Grant

This is true. Obviously, the entire team needs to improve each year, regardless of the prior season's outcome. However, it should be pointed out that despite the examples listed that the defense was one of our strongest and most consistent units. And to be honest, the games that they did "blow" or "give up", keep in mind that they were the unit that kept us in the game to that point in the first place. In all of your examples, we were in tight low scoring games (the Pats game could be an exception possibly). It's not like 2002 when the offense would be scoring 30 points a game and the defense couldn't stop anyone.

You managed to contradict yourself in only three sentences. Nice work!

When you're hoping for significant progression from a player that's been in the league for over a decade and is 32 years old, you know something is wrong. He's not a rookie. His mechanics shouldn't be a problem.

uh.... no. I understood your post just fine. What did I miss? I highlighted the summary of your post and addressed it. You said the easiest way to pick out personal bias is when they blame a certain player for a loss and refuse to give credit when they win. What's not to understand? I think maybe you are the one lacking the comprehension skills, sir. Okay, the rest of your post was just a bunch of insults and this highlighted sentence doesn't make sense. Try again.

I agree. Moorman picking up the ball and running like hell agains the Jaguars was a rollercoaster of a play! I don't think there's another team in the NFL where the fans love their punter as much as Bills fans do. Probably because most punter just go out and kick, but Moorman is pretty firey. There's a lot of great plays this season, but Spikes' INT against the Bengals was really meaningful, too. You could tell he WANTED that one.

I might be the only one, but I always preferred Dylan's version. That's just me, though. Also, most covers of George Harrison songs seem to be better than the originals. Which isn't a dig on the guy, he was a great composer and a terribly under rated guitarist, but most of the covers I've heard of his songs seem to blow the originals away.

I should say that I agree with this. And to be honest, although no one wants to actually listen to the other side, I believe that almost everyone was excited about the trade for Drew Bledsoe in 2001. No one is blaming Donahoe for bringing Bledsoe here in the first place. It helped a lot , in many different ways. You've pointed out how it helped the financial aspect of the team (which, to be honest, I don't think many fans care about unless it directly effects the product on the field), and also as far as Free Agents. With no Bledsoe, we might not have Takeo Spikes, Sam Adams and Lawyer Milloy. If for no other reason than that, the Bledsoe trade was a success (even if we have pretty much been at the mercy of Belichick since then). The problem lies in the fact that, although we may like Bledsoe, we also have to look at each player with some degree of objectivity (are you listening, AKC?). However, regardless of the other factors outside of the actual football performance, you have to ask yourself when discussing his performance on the field: has Bledsoe honestly helped this team more than hurt it? Many people, not only on this board but also in the organization, feel that he has not. I disagree with this, especially in light of Donahoe's recent comments regarding his unhappiness with Bledsoe's play. Fact is, we don't completely know the cap situation outside of what little is told to us in the press. The main problem is that there may not be many alternatives in free agency who could provide a helping Veteran hand that would be servicable as starters and could compete with Losman for the job, as well as simply providing a fresh start. I disagree with this, too, and although this is a point you've brought up numerous times, I think it's one of your weakest points. Players change over the course of their NFL careers, especially when it comes to the twilight of their career. I can't tell you exactly what, but it's very obvious that the Drew Bledsoe that plays for us is not the same player that took the Patriots to the Super Bowl under Parcells. The sacks have cought up to him or something, I don't know; but he certainly doesn't have the awareness that he showed in his early career in New England. Also, I'm not one to rely on numbers, but they don't lie when you're talking about Bledsoe in big games, especially when comparing them to other contemporary successful quarterbacks. You can deny the quarterback's importance all you want, but when you need to move 70 yards in under two minutes, your quarterback is the most important player on your team. Bledsoe has shown through out his career, especially the latter half, that he simply folds more often than not in pressure games and situations. I don't know. I don't want to take anything away from the offense, but they were saved a lot from the special teams and defense. The Cincinatti game, the San Francisco game, the Seahawks game all come to mind immediately. Reading between the lines of Donahoe's statement, you can be assured of one thing: Bledsoe is not as safe as he once was. On the surface, that sounds like a good statement. But it doesn't hold much water when you think about it. Teams are more than one person (which is the point you tried to make, but it didn't quite work). Again, they have stronger players and weaker players - and some times the stronger players can carry the load for the weaker players. Teams can, and often do, win in spite of certain players. Take Mike Pucillo for example. He hurt the team more than he helped it when he was a starter, and yet we won a few games with him in. Were they because of him or in spite of him? It's not as magical as "well, if we won, then everyone did good; if we lost, everyone did bad." Sorry. But don't feel too bad, a lot of Stadium Wall posters have a hard time grasping this.

AKC is getting almost as bad as Spiked. I can't remember the last non-Drew post AKC has made. Yet, everyone else is an idiot for discussing the quarterback position.

This is true, in the idea that over the course of the season, many different players contributed many different things. Thus is the function of any team, in general. But it seems as if your point is because this is a team, that everyone is excused. There are stronger members of a team, and there are weaker members of a team. Listen, we all know your post was a thinly veiled attack on those that dislike the performance of your favorite player. We're now a lesser community because we expect results from our quarterback? Ridiculous and childish. You're correct when you say that it isn't all of the quarterback's fault. Obviously. Still, regardless of who is around them, you expect to see something from your quarterback to give you hope. You, more than anyone, should know that TSW does not simply focus on the quarterback. Everything is scrutinized here, because that's all we talk about - football. Unfortunately for your favorite player, the quarterback position is the big issue this offseason. Why? No, not because everyone but you is an idiot, but because Drew Bledsoe has failed to help this team win. Bottom line right there. Sorry it didn't work out for Drew, AKC; we all are.

Actually, you said that. I said no such thing. I did say, however, that the quarterback is undoubtedly the most important position on offense and this is something that's pretty basic. Obviously, you can't prove something like that with numbers or statistics. I'm not putting this in an encyclopedia. But really, denying the importance of the quarterback to an offense is pretty idiotic (that's that word you like). They seemed pretty capable of winning without Duce Staley.

Wow. I barely need to respond to this post, you're embarassing yourself enough on your own as it is. I was kidding, of course, about hating anyone, especially on something like Bills football. You used the term first and tried to put it in my mouth, remember?

Ah, I didn't realize we were arguing about an offhand comment that a random poster made.

I don't think it'll be as bad. As I remember, the Flutie/Johnson camps were pretty evenly divided. For good reason, too, as both were amazingly average quarterbacks that showed occasional "flashes." Most people, including Tom Donahoe and Eric Moulds, think Bledsoe is finished.

No problem. I figured you could use a few pointers. oh, I don't hate Drew. I do hate quarterbacks that habitually perform badly, and people that refuse to hold them accountable for their actions. But there's no cave.

I'll use your one-liner arguments against you. Prove the center is more important than the quarterback. Pittsburgh has the same center as last year, when they went 6-10. But something on their offense changed this season, I can't remember what it was...

Terribly sorry about the namecalling. People aren't using Drew's won-loss record against winning teams for ONLY this year. It's not like it's something that's uncommon in the man's career. This is a trend, not an anomaly. You know yourself that a comparison is baseless. You know, even without looking at stats, that Favre is a bazillion times better in the clutch than Drew Bledsoe. Besides, as long as we're comparing, we ought to go through each position on Green Bay's team and blame them for the loss, right? Since it's never Bledsoe's fault that we lose, it's the offensive line or the receivers or the running backs or the defense or the kicker - all of these excuses made for Bledsoe sure ought to be able to be used for Favre, right?

That's the most retarded logic I've ever heard. "I'll post misleading stats to help my futile argument, but I refuse to back them up in any way, shape or form."

You can't just look at one year, you simpleton. If we did that, then Rick Mirer would seem like a god. Furthermore, then why not just look at one game? In your view, then, Rob Johnson must be the greatest QB to ever live. I'm telling you again: dig up Favre's career won-loss record against winning teams and compare it to Bledsoe. I guarantee it isn't close.

Please. If you think Drew Bledsoe only struggled against winning teams this year, you're delusional. Post the career won-loss records of Bledsoe and Favre against winning teams if you want to make a comparison. Or, if you want to be more specific, let's just do the last 3 years (the amount of time Bledsoe has been a Bill). Post those stats!

Posted this in another topic, but since some people like to repeat the same thing over three thousand different threads, I'll rebutt your point here, too. No one is justifying "only blaming the QB." But, just like every other position (including the often [unfairly] maligned offensive line), the quarterback needs to be held accountable. Unfortunately for Drew's relatives that post on this board, the quarterback is undoubtedly the most important position on offense. If you're going to try and argue something as basic as this, please don't bother hitting the "reply" button. People are upset that the board is a flurry of quarterback posts, but it's because that's the most important offensive position AND it's one that we are struggling at. It's a big issue this offseason, so get used to it. If it will help you to evaluate Drew Bledsoe's performance here in Buffalo, just pretend his name is Shane Matthews. Forget about the prestige, forget about the pedigree, forget about the name, forget about what he's done elsewhere - it doesn't matter. All that matters is what he's been able to do here. And he hasn't shown us that he can consistently be a player that helps our team. Bottom line.

No one is justifying "only blaming the QB." But, just like every other position (including the often [unfairly] maligned offensive line), the quarterback needs to be held accountable. Unfortunately for Drew's relatives that post on this board, the quarterback is undoubtedly the most important position on offense. If you're going to try and argue something as basic as this, please don't bother hitting the "reply" button. People are upset that the board is a flurry of quarterback posts, but it's because that's the most important offensive position AND it's one that we are struggling at. It's a big issue this offseason, so get used to it. If it will help you to evaluate Drew Bledsoe's performance here in Buffalo, just pretend his name is Shane Matthews. Forget about the prestige, forget about the pedigree, forget about the name, forget about what he's done elsewhere - it doesn't matter. All that matters is what he's been able to do here. And he hasn't shown us that he can consistently be a player that helps our team. Bottom line.

It came to me in a dream.

It's tough to say. If he had started all season, things wouldn't have turned out the same way. Maybe Willis wouldn't have gone the extra mile that he did, knowing the starting job was his from the start? I don't believe that, though. I think if Willis had started all year, things would have still turned out pretty similar to the end results. However, I think he could have been a big difference in the first two games where all we did was hand the ball off to Henry. With Willis in, I think we could've won both of them. 11-5.

What is it the kids are saying now? Oh, yes. OWNED.

Of course it's Moulds' fault. There's no way it could be your brother. Sorry, I meant Drew Bledsoe. Same thing.