wardigital

VERY light crowd there this evening.

It's because Brohm hasn't played yet this season -- nothing more.

Sanchez was looking right at Joe Namath when Namath was instructing about handling under center. This thread appears to be dressing up in full body armor to attack a hot fudge sundae.

I'm not "energized" over the issue. This is what I mean when I say that your tone is accusatory. I'm simply replying to a thread on this forum in the same way that you are. It requires no more or less energy to be critical of something than it does to be dismissive of any criticism.

SDS -- Do you just want to background white? I can do that for you in about five minutes. Edit: You might mean that you want a clear background? (Looking at the forum skin). For what it is worth, I think the skin looks plenty good as it is, but I should be able to help you out. Private message me.

Evans and Bledsoe played one year together, and Evans had 48 catches for the season, tied for second lowest of his career.

TO is almost a decade older than Evans, had 11 more catches, 200 more yards and essentially only ran one route (streak). If Evans caught between 75-85 passes a year, he'd be worthy of the reception he gets in Buffalo. Some of that isn't his fault (Carousel at OL, QB and Coaching) but some of it is his fault. Owens came in here, well past his prime, and had a season equivalent to Evans second best ever without trying particularly hard.

I would like to see the three linemen who are penciled in as opening day starters in the line-up before I pass any judgments. Not that they are going to be any better at all than the back-ups (they probably won't), but then again, there is the outside chance that they are at least a little bit better. I would at least like to watch these guys play this year before I am up in arms about a quote that Chan Gailey probably didn't say about a bunch of guys who haven't seen the field yet.

Well, the problem is, John, that I have tuned out, but I don't really think you hold any sort of authority over whether or not I am allowed to have an opinion on the quality of the programming there. So I guess, in regards to posts criticizing WGR, I'd give you the same advice.

Consumers care? Advertisers care? Listeners care? Everyone who is not trying to be a contrarian cares, frankly. Yes -- there is a television station that calls themselves "Fair and Balanced" that is not really, and they receive a tremendous amount of criticism for that, just like WGR is receiving. For all intents and purposes, it seems as though you're arguing just for the sake of arguing, and I can't believe you honestly think what your saying is even logical.

That's fine, but then they're not allowed to call themselves a serious sports station, which they do.

I think a lot of people have. But WECK is not yet a full, viable alternative to WGR because much of their morning/afternoon coverage is not sports. WECK is getting there, but it is not there. I tend to listen to/follow Nick Mendola, the Gooses Roost podcasts, Coach Sal, other WECK when I can. I'm 1,200 miles away from Buffalo so I'm also a little insulated, and also have other options. Ever since Schopp/Bulldog tried the ploy of "It was unsportsmanlike to 'run the score up' on Miami" deal, I have purposely avoided their program. They create controversy, are contrarian and argumentative because it creates ratings. But I also consider it a sort of sleazy, lazy way to do their job, which is not to be simply radio talk show hosts, but sports radio talk show hosts. But, point is, JohnC's argument is sort of ridiculous. Under no circumstance is there any requirement for a sports team to be good in order for the sports coverage to be good. It's a job, remember.

Cordaro Howard looked pretty awful Friday night too. Trash pile!

The uncapped situation makes it confusing. But also so does it being the pre-season. I believe the financials are different when players are cut before a certain date. If I remember correctly this is why Henry Jones was cut in the final cut many years ago.

He's good. They used him last year in the Welker role when Welker was incapacitated. I don't think he's as good as WW but I'd take him on the Bills in the slot any day.

I didn't know that until the other day either, but its good to know So he'll likely just be on the 53-man then. Probably misses a week, maybe two. The first three weeks of the season are an absolute buzzsaw anyway, so I don't know that Action J would make that much of a difference. I'd rather have him for the next three weeks though, which are eminently more winnable.

I understand what you're saying, but I think that if whoever plays this year is just "running out the clock" so to speak, until the team can draft a quarterback, I don't know that it makes a difference which quarteback is here, since they're gone anyway. But I think that if Gailey is already thinking about a quarterback next year, then he's not simultaneously thinking about wins this year. The fact of the matter is, Ryan Fitzpatrick, for his successes and faults, is simply not the future starter of the team. He's a stop-gap, at the absolute best. Edwards looked bad in Pre-Season Week 1, and there's nothing to indicate he'll look any better. But for whatever reason, for the last four years, under Jauron and now Gailey, he's had the confidence of the coaching staff and the belief has been held that if the chips fall correctly, he can be a starter in this league. Fitzpatrick is a free-agent next year too. At his price tag, with his production, he's not coming back. He's not a Nix guy, Brohm and Brown are in the wings, and they'll definitely go outside of the organization for at least one arm next season. So why keep him now? I think the most likely scenario is this: Edwards is the opening day starter. He is not specifically told, but the implication is that it is his team to run with for one year. He has the chance to prove his worth in this league for next season when he has all the options in the world of renegotiating a contract here or elsewhere. Fitzpatrick or Brohm are cut. Most likely Fitzpatrick because of his contract, and because the Bills are a frugal team who operate well under the salary cap when they can (they still do pay for players mind you, just not all of the time). They aren't going to keep the more expensive option for the sake of two wins that won't matter very much, frankly. Cutting him also gives the Bills the option of putting Brown on the roster, and using the practice squad spot for another player. It's just my opinion, but I really get the perception that Brohm vs. Fitzpatrick this pre-season is more about who makes the team than who becomes the backup. I think they want to know, in the event of an injury to Edwards (which will almost certainly happen), which one is more likely to be able to manage taking over the team. If Fitzpatrick is not leaps and bounds better than Brohm (and so far, he apparently has not been), then I would suppose he draws the short straw.

I'm interested in the details of it. I am curious if he tried to hammer out a deal with Houston (or Dallas) and simply couldn't based on any number of factors....(didn't want to play for significantly less money? Wasn't satisfied with his time to get back into the swing of things/learn a new system? Maybe he was honest and didn't want to look bad..) Or maybe it could be none of the above and he just decided to retire. Either way, good for him and the Bills.

No, I am surprised, and upset by it. There is no such thing as "someone else isn't doing their job so why should I have to do mine?" Well, I mean, there *is* such a thing, but its offensive. Especially when you're in a job that 80% of your customers probably would have rather than their own.

Well, if last year and the first game are any indication, the guys we saw in the second half will be playing as much if not more than the opening day starters, sadly. So it probably *would* be a good idea to get to know them and take a look at which ones might make the team.

Garbage men probably get bored with the monotony of picking up garbage, too, but they don't get to skip whole neighborhoods. There is monotony in all work. The amount of complaining WGR does about having to talk about the Bills is unacceptable. I understand everyone is human and everyone has the right to be frustrated with their job. But for a sports radio talk show host in Buffalo, NY (where there is so little work, let's remember), it is beyond lazy to complain about one of the most desirous gigs in town, its offensive. Privately, Simon, Schopp, Bulldog -- they don't have to like watching the Bills/talking about them, but they have to do it. That's their job. If it's not, and WGR is a Sabres-only station, that's fine too, but then they need to be upfront about it and act like it. This "We'll cover the Bills but only disdainfully" thing is offensive, there's no other word for it.

I think going in to camp, Nelson was near the bottom of the Receiver totem pole (as awful as that totem pole looks). But by all accounts he's had a decent camp and performed well in the first pre-season game, against depth guys, admittedly. With Easley hurt and Hardy awful, what do you think Nelson's chances are of making the team, and if he keeps it up could you see him getting some first team (or at least first half) looks in the pre-season? He looks like he could be a solid possession receiver, and the Bills really need someone who can get open and hold onto the football in long down situations.

Spiller is good, but he will need space, he's not a banger-type running back. The whole success of his career in Buffalo will be based on the ability for his blockers to give him space. I don't think Buffalo has that this year, and that is something they need to work toward. He is a very different back than Lynch or Jackson.

This is the last year of Trent's contract, right? The Bills would be faced with the choice of either keeping him or cutting him. No one is going to trade a draft pick (even a 5th, 6th or 7th) on a guy who has never really proved anything and is on a one-year deal. There is no team in the league that is impatient enough to do that, especially with the CBA in question. And, there are only about five teams in the league where Edwards would even be guaranteed to make the team based on his name alone. Being a starter here does not mean very much around the league right now, and like Todd Collins, and Rob Johnson, and Losman before him, he is probably a third-stringer at best on a majority of other teams (until he proves otherwise, which he still can). So what team in the league is going to give up a draft pick for a third string quarterback? Trent is here for the rest of his contract, exactly because he's cheap. He isn't great, and might at times be awful, but he knows the offense, is familiar with the team and the city, and can run under center. The much more likely cut is Ryan Fitzpatrick. Yes, he plays with a bravado and has some wheels. But he is also comparatively expensive and perhaps only marginally more effective than Edwards.

Stroud with 5.5