2003Contenders

This actually does bring up a good point. For as much criticism as MM has received for not running Willis enough on Sunday -- I seemed to recall TOO many times when Willis was on the sidelines sucking up air. To me there is clearly a conditioning problem here that is also evidenced by Willis' tailing off after the halfway mark of the season. Is this going to be an on going problem with Willis -- or is it a problem with the strength and conditioning coach? It is also a clear indicator that we need a second quality back to take up some of those carries when Willis is genuinely gassed. You know, someone a little better than Shaud Williams. Even Thurman had Kenneth Davis to spell him.

How'd McCown do the one game he played in Buffalo last year? Oh, that's right he made some comment about how he couldn't imagine how someone like Jim Kelly could have had a productive career playing in these weather conditions.

McGahee has ZERO leverage here. If he even threatens a hold-out, the front office should respond with, "Go ahead and do what you think's best."

One thing is, despite everything we heard to the contrary, Willis has yet to show the burst that he had at Maimi prior to the injury. Will he ever get it back?

I would advocate trading next year's #1 to move up to get him, as I think he is a player that will make an immediate impact. That gives us an entire year to work on re-acquiring that draft pick.

I just made reference to this in another post. I will have to say that MM really did show me somthing in last week's game. I'm not one that buys that the win was not a good one, considering that the Benglas CERTAINLY had something to play for. Here's what I would say... 1. Considering what was at stake for the Bengals, MM clearly out-coached Marvin Lewis, a guy who is on some lists as a Coach of the Year candidate. 2. MM had the team ready to play, when they could easily have been running for the bus. 3. For a change, the staff made some decent adjustments during the game. 4. They showed some heart in coming back practically everytime the Bengals looked to be taking the momentum. The on-sides call may have been the deciding bit for him. I know that it didn't matter because Holcomb ultimately threw that lame INT. However, the call was a good one -- and the execution was great. More important, maybe for the first time all year I didn't see that deer-in-the-headlights look when he and April pled their case to the refs. He was forceful enough to the point where the refs didn't even require the use of a challenge flag to correct the call. Maybe, just maybe this was a deciding moment for MM as a head coach in much the same way that players have a breakout game. Maybe we'll see againt next week against the Jets in another "meaningless" game. I just wish that we had seen more of this from him earlier in the year.

The team always looked pretty sharp and ready to play (save for the second NE game) at the outset of each game. The problems came from the 2nd quarter on. What does this mean? I think our coaching staff showed that they are pretty good Monday-Saturday, when the game planning is done. However, they are missing something on gameday -- when adjustments are made. That is one thing that I DID like about the coaching staff in the Cinci win. They showed some ingenuity -- and even some gumption in arguing their case related to the refs' near botch of the on sides kick. Really, it may have been an aberration -- but MM outcoached Marvin Lewis in that game. Let's see if the trend continues against the Jets. After all, MM himself can use a confidence booster heading into the off-season, supposing that he's back next year.

Josh Reed actually proved himself to be somewhat useful -- and even made some clutch catches here and there... Before the season I never thought I'd advocate bringing him back next year.

I agree that a quality pass-catching TE is very important. Need evidence, you need look no further than Drew Bledsoe. In his best days in NE he had Ben Coates. In his one good season with us he had Riemersma -- I know not much but still he had pretty good hands. I don't think it's any coincidence that Drew's coming back down to earth the following season was at least partially because JR was sent packing... It's also no coincidence that having Jason Witten this year has allowed him to make a comeback in Dallas. Hind-sight is 20-20 but for those who say that taking Willis with that #1 pick back in 2003 wasn't such a bad thing because TD still landed the guy he wanted in the second round (with Kelsay). Well, what if we had taken Kelsay with that first pick -- and then selected Witten in the second round? My point is that the TE posiiton has been just as neglected as the OL that everyone keeps complaining about. Let's hope Everett can make a full recovery by next season.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Adams the brain-child behind the Erik Flowers selection back in 2000? If memory serves me correct, he was the loudest voice pining for this late riser based on a supposedly incredible private workout.

I don't think MM and TD missed the boat with JP being named starter this year as much as they were simply wrong about everything else around him. Look at the Bears. They are proof that that formula: strong defense and decent rushing attack can mask the shortcomings of an inexperienced QB. If anything, Orton was even less effective than JP. The sad truth is that our own coaching staff overrated our defense -- and understimated the lengths that opposing defenses would go to to stop our rushing attack. Also, I don't think that starting Holcomb every game would have meant the playoffs for this team either. I think there was a conflcit in philosophy back in February, where someone -- be it Wyche or MM -- felt that the best thing to do for JP was to provide nothing in the way of a challenge and name him the uncontested starter going in. I think perhaps that whoever made the ultimate decision was looking too closely at things that happened with other teams -- namely Cinci and Pittsburgh -- without regards to our own situation.

I think part of the problem this year is that MW found himself in TD's and MM's doghouse for reportedly refusing to redo his contract to free up cap space. I am not one to say that a guy has no heart. But one of the qualifications to play OL in the NFL is the ability to play through pain. We all have a different threshold for pain. When I hear the things that guys like Mark Schlereth played through, I can't imagine EVER being so impervious to pain. While MW may have all of the talent in the world, clearly he misses the mark on the pain threshold requirement. Again, I know that is easy for me to say, but I'm also not the one making $5 - $10 M per year with the natural (and unnatural) abilities to play through an incredible amount of pain.

The only thing I will say is that the last time JP came off the bench in a game, he led us to victory against the Chiefs. Maybe MM is planning on starting Kelly, but will insert JP once we inevitably see that we are losing? Remember, even before Kelly got knocked out of that game, we heard that MM was planning on using both QBs. Just a thought. And, even though I advocate going with one QB and sticking with him, there is no denying that teams defend these 2 QBs differently. Do you think Denver would have only rushed 2 or 3 defenders on most passing downs against JP, as they did against Kelly last week?

That $12M guaranteed up-font money is too much to give him at this stage of his career. If he plays, say, only one year of it, then it would cost us $8 M against the cap just to release him -- and that doesn't even count the unamoratized portion of his orginal signing bonus. Much is going to depend on how much EM really wants to be back and how much of a cut he is willing to accept.

Thank you, sir!

Two things: 1. Even with such a great stat line, the Browns STILL lost that game. 2. These aren't the same Bengals.

Back to the Johnson Flutie thing... For all of the speculation that we have that TD is a control freak, I really do think that this particular decision was all GW. It would have been perfectly in keeping for GW to have felt that he ALONE could take this talented but fragile young QB and mold him into being a superstar. He had recruited Mike Shepard, Holmgren's QB coach to take over as GM -- and he was convinced that RJ would thrive in the West Coast offense. TD, meanwhile, had just come from ESPN, where as an analyst when asked about the QB situation in Buffalo, he cited Flutie's record as a starter and asked "What's the question?" I think GW sold TD on the point that past injuries had made RJ something of an unknown commodity, while Flutie's age provided lesser upside. GW went through the motions of talking to the players in the clubhouse about their opinions -- but his decision was clearly made up. Sadly it was this arrogance that marked GW's career in Buffalo, and I am sure he is feeding off of this "Defensive genius" stuff we keep hearing out of Washington. All of which is to say... when making a list for the prosecution regarding TD's failures in Buffalo, I'd pass on this particular allegation.

The truth of the matter is that our team was never well equiped to handle those strong NFC East teams that were so tough at the line of scrimmage. We played our best ball in that Giants game -- and darn near won, but the problems that would eventually plague us in the other 3 games began to come into focus in that Giants game. Remember that Polian originally built that team to thwart Miami, who had primarily owned the division for decades. As such we could score quickly and almost at will to keep up with Marino -- and our pass defense was strong. However, we were not built to handle a consistently strong rushing attack. Yes, I know that we managed to beat those NFC East teams during the regular season -- but in a winner take all tournament the stakes are very different. We simply did not match up well against those power running teams. I really think the treat that would have provided the better match-up would have been if the Bills could have faced the 49ers during one of those years. Of course, the 49ers had their own problems getting past those teams as well.

I could have sworn that the Giants kicked off (after kicking the go-ahead field goal) rather than punting to us for that final drive. Again, maybe I am having selective memory loss. As far as blame goes, I really have never been one to blame anyone in particular for that loss. It really was a great game: probably the most evenly matched game in Super Bowl history. Everyone wants to discount the Giants, but they were 13-3 just like we were with a GREAT defense that had held the mighty 49ers to just 12 points (I believe) the week before. Personally, I thought Kelly called a pretty good game. He completed 60% of his passes against a defense that dropped 8 and 9 guys into coverage much of the day. Based on the way the Giants were defending us, he also deserves credit for not throwing any INTs. And he made pretty sound adjustments by getting Thurman involved -- to the point where Thurman would have been the MVP if Norwood's kick had been good.

Carthon would be the worst possible choice. He has had a history of not being able to get along with the players. Saunders is intriguing for all of the reasons mentioned. His situation kinda reminds me of Marv's when he was hired back in 86. I don't know much about Grimm as a coach, but he was a tough SOB as a player. Maybe he could be the solution to the team's mental toughness issue. Could you imagine someone like Mike Williams wimping out on him?

It really was a classic game -- in my opinion STILL the best Super Bowl ever -- despite our coming out on the losing end. Think back to how well both teams played that day. No turnovers. Few penalties... and a great cat and mouse game by both coaching staffs. I have always said also that it was unfair to blame Norwood for missing that kick and resting the win or loss on his shoulders. I would say that the biggest reason for losing the game was #3 -- but magnify to say that we lost because our defense could not get off the field. That coupled with the lack of success that the offense had early on, didn't allow the defenders to catch their breath in the humidity of Florida. I also think that if the defense had done a better job on that final drive before the end of the half, we may have taken the G-Men out of playing their brand of football in the second half. One question -- as time has dimmed my memory... That final drive I believe started out on the 10-yard line. Was there a penalty -- or just a horrible run back? I'd have to say that starting out on the 25 -- or even the 20 may have meant a difference in the outcome of that drive.

JDG, That may be true, but if MM is putting all of his hopes on Kelly Holcomb, then he is even dumber than any of us thought. Personally, I want JP back on the field ASAP. I'm not convinced that he's rid his mind of that horrible game-turning interception that he threw at the goal line against Miami. Any positive progress he can make going forward would mean bigger kudos (from me at least) to MM than praying that Kelly can somehow muster a victory.

By turning down a proposed (if this report is true) long-term contract, he has ensured himself of being tendered the small qualifying offer that will be impossible for another team to best without having to give up draft picks. Thus, he has no leverage, as the Bills hold all of the cards.

MM is trying to be coy here. Either... 1. JP is fine and will start, and MM is just sending up a smoke screen for a "competetive advantage" or 2. JP's injury is more severe than they are letting on.

Considering that he'll be a restriced free agent -- and that he was a walk-on and not even a draft pick, it would take a very small tender to lock him up. It's actually pretty dumb on his part not to sign a long term deal.