st pete gogolak

How many posters to this board discount Foles and Sanchez because "Chip Kelly runs a quarterback friendly offense". Hey, here's a thought. Why don't we incorporate a "QB friendly offense" that will let us win without a Brady or Manning at QB?

Is there any - I mean ANY - indication that the Rams are going to make him available via trade or that they will release him? If not, this is all just blowing smoke.

Anyone know if this game is on YouTube or any other streaming source. Twenty three years later, I'd still love to watch this game!!!

The reason NOT to go after McCown is that you can't sign every reject QB out there. I'm sure we'll bring in a veteran FA QB. I hope it's Sanchez or Matt Moore (ugh, I know, I know). I think we may also take a flyer on a developmental QB early in the draft.

He's being dumped because he absolutely stunk it up last year. Look at his stats. They were God-awful.

How did you watch it? I missed that game and have always wanted to see it.

Really funny title to the thread. I live in St. Petersburg FL and I can assure you, Mike Glennon created no buzz whatsoever when he was actually playing football for the Bucs.

Sorry to hear the news. This is more about how the game has evolved rather than any ineptitude on the Bills' part but you've just used the #1 overall pick on maybe the greatest running back to ever come out of college football. You have the first pick in the second round (back then, only 26 teams so it's the equivalent of another first round pick today). What do you do? Pick another running back of course! By the way, for all you 20/20 hindsight folks, Ted (the "Mad Stork") Hendricks was selected by the Colts a couple of picks later.

My guess is that our most pressing needs (including TE) will be addressed in free agency. We'll have the luxury of picking a RB and developmental QB early in the draft.

Ja'Wuan James, Justin Pugh, Shea McClellin, Sean Weatherspoon and Prince Akmukarma. What do they all have in common?

There have been persistent rumors on this board that Sam Bradford, Eli Manning, Jay Cutler, RGIII and Colin Kaepernick (am I missing anyone?) may be available this offseason for various reasons. I don't see it. Why would any team give up a viable veteran (although not perfect) QB without an obvious replacement in the wings? I can kind of see Bradford because of the cap hit but even there why would St. Louis do that without an obvious candidate to take his place? This is a serious question.

Uh, the Falcons gave up that and more for Julio Jones. It didn't make them Super Bowl champions and it didn't really help the Browns all that much. It's really an equivalent trade to the Watkins deal. The Falcons got a really good receiver and the Browns frittered away the draft picks they got out of the deal.

I have absolutely no idea if Incognito can play or not at this point in his career. Absolutely none. That being said, I love this move. It shows (1) ownership is committed to winning footbnall games; and (2) the front office recognizes an obvious weakness and is addressing it early. On top of that, about 75% of this board espouses the notion that you shouldn't pay big money to a guard (we're talking to you, Andy Levitre). So we go out an get what is hopefully a capable veteran guard who fits the style of play we hope to employ in 2015 and we do it on the cheap. How can anyone complain about that? I firmly believe that we will be aggressive in free agency and fill obvious needs (OL, TE. veteran QB). That will give us the luxury of picking up a RB and developmental QB early in the draft. I think it's going to be a very, very exciting off-season.

Absolutely disagree. As much as I hated those Cowboy teams, they were simply superior to the Bills in those years. Better defensive talent, better offensive line, etc. If Kelly and Aikman were swapped out for those two games, I don't think it makes a bit of difference in the final score (by the way, Kelly was very, very good through about three quarters of Super Bowl XXVIII - still didn't make any difference.

Greatest coach-QB combo? I'm ready to concede that to Belichick - Brady, although Paul Brown - Otto Graham, Vince Lombardi - Bart Starr and Bill Walsh - Joe Montana have to come into the conversation, especially Brown and Graham. Greatest coach? Again, moral shortgivings aside, I'm ready to give that to Belichick over Brown, Lombardi, Shula, et al. What he has done as DC for the Giants, DC for the Jets and HC for the Patriots is really remarkable. One guy who doesn't get enough credit is Joe Gibbs. Winning three Super Bowls with three different (mostly pedestrian) QB's is an incredible feat. Brady as GOAT? I'm not convinced. He's at the table for sure. Great decision maker, very accurate, very clutch, great pocket presence - but, every time he is pressured like every other single QB in the league is presssured, he doesn't look all that special. You can talk about lack of HOF skill players during his career but the one thing he has had during his entire career is phenominal OL play. He is never, ever hit. Sometimes it seems like he has literally all day to make a throw. I think that there are QB's who could have duplicated what he has done at NE. Peyton Manning for sure wins same number of rings or more if he started with Belichick in 2000. I don't know if Brady wins the SB if he is on the GB team that Rogers won a SB with a few years back. That team had a lousy OL and Rogers still won a SB with it. Bottom line I think it's silly to just look at SB wins and say someone is GOAT. My test is flip QB's and ask yourself if outcome would have been different. Look at the Bills' four Super Bowls. If NFC teams had Kelly and we had Hoestedler, Rypien and AIkman would outcome have been any different? Nope, we would have been hammered four times in a row, probably by even bigger margins.

You know what one game makes me optimistic about the hire? Can't remember the year (last fifteen all start to run together) but Bills were something like 4-2 with Fitzpatrick at QB with Jets coming into the Ralph. The Jets just absolutely, physically manhandled us. That game ended that particular season. Hope to see that on a regular basis for the good guys in 2015. If you remember that game, someone idiot in the front office had us wearing all white at home. Lame.

No, no, no. The Bills do not get Mike Evans at #9 last year. If the Bills not make the trade, Cleveland picks Watkins or Mack or they trade with another team. If they take Mack, Watkins isn't making it past the Raiders. If there was a legitimate chance that Evans would have fallen to #9, I don't believe the Bills would have made the trade. Simple fact of the matter was that he wasn't falling to #9.

Or to put it another way, will we actually use our analytics department? Other than when the Bills played the Jets, I didn't follow the Jets much and I honestly don't know how aggressive Ryan was in 4th and short situations. I wasn't a Marrone fan but the thing that I hated about him the most was the ultra-conservative decisions on fourth and short. It was like he was in a time warp from 1955 and field position was the only possible consideration, even when playing high powered offenses like the Pats. I'm not an analytics expert but my understanding is that the stats are overwhelming when it is 4th and short in your opponents territory you go for it. In addition to the pure stats approach, I believe that habitually going for it (1) gives your team a mindset that you're out to win the game (the Tuesday Morning QB Greg Easterbrook theory) and (2) gives you more options on play calling if you know you are going to go for it on fourth and short, meaning you can run the ball on 3rd and 3 or 3rd and 4. I would love for the Bills to be the honest to God first NFL team to employ Moneyball analysis to football. Someone's going to do it eventually. Might as well be us.

To me Chris Hairston is as big a mystery player as we have had in the last 50 years. He played really, really well at RT as a rookie and even played some LT well. Then he got hurt against the Giants and I don't think he played the rest of the season. I thought we at least got a starting OL out of the Lynch trade. Then second year he's shelved with the mystery illness. Career over? Nope. Comes back and makes the roster the next two years but hardly sees the field. When Henderson was struggling badly, why didn't Hairston get a start? Was Henderson that much better? Was Marrone being Marrone (i.e. stubborn)? Is he a restricted or unrestricted free agent (I've seen him listed as both)? If he restricted, bring him back and let him fight it out for a starting RT spot under a new regime and a new OL coach.

1) QB 2) OL 3) TE What I think is especially unique about this offseason (certainly for the Bills) is that the needs are fairly narrow and we can target free agents with laser like precision. Pick up a vet QB to challenge Manuel, pick up a quality guard and maybe another free agent OL, pick up a TE who is better than Chandler, resign your own FA's on defense and it gives you the luxury in the draft to go after a RB (assuming Spiller isn't resigned, which I don't believe he will), a developmental QB and some depth on D.

If the Bills had honest to God targeted Beckham for the 9th pick, then it's a dumb - even bizarre - trade. I simply don't believe that's true.

The revisionist thinking on this board is astounding. If Cleveland had made the trade and then used the 9th pick on OBJ (besides blowing the minds of everyone who posts on this board from now to doomsday) then you'd have to give Cleveland credit for making the trade and being able to spot an enormous talent. But they didn't. They picked a CB who looks to be as big a bust as anyone picked in the first round. Why didn't Minnesota, Detroit or Tennessee pick OBJ? The reason is NO ONE projected OBJ as a top ten pick and it's foolish to project backward that he was. Give the Giants credit. They spotted a unique talent and made a hell of a pick. I wasn't a fan of the trade when it was made (because of nightmares that Cleveland would wind up with #1 overall pick) but I can certainly live with it now. We got a true #1 receiver. We have specific needs that can be addressed in free agency and the draft. Yes, it will come down to QB play but I defy anyone from making an argument that the Watkins trade prevented us from obtaining a franchise QB. Be happy with the trade and move on!

The only position I would hire Rex Ryan for (at least for this football team) is consultant. As consultant, he would have one job and one job only. Watch every play the New England Patriots run and devise game plans to beat them. That's it.

The way it works these days, there are about a dozen kickers a year who "deserve" to be All-Pro. It's easier to pick the one or two kickers a year who screw up so badly they get fired mid-season (guy from the Lions for example). No disrespect to Dan Carpenter, who has been absolutely terrific, but like Jimmy Johnson said kickers are fungible.