those WRs that you mentioned at least once except for Chrebet that I saw. Then again, the Jets passing game was a little off that day. Whether Winfield and Clements are playing good ball has absolutely nothing to do with Watson. "


No wys, as usual, you avoid the point and facts. Most all of the sports media I have seen in the last few weeks, and I could give you twenty examples if you'd like, has been saying that Watson has played well lately, and many of them say he was getting a bad rap before even though he has definitely given up some catches. I never said anything close to Watson being "awesome", in fact it was a rather reserved statement of playing "quite admirably", and was only speaking of this year even though he played pretty well last year, too IMO. And yes, in fact, he WAS a steal for that 4th round pick because we not only got that same pick back for next to nothing in last year's draft but he has played as a nickle back and fill-in starter on this team for three years, has excelled covering kicks and made an extraordinary play downing that punt at the one last week. You also, incredibly, imply that if a cornerback gets burnt on one play in a game by the team's best receiver he must not be very good or doing his job. That, of course, is criminally dumb. You also implied earlier that he only did well covering lousy receivers on crappy teams, which of course was proven wrong with prime examples. And the fact that what Clements and Winfield do against other receivers in the same game has a direct correlation to how well Watson is playing because if the guys are catching passes, making plays, getting deep on, and scoring TDs against our "shut down corners" and not Watson, he must be playing quite admirably in comparison, as I said.

[ublinkwescore]

I think it will....I dont think theres ever been such a dominating team...heck, I dont think that even if you put the best Bills All-Time they would go undefeated! ....the only ones I think would possibly break it would probably be the Dolphins themselves...I dunno maybe its a Dolphin thang!

- WCF

Now I know you were dropped on your head as an infant. The Bills have a better chance at going undefeated in an entire season then the fins do. The dolphins are going to be in cap hell next year, and won't be in the playoffs all the time anymore. The Bills will be in the playoffs for this season, and quite a few after that as long as Donahoe keeps us out of cap hell, and keeps bringing in "cohesive talent" (talent that will make a good team once it's jelled - like Bledsoe and the recievers, the O-line, and even the D now that they are getting used to the scheme) year afer year.

[Novacane]

Wys, Why is it every time someone defends a player you like to bash you call them a "Henry Lover" or "Your Boy Watson" ?

[WG]

I only know what I see Kelly. And from what I've seen, yes, Watson was superb, even to the point of being our best cover DB vs. the Lions. But other than that, I've rarely seen a CB get turned around as much as he does or is typically 5-10 off the WR that he's supposedly covering.

I've pointed out specifics, with times in games and all. You seem to ignore them all. All I can do is watch, and then make it as easy as it is to put on your shoes to go verify what I'm seeing, along w/ quite a host of other media people and fans as well.


Ben Judah,

It's easy, very easy to say that a D has improved v. two teams like Miami starting Lucas, who handed the ball to us 6 times, with McKnight and Ward starting for the first time in who knows how long; and v. the Lions who suck on O and are led by a rookie QB and a sketchy RB.

Nevertheless, would you say that our OFFENSE is sputtering then by the same logic since it's only put 40 points on the board over the last two games?!!!

Just curious! Or doesn't the same logic apply there? Because if it does, and it should by way of the reasoning that you've chosen, then we're gonna be lucky to hit 20 points this week, eh! 24 v. Detroit and N.E. is better, and only 16 offensive points v. Miami. Looks like there's something wrong w/ the O to me then! 20 PPG certainly isn't even good for average in this league.

;)

[Kelly The Dog]

Watson has given up one touchdown in eight games, to the great Abdul Jabbar Gaffney, and perhaps one in the Minnesota game (against the mighty Derrick Alexander? I really can't recall whether it was CW or not, perhaps someone can clarify that). Both games we won. That is quite admirable play out of CB I'd say.

[Buffarama]

Wys, I get your point, and I agree that our wins aren't dominant, pound the chest, playoff bound, king of the hill, type wins.
But in todays NFL, can you name any team that can be called dominant?
NE appeared to be that in the first 3 games, what happened? St Louis, biggest dissapointment in the league! Miami, paper thin like everyone else. Raiders, on a losing streak!
In today's NFL, with the exception of a blip in the schedule, there won't and can't be any team that is what you're looking for. There will be maybe at most one season where a team is the world beater (St Louis recently), but they go up and down as well now.
There are no more dynasties because of free agency, salary caps, paper thin rosters. What you're looking for no longer exists in todays game.
The Bills with some luck, some improvement on D, a healthy lineup, and a lucky break could win the Super Bowl just like anybody else could. They're good enough for that.

[BillsOwnAll]

i look at it as a win against cincy or against the chargers or against the pats


all it means is a WIN IS A FRIKEN WIN

___________________________ <-------thats the bottom line

[Shiny Chicken]

Nevertheless, would you say that our OFFENSE is sputtering then by the same logic since it's only put 40 points on the board over the last two games?!!!

No, I wouldn't say that... because our offense hasn't been having to play catch up like it had been throughout all the rest of the season... they're not putting up as big numbers as they were... but the point is, they haven't needed to.

[DIHARD2]

Wys Guy, if I'm reading you right then what you're saying is you're not supposed to learn to run by walking first, because right now and what I can see this team is just learning how to run and more time they spend on the field together the more they learn.

For you to even talk Super Bowl this year has to be the most unintelligent comments I have seem so far out of you. And, for you to compare this team to a Super Bowl caliber team, just prove my point. They are young and they are learning.

We have at best an 8/8 team, any more will just be great for the team's confidence going into next year. We don't have the defense so I don't know why your wanting more from what we have, because you're not going to get it. But each time this team stepped on the field they are progressing and they are learning for next year. Again you have to walk before you can run.

There's no longer a dominating team in the NFL one good reason is there's too many teams and not big enough talent pool, so there isn't enough top players to go around and team's will be built with average workhorses and just a few top performers. But those top performers will not be worth anything unless the average talent workhorses produce as a team. Which I think we're seeing this year in Buffalo and it was seen last year in New England.

As for throwing so many passes in a game if it works why not use it, we're not going to the Super Bowl this year, but every game we win makes the Bledsoe deal even better and it's giving this young team confidence for next year.

We bought an offense this year next year we buy the defense, deep into the playoffs next year if not the Super Bowl. This year is a learning year for one of the youngest teams in the NFL.

If you want to change the Bills and dictate how the coaches used the players you have two ways of doing it, 1 is buying the team, or 2. Send your resume to Ralph Wilson and maybe you can get hired as the coach or the general manager.

This is a great ride this year, and I will take a win anyway we can get it, especially after last year.

GO!!!...BUFFALO!!!...

[WG]

Hey, there's a huge difference between enjoying a season as fans and doing what's in the best interests of the team going forward. I agree w/ you largely there DH, we are, at best IMO also, an 8-8 team, more like a 6-10 team. But again, my point is that what's good for marketing and "building the players' confidence" may not be what's good for the team heading into next year. If it's a championship that we eventually want, then perhaps we had better start thinking like that instead of simply just trying to put as many points on the board in any way we can vs. teams that we should be doing so anyway by other means.

That's like the Enron thing where they made everything look peachy for a couple of years at the cost of the company later on. And yes, you can sacrifice future gain for present success. That's my entire point.

As to confidence and such, yes you need it. But let's face it, Chidi Ahanotu is never going to do well v. Orlando Pace no matter how much confidence he ever has going into a game. We are so inadequately outmatched in places that confidence is not an issue.

Let's use the Miami game as a standard. Our really only solid "defensive effort" all year long. I use quotes b/c many of us seem to credit the D where as I credit a poor O that really and quite literally gave the ball to us 4 or 5 times in that game. Nevertheless, shouldn't that then have led to an INT or sack, or something the following week v. Detroit?? I do. Yet it did not! Where's the improvement?

Yeah Wys, but we held Detroit to 17 points! So what! That's their average for road games. Is that special. Did we play a good game otherwise? What, Watson's lone defensive hail-mary highlight was spectacular as he danced around as if it was a SB winning pick? After that, not an INT, sack, little significant pressure as Harrington, a rookie who should have been easily rattled, had quite a bit of time in the pocket. A pocket which did exist. Why? B/c we played good D?? Hard sell!

I think not. We were not good last week on D. So "not good" that I say we haven't improved an iota. We benefitted from Miami having absolutely no passing game and from a weak, weak, weak Detroit D that hasn't done much more against other teams either on the road. Often less.

So I just don't agree that our D has improved. We'll surely see this week. They should have all the confidence in the world after back to back "monster defensive performances" according to many.

N.E. has averaged 13 points over the past 4 games. Let's see if we can hold them to under 20. If we do, then perhaps I'll agree w/ you that they have improved. However, if we allow 27 or in the 30s, then you would have to unarguably admit that I'm right.

In any case, gotta run, driving up to Roch now. Come to the TG party, try some wings, and we'll chat further. ;)


Buff,

"The Bills with some luck, some improvement on D, a healthy lineup, and a lucky break could win the Super Bowl just like anybody else could. They're good enough for that."

Surely you jest! I'll assume that you were just kidding there. We'd get killed in a SB right now.

[colin]

Wys, our D did very well against Detroit. The one TD was a fluke play and the other came off of a dropped kick return. We shut them down hard plenty of times and we stopped them with less than one yard to go a couple of times.

As far as Watson goes, he should be our second corner on third downs with Winfeild in the slot. winfeild is just much faster and a better hitter, while Watson has good size for jump balls.

[DIHARD2]

Wys, that is my point we do not have a team at this time that can blow out any team. We have an average defense at best, and our offensive line has never played as a unit together until this year. So for you to say that what's going on is not going to help next year, you have no way of knowing that. The fact is we had no idea that at the end of last year, we would be where we are this year.

There is a game plan that has been formulated between TD and GW, and I believe one side of that game plan has been put together this year, remember they said three years, and next year will be the third year. I can not judge this team as a whole until it is one and that won't be until after next off-season.

You're too analytical you should just be enjoying this season especially after the RJ nightmare. Which if I'm not mistaken you were all for keeping RJ. So that really doesn't look good in your favor when it comes to analyzing good and bad.

GO!!!...BUFFALO!!!...