rstencel

2 plays at very least. They would most likely put Chambers in first, then him, if chambers also goes down. At least until he learns the line calls, gets comfortable with way they handle line stunts, and shows what he can do.

And would have had to do that before the bills signed him. They didn't get an option to block it when we signed him, like a restricted free agent or anything. They probably liked him, but felt that he needed more time to develop before he could help them, hence putting him on practice squad. We have done that with players before, like when we cut Jason Peters in training camp and put him on the practice squad his rookie year. We also lost a CB the next year to the 49ers that the coaches really liked and wanted to keep, and thought they could hide on practice squad.

Good point, it has been since December 07 since the last division win if I remember right. Cant win the division, until we can beat the teams in the division.

OK, lets not be ridiculous. Yes several people on the boards, including me, would like to see Steve get more opportunities. I am not aware of anyone claiming he is a top flight receiver though. Just someone who has some potential, with descent height that the bench and players ahead of him for 3rd receiver spot don't have. Find it amazing that if anyone pushes to get a bench player some looks, that some members always seem to twist that into something like this. Not sure why it is considered a sin to hope young player on team can get opportunities. Now if there is someone on the team that would hope to step up and replace Owens next year, would hope that would be Hardy. He hasn't shown anything yet, and is not healthy I know. He was very raw out of college and didn't know how to run routes properly. With the time spent on team, and hopefully a full training camp next year, he has the raw talent to be a good number 2 receiver if he comes around. That being said, I am not saying that he is Better than TO, just would like to see him get some opportunities, and think he has potential. Now if you talk about player on the current roster who could be developed into starter who else is there. Hardy is on pup. Reid already had a few opportunities and bombed, and don't really see anyone else with any real upside to eventually be a starter at receiver. So for that reason, can see why people would mention him as a possible next year. Would be nice if Steve was able to grow into a top flight WR, but hoping he sees the field more, or wins the number 3 job from Reid is not exactly the same thing as calling for him to replace TO, or saying he is the 2nd coming.

Wow, didnt think would hear anyone say, we played well against the Pats, but theyre weak, wait till we play the Jets anytime this decade

I am impressed with how well the D-Line has been playing on short yardage runs. They have really made some big stops in the short yardage run defense. Need to get move pressure on the passer, but hopefully that will come later once Maybin learns some pass rush moves. Hopefully Butler isnt hurt too bad, and can come back soon. While Scott did Ok, think there is a big drop off from Butler when he is in there.

Don't think they are saying best chance is that our defense shuts them down, more of slows them down, and holds them to reasonable total, since they're defense isn't very good. Do not think the Bills pass defense was bad in the Pats game, although their pass rush was non existent in the 2nd half. They gave the short passing game too much and had a couple of break down against the Pats, but overall played good pass defense, with the exception of the deep middle passes to TE, which is a flaw of the Tampa 2 defense, if don't have a good coverage LB. Had to catch the game on the Radio tonight, so cant really comment on it. Do think we have a good enough to make some plays and keep us in the game, if McKelvin is healthy. However not sure if we have enough of a pass rush. If they can find a was to generate a pass rush, without giving up big plays in the process, think they have a chance to pull this game out. Especially if Saints main back is out. The offense will have to play extremely well, so that the defense doesn't get worn out early. Think they can hold them to 24-28 range if they can generate a pass rush, and think their offense can score that much as well, making it a close game.

Every time he ran off for a breather, seemed like they sent him right back out a play later, to get Omon off the field. Did seem like he was gassed by the no huddle at times.

Think you start Lynch. Jackson had mostly a great game for 2 straight weeks, but cant see them giving him the start over Lynch. The fumble didn't help his cause. If put Lynch in early to wear down the Defense then switch to a fresh Jackson, have more chances for big plays, and better use of the 2 than the opposite. Lynch is more between the tackle and move the pile type, which would be better for wearing down the defense and slowing down the defense. Having Jackson come in later and fresh after the defense slows down a bit, will make him seem even faster, and may allow him to have some real big plays at end of halves, IMO.

Yes, I would rather have two backs than one. Giants had 3 good backs when they won their Super Bowl, Miami has 2 great backs, and road them to division last year. Carolina drafts backs in first round like Bills draft CB's. And Pats have been bringing in RB's by the boat load last few years. They have ex starters in backup roles including a 3rd down back with skills very similar to Jackson, and one that is on list of all time leading rushers. So to say they wouldn't keep more than one back seems unlikely by those actions, plus Bill seems to like to have his starter being a big inside runner, so think he would be starting Lynch over Jackson honestly. Injuries are very common in NFL and RB's are very susceptible. Jackson is getting to age where injuries are going to be more common, and Lynch hasn't exactly been able to go through a whole season without getting dinged up. Plus they have different styles which could be used to play off each other.

It is what allot of the good teams do, run small set of plays that are designed well with adjustments built in to them. The one thing gain by slimming the play book, is ability to improve the execution of the plays that are run, and add options routes, or variation to them to keep them fresh from game to game, and play to play eventually. They also are usually real good at not tipping what play is about to be run, like seemed to be happening when Bills audibled to runs against the Pats.

I'd take that bet, only way one of them leaves is by holding out, or letting contract expire. Who you going to rely on if trade one when the other comes out, or gets hurt, Omon?

Was on inactive list for Week 1.

While what you say about his effort issue makes sense, I don't think being asked to do something outside your comfort level is a reason to go public with your complaints about being asked to do it, or to not finish your blocks or show any hustle on the field. Still think lack of hustle and openly complaining about being asked to move outside his comfort zone played a part in his being cut, as opposed to giving him a chance to move back to RT. Having the OC change probably played a big part in it as well. If he was unhappy with the move, and due to that didn't give full effort because of that, then he should be cut, as is a young line around him, and they learn from the Vets.

As a few have mentioned, he needs a training camp to learn the position and responsibilities, or at least enough time to learn it during the season, if they are even trying to teach him. If he would have signed early, they were talking about giving him reps at LB to see how he handled it but he hasn't played the position really before, that I am aware of. If we played a 3-4, different story, as they typically have a pass rushing LB, but not sure why would want to play him at LB if the main reason you drafted him, is his pass rushing ability, and we rarely rush LBs.

Awesome. Now we only need to spend a 2nd rounder every other year on a CB rather than a first.

Would be tough to get them both on unless ran a split back system, or split one of the out wide, as neither one is a good enough blocker to fill the FB roll I do not believe. Split back systems aren't used allot anymore in the pro game, so there may be some things could take advantage of there, sort of like Miami did with Wildcat, but not to that extreme. There is a reason its not used allot anymore, as isn't as good of a formation for passing game or inside running game, but does force defenses to defend edges and can hit quickly on edges. Backs tend to line up closer to the line, so doesn allot as much time to setup blocks. Also uses allot of pitches, which have more of a chance of miscues on hand-off. Is a intriguing thought though, and wouldnt mind seeing it run out there now and then.

Jackson has more carries out of spread formations and long yardage situations that Lynch. Lynch has mostly worked out of base sets and first 2nd downs, and Bills lean on him allot when they attempt to push the running game. Games were both are playing, Jackson has mostly run in 3rd down and passing formations are prevalent, so the defense isn't typically as stacked as when Lynch is in. When Jackson has started, they have done a very good job of taking advantage of his skills. The run allot more traps and Draws, which are his strengths, and hit the edges more. Not saying that cant be your every week offense, but it is a different style of running game with Lynch as compared to Jackson, and I think the defenses tend to spend more time working for the style running offense we play when Lynch is in since there is more film on that, than on style we run when Jackson is in. Its like when backup QB comes in, looks real good if in relief or only an occasional start, but if forced to take over, defense catch up to his style. Still, really like what Jackson brings, and he could be a good starter in this league with appropriate offensive scheme, just prefer having a back like Lynch, because believe it opens up larger possible play book for running offense, and makes it harder for defenses to key on specific types of runs. I do understand why people like Jackson as starter though, he is fun to watch.

If you believe the pre draft rumors, the Bills were rumored to like Lynch better than Peterson, and would have chosen Lynch even if Peterson was still on the board. Find that hard to believe, but have seen them make worse evaluations.

I don't honestly, Cribbs was a real good insider runner, and could wear down a defense. Also wasn't the greatest receiver. I think the Comparison to Hooks is more accurate honestly. As far as who is the better back, think depends on the role. Lynch is a better every play back, because he can do all the plays. Much better inside runner. Has decent speed and hands. Good blocker. Jackson is more dynamic, and exciting back though. He has all the making of a great 3rd down back, or a good back for a pass first type offense, that spreads out the defense. However do not feel like he can be the main back for conventional set. Not the type of back that will wear down a defense and make consistent gains with inside running game. Much prefer to have both backs and use them appropriately, as both are very good. But if had to only have one, with buffalo's offense would choose Lynch. Now if talking Colts or Chargers offensive style, would pick Jackson.

Running screen isn't easy either, but its the line that sells a screen as much as QB, and the line getting out front is what allows screens to consistently work. Don't think fact our line played well and Jackson made good runs makes TE a pawner. It does bode well for team in future however. If they can keep having success with the screen game, its going to help slow down opponents rush, and make whole offense better. Hope that success was due to how well the Bills ran it, and not because the Patriots didn't expect or plan for it. Last few years they couldn't run a screen well at all, so doubt the Pats spent much time on defending it. It may have been a bit of both, but seeing those young linemen running out front was inspiring, and due to that, it sure looks like is going to be tough for anyone to defend to me

for starters, was just kidding about the Skooby thing Trent did play pretty well. However, like several have pointed out, quite a few of these yards were gained on screens, which is more product of line selling it, and getting out front, and the nice runs after the catch to get those yards. He did make some decent throws on other plays as well. The drop by TO was a good throw, and so was the first play of last drive to TO as well. His play after that throw to TO on the last drive would be why I do not agree that he pawed Brady however. He seem confused and didn't step up when the game was on the line, which would expect from the pawning QB. Admittedly the play calls and line had allot to do with that, they should have run some check down routes for him to get it out quicker, or gave him another screen to slow down the rush. Also the fact that both teams basically had same yards per play stat, but Patriots had almost 2x the yardage. AVP did a good job most of the game giving him allot of easy throws and plays to get his confidence up, and he did play very well most of the game, but do not think he pawned at all.

Is your other login Skooby?

Very true, he messed up, but is a very good player. Even if he was the worst player on the team, don't take it out on his personal life, that's just plain despicable.