SouthGeorgiaBillsFan

Dec. 2, 1992, if I remember correctly.

And we're not the Patriots. Wait...

Tony Romo is far more overrated than Bledsoe ever thought about being.

Who, other than John Clayton and some delusional Bills fans, rates Lee Evans or Terrance McGee highly?

Delusions much?

There was nothing "elite" about the Giants scheme when they up-ended the Pats undefeated season. Put Brady on his can = win.

Lee Evans sucks. How long will the denial continue? You can't blame it on Trent Edwards anymore. You can't blame it on a terrible offense anymore. There is only one place to lay the blame for Evans' suckery: Lee Evans. With Evans out of the lineup today and Stevie obviously drawing the full attention of the defense, Stevie was still able to be more productive than Evans has been all year. What more evidence do you people need?

Sincere people have a small green dot behind their left ear.

Yes. If Luck is available to us we have to grab him, but otherwise forget about QB and get a beast on defense (we should be looking for someone a little beastlier than Maybin =o).

I mean you really need to ask yourself what would this team look like with Fiedler leading it rather than Fitz...can you honestly say that you think Fielder would have had this kind of success? I certainly wouldn't wager any money on that hypothetical situation...Look Fitz is blowing away all expectations and honestly I just can't see comparing him to some mediocre QB at this point. Perhaps he is playing as well as he ever will, but when you consider his success and the situation he is playing in (i.e. the lack of overall talent on the team), you have to think its possible that we have a special player here. I'm not ready to anoint him the next Jim Kelly just yet, but I'm certainly not going to anoint him as the next Jay Fiedler either. He's a young QB just fully coming into his own and has tons of potential room for improvement, both in his play and in the talent around him. If he finishes the season as strong as he is playing now, we can stop looking for a QB. And this is coming from someone who was one of the worst Fitzpatrick doubters on this board.

Do you really think it is a myth that the SEC and Big 10 are superior conferences to the MAC and MWC? I mean seriously? Certain conferences ARE superior, and to just pretend that isn't true is pretty absurd.

Seriously, Bruce is #4??? Bull ****. Does anyone else feel insulted by this? Nobody has ever been better. What a travesty. LT is the only one I can live with being ranked higher, but even still, Bruce was more impressive. Let Bruce stand up and rush the passer or slap a guy in the head....good grief that would be nasty.

So you mean SEC teams' combined BCS bowl record of 14-5 (.737) isn't enough "proof"? Just to show you exactly how DOMINATING the SEC is: BCS bowl records for major conferences: Big 10: 10-11 (.476) Pac 10: 8-5 (.615) (five of the Pac 10's combined wins are from USC...) Big 12: 7-10 (.438) Big East: 6-6 (.500) ACC: 2-10 (.167) Note: SEC teams don't play other SEC teams in BCS bowl games. They play the best teams out of the other conferences. So with more BCS bowl wins, fewer BCS bowl losses, and obviously a much higher winning percentage than any other conference in division 1 football, I'm not really sure what more "proof" you need. Maybe you need to let go of your bias (lemme guess: you are an alumnus of a big 10 school, amiright?) and just accept the plain and simple and undeniable fact that the SEC is far superior to any other conference in terms of competitiveness.

Yea same here. I don't expect a win, but its nice to know we can strike a little fear into a good team.

Nor should you be. Because the simple fact is Boise State would not be undefeated in any of those conferences, except maybe the Big 12 which seems to be in severe decline.

I was listening to ESPN radio yesterday afternoon and Scott Van Pelt was interviewing Pittsburg Steelers' Antwaan Randle El, and he spoke with a great measure of respect for the Bills, mentioning not only our 2 wins in a row, but the three games prior to that where the Bills have been playing great football. He mentioned our vast and rapid improvement, and you could tell the guy was not being sarcastic in the least and was 100% sincere, and he made it seem like his opinion was a reflection of the Steelers estimation of the Bills in general. While on one hand this means we are not likely to catch the Steelers with their pants down this week and it is going to be a very tough game to win, on the other hand it was really nice to know that a great team views the Bills as a threat. Hopefully this is a trend that will continue. On a related note, I don't care how bad the opposing team is, but any time you can hang 49 points on an NFL team, people start to stiffen up and take notice. It seems we are on a rapid rise to respectability.

Your argument here is very inane, and you completely missed the point of my post. I'm just wondering if you are actually suggesting that Lee Evans is a good value? Or are you the one simply arguing for argument's sake? Yes, we need an entire roster full of players who can "do it all." I wonder why the Bills don't realize that....

Why should a team that already plays 5 or more ranked teams per season add another one to their schedule? What Boise State and TCU need to do if they want a legit NC opportunity is move to a more competitive conference, because it is absolute BS that Boise State can pound on Idaho State Technical Institute and East by Northeast Leprechaun University all year long and then play for a NC. It's not Boise State or TCU's fault, but that doesn't mean they should be given a free ticket to the NC game.

*If* we end up with the #5 or #6 pick (seems likely at this point), and *if* Luck decides to come out this year, and *if* he somehow falls to us at that pick, then absolutely you take him. Really, it's likely to be a moot point anyway. If Luck comes out, he will be gone within the top 3 picks, most likely #1 overall, and I just can't see us with a pick that high anymore (which btw I am more than happy about, because the rapid improvement we have been witnessing over the past 5 weeks is exponentially more valuable than the #1 pick).

The incentive is TONS of potential upside, very little potential down side. At this point, $1.5 million gambles for a single season (BTW do not expect Merriman to get ANY offers close to that if he doesn't play the rest of this season..) are exactly the kinds of X-factor moves the Bills need to be making. If he returns next season at even 80% of his previous form, he would be a major acquisition for us. If he never plays a down for the Bills, we have lost virtually nothing (that 1.5 mil isn't going to win us any more games this year...). It is more than worth the risk.

I think Stevie and Lee compliment each other well. But it is a very valid argument that we could be getting much more value out of Lee's $9 million salary, and that is what people are talking about when they suggest trading Lee. If for instance we were only paying Lee $3 or $4 million per season, he would be among the most valuable players in the NFL, but he will never be among the best players in the NFL, and honestly I don't foresee him ever topping 1000 yards in a season again. When he was successful he was an unknown quantity. Teams have now realized that he can be rendered utterly ineffective by a double team, and he can be completely taken out of a game by a single elite defensive back, because he lacks the size and ability to dictate to anyone. That being said, Lee Evans is a guy who can make someone pay for a mistake in a big way, and there is value in that. But the bottom line is that he is not dynamic enough or consistent enough to warrant such a salary.

I'm really getting tired of the "playing from behind" logic. If you are playing from a 2 possession deficit, teams EXPECT you to pass more, thus success passing the ball is more impressive, not less. Furthermore, if passing the ball more frequently unequivocally translated into greater success passing the ball, teams would never run the ball. Obviously this is not the case. Your logical fallacy pretty much invalidates your opinion, in my opinion.

I guess they just figured that the Bills haven't had anything to shout about in so long that they could rip it off by default =o

I'm not sure I would call 497 yards and 4TD over 10 games "producing" Certainly if he was making $388k this season you wouldn't complain much. But Lee Evans production vs cost is an absolute albatross to the Buffalo Bills right now. Just face it. Lee Evans never has been and never will be a dynamic playmaker. So stop pretending he is. Also, Lee Evans produced MORE with Trent every year except last year (undoubtedly due to TO) than he did in the single season he played with Bledsoe, so basically you are making up garbage to support your garbage opinion.

The reason is because he is not good enough to be a featured receiver.