Last Guy on the Bench

Yeah, he really sounds high on Shane - basically if he wants to play next year he's the Bills' first choice.

I don't know. I don't think teams routinely make depth chart decisions before they've even had mini-camps, unless those depth charts decisions also have roster implications. If they're going to keep DB and JP at their current prices, I'd imagine they'd at least practice through the spring before making some big depth chart announcement. I could be wrong I guess. Cinnci might have made their Carson Palmer announcement last year pretty early. I can't remember when they did it.

I think that when you take into consideration the "We will make a decision at QB in the next couple weeks," which he apparently said on the radio, he is clearly asking DB to take a pay cut or contemplating cutting hiim outright. (My guess would be the former.) Otherwise, what "decision" is there to make? There's no decision to be made on JP. He's on the team. They're not going to name a starter in February. So unless you think he's talking about the big Shane Matthews decision, he must be contemplating some sort of immediate change re: DB (whether $ or roster status) to have made that comment.

What are you, in third grade? I'll keep a look out for your classic "four-eyes" posts. Might as well throw in a "fairy" post too. Despite his team-swapping ways, I think T-Bone looks lilke a pretty fun guy in that pic.

Isn't Darren Howard a free agent this year too? If so, he would get plenty of action, I would imagine.

The second round is a great place to get an athletic outside linebacker. Seems like a few good linebackers always drop, or get overlooked for one reason or another. I could definitely see an LB with our pick, especially if we end up with two 2nd rounders.

So it is. Color me double dumb. And as for the basement . . . priorities, man, priorities. ((JK. Thanks a lot for doing these DVDs. Can't wait to get some.)

Thanks, Jack. Didn't think to look there.

Fez, can you list the games you have available on DVD again along with contact info. I'm planning to order a bunch (complete with generous!! tip) and have mainly been waiting for that Sounds of the Game (or whatever it was called) from NFL Network that you were thinking about doing. Thanks!

Hey, it's just as hard to pick four losers as it is to pick four winners. Congrats. I just found your certainty entertaining. Hopefully your Patriots prediction will fare equally well next week. My own prediction is that the Colts break the Foxboro jinx and smack the Pats around. But I am "freaking wrong" more often than I'm right when it comes to football picks, so take it for what it's worth.

Rico, meet your mirror image T-Bone.

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. That catch was subtle, but downright amazing when you look at it. I think it was against the Jets.

Well, that will help us. The team who acheived the same record against a weaker schedule is presumed to be worse and thus drafts higher (meaning before the team with the stronger schedule - people use higher/lower in all sorts of ways when talking about the draft).

Teams out of the playoffs only draft before teams in the playoff within a given win group. In other words, an 8-8 team will always draft before a 9-7 team (unless the 8-8 team gets to the Super Bowl). If there are two 9-7 teams, and one makes the playoffs and the other doesn't, the non-playoff team will draft first in the first round. It will rotate after that just like any of the other tiebreakers (e.g., strength of schedule). Basically, the playoff/nonplayoff thing is the first tiebreaker within a given win group, followed by strength of schedule, and then, I think, the normal divisional/conference tiebreakers. http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/draft/update

Stranger things happen in the NFL every week. No guarantees, and the odds may be against us, but not insanely so. There's nothing outrageous about Kerry Collins having hot hand at home against Jax, or Bulger firing enough TDs at home to put the Rams in the playoffs against a solid but hardly spectacular Jets team. I wouldn't put a lot of money on it, but I wouldn't bet a lot of money against its happening either. I'm just psyched that there is no way we can be eliminated next week if we beat San Fran. The Pittsburgh game WILL mean something as far as we'll know at the time (unless of course one of the "stranger things that happen" is that we lose to the 49ers. Always possible)

It's around 9 degrees F here in Montreal (-13C) with a windchill of -6F (-21C). I guess I should put some pants on.

You must be looking at current divisional records. We'll each play 12 games in the conference. We cannot beat Denver in this tie breaker (assuming we are actually tied) because we are one game behind them in terms of overall record and two games behind them in terms of conference record. In other words, if we catch them in terms of conference record, we'll be ahead of them in terms of absolute record. There would be no tie, thus no tiebreaker.

Exactly right, which Denver would win based on conference record. Only one team at a time makes the playoffs in terms of tiebreakers, so we would then face off against the Jets, which of course we would win based on the same common opponents record that left us ranked ahead of them in the division. Bottom line, it would be the Bills and Denver (if and only if one of the Jets losses had been NE). The second phase of the above may seem stupid (i.e., why don't you just take Denver and the Bills based on the preliminary elimination of the Jets, since any subsequent face off between the Bills and the Jets will come out the same way). I think the reason they do the one team at a time thing, even though it seems redundant here, is that it would NOT be redundant if there were four teams. Say that Denver, KC, the Bills, and the Jets are tied. (Can't happen this year, but nevertheless . . . ) If KC is second to Denver based on divisional tie breakers, they are eliminated in the first round as are the Jets for the same reason. The Bills and Denver are not automatically the two playoff teams. They face off and Denver wins on conference record. However, now everyone comes back (including KC) for round two. Once again, the Jets are eliminated by divisional rules and now the Bills face off against KC. If KC had beaten them head to head or had a better conference record, they would advance (so it would be Denver and KC). Long explanation for a seemingly weird rule. Bottom line, if we tie the Jets (and they have a loss to NE), they cannot get in the playoffs over us, no matter how many teams are involved in the tie. And in fact, they cannot get in the playoffs, period unless we are the only two teams at 10-6, because everyone else beats us at 10-6 tiebreakers. (When you are behind a team in your division, you are paradoxically rooting for them to win any multiple tie breakers since you can then get back in the game, as in the KC example above). So, go Seattle this week, and go NE next week.

No he certainly did not. He had a few runs where he broke tackles really well. Look at his TD run. He dragged a couple of guys the last two yards if I recall correctly.

And here's a third opinion saying exactly the same thing. I was commenting throughout the game that, even though the end result was pretty much the same (THIS time), Willis was running faster and cutting harder than ever. It was very noticeable. He even broke out a few jukes, something he hasn't done much. I cannot freaking wait to see him next year. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see him pull a buck eighty game this year, which would have of course have to include a couple of big mongo runs.

I like Fieldpass for the pre and postgame (in between, I'm at the sports bar). But I listened to the preseason games and it's enough to give you a stroke when they don't come back on time and miss a big play. I, too, sent an email in complaining. How freaking hard would it be to get some sports broadcasting intern, who would be delighted to learn the ways of the booth, etc., whose only job would be to hit the button before and after commercials. I assume that someone is doing it who is also doing a million other things, because there is no other explanation for how often it's missed unless there is rampant alcoholism in NFL radio station engineering rooms.

Thanks. I thought that's what I saw. Since McFarland is never active, we basically have one backup tackle (Price), I guess.

Jennings was clearly playing hurt and Williams was out, so no surprise, that the OL didn't look so good at times (although I still think there were plenty of times where DB had a good chance to set up). Help me out, though. I was watching the game with no sound in a sports bar. When JJ got hurt and came out, did Smith come in at Left Tackle? If that was him, didn't I see him get smoked for a sack on his first play? And did I hear Mularkey say we only dressed 7 linemen? (Or was it 8?) (Listened to the postgame on NFL Fieldpass when I got home, but can't remember.) Anyone have a clearer pictue than I do of the OL machinations that went on?

Not impossible. Five catches a game (conceivable the way he's playing) and he ends with 49, nipping Andre and Jerry. Seventy yards a game (a reach, but also conceivable, especially if he has a big 100+ one in there somewhere - Hello Cleveland and San Fran) and he's at 834, right with Jerry. I could live with that. B)

See my post below. You're entering the attempts and completions backwards. Attempts go first, then completions. The resulting ratings seem much more believable (e.g., Drew's 65 today).