The Dean

What? Who said anything about Peters wanting to come back to the Bills after playing for Philly? I'm confused. I don't think Peters was motivated to play for the Bills after last summer's holdout.

I didn't even come close to saying that. But thanks for the misinterpretation.

Nate is a very good CB (not top 5, IMO). Winfield is still a better all-around CB than Nate.

The Red Zone represents everything that is wrong with the way many watch football, IMO. With that said, I was pretty happy to find out I have it, and didn't have to pay extra. One small positive to weigh against the mountain of Comcast negatives.

You certainly wouldn't consider picking a player you feel CAN'T excel in your system, would you? I agree the FO should pick players with skills that can translate to multiple philosophies. But if you pick guys that don't fit what you plan to do this year, you help guarantee this year's failure. I never suggested anyone acquire players that only fit one particular style.

The chance for the Bills to get Peters at the market rate was long passed, by this offseason. Peters wasn't looking for market-rate $$ from the Bills, he wanted to be gone. The Bills would have had to pay Peters what the Eagles paid him, or perhaps more.

Indeed. He had me fooled for a while, too. If he was reliable he's be a hell of a TE. But that's a pretty big "if".

Are you suggesting the team should pick guys who don't fit what the current philosophy, anticipating failure? I guess that would be one way to ensure failure. For what it's worth, I think the Bills were really concentrating on strengthening the interior, as they thought the guards available in this draft were better than the tackles. It seems they thought Walker and Butler would be OK, if the interior was strong. So far they missed (badly) on one assumption.

Happy Belated Birthday, Bastards. Thanks to Fearless Leader for keeping the site vibrant!

Karma's a B word. Stop taunting your dog.

I had the same reaction. The explanation for the move actually makes some sense, though. Based on his limited time playing LT last year (at a reasonable level), the Bills concluded he could fill the gap, if the interior OL was strengthened. I can understand that thinking. It became clear to them, based on the last two/three preseason games, he was not up the task. His skills had actually diminished quite a bit, from last year. But the biggest issue with his play, was his inability to handle the no-huddle pace. If they are committed to the no-huddle, he would be unable to play either tackle position. So his dismissal makes some sense there, too. I would have expected the OL line coach to get a handle on that during training camp, though. Perhaps the problem didn't fully reveal itself until more extended action in the later preseason games.

Seeing as how the Bills probably have no idea what they are going to run, I think that's a fair point. This is something I'd like to see them try if the defensive hounds have been set loose. One would think Trent should be able to take advantage of a blitz in this situation. But from what I've seen of him for most of the 2nd half of last season, and this preseason, I have my doubts about his ability to read the blitz and get the pass away to the right WR. I hope my concern is without merit. With a TE like Nelson and most of their RBs, they should be able to transition to the 5-wide in the no-huddle, w/o making any player substitutions.

You really are the perfect example of a dunderhead, aren't you?

A fight is far different than a sucker punch.

No problem, henchperson.

Is this a serious question? Physical violence is not an appropriate reaction to verbal baiting. The guy who punches loses the mental battle and is the bigger idiot here, IMO. He could have walked a way, or said something about the other dude's sister. Better yet, shake his hand and show himself a better man. But the punching choice is way more entertaining for us. So that's something. BTW, here's a link that works (at least for now): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0kk-LQ5IgI

Just a heads-up: The link on TBD front page to Tim's ESPN blog is now dead. The URL has changed. Tim's blog is here: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/category/_/name/afc-east I'm confident Fearless Leader, or one of his henchpersons will take care of that issue, in short order.

Couldn't you tell us, and then kill us? I thought that was how it worked. Looking forward to the report, Tim.

...says the Hedonism vet.

I think what you are saying is, the Bills telegraph their plays, with their formations (and personnel, at times). I would actually like to see the Bills run their basic plays out of many different formations, so the opposing D wouldn't be aware of what was called. Fewer plays (that they can run with confidence) but out of different formations and personnel packages, would be my preference. And I agree they have to build an identity. One of the reasons I would like a coach like Cohwer is, I suspect he would build a smash-mouth team, like the Steelers. That is the kind of team the Bills should be emulating, IMO.

Jimmy Johnson DID come to the NFL with zero previous NFL experience. I might note it was 20 years ago, and the NFL was a bit different then than it is now, but I won't. Instead I will point out Jimma's early record as an NFL head coach: 1989 (his first at Dallas and in the NFL) 1-15 1989 7-9 (Dick Jauron's favorite record) In today's NFL, it is unlikely Johnson would have had a third season as the Cowboy's HC. So, you make a good point, there. But understand, I'm not arguing Leach CAN'T or WON'T be a good NFL coach, I'm simply pointing out that head coaching success in college football rarely translates to HC success in the NFL. This is particularly true when the HC is without ANY NFL experience. It becomes even less likely when the college HC's success is a product of an offense that doesn't really translate to the NFL (thus the Steve Spurrier comparisons). Now, I wouldn't take the cheap shots if you could articulate why you believe Leach is the man who will be the exception. So far you have cited his press conferences. So, again, I will point out the stupidity of that.

I wasn't suggesting the Bills being in Super Steve. I was noting that Leach might be another Spurrier based on their backgrounds Yes. bringing in a HC with zero NFL experience because he gives a good press conference is just the kind of top-notch football thinking I've come to expect from you, Sen.

A dog? He was the head honcho for an enterprise that engaged in the systematic tortrure and murder of hundreds of dogs. Let's not downplay Vick's crimes.

Where did I say it would "suck"? I just think there are better options to pursue. The original Mike Leach may be available after this season.

To a deaf man, perhaps. Levy: 17 years as head coach. 19 playoff appearances. 11-8 in playoff games. 4 Super Bowl appearances. Nice try, though.