Bruce

IF I may ask, Mr. Dopeland, how do you think that the outcome is achieved? You bring up Super Bowl 25 and the Bills loss. If you remember the Bills of that time frame, they were a high-flying, no-huddle, K-gun, fast-paced, 3 WR/ 1 back offense that predicated itself on pouring on the points, then unleashing the pass rush on the opposing QB. Nobody could stop them. That is, until they faced the Parcells/ Belicheck Giants 'D'. With 2 down lineman and something like 5-6 DB's, our passing game was having a rough go of it. Now, because our IDENTITY for the whole season was 3 WR, fast break, no huddle...when the other team flooded the field with DB's we didn't adjust. We didn't lose our identity from the season. Heck, look at Thurman's stats for that game. When we were smart and used Thurman, he tore threw the Giants D because there were so many DB's. Why didn't we run more in that game? I would argue that because the Bills were so stubborn in their refusal to abandon the pass when it wasn't working was what put them in a situation of having to kick the game winning field goal. The outcome was determined by the identity the team had established throughout the season. Flash forward to today, and last week, and IMO we are not yet good enough to play to keep a lead. My only concern is that if that bunker mentality becomes our identity throughout the season, then when we encounter tougher challenges down the road (and they will come), that we will lapse into a false confidence of playing to protect a lead, and that we will lose. I've always hated the mentality of being conservative because you have a lead. Today's NFL is too explosive, too dynamic to sit back.

mmm, I don't know....the Packers look pretty solid.

It's funny, I was thinking the same thing today, then he bounced back and had a good play. He did that the last time he screwed up, too. He dropped a ball or got some 15-yard penalty against the Pats, I think, then recovered a fumble on special teams. Maybe it wasn't the Pats, but I was thinking today that with his position on the team, as like the 6th receiver or something, he should be like an offensive lineman and not want his name to be called. He'd probably do better if he was not noticed. And for all of his experience, he does make some bad decisions and is not too dependable back there. Maybe I've gotten spoiled now with 2 years of David Nelson.

I disagree. Now, I think Gailey is a H-U-G-E improvement over tricky-Dick. Gailey is clearly a professional coach, where Jauron just isn't up to head coach material. With that being said, we stuck to run-only way too long. IMO, this philosophy may eliminate the percentage of plays that are passing, and thereby (atleast in theory) reduce the chances to throw a pick, as we saw today eventually the defense realizes that it is run only and just plays the run. The Bills were placed in 3rd and long too many times because our running game was bottled up because of its predictability. I love the win, but we won because of that turnover by Barnett. True, a win is a win, and I'm not arguing that. What comes to mind to me is the Dallas Cowboys of the early-mid 90's. Or the 49'ers of the 80's. Or even the hated-Pats of this decade. No mercy. Never let the other team regain confidence and think that they can come back. I don't know if the Bills are good enough yet to play to protect a lead, versus playing to win the game.

For me, Kaz, after having been a Bills fan since '88 and watching football since then, a team builds an identity over the course of a season. My only concern is that we become too predictable when playing with a lead. I think it's great to be playing with a lead, but I would like to see us keep the foot on the pedal through the whole game, as no lead is safe in the NFL.

I would add: when playing with a lead, please don't stop being aggressive. What got you the lead is what you need to stay with. Going into a shell, and just running in an attempt to manage the clock makes sense on paper, but in today's NFL and with the prolific passing, we've let 2 teams come back from behind now because of this. We're 1-1 in that span. I look at the KC game as the case in point. We never let our foot off of the gas and won, convincingly.

I'm thinking that it has more to do with being way too conservative, and having a bunker mentality when playing with a lead. I put that more on Gailey. That being said, I think that it is easily correctable. No mercy for 60 minutes.

I discarded my Buffalo Bills, Reebok long sleeve thermal in favor of Bills colors Red T-shirt w/Navy Blue shorts. I rode the shirt for the 1st 3 wins, but had to lost it after the dismal performance last week against the Bengals. Hmmm....and I also went to church today.

What scares me is the bunker mentality some coaches seem to go into when playing with a lead. Today, this mentality almost put us at 3-2. With Philly knowing that we were going to run, no intermediate to long passing game having been established, IMO this run only mentality allowed Philly to catch up and stay in the game until their last turnover. If Philly is so geeked on 3rd and short in the 4th quarter, and you know they will be loading the "box" with defenders, why not throw a 5 yard out to get that 1st down? No one is expecting a pass to the flat, with the receiver going out of bounds. I can remember all of the successful, Super Bowl winning teams doing things like this, to eliminate exactly what we experienced today. I'm not knocking the win, but you can't expect a turnover like Barnett got their at the end. The momentum was in Philly's favor, they were right on the doorstep again, and had they scored to even the numbers I can only think that we'd be looking at another loss. I think Philly's problems saved the Bills today. They are turnover prone, sloppy tacklers, and make mistakes at the most inopportune of times. We benefited because of this. Last week against the Bengals and once again playing with a lead, Gailey felt it necessary to go into the bunker mentality of running the ball because you have the lead, and it DID burn the Bills with a loss in a game that they should have won. We should very easily be 5-0 right now. I love the Bills. Love the win. But I would like to see us be more aggressive and much less conservative when playing with a lead to start the second half. They talked much about not letting their foot off of the proverbial throats of the Eagles today like they did against the Bengals, but I saw alot of the same easing off of the gas pedal since they were playing with a good lead. Just my opinion, but the bunker mentality needs to go.

This is all a perfect example of the single-brain-celled, politically correct imbeciles that are so concerned about not freedom, but the bottom line. This is solely a move by Disney to dissolve even the remotest of remote chances that someone might get "offended" at anyone even associated with MNF. If anyone worth their salt even listened to the interview, Williams did not compare anyone to Hitler. He was stating that he was frustrated over Congressman Boehner and Obama playing golf together, as if they were old time buddies. He thought that they had as much business playing golf together as Hitler and Netanyahu. I.E.: Hitler attempting and being fairly successful at wiping out most of Jewish Europe while they did not have a home of their own at the time of WW2 and Netanyahu as leader of the current State of Israel. Polar opposites. Seems pretty clear to me. At no point did he say: "Now, Obama is ofcourse Hitler, and Boehner Netanyahu", so any association made is clearly that of the imagination and of an implied nature of people who don't know what was really said. This is a huge overreach and the assumptions are too many to list. What I find ironic, is that liberals got so upset over thinking (wishing?) Williams calling Obama, Hitler. With the way Obama has treated Israel these days, you'd think they would get more upset over thinking Williams was referring to Obama as Netanyahu.