transient

This is a reactionary article with absolutely no thought put in to writing it. Who that was available in the offseason would have been better? Who would you have staked the next 3-4 years of a rebuilding process on? Campbell? Thigpen? Troy Smith? The Bills apparently had interest in McNabb, who didn't show similar interest. They took a chance that they could rehab Edwards, and they admitted it when they couldn't... and quickly, no less. If previous regimes had done this, we wouldn't still have had this problem this season, and we would have never had a 4 year Flutie-Johnson QB debate. Their plan was see if one of the current QBs fits the bill, and if not find one next year in a year that might have better QBs available. Bringing in someone who you don't know flat out is better than what's already here is a waste of time.

Yeah, I think this year is starting off as planned. I was thinking yesterday that, in retrospect, starting TE made complete sense early on. Fitz is a bright guy, and one who likely has played up to his abilities the last few seasons, and he's proven he can come off the bench and give you what he has without a ton of first team reps, that was never the issue. TE was given the chance to sink or swim, and he went down for the third time, so reclamation project over. IMO, Gailey said a lot of good things about Brohm in the preseason, so now I think the competition is on for real. If Brohm can supplant Fitz or Fitz stumbles, we see what Brohm can do, and if he shows limited or no promise then I see the next few years being Fitz or a player to be named as we develop a young guy who's not currently here... the thing is, in just an offseason and three games I believe this staff CAN develop a QB (based on the evaluation process that appears to currently be taking place), whereas I wouldn't have said that at any time of any staff in the last 10 years, despite wishing like hell that they could.

Borderline penalty in a league full of much more deliberate and self-aggrandizing celebrations that don't get flagged... close game... in Gillette Stadium... going for the Patriots* who have a longstanding history of calls going their way (to the point that RULES are made in the name of them, i.e. the Brady tuck rule)... It would seem to me the very definition of home cooking, but that's me. I don't think it made a difference in the outcome, but I don't think it should have even been called, and I'm hesitant to say it even would have in different circumstances.

Unfortunately the days of Thurman calmly flipping the ball to the ref are long, LONG gone.

If not for terrible prevent defense, the field goal has them ahead at the half... but I guess that would be for losers. Going for it in that situation is exactly what a team without anything to lose would do, and is an admission that they're already desperate, and while it's probably true, it's not a great message to send, either. This decision could be argued both ways. Personally, if I thought they had a shot this season, I'd say take the FG and play some D, but knowing that they probably don't I'd say "WTF, take the chance." Players can see that, too, I'd bet.

I'm not sure which was worse, watching him trail the play, or watching his clueless safety "help" stand around and watch.

Everything that happened last year? You mean Lynch missing the first four games because he's kinda stupid, and coming back not in game shape (which is to be expected after missing the first four) carrying 10-15#s more bulk (intentionally bulking up in the offseason, according to what was reported last year (by my memory, no link)), which he couldn't play effectively with. Does that wipe out his first two seasons or the fact that he's looked good both last week and today? Despite FJ putting up similar #s last year to what Lynch did in his first two seasons yardage-wise (slightly higher avg yard per carry, but 1/4 the TDs), ML equaled his TD output with half the carries. Personally, I don't care who is starting and who is backing up, MLs running style should make both Spiller and Jackson more effective as the game goes on. Carrying three backs with FJ and ML getting the bulk of the carries, and CJ used situationally makes sense.

This really is an idiotic assertion, that teams in the NFL would not care how many points they gave up because they know they can score more against our D. Against Miami, the 'phins ran 40 times to get ~130 yards and passed for 180 and barely won. GB and NE are much better offenses, and if NE doesn't pick off the pass at the end or the one in the end zone they easily could have lost this game. Teams play to win, they don't bring "their B game" because they think their opponents suck, they usually try to take advantage of the weaknesses and blow them out so the game isn't in doubt. But, hey, if it makes you feel better to think that teams dog it against us because they can, then by all means...

Both Lynch and Jackson played week 1, but I'd guess they didn't get many touches that week cuz neither was ready to go 100%. Both looked up to speed, however, last week. I think Chan is planning to hammer Lynch's beastly head into the line early and often and then augment it with Spiller and Jackson, who's styles are much more effective off the bench, IMO.

I think he was referring to "hell," as in LT has been hell the last two years. He was making fun of the mis-punctuation.

I doubt very much that NE* is at all thrilled with giving up 30 today, or that they game planned that way. If Fitz doesn't throw the pick in the endzone, this could have very easily been a different outcome, as that was a 14 point swing. Saying they didn't care is ridiculous, especially after their D gave the game away last week to the Jets.

Until today, the front 3 at least made it difficult to run. It's no secret that we were gonna go through some growing pains with the OLBs, or the 4-3 DEs playing out of place, more like. I think both the lack of a pass rush, and the inability to cover TEs falls at their feet, and both killed us today. Unfortunately, I don't think the answers to this problem will be found this season. BTW, love the username. "Eat it, man! Not a lot, just a little piece. I'm sayin', Easy Wind is a lyin' moon cricket. But maybe on this one, he wasn't really lyin', 'cause I did it. For a small nickel. See, see, he leaves that part out. Five yards man. And it was only a little bitty piece of ****. I mean, it didn't really have no taste, either. Spongy."

+1 +100 Typical Pats* home cookin'!! I was more annoyed by his stupid haircut than the penalty.

If this game shows anything, it's that the OL is getting better, and that the offense isn't as far off as it looked with TE at the helm (though the caliber of defense we played today is not on a par with the last 2 weeks). I've been an advocate of letting this front office and coaching staff evaluate players and make their own minds up, not basing player evaluations on last year's disaster. Going in to the season, offense in general was a big ?, as were OLBs and defensive line. I wanted the coaching staff to see if TE could be salvaged. As of three games in, offense is starting to look like a matter of execution and getting serviceable play from RT and QB AND they've already turned the page on TE. Defensively it's still on the OLBs (pass rush AND figuring out how the &^%* to cover a tight end). Unfortunately the d-line gave up almost 200 yards rushing, which is a big step back. From a coaching standpoint, the gameday management is WORLDS ahead of last season... it almost looks like Gailey's coached a football team before. I expect over the next few weeks as they figure out who fits into their long-term plans, you'll see some of the dead weight jettisoned. I wonder if Scott's role today is an indication that Gailey/Edwards have seen enough of Whitner, already. We knew this would be a work in progress, but there is progress being made. I'd say three games in, and things are starting to come in to focus (and I'm still in the dinner's on me smartass competition ). If nothing else, at least this game was watchable.

Ultimately, I think they will, but it will still take a few games to get to that point. My point before was that right now everything is new to everyone, and in the next few seasons there is going to be a ton of turnover in personnel. Taking the time to evaluate who's here now lets them do it right. I couldn't agree more about Kelsay's play, but this is only the second game he's been asked to assume that role. If they're going to turn the page on him NOW, then they need to be sure they're done with him, because there are other positions that need to be overhauled, too. I'm just saying they need to determine the priority, and to do that they need to see everyone play. They're more likely to give the young guys longer to develop (even beyond this season), so they need to be sure the vets no longer fit into their plans (beyond this season) first, IMO.

Love the Fitz avatar!! Is that a bucket of pig's blood I see?! This place is gonna burn!!

Damn... I was hoping for a picture of boobs when I opened this thread.

I'm glad to hear you've turned the corner on your obsessive compulsive disorder. Now, if you can escape the delusion of granduer that your actions actually have some cause and effect relationship with the universe you'll be all set!!

I think evaluating veteran players in a new system, especially if they're playing a new position, takes some time too. If they're REALLY bad and not getting better, replacing them becomes a priority not only now but in the draft, however if they're serviceable now and showing improvement, they can be less of a priority to replace. Hopefully this staff can turn the page on bad players, which first means they've identified them and second means they've given up on them. This organization takes TOO long to do that, historically, because they're always back and forth on players and always failing at some sort of reclamation project. If two games was all it took to decide they're done with TE, great, check a box off on the list of things to do this season and don't look back. So what if it takes a few more games for some other players, and therefore it takes longer for some of the rookies to see the field, as long as it's done with an eye toward the (near, hopefully) future instead of the now, which will be painful regardless.

Nix best move as GM is not giving in to the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would have him trade every one and no one, bring in every free agent that becomes available just because, and run the organization like a fan. I love that it appears he can hear the message but ignore the personal slights that are thrown in with it, and I love that he appears to understand that this fan-base is thread bare on patience, and yet despite that is refusing to take short cuts in trying to build a winning organization. And it would appear that his coach has the same philosophy. IMO, the difference right now compared to the last 10 years is that we have a strong-minded personnel guy in charge (similar to the late 80s - early 90s!) with a vision for the team (which was thought to be the case with Donahoe, as well, but ultimately was NOT as evidenced by his constant defensive posturing and paranoid anti-fan persona). Unfortunately his team vision, while likely more suited to the climate and the division, is VERY different from what was here, and therefore there are A LOT of needs. Evaluating who is here RIGHT NOW that is serviceable in the role they're in will allow him to determine who needs to be replaced RIGHT NOW, and what he sees and what Chan sees is not likely the same as what the fans see. Some people will get on board with it, and realize it will take time, and some people will scream and shout and bang on the table because they're out of patience because of his predecessors' mistakes. Regardless, IMO the angry mob at the gate will not change the way he's going to do things, and it shouldn't. He seems like the guy who will tell you publicly that he's not the smartest guy in the room with a smirk because the dirty little secret that he'll never admit to is that deep down he KNOWS from a football standpoint he is the smartest guy in the room and he KNOWS he's the right guy for the job, and the ONLY thing that will convince people of that is the result, and ultimately he KNOWS he'll prove it. He answers the questions and plays the media game because it's part of the job (and he actually appears to enjoy it to a point), but he won't tell you what you want to hear because he doesn't care what you WANT to hear, but he will tell you the truth as he sees it and let you deal with it as you will. I also don't get the impression he's big on excuses, and would not be surprised to hear him admit it publicly when he's made a mistake. There is none of the defensiveness of Donahoe or the cluelessness of Levy (the GM) in what he exudes right now, IMO. Only TIME will tell if he's going to be successful, but expecting success RIGHT NOW AFTER 2 GAMES with the mess he inherited is unrealistic, and the only one's who don't seem to realize that are the mob at the gate.

I agree in principle, but I think there has to be a preparation process involved. Throwing them to the wolves when you know they're not ready does nothing but destroy their confidence. Hopefully the coaches are grooming the young to get them into the game in the next couple of weeks as they evaluate the other players at those positions. When they are on par, or appear to be a better option, then they should be put into the starting/active lineup. There are 14 more games left to do it, and just because we suck doesn't mean our rookies will develop quicker. Personally, I'm hoping this staff is better at getting players to their potential than previous staffs, and part of that is not crushing them early on IMO. So many people are livid about Modrak's job of talent evaluation without considering that truly talented players can be really ineffective with poor coaching and no development, thereby making his "choices" look worse when the coaching (or lack of) destroys these players.

Screw Flutie. He was a blip in this frachise's history and if it wasn't for his shameless self promotion and his schmarmy underdog story his mediocre play wouldn't have been talked about beyond his tenure here. In fact, I think the curse started when he hung Thurman out to dry with that terrible pass that resulted in a rib injury further deteriorating TT's skills, ultimately resulting in him finishing his career with the 'phins, thereby solidifying the curse. I say we sacrifice Flutie!!

You probably could have edited that a little better instead of leaving it that way for people to laugh at the wording and then feel bad about themselves afterward. As for the situation, it's rather Shakespearean... his grandparents must have had a truly astonishing bond.

I told you so mentality aside, it does add credibility to the FO's decision to (possibly) pursue McNabb, who would have been a clear upgrade despite Buddy's recent gamesmanship, and eschew players who were essentially exactly what they already had to work with, only with a different nameplate on the back of their jersey.

Unfortunately, sometimes you gotta put it under the microscope to prove it's cubic zirconia, though.