murra

Quick question: How can all these sites have such a wide gap? http://walterfootball.com/draft2010_2.php <This dude says we'll pick up Williams...with our 40th pick...How is it possible one guy thinks he's going 8 overall and another 40 overall. That leap seems a bit insane to me.

I didn't realize he was that highly touted. I was confident he'd fall to us if we had a top ten pick. It doesn't matter though, we can both agree that QB in the 1st round this year will be a HUGE waste of money. I'd like to see the Bills get Max Hall in the 5th-6th round.

I enjoyed when he questioned the refs not calling pass interference on Florence when he shoved Chambers about 2 yards past the line of scrimmage. Hard to imagine you could play the game at the professional level, and then become a commentator, but not grasp the concept of the 5 yard bump.

Well that sucks. I hope the FO realizes he was probably the only QB worth taking a risk on, and doesn't commit to one of the overrated projected first round talents at the QB position.

Uh oh... Be prepared to get "torched"

You've officially lost it.

You're absolutely right. You get rid of a quarterback for putrid games week in and week out for about three years. I'm not actually sure how someone can have 23 starts and never manage to amass over 300 yards in a single game. I'm still shocked that this guy, who averaged less than a TD/game still has fans. He's not going to start again though, and despite your attempts to argue for it, in the long run it will matter not, as Edwards seems quite visibly to not be in the Bills' future.

I'd have to agree. I like that we have 4 Safties I'd consider using at any point. Whitner and Byrd would be my starting pair, with Wilson subbing in to keep em fresh.

Edwards already got his make or break opportunity. That was this season, he failed miserably. He is sitting for two reasons. One, the AVP thinks this guy is not executing his offense. Two, Perry Fewell thinks Fitz can win him the most games, and he wants to get as many W's as possible so as to boost his resume. Now I may not agree with the second point, but that's clearly what's happening, and all you can do at this point is piss and moan about it. Trent aint startin' another game as a Bill. Why would you want Edwards hanging around the team next year? Fitzpatrick is the backup manager I think I'd want anyways. Trent is too easily rattled, and carries enough excuses for the entire team.

Remember, my claim is not that Fitzpatrick is the best QB, it is that Edwards is not the answer, and should not be counted on at all next season. Fitzpatrick can't make any throws, at all. He does look down-field which is a bit of a refreshment, but the INT where he tried to force the ball into Evans was unacceptable. However, he SHOULD be your starting QB right now. He's going to be on the team next year as the solid back up. Trent is an egg-head. He's messed up, another mis-managed QB. But you gotta let it go, he's not a gamer.

I'm no LB guru, and so I'm curious to see what others thought. I noticed a poor play on a pass to a TE he was covering, but that is all. You're on a football message board.

You're giving him a little bit too much credit with words like "juke".

Edwards is not the answer, and I'm sorry you're still in denial.

Agreed. Of course, last spring there were some that thought Edwards > Kelly. Regardless, I think you're plan is most likely to happen, and the one I'm most supportive of. QB's are a crap shoot. I think unless a serious amount of talent like Locker falls (almost statistically impossible) there is no reason to consider a QB. It's a serious need, but I'd rather not force it, ya know?

Agreed, but another fairly obvious thread. We were never getting rid of Lynch. Maybe the same fans who wanted Cutler and the likes have been calling for it, but it ain't happening.

We'll probably snag a QB or two on the second day of the draft.

No one was going to say that. I think sometimes you guys overplay the fanboy mentality on this site.

Haha... this was easily my favorite post in the thread

Yep, got work in the morning.

He'll get in before Reed.

If they made it so that the design for SUPER BOWL V was the same for every superbow the world would be a better place

Who are you?

You're so cool.

Is that a popular thing to do? To talk about the fame/historic importance of a bill while you're lobbying to pass it? I mean I can see maybe some of the civil rights amendments, maybe someone said, "hey this thing is going to be remarkably historic", but that is just. For some reason I get the impression that they're all only trying to pass national healthcare to say that they've done it. I used to think that they were just crazy from believing that gov't run healthcare is constitutional, but now I think that they realize they're totally bypassing legitimacy in order to be part of a historic passage. It's as if they don't even care about its effects. Harry Reid, saying that opposition is on par with slavery, I mean really, they don't care about nationalized healthcare they just want to pass it, and look really good doing it.

Did you click on my link? Did you notice how the "trend" was mild under GW? His un-employment rates were slightly above average, and they were actually decent on par with his 8 year total. Obama's had a spike. A huge freaking spike. That is why you can't say the word FALSE next to "unemployment has risen". It has. You can't tell us that we haven't seen the news. If you'd like to browse further on that site, it gives a year-by-year total, which is neat because it shows that unemployment currently is at a 30 year high...not that NPR would explain that to you, since they're so unbiased and all.