Grant

I'm hoping we can get Clements locked up too so we can have some stability at that corner position and have McGee and Clements as our starters for some years to come.

The problem lies with ESPN and other sports highlight shows that encourage this behavior by spotlighting it.

Losman is compared a lot to Favre. I hope it's more for the good reasons than the bad.

Isn't it crazy how many dyslexic announcers work for CBS, FOX and ABC?

(Note: posted in another one of the bazillion Randy Moss threads, but I put it here, too, so more people could see it) If Moss were on our team, instead of, say, Eric Moulds and the rest of our team were exactly the same, I think our offense would be a lot better. I like Eric Moulds as a person and I like him as a player, too. He's tough, athletic and can make some pretty unbelievable catches (though he does have a bit of a dropy problem lately, but I digress). That said, Randy Moss is in a completey different realm. To be honest, I think if we did have Moss, I don't think Bledsoe would be struggling as much as he is. That's not saying that Bledsoe's problems are Moulds's faults - it's just that Moss's ability would be able to cover up Bledsoe's weaknesses more. Consider how much Drew locks onto Moulds and throws the ball to him even when Moulds is double or triple covered. Most of those are picked, although sometimes Moulds will come down with it. OTOH, Moss regularly makes freakishly athletic catches and it would improve our offense A LOT just by his addition. I don't think Culpepper is a good QB at all, but I think Moss is able to cover up for a lot of Culpepper's weaknesses. As for his personality, I don't think it's a problem. He doesn't dance that much more than, say, Spikes or Fletcher. And I wouldn't say his arrogance is more than any other NFL star. So, yeah. Moss is a great player - maybe the very best receiver playing in the game right now.

Worse than Erik Flowers, Travares Tillman and Corey Moore?

If Moss were on our team, instead of, say, Eric Moulds and the rest of our team were exactly the same, I think our offense would be a lot better. I like Eric Moulds as a person and I like him as a player, too. He's tough, athletic and can make some pretty unbelievable catches (though he does have a bit of a dropy problem lately, but I digress). That said, Randy Moss is in a completey different realm. To be honest, I think if we did have Moss, I don't think Bledsoe would be struggling as much as he is. That's not saying that Bledsoe's problems are Moulds's faults - it's just that Moss's ability would be able to cover up Bledsoe's weaknesses more. Consider how much Drew locks onto Moulds and throws the ball to him even when Moulds is double or triple covered. Most of those are picked, although sometimes Moulds will come down with it. OTOH, Moss regularly makes freakishly athletic catches and it would improve our offense A LOT just by his addition. I don't think Culpepper is a good QB at all, but I think Moss is able to cover up for a lot of Culpepper's weaknesses. As for his personality, I don't think it's a problem. He doesn't dance that much more than, say, Spikes or Fletcher. And I wouldn't say his arrogance is more than any other NFL star. So, yeah. Moss is a great player - maybe the very best receiver playing in the game right now.

Ocean's 12 wasn't bad at all. It's not a serious film or even really a crime caper movie. The flick cleary doesn't take itself seriously, and it's actually pretty charming and fun. Meet the Fockers, on the other hand, is okay - but, like the original, still way too "sitcom"-ish. Also, like the original, the ending feels incredibly forced.

Well, at least you know. Knowing is the first step.

Nicely said.

Man, I'll tell you what, the Rams and Seahawks both suck. They may be in the playoffs, but they are not "playoff-calibre" teams.

Good point. I think what FFS meant, though (and I can't say for certain; I'm not him), was "should Losman be annointed the starter or should he need to compete for it in training camp?", just maybe not worded that way.

I didn't try to hide my insults, nor do I care if you insult me. I merely pointed out that's all your post was, where as mine at least had a point. But you can keep pretending your posts have some sort of glorious hidden meaning that I somehow missed (although you still have failed to point out what, if anything, I missed in your post - and I suspect you'll hide behind a "well, if you can't figure out, I won't tell you" sort of response because you know there isn't anything else there besides what I responded to). Don't cry, baby blue. It's just the internet.

I thought you said Bledsoe has essentially been the same player, with the same strengths and weaknesses that he's always had? Just busting your balls. Anyway, I do think that Bledsoe improved a bit from 2003, although as you pointed out, there was no where to go but up. He did improve a bit, yes, and if he were 22 years old instead of 32 I would have hope for him. Unfortunately, he still showed things that he always has (which you're right about in terms of the "same tendencies he's always had") - he can get extremely sloppy with his mechanics. Hoping for something like that to drastically change at this point in his career is.. well.. stupid. Yes, it was nice to have an offensive coordinator that tried to play to the player's strengths a bit more. Clements still has a way to go before I'd say he's even a great coordinator. A lot of playcalling was predictable (not nearly as bad as Gilbride), and I still think there were way too many trick plays (although they worked). I don't disagree with this. This is pretty accurate, too. When Bledsoe's primary receiver is wide open, he will make the throw probably 8/10 times.

Bledsoe's first game was a 2 interception game, against the Jets. No, it took more like 3 years for most people to want him gone. Wrong on both counts. Both Donahoe and Moulds have refused to publicly back Bledsoe lately. Reading between the lines, that's not a good sign for Mr. Bledsoe.

Haha, yeah. After McGahee's third game starting, Foxboro Mike quickly stopped his "McGahee-Carter comparison" in his signature.

Katie Holmes is going to be in the Batman "restart" movie this summer.

Of course not. My take is this: management wants Losman to start next year - but NOT if he isn't ready. Someone will compete with Losman for the job (who, I think, will be the front runner and will be given the benefit of the doubt). Whether it's Bledsoe or some other Veteran FA remains to be seen. Personally, I'd rather see another Veteran FA brought in to compete for the job, simply because they would offer us something different than Bledsoe brings to the table.

Forget it...

Consider how many strides this team has made coming off of 6-10 in 2003, you have to be feeling pretty confident about next year. Keep in mind, in 2003 we could barely beat anybody - and we certainly couldn't come from behind. Remember losing to Houston at home? Embarassing. But it wouldn't have happened this year. Some folks complain that we didn't face a very tough schedule and we were pretenders. Well, that might not be inaccurate. BUT, we are beating the teams we are "supposed to." And we couldn't even do that in 2003. Now, all we need to do is be able to win those games we "shouldn't" and you could be seeing big things in '05. Furthermore, something we proved that we could do this year that we couldn't in '03 - come from behind. In 2003, if we didn't take a hold of the game early, we were pretty much out of it. The Seattle, Cincinnati and 2nd Miami game this year proved that we are now capable of answering back. The most important thing about this season is that the team is learning how to win. We're winning, and we were CLOSE this year - and you know that next year, they should be wanting it even more. If we could start pulling out those close games, we'd be a force. Things are getting better, guys. Don't feel bad about this team!

Bingo. This team showed big strides this season. Remember 2003? We couldn't even beat Houston at home. Admittedly, this team isn't "there" yet. We're still not one of the big boys, and we seem to have trouble when the pressure is really on, especially in close games. So, those things need to improve. But, again, we're heading in the right direction.

I'll show you. You said: By excusing Volek's won/loss record, you say that "[we] had completely different scenarios this season in terms of talent and injuries." So, you acknowledge that the scenarios are completely different and then go ahead and say that if Volek were starting for the Bills, we would definitely be in the playoffs. See?

How sad is it when you have to look for bad things that Bledsoe wasn't directly responsible for in order to prove "it's not his fault." Again, no one is letting Travis Henry or the defense off the hook. But those simply aren't the big issues this off season, and for good reason. Henry's position was upgraded. The defense finished in the top 3 defenses statistically. There were bad times for everyone this season. It's just depressing when you have to go hunt for those in order to say "Well, it wasn't ALL Drew."

He's had about as many as Bledsoe. Ba-dum-tshhh!!! (I'll be here all week, thanks). But, in all fairness, there were times when he almost made me believe he could be The Guy. The Kansas City game with the last minute scramble and dive in the endzone, the San Diego game against Flutie in 2001, the Indianapolis game ... that's all I can remember, really.

I don't know how many songs have been covered or by who, but have you seen Concert for George? If you haven't, definitely pick it up (that's what I was using as a reference. All of the covers they did of his songs were phenomenal!)