Punch

He rebounded pretty nicely after that terrible INT, but he certainly seems to checkdown quite a bit. He's also taking command of the huddle in a pressure situation which is a big point in his favor; but his accuracy is leaving a lot to be desired, overall.

Amen, brother.

There's nothing righteous about any of this--- of course it's still cheating. Perhaps stealing signals "the old fashioned way" falls under the notion of "honor amongst thieves" which makes it appear relatively acceptable since "everyone does it". But it's still cheating. Using cameras is a level so far beyond sportsmanlike---- it's the difference between mugging someone at knife point or just shooting them with a gun. Both are wrong but the second one is much worse.

Wow, you're not kidding--- he froze the cameraman and the announcing crew just now!

It's exactly the kind of throw we haven't seen a Bills QB make since... I don't know, maybe Bledsoe to Campbell at the Giants forever ago. Luck is the real deal.

He certainly looked poised and found the open man on each throw, both of which looked nice. I'm still a bit nervous that he stomps around too much and takes his time with his delivery due to those long arms and legs. Really impressive start for the Razorbacks so far, although I don't think Alabama is really "all that" (beating up on Duke and San Jose State?). With a weak and inexperienced secondary I think Mallett could rip it up today and his stock should substantially shoot up.

Of course you're right, if it wasn't illegal at the time then it isn't exactly "apples to apples" with the Patriots' myriad indiscretions... but the fact remains that in using performance enhancing drugs the Steelers willfully stacked the deck in their favor, which is cheating regardless of legality. Mark McGwire will likely never get voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame for using HGH, which was legal at the time that he used it. But his home run numbers are considered artificially inflated and thus he insulted the integrity of the game. The '70s Steelers are not really viewed in that same light, despite the fact they are essentially guilty of the same thing. The NFL has always been much more willing to sweep their dirt under the rug than any other league, while MLB has tended to crucify it's own for the "greater good".

That makes less than no sense. If Harbaugh thinks the organization is a dead end then there's nothing they can do to change his perception, aside from a whole sale sea change in operations to satisfy his specific concerns. Plus, are the Bills going to fire Gailey after just one season? And try to lure in Harbaugh, again, after he publicly dismissed them? Maybe if we trade for Tom Brady we can lure Bill Belichick, too.

That's certainly a good idea in theory but The Bills all but handed Harbaugh the vacant Head Coaching position and he turned them down. It's pretty rare for a college coach angling for an NFL gig one day would ever turn down a pro job, but he didn't think this organization was worth it. You have to think he's whispering in Luck's ear about his opinions on the franchise.

Have you seen any other reference to this aside from your own recollection?

How are you able to continue typing such drivel while Belichick's 'taint is blocking your sightline? Pretty impressive, you and Douche in Anchorage are talented typists, able to simultaneously fully focus on two wholly unrelated tasks.

Bellichick has continued to cheat by lying on the team's weekly injury reports, at ther very least. I'm not sure what BS this is concerning a supposed " loophole" (despite the fact the organization and Bellichick himself was reprimanded by the league, heavily) or the idea of showing other teams have cheated in the NFL somehow exonerates the Pats of any wrongdoing. By producing drunk driving accident reports from the DMV website I would not exonerate Marshawn Lynch. Wrong is wrong, and any NFL fan should feel that way regardless of the team involved. I live in Virginia, and I can assure the Belichick apologists that fans of all teams down here think the Patriots are cheaters.

As far as I know it was not illegal at the time because it was the precipice of that kind of thing. It's due to the Steelers rampant use of them that it later became illegal. Using performance enhancing drugs is cheating regardless of whether or not it's illegal, in my humble opinion, because it creates an unbalanced playing field.

Is that true ???

Actually, it was with the Steelers of the '70s that the usage of performance enhancing drugs first became prevalent in professional sports. It's pretty well known, in fact Joe D. talks about it quite a bit when he appears on WGR.

There was a thread about this issue (not specifically the NY Times article) awhile back. I though it was in poor taste, but to be honest... it is one of the iconic moments in sports history, not just the Giants' personal story. I can't bring myself to get worked up about this now that I've had time to consider it. Whether or not they display the jersey, even the actual jersey, Jints fans and Bills fans alike will look at that game the same way, regardless. Displaying the jersey doesn't change the events of the game or opinions about it. So whatever. I couldn't imagine hanging David Treadwell's Broncos jersey in a Bills history display case at the Ralph detailing the run to 4 AFC Championships. If it floats their boat let them have it.

Well, there's a depth chart and somebody needs to be "named" starter. It doesn't seem to really matter who is technically the starter for this team as they will all be featured depending on the opponent and situation. But "naming" Lynch the starter insures his name is out there, like I said, for perceived trade value. I'm certain other teams (as well as the media) will take in consideration the fact that Lynch isn't being used by a last place team struggling on offense when assessing his potential value. I'm certain the Bills have been contacted by teams other than Green Bay (maybe New Orleans or Seattle) and they're in no rush to ship him out.

How is it possible anyone could think that in 20 years time "Spygate" (not to mention the numerous instances of HGH usage and the allegations of former players being threatened and intimidated into steroid use by the coashing staff) will completely be forgotten? Pete Rose hasn't "cheated" on baseball in approximately 20 years and the debate on whether or not he be allowed entrance to the Hall of Fame is raging as strong as ever. When one thinks of "Shoeless" Joe Jackson the 1918 Black Sox Scandal immediately comes to mind--- and that's 92 years ago. These are all different circumstances, no argument there; but the fact remains once a controversy becomes associated with a player/team/et al the two become inextricably linked. The 1918 Chicago White Sox may have been the greatest baseball team in the history of the sport, and their record prior to the '18 Series should be held high as a testament to this fact. But they are forever tainted, even "Shoeless" Joe, who by all accounts was not on "the take". What kind of Bills fan would want their team and city to willingly be tainted in that way? How desperate to be linked with a championship can you be if you're willing to also be linked to a stain on the integrity of the sport? Ridiculous. If anything, the stink from this area of Patriots football will grow more pungent in the years to come, not less so.

That's true, but it took him awhile. Because QBs are generally expected to succeed much more quickly (probably due to the exorbitant salaries) in today's NFL he would have been declared a bust and (possibly) out of the league. The 2010 equivalent would be if Alex Smith went down with an injury in San Francisco and David Carr took over and lead them to a Super Bowl title and then another in 3 years. Plunkett's resurgence was crazy and truly one of the great stories in NFL history.

I think Al Davis used to do this in the '70s!

You may be right. But I don't think it's crazy to assume utilizing Lynch in a starter's role is an effective way to raise his profile in 2010 for potential trade offers. Not prioritizing the opportunity to "showcase" him exactly, but so long as the Bills offensive assets are in the backfield they may as well get the most out of them on the field. Without a doubt Spiller should be a bigger part of the offense. It may take a back like him a few more carries to properly get into the flow of the game. Bringing him along slowly is okay, but invisibly is wrong for 1,000 different reasons.

The only one that sounds bitter in this thread is you. You started the thread, after all, so you're the one with the problem. If you really want documentation of NFL players, coaches, and front office personnel on record accusing the Patriots of cheating there is a plethora available for you to peruse. Why not go study that material rather than pick a fight with a group of people embracing reality? My opinion: The Bills have not been good enough to win consistently in this league since 1999. This is completely disconnected from whatever methods the Patriots employ in their preparations. The fact that they have literally been caught cheating by the league and reprimanded for it has no bearing on how well the Bills organization is run--- but I am not going to excuse the Pats for their cheating. Two separate issues, both disheartening to me for completely different reasons.

I think everyone else in this thread is a little confused about what point you're trying to make. Try reading the post you're responding to...

He looked pretty bad against Alabama last year, throwing 4 interceptions in a blowout loss, and he also had an 0-4 overall record in SEC road games. If he can move the ball this week and play with "guts and determination" (which is admittedly hard to quantify) even in a loss (can't really put the onus of beating the no.1 ranked team in the country on Mallett) then I'd definitely be on board. My only concern is his footwork and release... the way he sometimes holds onto the ball for too long and can't seem to get out of his own way worries me that he's Bledsoe 2.0. But, I'm definitely in love with his arm, fearlessness,, and overall potential.

Honest to god, I think if he started for the Bills this week he would give us a better chance of beating New England than any QB on our roster. He looks like an NFL QB, in part, because Harbaugh's offense is a sophisticated (but not flashy) pro style offense. Not meaning that he's all appearance, but that he has developed under a sophisticated pro style system. It's a good point as to whether or not he meets the Buddy Nix/Bill Parcells criteria for drafting QBs... of course he falls short in number of starts, but he meets everything else. And unlike Mallett, he has excelled when playing top ranked teams. His performance against USC on the road last year was incredible, and not just stat wise. He drove them up and down the field and made Taylor Mays look bad on a bullet TD right in front of him in the end zone. He responds well to pressure, has an excellent pocket presence, knows when to scramble (he's no Vick but he certainly can make plays with his legs), and can "make all the throws".