Rob's House

The Fitz bashing has gone a little overboard here. No, he's not an elite QB and he never will be. He's a decent starter than can manage a game and win with a solid supporting cast, but if you expect him to carry the team you're going to be dissappointed. At this point it's a little silly that while we're fielding what's possibly the worst defense in the history of the league that people are calling for the head of our average QB.

After taking some time to think about it and really reflect, I've come to realize that I still hate the new playoff format. A lot.

Wouldn't this be kind of like benching Fitz for Tarvaris Jackson?

I really don't get this. The guy coached good defenses in the NFL. When he was HC in Miami the defense carried the team. Sure that's been a little over 10 years now, but the game hasn't changed THAT much. That's why it's so mind boggling. How does a guy with a long history of success take over a team with this much talent and proceed to turn in the most epic failure in the history of the league? Again, the game has evolved, but it hasn't changed that much. Are these players just too retarded to hit their assignments? Is the talent on the defense a mirage? Did Wandstedt just forget how to run a defense? I just don't get it.

And what if Emily Procter wanted me to !@#$ her? I'd do that too.

I knew someone would chime in with this garbage. When Mario Williams is crying about his sore wrist it's one thing to rip on it. If you saw the hit that FJ took, understand how improbable it was for him to be back so soon, and are still spouting this crap I can only assume you're a miserable soul who just needs to complain about everything, and you probably deserve to be a Bills fan.

Can we at least wait until he's out of the knee brace before we declare him finished?

It takes a special kind of douche bag to go talk **** to the players on Twitter. We're all bummed by the team's performance, but getting personal with individual players is just childish & pathetic.

I'm as optimistic as anyone, but I think it's done. I suppose it's possible to right the ship & rally down the stretch, but even then I'd be absolutely shocked to finish .500. We just witnessed two all-time ass whippings back-to-back. Our team just got laid out like Trent Edwards in that Cardinals game, & I don't think they're coming back.

If TJax could hit open receivers down the field he'd still be in MN. Or at least Sea. We could use an upgrade at QB, but he's not that. It doesn't matter anyway. With the D giving up record gains we could put a 28 year old Peyton Manning back there and still get blown out.

I fully expect the Bills to win today. Of course, I fully expected a win last week, so...

If the same Bills D that showed up last Sunday shows up today, Al Gore will run for 300 yds and 5 TDs.

Fitz's biggest problem is his arm strength. He can dissect the play and find the go to receiver as often as most of the best; he just doesn't have the arm to rifle it in there, and because of that he has to overcompensate which makes his passes inaccurate. His TD:INT #s don't mean much. A bunch of the TDs are in garbage time and a lot of the ints are meaningless (like that one Sunday where he was intercepted 35 yards down field - It's essentially the same result as a punt.) What concerns me is his inability to hook up cleanly on deep balls and his tendency to miss open receivers when the window tightens. If we had a solid defense, like we thought we were supposed to have this year, I have no doubt he could lead the team to the playoffs. But with this sad sorry crowd we'd need a QB of Favrian abilities to carry the team on his shoulders if we're to see the post-season, and no matter how well he plays I doubt Fitz will ever have the arm for that.

That still doesn't do it for me. That same argument could justify the coin toss. To me it cheapens the game. It would be like NFL replacing the WC games w/ an overtime elimination. I'm not just bitter b/c the Braves lost either; I thought it was a crummy rule when I first heard about it. I get the part about adding value to winning the division; but IMO they should either do the WC right or not at all. I think this makes the most sense. The only reason for a 1 game playoff would be if 2 teams tied for the WC. This format change is just another dumbass move like making the all-star game count.

Other than throwing stuff on the field, what did the fans do that was so offensive? I didn't see it, but I imagine after following a 162 game season to see your team eliminated in a one game sham of a playoff, on a call that makes the Golden Tate catch look reasonable by comparison, I don't blame the fans for being pissed.

!@#$ baseball. This single game "playoff" is retarded. It was bad enough having best of 5 playoffs. One game in baseball? Might as well flip a coin. Bud Selig is ruining the game.

I always thought it was kind of like a really long subway? No?

Yeah, I get what you're saying; and perhaps I misinterpreted your comments about government's role in the economy in the 21st century. While I'm sure your ideal involves far more intervention than mine I'm sure we could, and I think even have found a few areas we could agree to start on and to the extent that moving on the things we agree on and putting the rest on the back burner could be considered compromise, I could go for that. But I think substantively the reality is closer to a debate between more government and less government. If framed as "Beloved Leader wants this and you guys won't give an inch" you can argue Republican's are the uncompromising "extremists" (I'm sorry, I laugh and sigh at the utter absurdity every time I hear some dickless tool call the current crowd of douche bags comprising the Republican party as right wing extremists [and don't take offense, b/c to my recollection you're not one of them]) But if you frame it from a POV where a reduction in government intervention is an objective the Dems have been staunchly opposed to any compromise. In fact, leading Dems call the very modest cuts the castrati that is the Republican party have mustered up the courage to propose, "extreme". The problem isn't just with the opposition, but also the scope. The modern bi-partisan compromise tends to be something along the lines of "I'll cut spending if you raise taxes". And whatever, that's all fine and dandy, but to me it seems like window dressing for the semi-interested masses. We need massive reductions in spending, a restructured tax code, and regulatory reform on a massive scale, and we're just talking about essentially moving around a few pennies here and there. These proposed changes and solutions remind me of the Eddie Murphy bit about Johnny Carson's wife getting a part time job to throw her $68 in with his $300 million to do her fair share. They sound good in theory when viewed from a certain angle, but at the end of the day they don't accomplish ****. And for failure to shuffle the pennies around we stand here like a bunch of stooges pointing at the other team saying it's their fault for not compromising as though this lack of meaningless compromise is the real hurdle to getting our economic problems resolved.

First line of the article ...there is now a Democrat in the WH.

Fixed YPA may be better than any other single statistic (that's debatable) but by itself doesn't necessarily tell you much either. It's subject to manipulation just like any other statistic. That's why statistics suck. Picking up 2 yards on 3rd and 1 looks bad on a RBs ypc and tossing a 15 yard pass on 3rd and 20 after you just took a sack for a 10 yard loss looks good on ypa (think Rob Johnson). Point is, no one statistic means dick without context.

He reminds me of Jamarcus Russell.

This is a perfect example of how stats don't always tell you a lot. Most of those KC rushing yards came in garbage time when the game was out of reach & we were willing to give them those gains on the ground & run the clock. Did you even watch the game?

Don't get your hopes up guys. If he's all that he's not going to last to the end of the first round anyway.

Gailey is fond of saying he expects to win every game. That's the right thing to say but I don't know if this team has always believed it. I think if they go into this, or any other game for that matter, truly expecting to and believing they can & should win, there's not a team in the league they can't take out on any given Sunday.

Props, that was pretty good. I get your point, the problem is it's not a matter of one extreme or the other but it is a difference in the fundamental approach. If you & I were leading the country I'm not even sure if we could compromise because I would want to back government out of the equation. Not eliminate it's role, just decrease it. You on the other hand think having the government steering the economic ship is the key. And we're a lot more genuine & reasonable than the !@#$s making the decisions and we're a lot smarter than the average voter they have to appease. I'm not saying it's necessarily impossible, but it's easy to throw around rhetorical terms like compromise in the abstract but when you have views that are diametrically opposed to one another & each side wants to pull in it's own direction, it's not so simple to find a middle ground.