Lori

Looks like he's misreading the attempts-per-game stats, same as the other guy did. Repeating from earlier in the thread: Edwards was 21-for-31 vs. the Bucs, 20-for-35 vs. the Saints, and 16-for-31 vs. Cleveland. His 31st attempt in the TB game was the 43-yard TD pass to Owens. His final five throws against the Saints were: 8 to Reed, incomplete to Owens, 12 to Jackson, 0 to Reed, incomplete (throwaway). Last throw in the Browns loss was a dumpoff to Lynch to set up the ol' lateral-till-you-fumble play. Totals: 5-for-7, with one completion over 20 yards, just like it says on the "Attempts 31+" line.

Another interesting fact: by the cover date on that issue of SI, Kay Stephenson was no longer the Bills HC, and Smith was back in the starting lineup to stay a week later.

Starts tomorrow: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?showtopic=105841

The 1-10, 11-20, etc. isn't yardage. That's breaking down his stats for the first through tenth attempt in each game, eleventh through twentieth, and so on. Take a look at the 31+ line: 5-for-7, but only one was for 20+ yards. His true long-pass completion stats, available on his main profile page: 14 for 20+, two for 40+.

(door flies open) MARMALARD: Ya betta ask someboddddayyyyyyy!

Not very often that Ritalin Child and I agree on something, but I'm not a big Clausen fan either. In fact, I was relieved when I heard Troup's name called with that selection instead.

Oh, she's still here. She just lurks in the shadows until some chimp behind a keyboard needs a slap upside the noggin.

I dropped that info into my last post: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...t&p=1852200

Now that one crosses the line into hyperbole, IMO, but I'll check. And don't take this as me defending Edwards, please. He lost his job to Fitz on merit -- and considering that when RF was signed, most of us figured it was expressly because he WOULDN'T pose a threat to TE, that's not good. I don't have that link open anymore. Tim (or Williamson) did say two 40+ throws for the year, correct? (Hmmm, that's setting the bar an inch above sea level for Brohm. Maybe you're right after all. Be right back.) ------------------------------------------------------ OK. This link might be password-protected; lemme know if it is: http://www.nflgsis.com/2009/Reg/16/54692/PlayStats.pdf Brohm was 17-of-29 in that game. Interestingly, only four of those passes traveled over 10 yards past the line of scrimmage: 47-yd INT, 32 and 19-yd incompletions, and a 14-yd completion to Evans (who added 1 YAC). On the other hand, nine of his passes were targeted at or behind the LOS. So, one game, one 40+ (to the wrong team) and a bunch of dumpoffs for Brohm. The contrast with TE might have been more apparent with Fitz. Still and all, I'm in the camp that's curious to see how Brohm does with a full training camp. To be honest, Edwards too, in a different system. I'm not ready to absolve Jauron of responsibility for last season's cluster.....

Paywall for non-subscribers, Guff. Anything new in there?

Actually, this is a new subject -- Matt Williamson's take on how Spiller will help Edwards (or whoever the Bills QB ends up being). You can't tell by the original post, which never even mentions No. 21, but the title of the story is "Captain Checkdown has sidekick in Spiller."

This one sounds like it's going to get ugly. Quick. http://www.lohud.com/article/20100506/NEWS...amapo-with-rape

Would have to include a function similar to Twitter's "@<username>" link on the profile page, I guess.

Right, Facebook does the same thing in its status updates now ... but only if the person is on your friends list, I think. Not sure about that, though.

Based on stories from Miami ... nope, no personality change. One female classmate said that he took her cellphone, put it in the front pocket of his shorts, and told her to come get it. Those wild and crazy college kids, eh? Difference is, he's not in college anymore, and he's eight years older than the sorority girls he was buying shots for. Whatever did (or didn't) happen in Georgia, he needs to stop acting like a frat brat, IMO.

Just so long as you leave the picture sigs and the flashing text turned off ...

The owner of the website established the policy, not me, although I agree with it. Why? Because both of them came here as a favor to us. They didn't need to do that. And if you'd bothered to read what Tim wrote, he walked away because he got sick of people taking shots at his friends, not himself.

Valid criticism. Guess I missed that one. Edited. Been a busy 24 hours or so, between deadline and this. And don't be afraid to use the report button.

Although SDS wrote his rules of engagement following the Schottenheimer fiasco, you're missing the part where John also left the board for a short period of time. He knows he's fair game on OTW or PPP, but the rule applies equally to both when they're discussing their work. In fact, I removed a post and dumped someone for taking a shot at him less than 12 hours ago.

True story: last fall, one of the guys on my other board, a college football beat writer, was leaning toward posting under his own name on one of his team's fanboards. I told him that based on some of the crap we'd seen hurled at both Tim and John here, he might want to rethink that decision. He did.

Don't like it? Too bad.

Agree completely, which is why that particular sockpuppet won't be visiting us again.

On that, we do not disagree. And why isn't it? Because as the population grew, we lost the small-town feel, and it probably isn't coming back. Doesn't mean that some of us can't rage against the dying of the light.

Excuse the !@#$ out of me for trying to develop what some people considered a decent resource for the site.