Rob's House

It never ceases to amaze me how so many otherwise intelligent Bills fans become ridiculous when it comes to Flutie. I already discussed Kemp & Fergie. As to the second one, I never said the defense wasn't the strength of that team. But Flutie did the things that enable a defensive team to win. Those who can't see that are either allowing emotion to cloud their judgment or have too narrow a mindset to understand that.

That's 1 game against a horrid D that was playing its back ups. Look at RJ'S W/L record while he was here and get back to me.

It was somewhat amusing. I didn't care for the shots at Hogan and Orton.

Does anyone know if having gotten a flu shot in years past gives you stronger resistance than if you've never had one?

God I'm so tired o hearing that horse ****. Yes, it was a good defense, but if that defense was so dominant why couldn't they win a goddamn thing when Flutie wasn't playing. This kind of crap makes me think the Bills deserve the curse. A dynamic but unconventional player comes in, makes us a winning team, and because he didn't put up big stats people say he just rode the coat tails of the defense. He played to win the game, unlike that California candy ass who kept taking sacks to protect his damn rating.

To be fair, he didn't get to play in the playoffs last time he got us there. Edit: And if defenses had him figured out, how'd he win 6 of his last 8 games before being replaced?

There's something to be said for being able to recognize your mistakes and correct them rather than being bull-headed. It reminds me of a story about an investment guy who hired two teams of investors. One was comprised of reasonably intelligent individuals and the other was comprised of geniuses. Surprisingly, The geniuses performed significantly worse. When he dug deeper he learned the reason was because the regular guys were willing to recognize their mistakes and make changes. The geniuses were so used to being right that they were unwilling to believe they had made a mistake and stubbornly stuck to their plan even when it wasn't working. Sometimes it's better to cut your losses.

I'm undecided. If we finish the year with a winning record he'll be okay with me.

I didn't claim to know Manuel's ceiling. You, or whoever I was responding to, did claim to know Orton's. I pointed out the flaws in that assumption. There's no inconsistency here on my part.

To your first question, yes, and I already explained that in greater depth earlier in this thread. To your second question, no, that was not the point.

The rumor is that Orton's the man, Homo's a douche, and Tebow rolls a little to holy for Orton's hedonistic ways. And it had to be awkward kicking it with EJ knowing he was there to take his job.

Looks like he was hanging in the pocket waiting for a receiver to come open and was willing to take the hit to make it happen but the defender got there before the receiver got clear. Dude's got a hefty set.

You were talking about accuracy, not draft position, and accuracy was not an asset that helped EJ. Assuming you're right, the only reason for that is because the read option is the new fad and people thought EJ had the combination of running ability and arm strength to make it work. No one would have drafted him in the first 4 rounds to be a pocket passer and that's partly because he lacks accuracy.

No NFL scout is comparing completion % between college QBs to gauge accuracy.

I find it interesting that the legend of Hairston seems to be growing. I'm hopeful he can progress but I'm curious whether people wanting him to start think he'll be an improvement or just hope he can be. I didn't follow pre-season as much as I'd have liked, but for those who did, was he beaten out by Henderson, or was Henderson given the job on account of potential?

If Bradford is signed it will probably be for more than Orton makes and likely as the presumptive starter. If that happens I can see Orton opting out and going elsewhere. If he has a good season he should be able to find some team who he can start for. If we could get them both on the roster at a reasonable sum I'd be fine with it.

This is kind of what I was thinking. Obviously we'll have to see how the season plays out first, but if Orton keeps playing the way he's been playing I'm not sure I'd see Bradford as an upgrade. He's not bad, but to this point he's a guy that's never quite lived up to his billing. Whether that's due to his shortcomings or the team around him I can't say for sure, but if he and Orton are more or less equal I'd rather go with the guy who's already in our system, doesn't get hurt every other game, and has a cool pornstache.

fixed

If that's the basis of your argument I think it's flawed. It ignores that Orton has progressed throughout his career in ways that most QBs don't. Many QBs picked higher than Orton have come into and exited the NFL since he was drafted, but he's still here, now starting, because he improved. His last stint in Denver he put up respectable numbers over 2 seasons with a QB rating around 87 and averaging over 250 yds/game. Backing up Romo he didn't see the field but he's still been practicing. To say he can't or hasn't improved since his time in Denver seems to be a baseless claim to me.

They are missing (I think) 2 starters. I wouldn't say they didn't miss a beat though. They couldn't have blocked Aaron Maybin two weeks ago, then this week they looked like a brick wall. I'm wondering if a few weeks for CR and Pears to get acclimated and for these guys getting used to playing with each other will make a big difference or if the talent/coaching just isn't there.

I think Orton stole it out of EJ's locker.

If you go that route I'd imagine Pears goes to RT (where he's far better suited than at RG) and Hairston is the swing tackle. So far Hairston hasn't been able to beat out Pears for a position.

A. Where's the evidence of any development. This isn't Madden franchise mode. Your QB doesn't necessarily get better just by playing. B. Games, the season, potential playoff run, the locker room, Sunday afternoons, potential FA who don't want to play on a team that can't score. Shall I go on?

Really? And you know this how? Based on 2 games? I'm just curious. If Matt Stafford were our QB would you bench him for EJ? Because Orton has played better over the last 2 games than stafford. Both play for teams that are 1-1 over the last two weeks, but Orton has had the better statistical performance. To be fair, Stafford had to go up against the big bad Vikings last week. Let's compare: Orton - 54/81, 607 yds, 66.7% comp, 7.5 ypa, 3 TDs, 2 INTs, 7 sacks, 1 fumble Stafford - 37/64, 416 yds, 57.8% comp, 6.5 ypa, 2 TDs, 1 INT, 10 sacks, 2 fumbles That's not a comparable play. On the one you linked Goodwin was single covered and the ball just had to be thrown past the defender. On the pass Orton made the safety was coming over and the ball had to be placed precisely where it was to stay in bounds and avoid the safety. Not to take anything away from Manuel for making a good throw, but those are simply not comparable plays.

If Austin Davis was a Bill I doubt you could find more than 3 people demanding we go all in on him and not draft another QB this year for fear of shaking his confidence.