BringBackFlutie

One can dream...I think they're just trying to see how versatile their depth is, since they have so little of it.

Agree.

The Dolphins ran a gimmick offense that produced a single season of winning. They also apparently were one player away from winning with Pennington (but it is proven that they are STILL rebuilding, because they quickly regressed). The Falcons went from Harrington to Ryan from 07-08, and from 7-9 to 4-12 from 06-07 after losing Vick and their coach. For what it's worth, there are many who think that the make or break for Buffalo this year is a hole at RT and QB. So in many people's eyes, it can be the difference of one player. But even if this is true, Buffalo had way more holes than a QB or RT at the beginning of the off-season, and two years ago the holes were all over the front office and coaching staff as well. I don't see what's so difficult to understand about this. Our franchise isn't on a downward trend, it's been marinating in the mildew of the basement for years.

Is all of this true? These teams were devoid of talent in nearly every category? Their front office was a disaster? They had endured 10 years of bad draft choices and personnel decisions? Out of any of the links below, what team's records actually show a complete sustainable change from being in complete despair for 10 years to being in the playoffs 1 year after the new regime entered? They all built off of what was already there (ATL), didn't really improve (NYJ), or improved for one year (MIA). http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nyj/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/mia/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/atl/ A new coach and a few "missing piece" players is not a rebuild. Our team has been literally gutted and rebuilt from the ground up to GM. Rebuilding is rebuilding, not remodeling.

...And I'm sure they had a reasonable thought pattern that led them to believing we'd win more than the year before. They were wrong. Noted. However, in a discussion at this time of year which is based only on the prior year's performance and what we have now as opposed to then, the power-ranking argument is quite weak. In other words, I'm not saying my predictions will turn out to be correct, but from a logical reasoning standpoint, based on last year's performance and the latest additions/subtractions it's pretty unreasonable to say we're going to be worse this year.

...my first guess would be that Williams was more highly rated than the CB and/or O-lineman they could have taken in his place. I think it's obvious that Nix refused all trades because he wasn't willing to give up our early picks in each round because we needed the value and the sure-fire picks more than anyone else. To say we could have had both positions in one round is probably accurate, but you have no way of knowing if those players would have been reaches at their respected picks. He did what needs to be done in the mid-stages of a rebuild- he decisively fixed multiple holes contributing to one major problem, and he did it with the highest-value, lowest-risk picks he could. ...Who has room for risk when they don't have a team to begin with?

So wait, Cornelius Bennett sacked John Elway 3 times and then told him he needs more protection? Or is this just inferred?

I think winning it all for the Bills is actually more than 100/1, I think it's 160/1.

The run defense will improve with film study. If it doesn't, would you rather have different personnel on the D-Line? Could we have remedied the problem differently in the off-season? Should we have picked up someone BESIDES Wannstedt to coach up the interior LBers? I just don't understand if your comparing this team to Jauron's based in part on the run defense. I can't think of any way to not be optimistic about this D-line with the talent involved right now...additionally, I don't know how you can essentially say that seeing a need on D-line and drafting Dareus is analogous to seeing a need on the D-line and drafting Maybin... You sir, are off your rocker.

Ha, and we somehow ended up with two of those: Dareus/Jasper.

Ha, oh I get it, trust me. I was in the Army working with a Time in Service ceiling over my head for 4 years. I also played second string QB in HS and never worked to improve during the season because I clearly outperformed our starter every preseason. It was nonsense, and I would not work hard if I were on an OLine that had their positions set either. But the question is whether or not they're doing right by not opening the competition for right guard as well... However, I understand the "keep it to a single variable" thing.

I just don't get it. We took the first 8 weeks to win a game because our coach and offense were finding their way. We finished 4-4 to end the season with injuries running rampant. The obvious reason we lost half of the games we did was because of 169 yards/game let up on the ground and our offense wasn't consistent enough to make up for it. Well, we are probably much better against the run and haven't changed anything on offense except for let go of Lee Evans and add Brad Smith. So, logically that means that we have the same offense with a better defense and should then win at LEAST the 4 games but probably more like 2-4 more. Throw in Fitz for 3 of the games that he missed and our offense scores more. All things considered, I think that common sense says we go .500. Last year we were young with holes at a lot of positions. This year we are 1 year older with young talent at a lot of those holes. Other teams get better too, I know, but every other team in the NFL isn't a bunch of young talent that's just learning to win together- everyone is different. Lastly, what is the deal with the constant idea that the lack of Aaron Rodgers at QB and the best offensive line in the NFL makes us the second-to-last team in the power-rankings? That argument is lunacy.

I'd like to have the NYJ's O-Line problems

I'm going to be honest here about Nix first: he should have known better at the beginning...rather than now. There are obvious problems on the O-Line. BUT judging by last year he was probably right. We had a carousel of linemen at the end of the year and they all filled their jobs in at least an adequate manner. Some were bad but I'm sure Nix and Co. were banking on all of the line coming back healthy and being better when all 5 of the best were out there, but unfortunately it didn't happen that way and everyone is even worse than they seemed before. He did say they thought they had better O-Linemen...Well, whatever, point made. I am extremely happy with Nix, at least he is acknowledging that the line is a problem, which makes me confident that he will fix it if he can. Which leads to the next point. We are building a young team for the future. He's not going to find stop-gap players. If he's going to sign a FA and let them fill our holes on the O-Line then you better hope those young players of ours can step up next year like they didn't this year, or that we draft all starting caliber O-linemen right away next year, because the stop-gap is gonna have to be signed short-term unless he's young enough. Why? The answer is simple and clearly overlooked by fans at an alarming rate: We have 20 million dollars of cap room which needs to stay there because next year we need to keep everyone of our skill positions. In the past we've argued that the Bills don't keep their talent when they can afford it. Well, if we go out and dump a bunch of money into free agency this year, chances are, next year we won't even be able to keep our big-name young talent. I'm pretty sure that Buddy is just going about this the most cautious way possible. He's waiting for final cuts by all of the teams. If he can sign a good O-Lineman that will pay dividends and be worth the money for years to come, he's gonna do it. If not, then he's gonna have to go out and take a hit to sign depth players and hope that the ones on the team now are gonna be adequate to mix in with some rookies next year.

Now I understand that we already have a thread about Levitre's move yesterday, however, he has been moved back to starting LG today already. http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2011/08/17/levitre-back-with-1s/ Whatever, who cares right? Obviously Levitre moving BACK to HIS position within one day to at least "split time" there is no big deal. The question of the day is this: Why move Levitre back to the 1's and still not even have Rhinhart at RG? Why is this shake-up happening only on the left? Why is Urbik untouched so far? I guess what I'm trying to get at is, does anyone know the logic or reasoning behind this? Does the coaching staff know something about Urbik that we just don't? Was it secretly Levitre screwing up the whole time and that made it look bad on everybody? I just want some more rationale, since Gailey and CB clearly won't provide.

At this stage in the season it's silly to assume that this means flat-out, "Levitre is demoted." I think it's just a matter of shifting things around to see who works best together, so that we don't have a repeat of the Chicago game. While it seemed to be mostly Urbik, there were other missed blocks further down-field and I bet the line is being addressed as a whole. No big deal. They aren't going to just roll the dice on the O-Line- Gaily doesn't want Fitz to get killed.

Parrish isn't in that category..

I went home to Rochester a few weeks ago to see the Bills' first night practice. I remember the first thing I saw was Aaron Williams doing a coverage drill. He was sticking to all of the receivers like glue. He is a physical specimen, and I was impressed. The same can be said for McKelvin- if not for his in-game mental breakdowns he'd be one of the best in the league, he is SO INCREDIBLY TALENTED.

I think that we're shaping a new kind of team- one that we've really never had before. Our whole defense is shaping up to be big and nasty, plus we've got high-profile rookies and leaders. Additionally, you have people emerging on offense like Stevie who is a media darling. I think that attitude thing is huge. It makes for more publicity (with good performance) that could be both more intimidating to other teams and way more exciting for us fans. And players are genuinely excited about each other. Merriman was laughing and having fun with how Marcel was ready to take all the credit for his sacks. I thought that was cool because it means that Merriman feeds off of the rookie's excitement, and he is also acknowledging that teams can't stop all of them.

I FULLY agree with this. As much as people say the Bears O-Line was horrible, it can't be much worse than ours (if at all), and the Bears (Pass-rushing strength) couldn't penetrate our line like we did theirs- so by comparison, our pass rush is better than the BEARS, which is good company to be in (or above). And yes, our first team offense definitely out-performed theirs. Granted, this is all preseason, so all of these conclusions could mean nothing. The point that I have made, however, is that as great as our first team looked, it was scary to see us get run on like we did, even with a lot of the starters still in there. That was worrisome. It's not that we weren't a lot better, and didn't make plays we haven't seen the Bills make in years, it's more that I feel the big plays may have overshadowed some pretty poor run defense. I'm personally just scared, because we now have a large aggressive interior line, but if we aren't better about the run come next week, what's the answer?

Seriously, how the heck does Derek Anderson go from a pro-bowl QB with the Browns to a 3rd-string QB with the Panthers? Talk about lowest of lows...

Ah, I was talking about the throw to Jones down the sideline. Looked strange and poorly planned or miscommunicated.

We'll have to wait until next week to start making real judgments...but why is it that when Buffalo dominates in any area that the other team is bad at, it automatically means we aren't that good?

Whoa, now that's some subtlety... I believe you're right, jc.