dayman

Those who say he's no good w/ out the roids how does your opinion of him have any weight compared to the obvious fact that we have guys on our roster who we've already given a shot and are sitting there doing nothing? There is no reason not to bring him in and simply cut his ass if he's no good. Absolutely no reason.

It's nice to say we should want to win every game guys...and I was with you a mere couple weeks ago...but this has been just an unbelievable last 2-3 years to deal w/...we deserve the #1 pick and that's the bottom line. No winning from here on out can take away the absolute disaster of a season this has been...and come summer time we do ourselves a disservice if teams like the Cowboys and even the Vikings are somehow picking ahead of us... If Luck comes out and we don't get him b/c we win 4 games instead of 2...that's tragic. Simple as that. There is no rationalizing that point away.

Yup, automatic. Should just be automatic. Give him time to get healthy, give him some love, and see if he works out. If he doesn't, oh well...cut him. Who cares...

2 I don't root for us to lose, but I don't want us climbing back into our regular 10ish pick spot either. This season, regardless of what happens from now on, was brutal. Let's reap the rewards for our suffering and have our pick.

Williams on the end...yeah...let's do that...

There is simply no reason to not bring him in even if we cut him. We haven't cut McCargo yet...it's idiocy to suggest this guy shouldn't get a shot on the Bills...

I saw Moats getting absolutely blown the !@#$ off the line last week by KC's unbalanced formations...I mean it was like a wave and the edge (where Moats was) was curling up like my hair when I have a hat on.

I think if we got good the media would indulge us...it would be a "story"...after over a decade of darkness the "loyal Bills fans some the best in the NFL" are rewarded and they are circling the wagon once more. While we weren't good enough for everyone to buy in, I feel like we were on the verge of getting some true props w/ our 5-1 start.

Yeah, they did "the good, the bad, and the ugly" of the nfl weekend and we were Golic's bad and he said it's bad b/c we play hard and fight and to lose like that twice and have no wins is tough. Greenberg said something "oh I'm glad you took that turn b/c I saw bills on there as bad and was going to take issue"...so both are in agreeing there... Bottom line we are not one of these clueless dysfunctional teams...we have guys who are experienced now running the show (regardless of what you may think about that experience) and we just aren't good but we play hard and people won't root against that...they all saw the bull **** "fumble" last week and they all saw the bull **** freeze this week...

When you find a Brady and build an o-line around him that you maintain and pay attention to all the sudden filling other holes becomes much more manageable. They have an identity and they know who they are. Thus, they know what they need to do. That said they've busted recently on a lot of their draft picks despite having many.

John you don't have to put the entire game on him, but blame falls on Fitz. The int and the over throw of Spiller both could have ended it as much as anything else...if it had gone the other way.

Local papers are asking if he's the worst player in the league less than 24 months after we took him #9 overall...yes.

Yup. TO was a total pro when he was in Buffalo. He's a great player and honestly I think much more highly of him having had him on our team for a year than I did before. I also see that he's not done even though he's old. He's one of the hardest workers in the NFL.

Yup. Always. Unless you are a team that has won a super bowl recently.

But..but...they have to know how to win! We need winners, guys who win in college!

Heyword looks slow. Clayborn looks great in that video. Love the attitude.

Nobody pays attention to the worst team in the league. So everyone is at a disadvantage. AND, people have preconceived notions about what Fitz is...much like many Bills fans did (despite him clearly getting better) and some still do...sadly unless Fitz keeps up w/ the awesome production he's had recently all year he won't have a shot. If there's any reason to put 3 guys ahead of him, they will be ahead of him. And even if there isn't...he probably will be shafted.

He's always been solid when asked to do things he can do...people forget that b/c he makes what is in actuality not an enormous amount of money (relatively speaking of course)....

Man I've wondered about if Chan was the man for the job this season...who hasn't...we've been TERRIBLE...worst we've EVER been. BUT, I never doubted the O would be better. I instantly could see what we were trying to do was better (despite some peoples problems w/ not running enough early on)....but when we cut Trent...I knew for damn sure he was legitimately going to improve us on offense. Now...defense...well..he's about as advertised there as well...just b/c he calls the plays doesn't me he doesn't have to take ownership of that mess. He's the HC.

Thing about KC is I'm not sure they know enough to not look past us.

While there are no "moral victories" in football...we basically got one yesterday.

First time all season we look like we can win a game...we actually look like we can win a few...not many...but some.

I post only to say that this is NOT a ridiculous question to ask.

Well, now that he's a big deal...I ask what is with this "Stevie?" Where does it come from? Why do so many people call him "Stevie" as opposed to "Steve." What do you call him? Am I the only one that, quite frankly, think it's gay to call him "Stevie?" PS: Like I said if there is a reason for this feel free to inform me...I don't know.

Fitz said in presser after game: "Steve's been my guy since I came to Buffalo, glad to see it out on the field finally." And Chan talked about them getting on the same page w/ Steve's "subtle" moves that work well when done in time w/ the qb... Passing game looks great.