Defender51

Um...no. Beast Mode was awesome, but just as the team was failing as a whole for three and a half quarters, it was the team as a whole bringing them back when it was needed. On that 96 yard drive, it all started with that crazy flip play from the end zone and Marshawn somehow getting the first down. Edwards had a lot to do with that entire drive, though, too. But, what I think you're failing to pick up on here is that people are excited over the fact that we seem to have a quarterback now who doesn't poop his pants when he's needed. That hasn't happened around these parts since, well, you know who. You're saying that Beast Mode was the only reason. I think you overlook the more obscure members, as well. You discount the performance of the much maligned Josh Reed? The defense didn't play GREAT, but aside from that forgettable Higgins play, they kept the Bills in the game until the offense figured themselves out. No, Beast Mode was definately key to this victory, but he wasn't the only reason they won.

I don't know about you guys, but that was painful for me to watch. You could tell that he has a lot of contempt and was expecting that question...and apparently got it. It's old news. I say just let it go. Marshawn gets paid to run the football, which he's doing very well. For those of you who disagree with my take, I invite you to WebEx with me and I'll interview you about all of your personal business, too. We can talk about how you cheated on your wife, or maybe knocked up a younger girl....you know, personal stuff that you don't want anyone to know. Those things don't make you less of an accountant or construction worker.

Point number 2, I concede. Tackling at times was atrocious. But, point number one I have to take up arms against. While I agree that we should go downfield more often, in a game such as this one where we were having some manner of success underneath (thanks Freddie Jackson) and we are playing a TOUGH defense on the road in a sold out stadium....eh...I'm ok with what they did. They did what they did when they had to and it worked. Maybe on another day it won't and I'll be right up there with you. As for the killjoy that started this thread. I agree it's just week two. I've been saying that we need to prove more...but proving more starts in the week that you're in and the opponent that you're against. Go ruin someone else's day, huh?

Look, now I'm getting sucked in. Very few people actually know the history of this country, and I think most people would agree that Abraham Lincoln was a great president. But who actually knows how it came to be that he was in office? Look it up. He was a relative unknown who was basically inserted as the nominee to lose to the other guy. I think that turned out pretty well. Personally, I don't like Obama, but his experience, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with that. So, it's not fair to go after one for experience and not the other.

Would you have been equally offended if the views in the article were your own? That being said, I appreciate a good defense for Palin and I agree with all points in the article, but eh...not really the forum for that here. I used to be a member of the yahoo Bills board a few years back and I got tired of the political tyrade on there. I'd really prefer not to see it repeated here.

Jacksonville is dangerous. I know you're thinking that the Jags are just gonna lay down because they are missing some o-lineman. I'll bet you're also thinking that the Pats are gonna suck because Tom Brady is hurt. I'll bet last year you were saying that Tom Brady is overrated because anyone can throw to those weapons. Think hard. Search your feelings..you know this to be true. Bottom line is that you can't take a Super Bowl contender one week and then discount them the next because they are missing some guys. The Jags have proven something lately.....we have not. Don't underestimate them or overestimate the Bills. 31-0 in 2003's home opener ring any bells for you?

And here's my take on the Crowell situation, which is actually just asking a question. The Bills played a lot of nickel on Sunday, negating the third linebacker, anyway. Even if Crowell is playing, you're gonna keep Poz and Mitchell on the field, leaving Crowell as the benched man in nickel. So, my question is, did the Bills play a lot of nickel because Crowell wasn't there, or was it going to be gameplanned that way, anyway? A lot of teams play the nickel as their primary scheme. Maybe we can....or should, for that matter.

Let me premise what I'm about to say by saying first that I think losing Crowell is potentially very damaging to this defense. But...do hear me out here. Ellison, while not the biggest guy out there, can fly around a bit in the defensive back and midfield. If our defensive line is truly improved, and I see no reason why it really CAN'T be, Ellison's speed might not exactly be a bad thing here. Additionally, and this is really stretching it, we did play without Crowell last year at times, as well as not having Poz all year and we didn't have Kawika then, either (who I'm really stoked about, BTW). Yet, this defense last year, without Stroud and Spencer Johnson, kept the Bills in contention with the most boring offense in the world. I think that even without Crowell, this overall defense is better than last years, and even if it's roughly the same, maybe the "new" offense can score a few more points to make up the difference. I guess my moral is, don't panic just yet. Besides, I think Crowell is at fault here. Me thinks he was angling for some more cash, didn't get it, so said, "fine, I'll take my knee and leave"...to which the Bills simply replied, "OK...enjoy your new offseason". I mean, really...this guy couldn't scope this knee months ago?

Ah, yes. How will history remember the Coy Wire era? Actually, I always kinda felt sorry for the guy. In 2003, after a good rookie season, he was primed to be the starting strong safety for us until just about this time before the regular season they go and sign Lawyer Milloy. Then, after we lost Milloy, we tell him, "Oh yeah, why don't you try LB on for size?". Gee, sorry that didn't work out for ya, Coy. Here's a pink slip for your trouble.

Yeah, and not that this dead horse isn't already beaten Buffalo Bills red and blue, but from the beginning, I've not known where to stand on this issue, which is what makes this particular holdout so perplexing. On one hand, you've got a guy who came from nothing, the team went out on a limb and gave him a better than deserved contract for what he was when it was inked and he signed it happily. Stands to reason just by that statement that he should have no reason to complain. But, then you add that he did, indeed (and I don't think anyone is arguing this point) prove himself worthy of not just the current contract, but a far better one, especially considering the fact that the team spent a ton of money on Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker. At the time, nobody in Bills land could argue those contracts because we sorely needed that kind of beef on the line. (In my mind, Dockery was the better signing at the time, but Langston Walker has turned out to be a hell of a find, too...if not the better of the two). So, I think that the Bills do owe Peters more money. The problem I have, and from what I've gathered, most of you, too, is that why can't HE exercise a little bit of faith in a team that exercised a lot of it on him? Hell, I'm even fine with him skipping training camp. If I were him, I probably would, too. (Why risk injury in meaningless games, especially if you're gunning for a better contract? Just this man's humble opinion) But, by now, he should be here. He should be in that lineup on opening day. And THAT is the misery of it. He played his best hand all at once and the Bills called him on it. He might have had a flush, but in my mind, the Bills have the Royal Flush. (no pun about current tight ends intended) So, here we are. I blame both sides. Yeah, doofus has the responsibility to report. But, if I were the Bills' front office (and I'm surely not) I'd be knocking on this guy's door on a daily basis. They say he hasn't called them, but I find it hard to believe that they don't know where he lives. Get someone over there! I'm not suggesting that they pay him now. I'm suggesting that they at least convince the idiot that it's better to play this season on good faith and that they will definately take care of him, yada yada yada, ad nauseum. Ok...so there's my take. Add it to the very large pile.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Oh! Oh! Can I play? Ok, Ok...here we go. John Clayton reported this afternoon that the Buffalo Bills....play in Buffalo! (This is making me sick)

Still standing behind this statement? Just in case any clarification is needed on the beating of this dead horse, Peters won't be back for quite some time.