What a Tuel

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24989032/bill-belichick-uses-science-my-cousin-vinny-to-explain-deflategate CBS Sports seems to believe him.

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/video/aikman-on-deflategate-i-can-t-imagine-brady-wouldn-t-have-known-012115 I posted this already, but this thread is moving fast. Aikman says he can't imagine Brady wouldn't have known, and that when he played no one would mess with the game balls without checking with the QB. On another note, and I am not defending them, but is there a chance Brady went through "his process" and picked out underinflated balls, and then they went for inspection and were inflated to the appropriate level? And then someone let the air out of them after without Brady knowning? Then he would at least be telling the truth that he didn't notice the difference. That sounds plausible, but then again I watched the conference and he is clearly lying through his teeth.

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/video/aikman-on-deflategate-i-can-t-imagine-brady-wouldn-t-have-known-012115 Listen to the end. Troy Aikman "No one would have ever done anything with the game balls without checking with me first"

You mean when they lost 3 in a row pretty much losing a guaranteed playoff spot? 96 yds 2 tds 1 int against Seattle 252 yds 0 tds 2 ints against Dallas 374 yds 2 tds 1 int 1 fum against Washington 292 yds 2 tds 1 int against NYG

What did Schwartz do as a head coach that was so much better than Rex Ryan? Edited to make it easier to see Schwartz 2-14 6-10 10-6 lost WC 4-12 7-9 Rex 4-12 8-8 6-10 8-8 11-5 lost conf 9-7 lost conf Total 29-51 Schwartz 46-50 Rex This isn't to bash Schwartz, I actually like him, but people act like he was a more premier head coach or something. Maybe its because we in Buffalo like Detroit a hell of a lot better then the Jets or something. Ryan was a division rival and all... Also most people agree that defenses are a hybrid these days and the 4-3, 3-4 nonsense isn't a huge deal and we have the talent which is really what matters. We are not "blowing up the defense again"

Exactly. Shanahan - Retread that ruined RG3 Little Shanahan - Just following his father's footsteps Reich - too inexperienced Gase - only good because of Manning There would have been an excuse for people to complain about no matter who we picked. I hated the Ryan pick at first, but I am coming around and realizing that the only reason I hated him so much was because 1. he is a goofball, and 2. he was a divisional rival on a classless jets team. Neither of those will affect his coaching abilities, and his defenses are always good. It's not a "bad" hire, just a "not what I was expecting" hire.

The Bills had 414 rushing attempts against them. The Jets had 396 rushing attempts against them. I feel as though our run defense has room to improve even though it was decent. The stats may not back it up, but sometimes during those games, it felt like 3rd string running backs were getting chunk yardage that were keeping teams alive in some games. Please name one solid offensive draft pick the jets have made in the last 5 years. The Jets suffered from a poor GM more than anything.

Bryce would have to do more with the carries he's got first. Fred - 3.7 yds/carry Bryce - 3.5 yds/carry

Thats a great video! Too bad that horse got in the way.

Actually people are. We have a verrrrrrrry good WR and people still find a way to complain about it. I believe I have seen quite a few topics about trading Sammy as well. JTSP even speculated we could barely get a 2nd rounder for him, maybe even just a 3rd. Just watching Sammy play, he had to stop in his tracks and come back for the ball consistently, make a circus catch or play defense on the ball just to stop it from being intercepted. While Beckham made some crazy circus catches of his own, I didn't see his abilities visibly compromised by Eli Mannings poor accuracy Givens: 1. You don't know what you are talking about. Debatable: 1. Watkins vs Beckham's abilities.

That line of thinking is the wrong way to go about it in my opinion. It is all about what the owner intended for the wall to be. Which is clearly stated "honors former players, administrators and coaches who have played significant roles in the teams history." They are not honoring what he did off the field. Plain and simple. So if he was part of 9/11, sure he would be taken down pretty quickly. There will always be degrees of situations in which someone (the owner) will throw everything out of the window to save some face. But again it is really up to the owner whether or not they intend for the wall to be honoring on the field performance or an all encompassing honor of ones life. My guess is the Bills mean the former since they kept him up there. Unless you feel Ralph Wilson and the Bills organization was somehow honoring OJ's actions in the 90's way back in the 80's. They likely had this conversation and came to the same determination after the murder situation. They obviously felt that putting OJ on the wall was for his on the field performance, not for his actions afterwards. What is wrong with that? Why is that a bad thing? I just don't understand how you can't separate the fact that the Bills organization obviously does not condone murder, but they do condone his on the field contributions. Those don't just go away.

A big part of it is that his name went up before he did what he did. Would his name have went up after? Probably not. I am just not a fan of altering history because it would make people feel more comfortable. The facts are that he was an outstanding football player who deserved to be on that wall, and was put on it long before the white bronco. Why should a future event change an honor that predates it? Honestly though I think it is up to the owners. But I won't give them crap whatever they decide. If anything, I think the wall loses a bit of it's integrity if it takes him off, but really it is up to the owners of the organization or better yet, the same panel that put him up there if possible. I don't think people should be putting pressure on them to take it down because they can't separate his actions from his playing time. That is up to the organization. If Mr. Pegula can't separate OJ's actions from his play on the field, and he would feel more comfortable taking it down then fine. I also don't think we should all be offended or look at it as a black eye on the organization if he leaves it up. Either way it is a way for the Bills Organization to "honor former players, administrators and coaches who have played significant roles in the teams history." Fans get heckled by other Bills fans for wearing OJ Jerseys. Do you think people should be ashamed to wear those jerseys?

If the Bills Organization cannot honor OJ Simpson accomplishments, and give him what he deserves which is a place on the wall, (I think we can agree his football play puts him on that wall easily) because it would be too shameful given his actions. Then why would it also not be shameful for me to talk about OJ Simpson and his great football moments? By talking about his accomplishments, I am also honoring him and his talent. Are we really at the point where we are saying the Bills Organization should pretend OJ Simpson wouldn't qualify for the wall, and wasn't good enough to be on it? How does that help anyone? I'm still talking about how good he was, you are still talking about how good he was. Is it just out of spite? Do we think by falsely and inaccurately taking down his name, we are doing someone a favor? Getting some justice? What? I don't get it other than "we don't like him, he did bad things, I don't want to see his name".

Round 1 Pick 2 Calvin Johnson - 15 games 48 rec 95 targets 756 yards 4 tds Round 1 Pick 23 Dwayne Bowe - 16 games 70 rec 117 targets 995 yards 5 tds Would it be explaining away to say Calvin Johnson had Kitna throwing to him, and that his rookie year wasn't a fantastic assessment of his abilities? Bowe had Brodie Croyle and Damon Huard throwing to him..... This is not to say that Sammy Watkins is Calvin Johnson, or Odell Beckham is Dwayne Bowe, or vice versa, but rookie years are simply not great for evaluating a WR's true talent. Both had great rookie seasons. Let's leave it at that and quit the crusade.

Would you rather have: Beckham and no 2015 1st rounder, or Mike Evans, and a 2015 1st rounder?

Hard to separate by for many doesn't change the fact that the stated mission of the wall "honors former players, administrators and coaches who have played significant roles in the teams history." I don't think it is the peoples job to rewrite history because they hate the guy for what he did more than a decade later. I wasn't alive back then, but would I be a bad person for thinking "What a running back OJ Simpson was, he was fantastic!" Should I feel guilty for that or something?

I'm not confused at all. I very clearly stated if you meant one thing thing I agree. If you meant the other then I don't. We clearly agree that in terms of trade value at this moment in time, beckham is worth more. Long term is different but you weren't commenting on that. I think you have fooled yourself into thinking this is some type of battle that you need to win or lose. It's just a conversation.

No my statement was derived from your post that Beckham is on a whole different level. If you were limiting it to trade value at this point in time then I would agree. However, something tells me those "Bills Homers" you were speaking of aren't thinking of trade value though. Regardless I think we both agree it's not safe to say one is leagues better than the other before we give it a few years right? Do you think Foles throwing to Woods, and Goodwin is really even 9-7 material? I like Woods and all but geez. Next thing we know, we will hear that "QBs cant be expected to be good if they have noone to throw to! Look at Cam Newton" For that matter, do you think maybe its a possibility we could get a QB without giving away our best offensive weapon? If you think we are a QB away from the playoffs then let's trade next years 1st round pick for someone. Imagine your dream QB WITH Watkins.

But there are plenty of players that are better or worse. Beckham may not be on the table, but Watkins would. (not really though, because we both agree its ridiculous ) It just sounds as if you are saying Beckham or no one else is worth it. I don't think that's the way to approach it. But to each their own.

There are 8 wide receivers who had 1,000+ yard rookie seasons in 20 years. Sammy had 982. You are devaluing him because of Beckham in every post. "if a team were looking to trade for a WR, they would trade for Beckham first". What does Beckham have to do with trading for a WR? Do you not trade for Drew Brees because you would prefer Peyton Manning? Rough comparison I know, but you get the gist. You may not think he is worth it, but we will have to agree to disagree because I think he clearly is and I think a few WR needy teams would jump at the chance.

No Sammy didn't prove that to you because he didn't do better than Beckham. I saw the change in attitude amongst many people as soon as Beckham started doing well (mostly the fingertip catch). They all went to their computers and looked up when Beckham was drafted, and monday morning quarterbacked the draft pick. That is when people started devaluing Sammy Watkins. The funny part is that he is the same WR that we drafted him to be, and he will be successful. The Bills failed to do their part and get him a QB. Constantly had to adjust to the ball all year and make circus catches, or play defense. We will come back to this debate in 3-4 years.

yep just got a notification. Interesting.

You are out of your mind. That crop of wide receivers only comes around once a decade or so. You are acting as if teams will just get theirs this year. Some teams didn't get theirs, so yes teams would absolutely trade a 1st round pick for Sammy Watkins. Would someone give a 1st for Odell Beckham? Jesus Christ. Now I see a 2nd rounder might even be questionable. Sheesh. You guys need to take some time off, and relax. Edit: I should mention that I am certainly not advocating trading Sammy Watkins, I think that idea is ludicrous.

And assuming we want Mariota or Winston, how much of our future would we mortgage to get to 1 or 2? On top of that, Tampa, and Tennessee are picks 1 and 2. There is virtually no way either of them trade that pick. You are right, not having a first round pick doesn't help our situation in any way. You are forgetting the other half of the deal though. Sammy Watkins came with it, and that does help us. On topic, Jets fans seem verrrry anxious to get their hands on Marrone. Claiming the best coach available. Are we missing something?

Gronk didn't even play so no he wouldn't have. Did you even watch the game? Who knows what "would" have happened. All I know is that we beat them in the 1st half. And our defense held on in the 2nd. You mean the Pats who struggled to beat the New York Jets....TWICE? Edit: This is where I believe you have it all wrong. How can you possibly not be the one with the loser mentality?