What Type of Fan Are You?

[kscdogbillsfan1221]

Am I wrong to recall that Kyle Williams and Nigel bradhamwere out for one of our wins or was that a loss. I cacan't remember.

[feldspar]

Am I wrong to recall that Kyle Williams and Nigel bradhamwere out for one of our wins or was that a loss. I cacan't remember.

No, you are right.

That was a win against Detroit.

[BillsOverDolphins]

Well, you don't really know.

I could have just created an Internet character like you have done so many times.

However, you need to remember one thing so I will relate a story.

My buddy and I went to visit his Dad in East Texas back in the '90's. There was some racial strife in the area due to the Jasper incident. We were sitting on his porch having a few drinks and I asked his Father if he was worried about white boys coming around and starting trouble. He was a thin man, looked kinda like an old blues player and he said something I will never forget. "Son, I'm too old to be worried and I'm too old to get in a fist fight, but I do take precautions". He pulled out a Ruger Blackhawk .44 from underneath the pillow on his rocking chair and said "This here is my persuader, it persuades anybody tryin' to **** with me to get on down the road. We had a good laugh.

Just goes to show ya, even an old dog doesn't have to take any **** from anybody.

Well that was an amazing anecdote, Mortimer. Riveting stuff

[BuffaloRedleg]

I think you're getting a bit particular and taking it into the realm more of emotion when you talk about people giving credit for a win. Win or lose, after games I look at a number of things including why we won. You've probably heard me state repeatedly over the years that I'd rather see this team go 6-10 but play competitively as a rule for the season than to go 9-7 or 10-6 in the manner that we did it in 2004, by beating a string of teams that were downtrodden.

We've won four games now. In every win we essentially came in at full strength with only minor and insignificant injuries apart from Kiko who we knew would be out all season. Every team has injuries, but not all teams suffer the same injury fates.

After the Detroit game everyone was crowing about our D. Was I upset that we won? Of course not, but for purposes of discussion I didn't see what the big deal was in beating a team that basically had one weapon, Tate, who lit us up and posted a career day. If I were a DC I'd be concerned that we couldn't stop their only notable player, but that wasn't on anyone's radar. I was evaluating the team on the season.

FF to this past Sunday. We beat the Vikes, were you impressed?

A RB named McKinnon put up 103 rushing yards on 5.4 yards per carry. Does this concern you? It concerns me. I'm curious why we allowed a RB like McKinnon, if our D really is as good as everyone seems to insist, to that kind of yardage and 158 on 5.4 overall for the Vikes. The Jets have three times that rushing prowess and three RBs that have historically ripped us apart.

So while everyone's off insisting that a win is a win, I'm trying to figure out how good this team really is if Bridgewater can put up his first NFL TD against us and a no-name RB can do what he did and nearly win them the game, in Buffalo, in a must-win game for us.

So I state those things and that kind of thinking appears to be disallowed here.

Are you not concerned that McKinnon had that kind of game, particularly considering that we now face three RBs that have all had banner if not career days against us in the past? Keep in mind that all Schwartz had to do was come in and shut down their running game because no one in the world had any faith that Bridgewater was going to beat us through the air.

So what happened? Schwartz didn't do the obvious correct thing? He tried but failed, which is what I think, but then the question becomes why?

How much and what kind of credit should be given this team for playing the way that they did on Sunday? I'm curious.

We beat Miami at home in an atmosphere that we won't see again as an advantage, and they lost Moreno early. What's funny is that before games here people get excited if say Chris Ivory were out for the Jets, they like it because they know it's an advantage. But after the games those same people talk as if it wasn't. Of course it is. Who doesn't think that playing Detroit with Calvin Johnson out there isn't a much different ball game than without him? The prevailing opinion here seems to be that Watkins is a huge playmaker that shapes games. If that's even half true then how much more regarding Calvin Johnson?

Chicago's Cutler did everything he could to help us win that game and even put up over 400 yards, closer to 500, and it still took a huge run by Jackson just to put us into OT. Chicago as it turns out is not that good this season.

Make sense?

What of that do you disagree with and why? It seems like most of the disagreement here is over my inability to close my eyes and not insist that beating other teams without their key players is the same as beating them at full strength and what that actually means for us over the entire season, such as in rankings, which are almost all categorically plummeting.

Well when you lay it out like that I can't disagree. Everything you are saying is correct, although I disagree about McKinnon. I think he is a fantastic talent.

My issue is the looking for reasons to not like a victory, and not holding the same standard in losses. If things are more important than wins and losses (which you believe and I believe as well) then they matter for wins and losses. You can't just have blinders to the good things and only look at the bad things.

For example Green Bay:
-Loss vs Seattle where they embarrassed themselves.
-Win vs Jets where they really should have lost if it wasn't for that time out.
-Loss vs Lions who we beat
-Win vs Bears who we beat
-Win vs Vikings who we beat
-Win vs Dolphins who we beat
-Win vs Panthers who are 3-3-1 and not very good

I can make that Green Bay record look bad by saying they haven't beat any good teams this season, just like I can say that about the Bills. The reality is that a lot of teams are deeply flawed in this league and if you are looking for negative things about victories you will always find them. That is just the nature of the league. You get wins where you can get them, nobody is criticizing Green Bay for almost ****ting the bed vs the Jets. They just move on, because that is the way things go.

My issue is never with anyone's opinions as long as they are honest and fair. Refusing to acknowledge anything positive and only looking at the negative is just plain ole' dishonest and I will always address that. For the record, the Minnesota game was terrible and yes we got the win which is great but I'm not impressed. I'm all in against the Jets this week, if we lose we are done done. That goes both ways though, if we win I have to give them credit even if it is sloppy.

If you you are going to make a big stink about how a loss matters, then a win, however ugly it may be, matters as well. To not do so is just being dishonest.

[pmoon6]

Well that was an amazing anecdote, Mortimer. Riveting stuff

Hey!! My name is not Mortimer.

It's Cletus.

[imbondz]

The weird thing is, another Bills fan is the only kind of fan I can imagine that would have this reaction.

I used to be the kind of Bills fan that shrugged when they lost and had an extra beer at dinner when they won. Now I'm on the roller coaster.

I had some issues back then.

[Bunion]

I had some issues back then.

Sorry to hear that dude. I hope you're feeling better.