skibum

Hats off to the guy. He held down an NFL roster spot for FOUR YEARS despite his only real playing time being historically bad. He probably made more money than I ever will in my entire, long, brutal career. I love guys like Peterman.

Sanders took catches away from everyone. They're still a top 5 WR group in the league. Nothing to see here, only problem is maybe they could have spent Sanders' money and roster spot on a competent Guard instead, and still had a great WR group. Allen will have to figure out how to get Sanders, Diggs, and Beasley each 100 YPG if everyone is going to look great on paper this year.

Trubisky is a great insurance policy, and there is nobody else on the roster to fill that role. They would need to get Fitz in return, and I can't see Beane making a trade without improving the team for this year's playoff run, so any deal would also have to bring another player back to Buffalo. Preferably an interior OL. Why would he trade Trubisky for a pick unless they were out of the playoff mix? If anything, Beane should be sending picks with Trubisky to get a nice return for this year's playoff run. I'm thinking Mitch plus a day 3 pick for Fitz plus a Guard.

Ridin' Free with the Buffalo, Here I Go!

I was just thinking about how likely it seems that Henry will be less of a factor come playoff time, either from acute injury or just from being worn down to the nub. I guess it's happening sooner than I thought. Sucks for him and the Titans, but I still think Tannehill is a gamer and the Titans are a solid team even without Henry. Just not as good as the Bills.

Gotta say I'm on the T-Sween bandwagon. You gotta love Diggs, the superstar everyone wants to think is a prima donna, talking up the backup TE the way he did. That was a cool move for Diggs, and I think the kid can deliver, too!

I'm surprised San Jose didn't make the list. Yes, it's the Bay Area, but that market has supported two teams in the past, and San Jose is dripping with Tech money these days. Not saying they deserve a team or would be an exciting location, but they can certainly afford it.

Looking at the big picture - It's not like they went out and laid an egg. They lost a close game on the road, to a good team with a RB from Tecmo Bowl; made a lot more good plays than bad ones, and scored over 30 with even turnover ratio. While i certainly wish they had done a few things differently, made fewer mistakes and won, I could hardly be frustrated with the game.

I didn't think it was a 'bad loss'. You could argue it was winnable for sure, but you have to give credit to the Titans D and Derrick Henry for making plays when they needed to. Also, the game before the bye week is arguably the best one of the season to lose. The team now has two weeks to stew over their disappointment and stay hungry, rather than pat themselves on the back and rest up.

Less than 50% because they would have to make the field goal first, which has its own probability of not happening.

I thought the refs made the right calls last night, but what was up with all the deliberating? Total waste of time, slowed the game down horribly.

You forgot about Bass having every single KO returned. What is up with him kicking off from a stand-still? He never got one into the end zone all game. It wasn't what cost the Bills the game, but WTF?

Highest scoring team in the league and we're talking about how the offense isn't good enough?

It's a very good list, but I think Steve Christie should be on it! I would rank him higher than Owens, Clay, Centers, Morse, and Sanders for sure.

It helps to have a bunch of guys that are all really good. I don't know that every team could get away with this strategy - some reserve NFL linemen are liability-level players. Would the Bills be able to run this successfully with the likes of John McCargo and Aaron Maybin on the roster? I do think it speaks to the value of building a DL of versatile players rather than specialists.

Easily the Titans. Derrick Henry is the kind of player that can win games by himself, and the rest of their team is pretty good anyway.

Heinecke has been solid, but if the Bills D gets off like it did vs. Miami, he's going to have a really hard day. Could be a repeat of the Miami game if defensive dominance results in turnovers - Bills will have favorable field position and score a lot of points without having to generate lots of yards. Bills: 38 WTF: 6

I think it's important to remember that when your defense is dominating, your offense doesn't have to take risks to win the game. If the game plan was conservative on Sunday, it's probably because they didn't need to do more to win handily.

Nope, sorry. Not by any measure, except that I would rather have a beer with Jim Kelly.

I don't have any specifics, and I have never been to Green Bay, but I have been all around Wisconsin and can tell you they have the best bars there! Friendly people, old-school atmosphere, fried cheese curds, cheap beer. You will find yourself a great spot with minimal effort.

It has Seattle starting the season 0-9. Not sure I trust the algorithms on this one!

The Bills are stacked at WR with a bunch of gifted, smart athletes (mostly vets) who can always get open all over the place. They can all go deep - even Beasley. This shouldn't even be a conversation.

I never understood why so many teams run on first down. At first down, you know you still have three more chances if it doesn't go right, so why not shoot for the moon? I'm not a big tennis fan, but I do know that 'first serve' is when they just rip it with everything they have, because they know if they fault, they get another shot. Second serve is the conservative serve - just make sure it's in bounds. Why isn't this same strategy applied to football?

Yes, the old Vosean Joseph maneuver! I think that was his name, anyway. That actually sounds like a likely scenario if they don't think Boogie's ready. Charles, I think you might have called it!

If there is an opportunity to fill a need by obtaining a player of similar caliber to Hughes, and the rest of the DE group looks solid, then yes, trading Hughes for a player would seem like a logical, if painful, move. If you think about it, if this was another rebuild year, Hughes would probably get shipped to a contender for a decent draft package. He could be a major missing piece for a good team looking to make a run, so he's a valuable asset. I don't think either side is looking to part ways, but business is business. Any trade partner would likely be a contender with a surplus of good players, so that would at least give Hughes a softer landing. I just don't know if they would want to give up his vet leadership. He's a major presence in that regard.