mjd1001

I'm fine with the decision to go back to Taylor. I also want to see Peterman again for a prolonged period of time. If the Bills lose the next two...or if they lose against the Cheifs and Tyrod looks awful, I'll be ready for Peterman for the rest of the season.

With KC and New England coming up, it looks like the Bills have a real shot at allowing 200+ points in a 5 game stretch. When was the last time a team did that?

If I were an owner, I would be happy with the job Goodell has done overall and would want him back. How he handles the player protests is a tough one. He kinda has to walk the tightrope...by doing so he gets 'both' sides unhappy with him, but if he picks one side...there will be a total revolt. HOWEVER, if what he is asking for to get paid is true...I'd have some reservations. Not that the owners can't afford it....but it looks like he is doing this as a 'golden parachute' of sorts for when/if he is shown the door. Jerry Jones...Daniel Snyder...I have zero respect for. Kraft is slightly better than those 2.

What I'd like to know is...from someone who knows more about football than me... A.) How much time did Peterman have to throw against that 'prevent' garbage time D? Versus how much time did Taylor have throughout the game. b.) How much seperation did the WR's have from the DB's when Peterman made the throw? And did Taylor have similar option (WR's had similar seperation from DB's) and he checked down to McCoy or Tolbert?

I agree with this 100%. If Peterman plays and loses, at least it is something different. I know what I get with Taylor..and to me what I get is bored. With that said, I want to see Peterman play. However, I can't blame the coaching staff much if they don't play him right now..I don't expect it. If the Bills lose 2 of the next 3 (or all 3), then at THAT point I would expect Peterman to start vs the Colts. If that doesn't happen, THAT is when I'll be really upset.

I understand the Saints were probably in a big-time prevent defense, and didn't show a lot of complex looks to Peterman. I also know that he made some nice throws..throws with D-men in his face that Taylor rarely makes. I want to see more of Peterman as the season progresses.

I admit the D-line is worse, and of course has less depth without him. However, in the long run I think they are better off without him and his contract. Still happy with the move in the long run.

I don't watch the NFL as much as I used to either, but it isn't because of too many commercials..and the protest don't bother me either. -There is nothing I see now that I haven't seen before. In my first 10 year or so of watching the NFL, it seemed like everytime I watched a game there would be something new. A run unlike any other...a great catch...a comeback that I had never seen before. But now, simply because of watching so many games...it all seems the same. Different names on the back of the uniforms, but that is all. -I do not like the media coverage. No-one in particular (maybe ESPN, but everyone is doing it), but I'm tired of the shows that have to have 2 guys yelling and arguing over a topic. I'm tired of every discussion about who is the 'best QB ever' or every 5 or 6 years someone says "this is the best Defense ever'. I KNOW that stuff actually GETS ratings, but if I do sit down, I just want to watch the game and listen to some in-depth analysis (I liked the old "NFL matchup" with Jaworski and Hoge, where they actually broke down the film and talked strategy---90% of the media coverage is going away from that and to arguments/discussions or fantasy football related.

I loved the win, but I'm glad people post things like this to be honest. After a loss I don't need EVERY post to be negative, and after a win I don't need EVERY post to be positive.

I agree. I'm not sure you can get much of anyone right now that will step in and help this team considerably. A great DT or a great Rushing DE or LB are probably the most easily integrated into the system at this time of the year, but don't think any really good ones will be available for offer.

The problem for those who want the Bills to draft a QB in the first round is....how many teams that are just as desperate (maybe more desperate now) for a QB might be picking in front of the Bills? Of those teams, is it likely they will pick a QB? San Fran? Yes. Cleveland? Yes. Giants, a strong maybe. Colts? probably not unless a major trade comes down. Bengals? Possibly. Bucs, No. Cardinals? Yes. Ravens? maybe. Jets, Yes. Chargers, possibly. Broncos, probably, Redskins, maybe, Jags, probably. Standings can change, but there might be 5 or 6 teams AT LEAST that will be picking in front of the Bills with getting their QB of the future a top priority.

I really don't see anything much better than 8-8....and with any more injuries....that is unlikely to happen. It is sad to say, but even with a winning record now, I'm almost more interested in seeing any hints as to what is going to happen next year. Will Matthews be resigned at WR? Is Cordy Glenn going to be gone (along with Dareus)? Will Peterman get a chance or is he just a clipboard holder for a high draft pick next year? With Kyle Williams and Dareus likely gone next year....how do they fill that HUGE hole in the DL (add to that Jerry Hughes isn't getting any younger/better) I'm actually very interested in seeing moves made sooner than later for next year. If the Bills happen to make the playoffs this year..then great. I just think there is about a 10% chance of that happening.

I put out my idea because it seems like there are a lot of people around here who are sure he is elite...if not on the field..at least elite talent....thinking as soon as he is in a good offense, hes putting up 100 catch, 1500 yard seasons. My thought is he might be a max 70-80 catch, 1200 yard guy and that is it.

Maybe there is a middle ground here. Maybe Watkins isn't a bust....but he isn't a top 10 guy in the NFL either. What he is....is that he is actually a top 20 WR (in the 15-20 range)? Better than anything the Bills have now by a lot....and a guy who can occasionally have a big numbers game...but someone who is no-where near the talent of a AJ Green or Julio Jones. It just might be that the Bills would have loved to have him around...but the new staff saw in camp he was a very good, but not great WR who was asking for elite WR money and decided to move on.

Can we please see the Packers play the Pats next week or sometime this month? I just wish the NFL could change the schedule, I'd love to watch that game now.

This year there isn't much that can be done I am afraid. Do the best with what you have. I'd LIKE to see Peterman play, but I don't know if that will be much better. I think the work will be done in the offseason: -If Dawkins improves (or at least looks above average), I think you may see Glenn gone. Not that Glenn isn't good, or he is a bad guy, but I don't see this regime sticking with an O-linemen payed as much as him that isn't 100% reliable and on the field. -Get your future starting RB. Either a guy to replace McCoy...or someone to back him up next year that will replace him the following year. -If they love Matthews, re-sign him. Hopefully Jones improves...and get one more top-flight speed guy (a guy with downfield ability that can get you 50+ catches a season) -QB....whether Peterman or a draft pick or trade...look for a long term solution. Unless they know something about Tyrod that I don't know. The game didn't bother me a lot overall. They lost by a few points...on the road...to a team that has played well the last few weeks...in bad weather...and with a lot of injuries. If they Bills truly are a good team they will bounce back...if they aren't that good...a win here isn't that important for the big picture.

I used to live in the Boston area (2 times for 5 years), and my current job is based out of Boston so I go there for meetings pretty often. Most of the guys and gals at the home office are Pats fans and love to talk about them. The thing is, they are 100% convinced, and I mean 100% CONVINCED, that if the NFL as a league and the officials weren't 'against' the Pats, they would be 16-0 pretty much every season. I came out and asked them about all of their losses the last 2 years...and without any doubt in their head they said all of the losses were flukes. I know fans always favor the home teams, but most Pats fans are SO USED to winning, they can't even comprehend that anyone can beat them if the game is legit.

It was a good win. If ATL had all their weapons for the whole game it would have been a great win, but it is still a good, very good win (being on the road means something, even though the stadium seemed half full at most times.) A typical Bills thing to do would be to lose to Cincy next week. Providing they can win next week, I think you can say this team is a legit playoff contender.

I can see his point about wanting Kelly to talk to them before. Agree with it or not, apparently everyone on the team and the coaches talked about what they were going to do, and probably knew who would stand, who wouldn't, ect. If Kelly wasn't in that team meeting, then it might be a suprise to the players if someone else shows up and does something different. It is the opposite of a show of unity that way.

Tyrod is an average QB. He is not good, he is not great. Hes not awful. He is average. That means he can have some above average games (Seattle and Miami), and some below average games (today). The problem is, average isn't good enough if you want to be a top team in the league.

I'm OK with this...as long as the same rules apply to all teams...come gameday all teams should be at the same advantage/disadvantage.

I guess how it plays out is a big thing with me too. Like many have said, if you are going to lose, try to do so in an exciting fashion and give us something to look forward to next year. The Sabres tank was painful because of just HOW bad they were at putting the puck in the net. I could be ok with losing, if they did so while moving the ball. I hate watching a 'competitive defensive game'.

I'm not a season ticket holder anymore, but I'm someplace between baffled and upset. I said in another thread, they have a lot more knowledge and information than I do, yet it is move after move that doesn't make sense. Even if they are after some kind of 'bigger picture' thinking, it just seems there might be a better way to go about it? Maybe not, but there is so much stuff that boggles the mind...how about more of an up-front explanation? If you want to say they are looking for a certain type of team, they TELL us the reason for the moves. Tell us the real reason, not the P.R. reasons.

OK, I'm supportive of the new staff as much as most....and I'm willing to admit there are things they see and know that I never will, but even thought I keep telling myself that I am starting to turn on them.

I want Peterman to be good, I really do. I want (and hope) to see him in a regular season game once the Bills are eliminated from playoff contention (maybe earlier if they technically aren't eliminated in week 11 or 12 but it is obvious they will be). BUT, I still cant say he will be good, or even average, until I see him throw downfield. I'm talking 30-40 yard fly patterns AND 15-25 yard outs, slants, and crossing patterns. I don't care how good Peterman is on the short stuff, he needs to be at least average on the mid/long routs (15-25 yards).