TheLynchTrain
-
Posts
1,058 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TheLynchTrain
-
-
I'm all for expanding the base to Canada, but am I the only one getting tired of hearing "offence" and "defence?" I know you guys say it the British way, but this is American football you're talking about. Why can't you say it the right way when you're talking about football? I'll give a free pass in hockey, but geez. Please don't take this as an arrogant American comment (it probably will come off anyways), I'm just trying to grasp this issue.
-
Couldn't you see a stereotypical high school version of the two where Jimbo's putting Flutie up a flagpole or shoving him into a locker? No offense to Flutie, but nobody did it like Jimbo...
-
For advice on both Youboty and McKelvin look no further than the San Diego Chargers and their handling of Antonio Cromartie.
Cromartie was a first round pick (16th) in 2006, a player that was a freak of an athlete, was young and had GREAT potential. Tye Hill out of Clemson went two spots above him because they thought he could come in immediately and compete - he was also 2 years older than Cromartie. Tye Hill won the Rams Rookie of the Year award while starting most of the season; Cromartie did little more than special teams in his first year in San Diego - I don't think he even started a game. When he did play on the field, he showed flashes of brilliance mixed in with a lot of inexperience.
We all know what happened to Cromartie last year - the dude had 10 picks, returned the field goal against the Vikings - and HE DIDN'T EVEN START UNTIL NOVEMBER 24! And suprise suprise, he made the pro bowl. I know Peter King said Youboty's playing like a pro bowler, but Cromartie goes to show you don't necessarily need to start at CB to be a pro bowler. Give him time - more than 2 games.
It's also worth to note that Peter King is such an idiot/incompetent that he probably thinks Youboty's started the last two weeks. King could probably name only 5 guys on the bills if he was on the hot seat...I don't think he's alone in that category (See the entire staff of ESPN).
So wrapping up, Cromartie shows that a player with ridiculous potential can ride the bench and look real inexperienced his rookie year and show up to play in year 2 or 3. I think so far Youboty (to a lesser degree) is proving the same point. We also can't declare McKelvin a bust yet, but in the same light, we can't call Youboy a star (like Peter King) after two games.
I'm sure Youboty was an afterthought on film to a lot of teams, but you can be sure Defensive Coordinators will definitely be breaking down Youboty's technique to find weaknesses in the next few weeks. I think we're gonna be set with both player's for quite a while.
GO BILLS!
-
I agree with John Adams. While its not ILLEGAL or even a mark of a bad fan to try and predict the rest of the schedule, it still probably can be considered bad taste. We still shouldnt be looking ahead like this. I hope the Bills players aren't, because if they did we're going 6-10. The reason why the Pats* won all those superbowls (along with some illegal help) is because they took one game at a time. Let's just worry about the Oakland game before we start talk to 4-0, 5-0, 11-5, or 12-4. It's just silly, and if we lose this week (we better f'n not!) these posts will look downright stupid. I know you guys are all die-hard fans and we haven't been excited like this for years and I'm not questioning your fanhood, but lets win more than 2 games before we talk like this.
-
Ok - great game by the bills yesterday. I'm not here to bash the bills or Jauron or "temper enthusiasm" like I heard in a few other posts. I'm not second guessing coaching or playcall - I want to see what people think about Jauron's game managment strategy in dealing with the fourth quarter field goal.
Now the bills were up by one point with less than 30 seconds left in the game - on the 27 yard line. At this point, I'm thinking - with 29 seconds left, we should go for it here. Granted, it was 17 yards, but we probably could have managed a dump off to a running back, picked up 8-10 yards. Jacksonville would get the ball back on the 20-25 yard line with 20 seconds left and have to drive almost 50 yards to have a shot at a 40-45 yard field goal.
Now we all know what happened - Lindell came in and boomed a 43 yarder and the rest is history. His field goal put us up by 4 points - forcing JVILLE to score a touchdown if they wanted the win. My concern was WHAT IF he missed? I'm not the most ardent supporter of Lindell (I know I probably should be) but his notable and untimely misses early in his career have forever scarred me (see week 16 against Pitt -Bledsoe's last year). If he missed, JVILLE gets the ball back on the 35. I think either decision would have been good, but I guess kicking the field goal (and knowing it went in in hindsight) was a better choice.
It is good to note that the Cheatriots**** had a similar decision to make with 1:56 left on the Jets 29, leading 19-10, with a 4th and 3. Cassel went for it and hit Welker on a slant - game over after a kneel. Obviously these were different circumstances - they had a 9 point lead, more time on the clock, and obviously only 3 yards to make. You could almost argue that the Pats* would have been better off to kick the field goal and be done with it. The Jets would have then needed 2 TD scores. But Bellicheat was probably scared of a block, or he maybe wanted to shove it down the Jets throat even more.
Either way, we won the game and I'm proud that Lindell made the kick.
-
Ok - great game by the bills yesterday. I'm not here to bash the bills or Jauron or "temper enthusiasm" like I heard in a few other posts. I'm not second guessing coaching or playcall - I want to see what people think about Jauron's game managment strategy in dealing with the fourth quarter field goal.
Now the bills were up by one point with less than 30 seconds left in the game - on the 27 yard line. At this point, I'm thinking - with 29 seconds left, we should go for it here. Granted, it was 17 yards, but we probably could have managed a dump off to a running back, picked up 8-10 yards. Jacksonville would get the ball back on the 20-25 yard line with 20 seconds left and have to drive almost 50 yards to have a shot at a 40-45 yard field goal.
Now we all know what happened - Lindell came in and boomed a 43 yarder and the rest is history. His field goal put us up by 4 points - forcing JVILLE to score a touchdown if they wanted the win. My concern was WHAT IF he missed? I'm not the most ardent supporter of Lindell (I know I probably should be) but his notable and untimely misses early in his career have forever scarred me (see week 16 against Pitt -Bledsoe's last year). If he missed, JVILLE gets the ball back on the 35. I think either decision would have been good, but I guess kicking the field goal (and knowing it went in in hindsight) was a better choice.
It is good to note that the Cheatriots**** had a similar decision to make with 1:56 left on the Jets 29, leading 19-10, with a 4th and 3. Cassel went for it and hit Welker on a slant - game over after a kneel. Obviously these were different circumstances - they had a 9 point lead, more time on the clock, and obviously only 3 yards to make. You could almost argue that the Pats* would have been better off to kick the field goal and be done with it. The Jets would have then needed 2 TD scores. But Bellicheat was probably scared of a block, or he maybe wanted to shove it down the Jets throat even more.
Either way, we won the game and I'm proud that Lindell made the kick.
-
You are correct, Russel was more of a pocket passer and I shouldn't have lumped him in there.
Culpepper sucked. I could have been all pro throwing to Randy Moss and Chris Carter. He did ZERO after Randy left. His knee injury is long gone and he can't get a backup role when QBs are dropping like flies. That's why he retired.
I like QBs who can pass, its a big part of the job. Vick was very dynamic, no doubt about it, but never developed into a good passer. Also, I said the Titans were winning despite Young, not the Falcons used to win despite Vick.
Sorry Reverend Al, I obviously left out Crouch because the whole point of my post was to make racist assumptions about college athletes.
RTB
His best season when he threw 40 TDs (overshadowed by Payton) was without Moss
-
POZ + KMITCH + STROUD = NEW BERMUDA TRIANGLE
-
Hey I know the seagulls game is over, but I like the rielly comment about from hasselbeck
"When I first got here," says Matt Hasselbeck, "we'd play at Husky Stadium. They'd get 72,000 on Saturdays. We'd get 25,000 the next day, and 10,000 would be there for the Raiders."
what about this 12th man? Hasselbeck came to seattle in like what, 2002? thats 6 years ago!
-
Forbe's list of NFL franchise values
The list is out and as expected the Buffalo Bills are near the bottom: 27th out of 32 NFL teams.
Now I'm not an economist or an MBA. Maybe someone else here can help dissect the numbers better, especially if I'm barking up the wrong tree. But If you look past the Forbes list of values and look at debt value, operating revenue, and operating income, the Bills appear to be one of the more robust teams in the league!
For example:
>The Bills are #6 in operating income, thanks to a low level of debt (ranks 5th lowest). Forbes does not indicate if Toronto monies are included in this figure. I'm going to assume not. So if you add the expected $7.8M annually, that brings the Bills up from $34.6M to $42.4M...which puts them at #3!! (Oakland #2 @ $46.2M, Dallas #1 @ $66.0M.)
>The Bills are tied at #7 with 6 other teams for growth in value, 9% in 2008. The NFL average is 6.9% growth. The teams that had the highest growth have or are building new stadiums.
>If you add $7.8M from Toronto, the Bills have virtually the same revenue as the Jets and Giants, but have considerably more operating income!
>The Bills rank 5th from the bottom, tied with 4 other teams for lowest revenue. However they are only 15% below the league revenue average of $204.3M. Again if we add $7.8M, the Bills revenue increases to $196.8M, good for #14!
So if I'm reading these numbers correctly, Buffalo is no where near as bad an NFL market as the media makes us out to be. While we aren't swimming in cash, the Bills seem to be in the middle of the pack revenue-wise, at least when Toronto monies are added in.
One more point: the present valuation is $821M, 15% below the NFL average of $957.4M. But the Bills are one of the more profitable franchises in the NFL. Debt seems to be the key. And the question is can a new owner carry a large debt load and still be profitable in Buffalo? Maybe, maybe not. But looking at the Jets and Giants, who currently carry the largest debt loads in the NFL, they barely make a profit even being in TV market #1. So would a new owner even be able to make a profit if the Bills were moved anywhere?
Again, anyone with more knowledge in this field please chime in.
PTR
Very good analysis. It says at the bottom of the article that the revenue and operating income are from the 2006 season. I guess thats why the Toronto money would not be included. My guess is that since 2006, we've sold like what, 4-8 thousand more season tickets? And the Bills are definately getting smarter and smarter every year when it comes to advertising and marketing. This shows in the 9% growth rate. So these numbers are definately lower than present numbers. The only problem is that, IMO, I'm sure other teams, especially dallas, Jersey A + B, and washington all have great PR and marketing depts too and have raised profits also. The new stadiums are a serious concern too. I read somewhere that each suite in dallas stadium raises the salary cap the next year 1000 bucks. This is rediculous.
-
That board was too funny. They have one thread titled "Why is everyone jumping off the bandwagon already?" It is really funny to watch fanbases of teams that have been historically bad (but good recently) react to losing. 12th Man my......you get the picture. These fan bases just can't handle their teams when they look bad. On another note, I also saw a board where one "civilized" seahawks poster congratulated the bills on the win and apolgized for his compatriots poor behavior, ei tim russert and kevin everett jokes and pictures. He was mercilessly abused and attacked by at least 15 prebescent seagull fans, including the supposed admin (the one with the gay hasselback holding the lombardi-----doesn't make any sense, i dunno). The imaginary Superbowl MVP went on to tell the nice guy that he was a crappy fairweather fan like the rest of seattle who drinks "lattes." HAHA. self-immolation by a fan base was too much and just plain hilarious.
-
I think almost all the posts I read here agree that Peters plays as soon as the coaches are conviced he'll perform at a higher level than Chambers. The disagreement seems to be if that is next week, or later, due to conditioning and learning the playbook. As for the argument that Peters might permanently lose his LT job, sure it's hypothetically possible, but given what we know now, it's a one in 100,000 chance. (And if that happened, we'd see him go to RT... or play TE - - never mind, this hypothetical is absurd.)
I personally guess the O-line will stay in their current positions against the Jags, and Peters will play some, but not all of the series. More interesting is who is cut and who is made inactive. Can we sneak Bell to the PS?
Matt Murphy is cut as soon as Peters is activated
-
I'm in the "I never wish harm upon anyone" boat, but when it's already happened, it's great!
It's not like he's going to die, become a cripple, or go poor. He messed up his leg. A rival team took a turn for the worse, they still have a good defense, two fantastic receivers and are loaded at running back, this team can still win.
If you feel bad about being happy about this, remember the seacocks board that had pictures of Kevin Everett on the turf and made jokes about Tim Russert. Now THAT is low.
Does everyone remember Vince Wilfolk's DIRTY hit on JP Losman during last year's opener? Does anybody remember the next time we played them, they tried to do the same to Edwards? What comes around goes around. Much props to the Chief's defense. Now I don't wish harm on anybody, but from what I saw that was a lot less dirty than the JP hit, if it was dirty at all. And Tom Brady isnt going to die from a bum knee, maybe he'll just suck!
I was at a Bills bar in DC (McFadden's) with about another 300 crazed screaming bills fans - and I dont remember the place ever being louder than when brady went down.
-
From what I head too the team unceremoniously dumped his locker stuff in a practice squad locker next to the cleaning supplies. Not really a way you'd treat a guy if you wanted to bring him back.
-
But I don't blame the FO for any of this, like others that I keep hearing on this board. They had to make a decision, and they had to make it fast. Obviously they were made they couldn't put him on the PUP list - in their minds all he had to do was say this injury a few weeks before, and he could have gotten the exemption. If my understanding is correct, and if his injury heals fast, the Bills could release him and sign him back (provided nobody else would wanna pick him up). But this theory has some huge holes, namely the Bills AND Crowell would have to get past their tension. I can't see any other team bringing in a linebacker with a prior history of a bum knee and limited knowledge of a system 4-8 games into the season.
-
Yeah, but I hear he has a real attitude problem.
I dont know how you could say that. He's been on the team for 6 years, never complained when he was a backup. As a third round pick, he proved to be good value - not a superstar, but not a dud either - just SOLID. Every player on that defense always said he was a leader. He was the only guy on the defense last year that didn't miss a game. I never heard anything about him having attitude problems. The reason why he didn't get surgery earlier was because he wanted to be there for his team. I feel for the guy.
-
Aikman has had one too many concussions to may any clear and succinct arguments. Besides, he is too much of a homer to do Cowboys games. Now one may argue that this is the reputation he must uphold as one of the Cowboys all-time greats, but look at Steve Tasker. The guy wears the Buffalo Bills and the City on his sleeve, except on game days.
-
I saw Marshawn and his crew out on Chipp. the night before a game - no joke. Pretty sure he was still injured. I think one of the crew was his uncle that also got a DWI. When we asked him if he was playing, he said "Aowe no mayn," but one of his crew said "If he ain't, we asss owt!"
Gus Frerotte replacing Tarvaris Jackson as starter
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I kinda feel for the Vikes b/c of our similar QB situations in the past - but at the same time they have no one to blame but themselves. They built a team of savvy veterans on both sides of the ball. They have the arguably best O and D lines in the game, the best RB, some pretty good LBs, and even some playmakers in their supposedly average or below average secondary - Winfield and Darren Sharper anybody?
But when you build a team that can win now (especially with all the money and draft picks they spent on free agents and trades) why do you give the car keys to an unproven second year starter like T. Jackson? Because of potential? Are you kidding me?
People could say the bills put Trent Edwards in the same situation - but the teams are completely different. The vikes are an older veteran team (more like the 2003 bills) that need to win NOW. Pat Williams can play at a pro bowl level for no more than a few years, the Jarrod Allen trade is going to leave them lacking with young talent the next few years, Winfield and Sharper are getting old, as is the O LINE. The bills on the other hand are a team built through the draft, and if they don't make the playoffs this year, they have a good shot the next 2-3 years before the window closes up and the next cycle begins. The Vikes are fast closing. While we all want trent to win now, we know its not as important as it is for the bills to win consistently in the future.
The vikes screwed up. They should have upgraded in the offseason. Even going after Pennington probably would have made them a playoff team. Or went after a solid backup in the mold of Kerry Collins or Kurt Warner. Now they're stuck with Brooks Bollinger? At least ride out Jackson - don't JP him.
Poor Purple Eaters...