mjt328

Actually, that sounds about right. The Bills have a few winnable games in the second half of the season. No matter how bad they are, they have to win some meaningless games. That way we miss on the playoffs and a good draft pick.

Drafting any position is not a sure thing. But in this league, you have to have a good quarterback. The Bills have to take a chance. Look at the Dolphins back in 2008. They passed on Matt Ryan for Jake Long. Long turned out to be possibly the best left tackle in the NFL. But Miami has regretted it ever since, because having the game's best left tackle is worthless if he has nobody to protect. At this point, I don't care if the Bills "reach" for Barkley, Smith, Jones, Bray... The first pick in the draft HAS TO BE A QUARTERBACK.

Tebow probably isn't the ideal choice, but I'm just ready to move on from Fitz. I don't really care who it is. If we go after Tebow, it shouldn't be at the expense of adding a quarterback EARLY in the draft - and possibly adding another veteran to compete in the offseason. I'm all for the Seattle approach... Let's not put all our eggs in one basket.

First of all, Super Bowls are a team accomplishment. Matt Light has the same resume (5 Super Bowls/3 Wins), but you don't hear anyone comparing him to Anthony Munoz... or even someone closer to his era like Jonathan Ogden or Willie Roaf. Kevin Faulk was there for all 3 wins and the first loss, but you don't see his name thrown up there with Walter Payton and Jim Brown. You wouldn't argue that Barry Sanders and Ladainian Tomlinson (0 Super Bowl rings) were inferior running backs to someone like Brandon Jacobs (2x Super Bowl champ). So why do we do that for quarterbacks? - Brady, Aikman, Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, etc. Same thing with the 16-0 season -- (Bob Griese anyone?) Brady's 50 Td season was impressive, no doubt - but it's not like he sustained that pace for a career. It's the same reason I didn't put someone like Kurt Warner above him on that list. Most of his years, Brady has been a check down passer and game manager - with overinflated stats because of the way the NFL rules have changed.

First of all, THE main reason for that team's success is Bill Belichik and the coaching staff. And even the year that Brady went down and we played twice against Matt Cassel, we were 0-2.

I could care less what the majority of football "experts" say. They are wrong. These are the same morons that consider Ben Roethlisberger and Eli Manning sure bets for the Hall of Fame, simply because they have championship rings. The media looks at Super Bowl wins (should be considered a team accomplishment, not an individual one) and the stat box (which can be very misleading) above all else. I prefer to watch a player on the field before making an assessment of how good he is. Brady is a good quarterback, no doubt. He is extremely accurate, has great pocket awareness and makes excellent decisons. But 99% of his success has come from dumping the ball off to an uncovered receiver (Welker, Branch, Brown) or running back (Faulk, Woodhead) with a pass that travels less than 5 yards in the air - then proceed to watch them do the rest of the work. I refuse to consider that CRAP better than a player like Jim Kelly or Dan Marino - who made a living out of destroying defenses with pinpoint downfield passing.

I didn't say that receivers were never open over the middle. I said that they had to work for it. Andre Reed was one of the game's best outside receivers at the time. When he got open over the middle, it was by beating a cornerback - who was allowed to play physical man-to-man coverage - with excellent route running. Oh yeah, and he also had the threat of being beheaded by a safety for going over the middle. Do me a favor and keep your eyes on Wes Welker during the Patriots game this weekend. Most of the time, he lines up in the slot COMPLETELY uncovered. If he is covered, the defensive back is so far back that he can't be seen by the camera. If a defender is in the viscinity, it's usually a linebacker. Really hard to complete that.

He is overrated. I'm 33 years old, and I've been watching football since the late 1980's. During that period, I would put the following quarterbacks above Brady without even thinking twice: Joe Montana Steve Young John Elway Dan Marino Jim Kelly Warren Moon Brett Favre Peyton Manning Drew Brees Brady belongs in the same conversation as Troy Aikman. Both were overrated because of their team's success.

Before the 2004 season, illegal contact was never called. So even if it was on the rule books before then, cornerbacks were able to keep their hands on the receiver (as long as there was no grabbing or tackling) until the ball was in the air. Before 2004, you would never see a wide receiver running uncovered across the middle of the field, unless it was a busted coverage. Today, defenders give MASSIVE cushions to guys, because the only real option is keep the play in front of you and try making a good tackle. Ten years ago, the slot receiver was a gimmick position. Today, guys like Wes Welker, Victor Cruz and Danny Amendola are leading the league in receiving. As far as Brady, I've never tried to say that he's a terrible quarterback, or that he doesn't belong in Canton someday. It just makes me sick when people say he's the "greatest of all time." His whole career has been built on check downs and dump offs. He's a great game manager with overinflated stats and a couple rings. Here are Brady's average stats before 2004 (he was a starter from 2001-2003), when illegal contact became a point of emphasis in the NFL: 3,409 yards passing per season 23 touchdowns per season 61.9 completion percentage And here are Brady's average stats in the 7 seasons following (2004-2011, subtracting the season he missed in 2008): 4,239 yards passing per season 33 touchdowns per season 64.7 completion percentage

Exactly. Modern offenses like New England wouldn't have done squat back in the 1990's, before illegal contact changed the way football is played. Can anyone really imagine Brady being successful with his check-down options (Welker, Branch, etc.) being forced to actually beat tight coverage? He's the most overrated quarterback in the history of the NFL. And on that same note, can you imagine how good the Bills would have been if we could just put Don Beebe in the slot - dump it off, and let him run free? We would have been even MORE unstoppable. If that's even possible.

His natural position is as an edge rusher. In the 3-4 (what San Diego used to run), that would be OLB. In the 4-3 (what we run), that would be DE. There are certainly differences in the two schemes and not everyone is equipped to switch from one to the other. 3-4 OLBs usually rush from a standing position. 4-3 DEs usually rush with a hand on the ground. If Merriman was to play OLB in the 4-3, he would be doing less rushing the passer (actually none in Wannstedt's system) and doing more run support and pass coverage. That would definitely be a bad idea.

Fans keep trying to point towards "the" problem. There are several problems on this team. Our coaches are stubborn and/or stupid. Our quarterback sucks. Our $100 million free agent doesn't appear to be making a full effort. Our #3 overall pick from a year ago seems to be regressing. Our linebackers are possibly the worst in the league. Our young players are not getting better - especially our starting middle linebacker and one of the cornerbacks. Our starting strong safety is suddenly a major liability. Our new punter shanks kicks at the worst possible times. Every single one of these issues is contributing to our team sucking. Mario Williams is only one player. If he is dragging everyone else down, they need to man up.

2013 looks like a weak draft class, especially at QB. None of these guys are sure things. But after 3 drafts of passing on prospects, we absolutely have to take a chance on somebody as our future starter. Fitz has reached his ceiling and it just isn't good enough.

The problem with Wannstedt's scheme is the LACK of ADJUSTMENTS. I was yelling at the tv from my couch in the first quarter of the Jets game - screaming for the Bills defensive backs to start playing tighter coverage. If I could see the problem from my living room, why couldn't our defensive coordinator? The Bills didn't finally adjust until Week 2 against Kansas City. The gameplan against New England was a good one. Replacing our linebackers with an extra safety (Scott) was a very good strategy for taking out Gronk, Welker and the short passing game. But when Brady/Belichick figured it out and started running the ball down our throat, Wannstedt had no counter. LIke someone else mentioned, our defense played very good against Arizona. But with the game on the line, Kolb kept scrambling for first downs. Why wouldn't our defense start spying the quarterback? If Kolb hadn't gone down with an injury, the outcome of that game might have been completely different. Football is like a chess match. But after Wannstedt makes his first move, it's almost like he packs up his playbook and heads home for the day.

Somehow, Chan still thinks the light is going to come on for Fitz. That one day he will magically be accurate and be able to hit the open deep ball. He looks back at the goods games Fitz has had in the past (such as Week 1 2011 against KC) and figures "if he did it there, he can do it again." On top of that, it's been mentioned that activating Tarvaris Jackson before Week 10 will turn the Seahawks compensation from a 7th rounder to a 6th rounder. We won't be seeing a quarterback change until our season (and Chan's job) is officially on the line.

Mario's good play was a big factor in yesterday's win. His bad play was a big factor in all of our 3 losses. So he's 1/3 of the way towards making up for himself.

Our best chance to ever win a Super Bowl is for the franchise to move, then we can start over with an expansion team. It worked for Baltimore.

It would be easier to say what isn't wrong. Our defense isn't just playing below expectations. It isn't just playing bad or struggling. It isn't just playing horrible. It is setting NFL records for how poorly it is playing. No defense in league history has been run, passed or scored on as much as the 2012 Bills defense.

We have been on a constant cycle of rotating from offensive coordinators to defensive for the last 10 years. > Gregg Williams - defense > Mike Mularky - offense > Dick Jauron - defense > Chan Gailey - offense It makes absolutely NO difference what side of the ball they have expertise in. If they suck at the head coach position, they won't help our team. In my opinion, Gailey has gotten great production out of our offensive talent. Fitz, FJax, Stevie, Chandler, Pears, Urbik, etc. - All of these players are mid-late round picks that have been better under Gailey than under any other NFL coach/coordinator. Gailey's downfall is that he has shown NO ability to handle the defensive side of the ball. His assistant coaches (Edwards and Wannstedt) have been bad. And as the head coach, his team seems unprepared to play (slow starts, sloppy, out of rhythm) about 25 percent of the time. The players also seem to quit on him whenever they face adversity. i don't think I've seen this team play 4 quarters of good football since he's been here. We need a GOOD head coach, plain and simple. I don't care if he's offensive, defensive or special teams.

This team NEVER plays 4 quarters.... NEVER. Even when they start hot and get up big, they coast through the second half. Yesterday, the team quit about half way through the third quarter. With the exception of quarterback, I think the talent level is enough to compete for a playoff spot. But the passion, fire and attitude on this team is absolutely pathetic. They let themselves get pushed around -- and honestly, I don't think they even care.

I cringe everytime Fitz steps back to throw.

Here is the problem. Fitz is an extremely limited quarterback. He has a below-average arm for an NFL starter. His deep ball accuracy is horrific. His decision making is spotty, especially when he is pressured or his initial reads break down. Chan designed this offense to hide these flaws and take advantage of the strong point Fitz does possess - specifically the ability to make pre-snap reads of a defense. That is whey you see the spread 95% of the time. It give Fitz the ability to scan the defensive coverage, audible if necessary and then make quick-short throws with very little pressure. And for a handful of games last season, this was a very effective strategy. Defenses started catching on after about 3-4 games and it's been downhill ever since. The book is out on the Bills offense. All they have to do is clog the short passing lanes and dare Fitz to beat you deep. He CANNOT do it. His receivers cannot gain separation and he cannot put the ball in a catchable position. It's easy to SAY that Chan should do something different. It's entirely different to expect success with something different. People say we should simply run the ball more, because Fred Jackson and CJ Spiller are our best players on offense. That sounds good on paper. But it's not so realistic when you consider the overall talents of our offensive players (and not just Fitz). Our players are just not suited to a power running game. > Can FJax and Spiller CONSISTENTLY gain 4-5 yards - between the tackles - when the defense knows it is coming? I have my doubts. Spiller has a history of dancing at the line of scrimmage. Jackson was an average NFL runner until last year, when he found his niche in the spread offense. > Is our offensive line physical enough to consistently outmuscle the opposing defensive line? Without a strong push by the guys up front, Fitz will be facing a lot of 3rd & 7 or 3rd & 8 (which is almost impossible for him to convert). > You just can't run the ball 20-25 times a game out of shotgun. A successful running game would require us lining up under center more often. That means less receiving options and a 3-4 step drop for our quarterback. This would limit Fitz's pre-snap vision of the defense and force him to make decisions in the pocket. This completely plays against his strengths. If you think he is bad now...

Better than a 18-35-1 career as a starter, or 71:68 TD-to-INT ratio... (Fitzpatrick's stats)

Simple mathematics in Sunday's game. The Bills almost never blitzed - sending 4 rushers on almost every play. The Jets protection plan called mostly for the tight end or running back to stay and help - leaving 6 blockers on almost every play. That left 7 Bills defenders against 4 Jets receivers... Almost double coverage on EVERY receiver. On top of that, the Jets used mostly 2-3 step drops, meaning receivers only had a few seconds to beat coverage. Yet the Bills managed to leave receivers WIDE OPEN on virtually every play. It might have been the worst performance by a secondary that I have ever witnessed in 25+ years of watching the NFL.

Quarterbacks today have all the rules catering to them. When Jim Kelly played, wide receivers actually had to fight off the line of scrimmage to get open. Cornerbacks were allowed to use bump and run coverage. There was none of this illegal contact crap. Want some proof? Just look at one of today's "elite" Hall of Fame quarterbacks (who some are now calling the best ever). He has spent his ENTIRE career throwing 90% of his passes to slot receivers and tight ends. His claim to fame is throwing the ball 5-7 yards over the middle and watching his receivers to the rest of the work. Do you honestly think that DINK and DUNK garbage would have been successful in the NFL twenty years ago? Not a chance. Half of the guys on your list would have been BELOW average in Kelly's era.