Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Did you hear about the 75 yo guy at the gym, This 20 something hottie walks in, totally built. The 75 YO looks at her, then asks the attendant working there what machine he should use to get this hottie to notice him. The attendant looks at the girl, then at him and suggests the ATM in the lobby!

To me playing well on a poor team is much more impressive. I prefer the QB from the 2nd tier schools as their stats are bloated by great talent around them.

Actually I'm happier with a guy from Florida State than someone like Barkley. I hate taking guys from programs that have star players top to bottom as it makes everyone look much better than they really are. I prefer someone from a middle of the road/conference program.

How is it in Ralph's best interest to pay billions in taxes now, then pay again when he dies if he leaves the $$ from the sale to anyone other than his wife. If he keeps the team until he dies and passes it onto his wife there are no no taxes due until she dies or sells the team. She could even find a nice 20 YO to marry and delay taxes for another 50 or 60 years. I'm sure there are volunteers on this board for that job. She's actually pretty hot looking, Or maybe he's waiting for Trump to become president and abolish estate/capital gains taxes. RW missed the boat, he didn't die in 2010.

While I don't necessarily disagree, the problem is there are only about a dozen QB's who aren't in group 2. So who should the other 20 teams then use for a starting QB since you point out they shouldn't be starting. That's the problem, there aren't 32 good starting QB's in the league, and the odds of finding that true franchise QB are low, much less than 50/50. So many teams in the league have the same problem as the Bill's, they try someone for a couple years it doesn't work, so then they start over with another one, until he fails, by that time the rest of the guys you've signed over past few years have got old, and/or contracts are up, so you end up totally rebuilding, not just QB, but the entire roster. That's why the Bill's went with Fitz as they realize the odds of them finding that magical guy are low. Did they expect to win with Fitz playing as poor as he is right now, I'm sure not, but were hoping that he'd improve from what you saw last year as it beat the alternative, playing "As the QB Turns"! It's not a problem unique to Buffalo due to having a weak front office, there are many teams with highly thought of front offices who've gone through same repeated cycles. If Polian truly does stand by that statement, he should have added and unless you're one of the temas that gets lucky and finds that great QB, you're team is screwed.

Honestly I think some of the "numbness" is doing to having a bye week. Playing poor all year, then having the bye week was kind of was nice, made you almost forget about them and was almost a disappointing feeling today that I had to watch them play. I have ST and found myself switching to other games more today than prior. having a bye week, out of sight, out of mind, and was kind of anxious to continue that feeling today

Yes, did you miss the offsides call against him??

I don't recall them showing Chan on TV giving a TO signal?? How do you know one of the players didn't call the TO on the field with nine seconds left?? It's really funny as soon as that play happened I thought to myself I'll bet the typical morons here will be screaming about CG's clock management when there is no way to know who called the TO. I had faith in many of you.

More like three decades. Don't forget Richard Todd! He actually was decent QB, didn't last too long though.

I'm in Wilmington NC, we had 3 inches of rain yesterday, winds were wiping pretty good last night and today, but around here with all sand so 3 inches is nothing. Three years ago we had 23 inches of rain over like four days, and minimal flooding on the coast, Inland is usually worse.

Let's see how he does for a couple of years before calling him great. So far this year, isn't looking nearly as good as last season. Totally not true, just like the majority of the teams in the league, they haven't had any luck in finding one. They've tried many different guys, none have worked out, just like many other teams, It has nothing to do wit hBill's management being worse than any other teams.

I just looked at the last twenty winners and it was made up of twelve unique teams, so if you keep drafting and changing guys because the last guy didn't work out, you'll never get anywhere. So it's a great idea if you're one of the twelve teams who won, but not so good for the other twenty in my opinion. If you look at it, that's the road the Bill's have taken actually, see my post above, nine different QB's, so how's that worked out?

I did some research a few months back and found that since 1995 when Kelly retired, the Bill's have tried 9 different starting QB's, that may sound like alot, however the average for all teams was 6.7. At the bootm you had Indy NE, and Green Bay with two , but there were many teams who had as many as ten. There were a number of teams with ten that you'd consider well run clubs, so having a good or bad front office has little to do with finding that guy. (you could view that as a good point in Buffalos future quest) I don't have the numbers in front of me right now, but I recall Baltimore had a fairly high number of QB's and many people would consider Ozzie Newsome to be one of the better GM's Another one up there were the Giants until they got Eli. I'm certain that's a big reason why the Bill's stuck with Fitz, behind closed doors did they ever think he'd be on the great list, no probably not, maybe were hoping he'd be in the above average list. But they stuck with him as they knew the odds of finding a better alternative were not very high. As far as the data goes, I probably would have created a fifth catagory called potentially higher than average and would have thrown RG III, Luck, & Tannehill in there. More than likely out of the what was is eight rookie or second year starters this year, two may be considered great in five years,, two will likely be out of football, and the rest will be on their second or third team, sometimes doing better for awhile (see Fitz) then regressing again once other teams figure out how they fit with the new teams offense and how you now stop him again. It all goes back to my overall concern, there are 32 teams in the league and around 10 really goot QB's!

He was there guy last year, but I doubt they expected this leve lof play either. They will continue to tell everyone he's their guy until they select his replacement, then the new guy will be brought in to complete. Then he becomes the new starter. Unless there's a better option on the roster which right now is unlikely, they will continue to tell everyone he's their guy. That's all it means.

OK, but thats more on the play calling than on Fitz. I was hoping for a QB bootleg, at worst it would have kept the clock moving and maybe even get a first down out of it.

Can you show me that card?? From everything you hear and observe, most teams don't go for two until maybe five minutes or so to go as too much can change by going for it early. On the drive where Fitz had the INT, if we go down and get a field goal we're up by nine. If we went for two and failed, then we're only up eight and Tenn could tie with a TD and 2 point conversion. Tenn hadn't stopped the Bills' all game so was very good chance they could get at least a field goal out of it. That's the argument as to why not to go for two.

While I don't disagree with any of your comments about Fitz, I can't blame him on the loss when he drove down the field for five long scoring drives, didn't need to punt until was half way through the 4th quarter. He was blind sided on the fumble, more an O-line thing than on him and you often see fumbles result from that. One Int while it was a terrible pass and terrible call, can't blame him for playing a one int game. I was hoping for the QB bootleg that they did earlier a couple of times with success. I put the blame on the D who could not stop anything all 1st half and half of the second. The problem I do see with Fitz among many is his game plan how he manged the game was good, dink and dunk, we have guys who are good at YAC, let them keep moving the chains and mix it in with the occasional 20 yarder when you have the chance. That's not a bad game plan as long as you're ahead. But with a minute left and the D knows you have to gain 15 to 20 yards at a clip, Fitz can't do it. That's the problem with Fitz!

Yes but on the drive where Fitz had the INT, if we go down and get a field goal we're up by nine. If we went for two and failed, then we're only up eight and Tenn could tie with a TD and 2 point conversion. Tenn hadn't stopped the Bills' all game so was very good chance they could get at least a field goal out of it. I thought it was the correct thing to do as too much time left to go for two. Tenn had 4th and 8, we stop them get the ball back assume in that situation we run three times, gain very little and punt it back. If we had stopped the clock earlier Tenn would then have much more time to score. At the time it happened, I thought it was mistake on Tenn part not to stop the clock earlier. Lately too the Bill's were stopping Tenn some so wasn't totally out of the question that we'd stop them again.

Actually I thought it was a mistake on Tenn part not calling a time out earlier rather than letting it wind down. It's 4th and 8, if the Bills stop him., they get the ball they run three times and punt, Tenn may still has time left to go back down and score so if you're taking the time out anyway, may as well take it earlier in case you need the time later. On the int, I thought they should have ran that Fitz bootleg play again that worked earlier

I think the best way to use him would be to hide him in your offense, hide him in a nook someplace!

He may get cut, but he won't be traded as he has no trade value.

It tells you that at the time they had better options, bow due to injury it was worthwhile to bring him back. Hope that answers your questions about the staff!

There was no blunder, he just couldn't get to the ball and keep it in play without touching the endzone. See it happen quite often during games.

If we were 0-7 maybe they'd make a change but either 3-4 or 4-3, there's not going to be any change unless somehow the Packers cut Aaron Rodgers and we sign him, then maybe. Anything short or Rodgers, Brady, Rivers, and Brees, we're not making a change!

Schedule is set based on where you ended in what division. Not only who they play, but where they play. I believe there is some flexibility in scheduling say for example every 4 years the Bills and SF play, well in 2016 the game may end up in SF again, if in 2020 for a third time in a row the game was set for SF, they may make an adjustment to play the game in Buffalo instead. But they try to keep these things to a minimum as it's just simply changing the site of the Bill's game, now they also need to change two other teams in the series of AFC east vs NFC west and there may not be another easy one to change so it's not a guarantee.