WickedGame

Not a receiver, but I'm warming to Eric Ebron, TE out of UNC. A big body over the middle, fairly athletic. Watch his tape...he makes you realize just how slow and plodding Scott Chandler is.

Ill be there. Driving up from Charlotte one week after my wedding.

If Kyle Williams had good hands he'd be a receiver. That play showed he's clearly better suited to be a DB. Let him rotate in with Gilmore.

Getting Gilmore back > Getting Byrd back.

Nope, not I.

Per Bills text...the rubber mat is doubtful for Sunday.

Dew point.

The title of this thread should be changed to "Random Bills Fan: 5 Reasons the *Pats Can't Beat the Bills Week 1." It's misleading to imply Yahoo says the *Pats can't beat the Bills.

Can he play quarterback cornerback long snapper? Does he know how to walk on rubber mats? May as well sign him.

Fixed.

Excellent. Instead of a discussion on a substantive topic like a free agent, we get a series of rants about etiquette and protocol. Boy, objecting to the OP sure proved useful! *sarcasm*

Can anyone identify these players? The only one labeled is Brad Pitt, who I believe is practice squad eligible this year and likely won't make the 53-man roster.

Friskiness. It's a legit use of the word, and a refreshing break from stale cliches. If you think it's a word that only applies in the bedroom, it's time to cancel your Maxim subscription.

Maybe 11-3 is the new defensive front we plan to run...

+1

"What do you mean you'd trade me for a 6th round pick?" "Turn it off, or YOU'LL be Mr. Irrelevant." "Why do they keep showing an old guy sleeping in the Bills room?"

I sincerely doubt you need a smokescreen to get EJ Manuel at #8. The point of a smokescreen is to Jedi Mind Trick teams ahead of you into passing on a player so he'll fall to you. Who exactly do we need to Obi-Wan at #8? And I doubt we're setting up a smokescreen in preparation for a trade down. First we'd need a trading partner. A pre-emptive smokescreen would be thinking, like, two moves ahead. Did we graduate to the draft big leagues when I wasn't looking?

This thread isn't for mock drafts or who you WANT the Bills to pick. Let's see who you PREDICT the Bills will pick. Based on all the interviews and analysis, all the scouting visits and intelligence gathering, who do you think the Bills go with at eight? I'm going on the record: I predict they pick Keenan Allen, WR, Cal.

Saw this quote from an "AFC college scouting director" in an NFL.com article about Barkley: "Based on his junior tape, he was a second-rounder for us anyway. That's his talent. Coming back, you could argue that, with less quarterbacks this year, he should've rose to the top," the scouting director told Breer Anyone else think that could be Nix talking? Sure sounds like his Southern-speak. Pure speculation on my part, but I wouldn't put it past them to downtalk Barkley in hopes of getting him past Oakland or Arizona, or in hopes he falls to us in the second. They did the same thing with Cordy Glenn last year. http://m.nfl.com/news/0ap1000000156398/uscs-barkley-is-a-backup-qb-says-afc-scout/

All those...words.

I agree with all those points, but if you watch the New England game (pick one) or the San Francisco game, you'll come away with a lot less optimism. What did we give up, about 2,700 yards and 183 points in those two games? We had games last year we could have one. We had games where we looked worse than a Pee Wee football team. I hope the housecleaning is the start of something new.

Safety: the guy who tackles the running back after the front 7 have failed. This team needs all the safeties it can get.

Chris Kelsay is cheap.

When will people learn: Bleacher Report doesn't "name" anything. Bleacher Report didn't decide, as a publishing company, that this game was #1. This particular author did. One writer. On a site with lots of writers, lots of content, lots of opinions, and very little expertise.

I'm not trying to sound like a harbinger of doom here, but the analysis sounds eerily similar to Chan and Fitz: > When the ball is snapped, it moves fast: That's was one of Fitz's strengths (i.e., quick decisions, quick throws) > Doesn't rely on bigger, faster personnel: Sounds like our offense of the last three years -- waterbugs and WRs who weren't physically imposing > Bunch formations: Used pretty extensively by Chan in years 1 and 2, less so in year 3 > Limited use of the TE: Classic Chan Gailey > A lot of shotgun: Yep. Hey, at least Marrone keeps a back in there... > Get the ball out fast to compensate for protection issues: Typical Fitz/Chan offense. It wasn't until this year that our O-Line came together and Fitz didn't have to compensate for their weakness > Struggles inside the red zone: Yeah. Obviously the key differences are no empty sets, well executed, and well coached. Heck, even Chan's game plan could have been effective if it were well executed and well coached. The Nassib-Fitz comparisons scare me a little, too: > Gets the ball out really quick: That was Fitz's M.O. > Tries to force it into places it doesn't belong: Another Fitz trait. > Accurate on 15-20 yard passes: Sound familiar? Although, Fitz was more of a 10-15 guy (which was better than Two Yard Trent...) > Throws with a lot of zip; doesn't push it downfield: Fitz fired bullets on short passes, couldn't throw the long ball to save his life. Now, I'm not saying they're EXACTLY alike, but there are some definite similarities. In fact, even before I read the OP's analysis, I had watched a few S.U. game reels and felt Nassib looked a lot like Fitz in a lot of cases. Not always, but enough to make me wonder how much of an upgrade he'd really be. All that being said, I think Marrone's offense will be better than Chan's, not because it's more innovative or cutting edge, but because it's more balanced, better executed, and better coached. He needs a good QB, but unlike Chan, he'll lean on other talented players rather than being sunk by an average or below average QB.