BisonMan

Woods is a moron. Somebody should stuff Fitz's jock strap in his mouth. Only a self-delusional player would see that it's the fans' fault that they don't come out and watch and cheer for his team. Toronto is not Buffalo. It is a new market for the team (a.k.a. the product). Can you imagine a Coke executive saying "China is a joke" because they didn't buy a lot of bottles in the first few years the product was in their market? Buffalo Bills football is an acquired taste, especially when the team sucks as bad as it has for so many years. Woods is basically selling sour Coke and blaming the new market for not liking it. (The rest of us just keep drinking the sour Coke just because it comes in the same old bottle.) How about producing a better product? How about committing to a market for a while with a good product before pronouncing that the market is the problem? How about telling your employees to shut the $@$% up about your customers unless they have something positive to say? The Buffalo Bills play in the 56th largest media market and it's shrinking. Expanding to one of the largest cities on the continent that can already watch your games over the air is entirely sensible and almost mandatory.

Yes, if we go back 20 years or more, we see a different NFL than the pass-centric game that it is today. I know Baltimore won as late as 2000 but since the league changed rules around the passing game, teams without a top flight QBs generally win the big game. Some teams have had both a great QB and a great defense but QB play now dictates success. I've already ceded the point on Harbaugh and Alex Smith in the OP. This is the exception, not the rule. With a lead and Fitz at QB against a weak offensive team, I'd probably punt too. Sometimes the odds don't work out. Ask how going for it worked out for the Hoodie against Manning in the playoffs. It didn't but it was still the right call, IMHO.

Yeah, they went to the playoffs both years and Aikman's numbers went up in those two years over the two prior years. I disagree with a lot of this. Gailey has created an offense around the lack of skills at the QB position. Lots of screens and short passes hide Fitz's lack of arm strength and accuracy. This offense also accentuates Fitz's pre-snap read capability by spreading out the defense to identify matchups. I truly believe that Gailey would fundamentally change the offense if he had a strong-armed and accurate QB. Still, I tend to agree that he doesn't make effective use of the talent at RB even though the Bills run a lot more than most teams. Gailey does a lot of things wrong as many posters have said. My original point was that a great QB hides poor or mediocre coaching. A crappy QB makes even the best coaches look like chumps.

As a Ga Tech grad, this is a painful reminder. However, GA Tech is not a football school and Georgia is. If GA Tech offered degrees in basket weaving like UGA, they could compete!

There has been a lot of postings around here lately about how the Bills should have picked Andy Dalton, Colin Kaepernick or Russell Wilson. I say hindsight is 20/20. There are lots of QBs that have been picked in the last three years that everyone would have screamed about had the Bills "wasted" a pick on them as other teams have done in the first 3 rounds. They include: 2012 (1) Brandon Weeden: much worse numbers than Fitz (2) Brock Osweiler: hopefully learning from Peyton Manning but will not see the field for years 2011 (1) Jake Locker: not showing he's NFL caliber (1) Blane Gabbert: about to be replaced by...anyone (1) Christain Ponder: can't even succeed with 11 guys in the box to stop AP (3) Ryan Mallett: likely behind Brady until his contract runs out 2010 (1) Tim Tebow: about to be cut, deservedly (2) Jimmy Clausen: not NFL quality (3) Colt McCoy: backing up Weeden...ouch! I personally think that once NFL defenses catch up to the spread option, both Kaepernick and Russell Wilson will see their production fall off. Even so, of the QBs the Bills could have picked in the last three years under Nix, 9 are not either very good or even starters (and/or unproven) and 3 (Dalton, Kaepernick and Wilson) are successful so far. In my opinion, only Dalton has enough starts to evaluate reasonably. So, the odds were only 25% of picking a passable starter and none of the ones they passed on are yet considered "elite". So, if you don't feel really good about a QB, you are setting your franchise back years by picking the wrong one. Missing on a CB, DL or other position doesn't hurt you as badly. Of course, you don't win the lottery if you don't play. I think the Bills were right in focusing on their many other areas of concern before taking risks on drafting a QB.

There has been a lot of sniping at Chan Gailey these days but living in the DC/Baltimore area has taught me something lately. Coaches with QBs that play great are considered great and coaches with crappy QBs are considered terrible. Last year, the talk around DC was how horrible a coach Mike Shanahan was and how Kyle Shanahan should never be allowed to coach an offense again. One year and one RGIII later, both are hailed as geniuses. Kyle is now considered a top contender for teams looking for a new HC. On the flip side, while Joe Flacco was playing well (and their defense was healthy), John Harbaugh was considered to be a great coach. Flacco outplayed Tom Brady in the AFC Championship game and was one Lee Evans drop away from the SuperBowl. Now Flacco has regressed (QBR lower than Fitz) and everyone is questioning the job Harbaugh is doing. They fired the OC last week and Flacco did even worse. Looking at a list of the highest rated QBs on ESPN's QBR ranking shows us a list of successful coaches. It is rare that a coach is considered "great" without a really good QB. I'm hard-pressed to find a "great" coach that I can credit with elevating a QB's game considerably. Jim Harbaugh in SF might be the notable exception (Alex Smith). So, if by some miracle the Bills secure an elite QB either through the draft (best hope) or in FA (unlikely), I'm sure the collective wisdom about Chan's coaching ability will turn around. I personally think that Gailey is getting the most out of Fitz's limited talent and that Fitz would do worse in a more conventional offense (with more down field throws and longer patterns). Similarly, the Gailey scheme limits the exposure of our O-Line that still needs work. I've been critical of some calls by Chan but overall, I think he knows the hand he's been dealt and is putting the best face on it.

:thumbsup:

First, let me say that I have often yelled at the TV when the Bills lined up in a 5-wide 3rd and 1 situation. I'm a fan of at least pretending you are going to run the ball in those situations. Nonetheless, I have serious disagreements with an analysis that says "When we run more, we win more." With that statement, I think they are saying that running more causes us to win. I think that likely has the causality wrong. We could have easily said, "When we're winning, we run more." The statistics from one poster bears that out in spades. The larger the winning margin, the larger the run/pass ratio. The larger the losing margin, the smaller that ratio. Every team with a big lead runs more even if their running game sucks. There is no sense creating turnovers rather than focusing on killing the clock. Last night the Broncos were without their starting RB and still ran on almost every play in the 4th quarter with Peyton Manning at the helm. Situational running analyses are much better for this type of thing. I saw one post here with reference to that and the Bills appear to run more than almost every other team given a score weighting. It's OK to have issues with when/how the Bills use the run vs. the pass but it's silly to say that they don't run enough or that running more drives winning.

We should also factor in the number of screen plays we call to our RBs. The Bills are considered very good at that and screens are often referred to as "extended running plays". Around 1/3rd of each RBs touches are receptions. My guess is that most are screens. Finally, given how far behind the Bills have been in most games, it's a miracle they rank 9th in rushing attempts. On the flip side, the Bills haven't been in a position to milk the clock with the lead very often this season.

I neither love nor hate him. I haven't even met him! Seriously, I think that he's is the definition of average. He's not our biggest problem given that elite QBs aren't something you can easily obtain. I don't like the odds of getting an elite QB any more than I like my odds of dumping my wife and marrying a supermodel. To be clear, I wouldn't trade her in for a supermodel but I'd be willing to share one with her. Other high quality players are more attainable because they don't have to be elite, just work together well as a team. I agree with most here that say we are unlikely to replace Fitz in the next year or even two. Even if the Bills draft a 2nd or 3rd rounder with a lot of upside, he won't beat out Fitz next year.

Wow. So far on this thread I've seen postings that say basically "Fitz stinks because Gailey is so great that he got Thigpen to look like a star in KC" and "Fitz would be better if Gailey wasn't such a crappy offensive coach". You can't have it both ways. By the numbers, Fitz is average. Is Gailey so good that he makes him look better than he really is or is Gailey so bad that Fitz is really a top 10-15 QB. My guess is neither. To paraphrase Bill Parcells, he is what his numbers say he is...average. I totally sick of holding a QB's win/loss record as the defining evidence of his skill level. That is complete garbage. Tom Brady is totally underrated...yes, underrated...because he is able to overcome such a lousy Patriots defense that bleeds points like a member of the Russian royal family. Mark Sanchez had a great win/loss record for a while because the Jets had an elite defense. Now he looks like a chump because their defense has waned. Going back many years, Archie Manning never took the Aints over .500 because he was surrounded by bums on both sides of the ball. I'd still take him today over all but a few QBs in this league. Given the poor play on defense by the Bills this year, Fitz has been put in "comeback" mode entirely too many times this year. The turnovers tend to come later in games when he's forced to take too many risks. Certainly some have come early to put the team in the hole (see Jets game). Overall, he still has a decent TD/INT ratio. His QBR is just below average (~47). Could the team do better? Maybe, but elite QBs don't come around often even with high draft picks. Just ask Oakland, Arizona Jacksonville, NYJ, Tennessee and several others in the past 10 years. My bottom line: Let's fix the defense and ensure we have a good set of role players on offense. Scoring 25 points a game is good enough if we had an elite defense, which is easier to build than an elite QB.

I think this is the big knock against Sanchize. With that pop-gun offense, they shouldn't be allowed to call themselves the Jets. Sanchez runs an extremely simple offense and has his whole pro career. If the Bills are going to keep Gailey and his offense, Sanchez would be a horrible fit. For Gailey, the ability to read pre-snap and find the right match-up is critical. Fitz normally does this but just can't make the throws. Sanchez would just be lost from day one. I think Vick has similar problems that get masked by Andy Reid's offense. He doesn't do a lot of pre-snap reading of the defense and has a limited progression once the play starts. He too would be killed in Gailey's offense. The Bills need a QB with a good brain, good accuracy and an average arm. A player like Drew Brees would be perfect but not realistic. Given the options in FA, Alex Smith or Matt Flynn are likely the best choices. Neither has a cannon but both look like they are accurate. Flynn ran a reasonably complex offense (for one game) in GB. Smith has had a new offense just about every year of his pro career. Maybe he would fit in WNY.

As a previous posted noted, QBR points out all too well that the QB position has become the determining factor for success in teh NFL. Rule changes have almost completely eliminated defense as a factor in which teams make/miss the playoffs. Looking at the top 12 teams in total defense (I pick 12 because 12 teams make the playoffs), only half of them are likely to make the playoffs this year. Basically, it's a coin flip if you have a top defense...but not really. Teams with top defenses not currently in a playoff slot: Arizona, Cincy, San Diego, NY Jets, Dallas and St. Louis. None has a top 12 QBR quarterback. Teams with top defenses currently in a playoff spot: Pitt, SF, Denver, Seattle, Chicago and Houston. All have quarterbacks with a top 12 QBR. So, defense no longer even gets you a chance to play in the playoffs, let alone "win championships". It's a sad state for the sport in my opinion.

Even worse, Fitz doesn't have one of the highest 50 game QBRs this year. His best game was against KC and ranks 56th among the best games of the year at QB. Fitz has been up and down and down all year. His last three game QBR's are 62.5, 16.3 and 78.6. So, he's never great but sometimes horrid.

Close enough.

For those that don't think the Bills need a new QB to make the playoffs, just look at how ESPN's QBR system rates QBs and how highly that correlates with a team's playoff chances. So far this year, of the 12 QBs with the highest QBR, 10 are on team's that will make the playoffs if they hold to form (i.e. beat teams they will play with lower win %). The two that aren't in the top 12 (Flacco and Cutler) play for teams with elite defenses and still have QBRs better than the median (QBR>50). The same cannot be said of QB Rating where just 8 of the 12 projected playoff teams have QBs in the top 12. Four QBs in the lower half of the QB rating system are on playoff teams (Flacco, Cutler, Luck and Eli Manning). Most interesting is Luck, whose QBR is 6th best in the league but whose QB Rating is 29th. My eye test says Luck is clutch and his QBR bears that out. Fitz...not so much even though his traditional QB rating is higher than Luck's and many others. In fact, Fitz has a QBR of 47.2 (27th) but a rating of 85.1 (17th). Fitz's QBR looks a lot closer to where I'd put him in the league than his QB rating does. It also tells me that the Bills won't make the playoffs until either Fitz gets a lot better and the defense gets a lot better OR the Bills get a new QB. I know it isn't really news to most here that the Bills need a new QB but it's nice to see the math bear out that opinion.

Yeah, this week's Indy game is critical for us to make the playoffs. Win that one and we can lose to either SEA or STL and we still control our own destiny provided Cincy doesn't go on a crazy run. Of course, that means sweeping the remaining division games which has not been the Bills strong suit.

Yes, the Bills are not yet a winning team. They don't yet compete with the likes of NE, Houston, SF, etc. I think they are closer than they have been in the past where I had no faith in the organization's direction. For those bemoaning the failures the Bills have had in recent drafts, let's get some perspective. The draft is still a bit of a crapshoot. The Patriots are often considered a great drafting team. Excluding 2012, how many players from the Pats prior four drafts that were picked in the first three rounds are still on the team? 10 of 20 picks in the first 3 rounds from 2008 to 2011 are still on the team. 8 are starters. To be fair, there are a couple of Pro Bowlers in there (Gronk and McCourty). Of course, being on a good team helps improve your stock. The great defensive guru Bill Bellicheck has had one of the worst defenses in the league for several years running despite drafting for defensive players for much of the last few years.

I think comparing records from year to year can be misleading because the schedule changes so much pertaining to the quality of opponents. The question I think we must ask: "Are the Bills in a better position today and moving forward than they were in 2009?" Fundamentally, I think they are. For those that think Dick Jauron is a better coach than Chan Gailey, please pass me that doobie after your next drag. For those that think JP Losman (out of the league) and/or Trent Edwards (mostly inactive 3rd stringer) are better QBs than Fitz, I'm taking your doobie privileges away. The 2012 Bills have finished the toughest stretch of the season. They only play two teams with winning records going forward. They played 5 in the first 10 games. Let's see how this team responds. I remain hopeful and confident they are on the right path for the first time in more than 10 years. Patience grasshopper.

Buddy Nix has been getting a lot of heat here at TBD lately and I’d like to rise to his defense a bit. The first criticism we tend to hear about Buddy is that he has neglected to draft a franchise QB during his tenure. I’ve addressed the fact that there have been limited options for this in a previous post: http://forums.twobil...e-last-7-years/ Even if you think there was a marginal QB worth taking high in the draft (i.e. first two or three rounds), I think Buddy has been smart to avoid that. My cursory view of early career QBs tends to show (but not in every case) that rookie and 2nd year QBs don’t tend to fair very well without a strong supporting infrastructure. There are always exceptions but they really are rare (see: Andrew Luck). Some seemed to bring a unique problem to defenses (see: Cam Newton) but got exposed in their second year. More often, successful young QBs have a good infrastructure around them. This includes players like Ben Rothlesberger, Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan, Tom Brady, and Mark Sanchez (yes, he really was successful early). Some “promising” QBs failed early and never recovered because their supporting cast was horrible (Trent Edwards or Alex Smith might fall into this category). It appears Buddy is building the machinery around the QB position before risking a franchise QB pick. Looking at each facet of the team, I think we could agree that Nix has mostly improved the team: Quality by position since Buddy Nix became GM RB: the same or better (I’d rather have Spiller than Lynch) TE: better OL: better. Buddy looks to have solidified 2 positions on the O-Line (LT and RG). WR: the same or better (I think David Nelson makes it better than pre-Buddy) DL: better (Darius and Mario Williams are definitely better than what we had) LB: the same (Barnett is an improvement but Sheppard is a downgrade from Puz) CB: the same or better (a bit of a wash between injury-prone McGee and rookie Gilmore) S: the same By my reckoning, they may have improved in 6 of the 8 categories. That’s also testament to how bad this team was when he took over as GM. I now think the Bills are poised to take a QB in an early round and have the supporting cast to make him successful. I do think LB and CB could use improvement first but QB now should not be far behind. My 2 cents.

Although Dalton is popular, I don't think he has proven himself to be a franchise QB. He had a good year for a rookie with a strong defense and some good targets. However, his QB rating was only one point above Fitz's. This year, he has regressed and has more picks and less TDs than Fitz. Again, their ratings are about the same (1.5 points apart) but Dalton takes a lot more sacks (22 vs. 12). Dalton may yet prove to be a good pick for Cincy but at this point, the numbers don't show him to be a significant upgrade (or an upgrade at all) from what the Bills already have.

I think a lot of folks are overestimating the talent the Bills have on the O-Line. When we spread people out effectively, we run effectively because our line ins't forced to block fast LBs as much. When they put 3 LBs in the box along with a safety against our 3 WR sets, there is little chance a run could work and would likely lose yardage with this line. The problem is still at QB and WR. If the Bills had a talent laden bunch at WR, even Fitzgibbons could hit them with 8 in the box. But with a natural 2nd receiver (Stevie) and two other guys who'd never crack the starting lineup of almost any other team (Jones and Graham) he has no chance. If we had Peyton Manning, he could probably get something out of this WR corp. The combination we have is deadly...for us. Any chance Nelson comes back this season? I haven't heard boo about him lately.

I've seen a lot of sniping about Chan Gailey as a head coach around here. Publicly, Gailey is often complimentary of his players even when they are obviously below par (see: Ryan Fitzpatrick). I guess I would do the same thing publicly if I were in his shoes. What's the point of throwing your QB, CB, LB, DE (holy crap this list is getting long!) under the bus? The truth is that it appears Gailey knows how poor the talent on this team is and he's trying to coach around it as best he can. Jerry Sullivan wrote an article today the slammed Gailey for allowing defenses to determine what his offense would do. I think Gailey is doing that too but he's right to. This team has ZERO ability to "impose its will" on defenses determined to either stop the run or pass. The Bills just don't have the horses to run that way. The same goes for the defensive unit. As we look at the various segments of our offense and defense, it becomes pretty clear. Here's my opinion on the talent on each unit and whether or not they are above, on par or below average with the rest of the NFL: Offensive Line: On par with the potential for being Above Average Quarterback: Below Average Running Back: Above Average Receivers (including TE): Below Average (perhaps way below) Defensive Line: On par or maybe Above Average Linebackers: Way Below Average Secondary: Below Average So, we have one segment (RBs) that is above average vs. the rest of the NFL. Two that are on par and four (4) that are below average. Perhaps Buddy Nix is at fault for this but given that the situation was even worse 3 years ago, it's hard for me to ask for his head at this point. Every team has draft picks that are busts but over a 5 year period, you get the sense of whether they are doing a good job in the draft and free agency or not. In any case, I don't think this situation is Gailey's fault but he's certainly taking a lot of arrows for all of those guys on the field.

Exactly. There is no threat of the run with the empty set unless Fitz goes all QB-draw on them (watch, Chan will stick that in next week ). Showing a commitment to the run in those situations would help with the passing game especially late in the game when you can call play-action and rack up 20+ yards on a short throw that Fitz can actually complete.

Should have added this to the OP: http://espn.go.com/nfl/standings/_/type/playoffs/sort/conferenceRank/order/false Savor this while you can. I have the feeling it won't last.