ATBNG
-
Posts
685 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ATBNG
-
-
Wow I was just looking at the teams we play next year and 5 of them will be like us....teams that have a new coaching staff.
1 new york jets
2 houston texans
3 minnesota vikings
4 detroit lions
5 green bay packers
jeeez the bears will be the only team in that division that has the same coach. even with our new coach if we fix the lines and yes i know our own division will be brutal,but 9-7 can be very possible.
Think about how Saban and Belichick feel with half their games against teams with new coaches. (the five teams above, 2nd game with the Jets, and two with Buffalo).
-
He's very likely to bring on Rob Ryan as his defensive coordinator if he is hired.
I don't know on this one. Could be interesting, but I think the guy needs a little more seasoning and is not ready. He's obviously had great tutelage since entering the league between BB and RAC. I think his first year as a defensive coordinator was no better than a B-. Obviously he had lots of injuries and turnover, but still the rash of big plays against the team early in the year also have to fall on the coordinator's shoulders as well. Stepping into the frenzy that is the Big Apple with one year as a coordinator and while being 30 million bucks over the cap at 34....he'll have his work cut out for him.
-
-
Does everyone have reading comprehension problems or what? HE, HE, HE, HE, HE ... there is no HE in TEAM. Will his TEAM ever get a better shot? I dont know.
He did not lose this game. His 22/38 for 290 yards and a TD did NOT lose this game. The crappy play of the defense and the protection problems from the offensive line lost this game.
Let me ask you a question. If Willis McGahee ran for 65 yards and TD, against the Pittsburgh defense on a day when the Bills offensive line kept letting the Steelers INTO THE BACKFIELD and the defense let the Steelers offense walk all over them ... would you say McGahee lost the game or would you say The Defense and Offensive Line cost the game?
Ridiculous.
The analogy doesn't work. Manning has the ball and the responsibility for reading the defense on every play. Heck, he even makes the in game strategy decisions on whether to go for it or not now. He's the highest paid player in a salary cap league - by that right, he is the player on the team that needs to accept the most responsibility. McGahee has no playcalling control. But here's the rub - if McGahee after the game threw his QB (for not calling the right audibles) and his line under the bus, I'd probably criticize him. The league's too tough to have adversaries wearing the same color uniform as you.
Peyton chose to sign his latest contract of his own free will, and said contract's structure makes it so he gets the most money in the league. That leaves Polian the least money in the league to pay the other 52 players. I think it's pretty obvious that Peyton was all about Peyton on signing day, but he's all about blaming his offensive line today.
One other thing I didn't like. Glenn got called for a false start on the Mungro TD that was called back, and Peyton gesticulated to the crowd to pipe down after the play. I thought that said a lot about his focus, or lack thereof. Manning played all year with amazing protection, but a good defense is going to impose its will on a few plays here and there. The guy just rubs me the wrong way.
-
Incredible play by Roethlisberger. The announcers failed to emphasize that he took the correct deep angle to cut (Harper's) right side of the field off, as well as make a great tackle.
That kid showed brass balls today. Awesome performance.
-
Yes. But the real question is this: Does Manning have putrid playoff showings or does the Indi Offensive Line, and the opponents mugging his WR's really have the putrid playoff showings. For example, Roethlisbergers QB rating was around 95 and Mannings was around 90-91 .... so there is only a 4-5 point difference. Yet you could clearly see what team was more in control of the game. That is because even though Manning played well, the rest of his team kinda collapsed (barring, Edge and Wide Receivers).
The great ones get it done. Jerry Rice faced double coverage on the majority of his Super Bowl snaps yet he had a huge game every time on the biggest stage there is. Peyton's current legacy is excuses.
The team put around him in 2005 was built to win this year. Manning's cap figure next year jumps to 17.6 million. Will he ever get a better shot than he had this year?
-
Now how can you put this loss on the shoulders of Peyton Manning? He had 2 bad passes (that I have seen) thus far. One that should have been picked off (that was thrown to Wayne) and another one that kinda was picked off but was taken back.
He had at least two 3rd down and long plays where he threw short of the marker and his receiver was wrapped up easily. He threw several passes way over receivers as well. Polamalu dropped three interceptions.
Was he the reason they lost? No, but he's also the highest paid player in the game, and he played a so-so game at best. He can't walk away feeling like he played well enough where they deserved to win.
That "protection" comment after the game was disgraceful.
-
-
I cannot cheer for the Colts and Manning as long as he continues with his stupid "theatrics/gyrations/whatever you want to call them" at the line of scrimmage on every single play. Why can't he call an audible like every other QB in the NFL.
Go STEELERS and anybody else that Indy plays for the rest of the playoffs!!
The home crowd can get pretty loud. Better make sure everyone gets the play personally.
This is one reason why the public overrates Manning as a QB - he gets credit for calling plays at the line of scrimmage because everyone in the free world knows when he calls an audible. Other quarterbacks just yell "Albuquerque" and be done with it.
Whether you're cheering for them or not though, I think you should be betting them today. This is going to be a massacre.
-
-
ESPN is perfect for Donahoe. Does anyone really watch anything other than Prime Time that's on that channel anymore. All it is is a bunch of mindless monkeys reading off a teleprompter. It can't be more obvious the way they do it. They should just run the damn prompter content on the screen.
Prime Time is done at the conclusion of this season as well.
I guess I'll watch a college basketball game, a few hands of poker here and there, and PTI is a worthwhile half hour if I'm not at work. Nevertheless I watch ESPN way less than I used to. It's too Hollywood these days, although I can understand their marketing strategy because the internet makes the delivery of scores/highlights/statistics a less critical mission for ESPN.
-
Why is everyone seemingly off the Indy bandwagon? They really only lost one game all season (I'm giving them a pass on the Seattle game because of the Dungy's son situation). I can see Indy, NE, Pitt, Denver, Seattle, Carolina, or even the Redskins as having a shot at throwing together a Super Bowl run. I'm hoping there will be some upsets and we'll see some new faces in the Super Bowl.
Everyone wants to have their own unique angle. There's a reason why Indy is even money or less in Vegas. They have proven themselves to be the best team in the NFL this year and have not been even competed with in any meaningful game this year.
I think New England has the best chance of competing with them because their defense is intelligent (moreso when Bruschi plays) and might be able to handle the hurry up. They did not come close to doing so though back in the regular season. It was somewhat embarassing. They shouldn't however have that happen a second time to a Belichick coached team.
As long as Peyton doesn't spit the bit, they should cruise.
-
Vegas Insider
Skins +9 at Seahawks
Pats +3 at Broncos
Panthers +3 at Bears
Steelers +9.5
at ColtsI don't remember any other 4-game playoff round where I like takng the points in every game.
Steelers didn't really give them a game in November. The Pittsburgh defense can play a little hard headed sometimes - I like the matchup of the Indy offense bringing its full playbook and two weeks rest against them. Plus, Minnesota victory aside, Pittsburgh has very little experience on the fast track over the last five years - something like three games total?
I think it cannot be forgotten that Indy has not yet lost a game of consequence this year. In the three games they needed to turn it up (@NE, Pitt, @ JAX), they dominated....especially offensively.
I also think that the Pats will be favored by kickoff Sunday.
-
There was a column yesterday by Donn Esmonde of the Buffalo News on the Buffalo Sabres resurgance. In it, he stated that the Sabres were the first professional team to institute variable ticket pricing where ticket prices vary from game to game based on the quality of the opponent and day of the week. I was surprised by this statement(that no one else has done this) and was wondering if anyone knows of other pro sports teams that have gone down this route.
Thanks.
The Red Sox have been doing it with a small portion of their seats for a few years now - specifically the left field wall seats and some of the roof areas. Next year it will be $110 for "blue" games and $130 for "red" games to sit on the front row of the green monster.
I think it makes sense for organizations to variable-price. I suspect it is the wave of the future. A substantial portion of money is spent by a patron on "other" (concessions, parking, shirts etc.), and the ticket price is the best weapon to get them inside the gates.
-
I think that you are correct HF, but that the NFL has chosen to share its footage with ESPN for the last 19 years and is now going to give that content exclusively to NBC. I expect the other networks to have specific limits on the replays it can show...I'm a little wary about this development. It has a different name - I think "NFL Gamenight."
-
NFL.com has Casserley staying. Yikes. Every other recent expansion team made the playoffs by now, and he's coming off a 32nd place finish.
Are Reeves and Casserley connected in any way??
-
ESPN and ABC are the same company. Michaels and Theismann will be doing the Monday night games on ESPN next year.
Madden and some unnamed PBP guy (Costas, Albert, Hammond, Collinsworth) will be doing Sunday night football on NBC.
NFL Primetime is also gone off ESPN, and will move to NBC. Costas and Collinsworth slated to host for now, although there is lots of talk one of them will end up with Madden and there will be a replacement on NBC Primetime.
-
Running a play that hasn't been run since 1941 is a real knee-slapper, all right. If he wanted to get Flutie some snaps in front of the home crowd then why not let him come in to the game and win it...all he does is win and it would add to the truly New England Flutie mystique. If Miami goes for the block and breaks the Magic One's leg on a gimmick play that hasn't been attempted since WWII that would surely cement Belicheck's HOF status, wouldn't it?
I bow before the more knowledgable NE Pats fan because I simply don't see the genius of a backup QB drop-kicking a meaningless extra point. I apologize for missing the historical nuance of that play.
Also, WTF does his dead father have to do with drop-kicking an extra point?
Belichick's Dad was an old time football player and the drop kick was common in that era. Belichick these past two weeks has had an hour long "film session" with the media where he has shown old footage thru to the modern era showing how defensive and offensive play has developed through time - included in that was a kick return for a TD by his Dad when he played for the Lions.
I think the odds of Flutie's leg being broken were in the million to one range. Look, I think it's perfectly fine for you to root against the Patriots, but I find the idea of anyone from a fan to a player being insulted by that play pretty ridiculous. Worry about other things, man.
-
It was a crap play if you have irrational hatred for the New England Patriots.
Those that do will continue to whine about everything they do, and the refs, and try to tear down Brady until time stops. It's the equivalent of white noise at this point. For those who have a love of the unique, who understand Flutie's place in New England lore, who understand Belichick and his respect for the history and nuances of the game and his recently departed Dad, it was pretty cool. Very cool.
By the way, I'm guessing Nick Saban falls into the latter category.
-
I think that today the Bengals laid down for the reason that JDG offered, as did New England. Obviously, when you pull 18 of your starters after one quarter, you're not playing to win but to remain healthy for the playoffs.
I don't think that was the case last week. No coach is going to ignore a chance to gain a bye. You can post about it 1,000 times Johnny, and you're rapidly approaching that number, but it won't make it true. Sorry.
One thing that I think teams do is that while they may play their starters, they often hold back on their playbook. The press will play the "Indy has lost their momentum" card for two weeks, but they've still won every game of consequence decisively this season. They still hopefully will have their hands full with New England considering all the history there if the two teams end up meeting.
-
Thank you.
The Patriots had just scored a TD and were down by 6, so they were "supposed" to kick the extra point. The entire game was one big scrimmage for New England.
-
That would probably be me. And I still don't think RW is an issue. The real issue is pay me now or pay me later.
If you say it cost RW in interest because he is paying now for future use, I agree. But I would be willing to bet the interest isn't viewed as a big issue. It is TD's responsibility as a cost to the Bills. It makes it harder to keep them profitable. TD's focus is on the cap, not on the interest, even though he has to account for the bottom line.
In the end, bonus money has to be paid off to balance the cap. All that dead cap space the Bills can't spend now is because it was already spent and but still has to be accounted for.
If money is such a big issue to RW, he could just as well tell TD not to spend to the cap number. From posts here, I believe there are teams that do this.
It's not interest. It's real dollars.
Let's look at this a little closer.
For the sake of argument, let's say the Bills cap was 65 million in 2001, and 85 million this year, increasing 5 million a year.
The cap charges probably were very close to 65, 70, 75, 80, 85.
Now the actual money paid out can fluctuate. Ultimately, every dollar needs to be accounted for, but by using bonuses you can stagger cap payments with money up front.
Let's say they signed four big free agents in 2002, and none in 2003. Due to those four bonuses paid up front in 2002, cap-staggered through the life of the contract but actually paid up front, their real dollar spending might look like this:
62, 102, 55, 70, 86.
Now, you can do this...but the owner does have to come up with the 102 in 2002. The owner might not be willing to do that. His projected revenue might only be 75 million and he may not be willing to put himself or his business 27 million in the red. Saying that you don't think Wilson is an issue is preposterous. Every business person from a lemonade salesman to a pro football owner lives and dies by revenues and costs.
On your last point, how do you think the fans would react if Wilson didn't spend to the cap? Think that would be a revenue neutral decision?
-
Actually, no you can't. If say Hutchinson would never come to Buffalo under any circumstances, then nothing the Bills could do could "make it happen." A free agent has that freedom. I hate when people claim teams "could have signed a free agent." Not always - contracts are a two way street.
Practically, one should also propose where to cut the fat when advocating big free agent signings.
Someone earlier in the thread said RW isn't a factor. Well, of course he is. The cap will be 96 million or something like that as will the Buffalo cap charges, but his out of pocket expenditures can vary wildly from that depending on how much of the year's payroll is allocated between bonuses, past bonuses and salary.
Bonus money is indeed paid up front, so if you want to get great players for a small 2006 cap hit, you're looking at RW shelling out 10-15 million dollar bonuses. For instance, you could get a guy at 25 million, 5 years, 10 million dollar bonus, escalating salaries from 1 million to 5 million. That contract would cost Buffalo 3 million against the cap in 2006, but would cost Wilson 11 million in 2006.
-
I tend to disagree with the plan. I think that the past five years have shown that the Bills need an entirely new management style, team and philosophy. They are not one or two players away. For every move that seems to be going forward, it seems that the other teams in the league are making more progress. If they spend big money on the line, they will be lacking at other positions.
They've spent to the cap every year in the last five, and they've been only good enough to have one winning season. They also have had a tendency to come apart in big games (last year's Pitt game, the two big division road games this year). I think that demonstrates there is a fundamental flaw in their team development process, and not one or two misallocated resources in team design.
I think that Donahoe can evaluate talent on an elemental level. The play of the special teams (especially 2004) shows that he can find players that have superior athletic ability. The problem is that he has shown an inability to build a team that functions as a team. Is it that these athletic players don't have the right personalities? Is it that they are not "football" smart enough? Is it the coaching? Are they not motivated to the point where they need to be to be competitive on an NFL level?
To me, there seems to be evidence of a lack of communications between Donahoe and the two coaches he's had. I'm not saying that they don't speak to each other, but there has not been a meshing between the coaches brought in and the players brought in. It's partially system (claim you're a running team but then devote the first and second rounds of two consecutive drafts to two speed receivers and a mobile QB), and partially personality. Donahoe had more success in Pittsburgh because Cowher, for all of his other flaws, is an excellent motivator. Cowher can get the max out of a knucklehead like Joey Porter. Williams and Mularkey probably need more self motivated players.
The other issue with Donahoe is that I think he has gotten cocky at the wrong times. The Bledsoe trade and the Losman trade - he just gave up too much in both deals. Obviously, the book is not written on JP but he still paid too high a price to get him.
I don't think Mularkey is "at fault," but I also don't think that he brings enough to the table to make him a guy that Buffalo should keep around.
All the talk over and over on here about the offensive line. The Patriots line has been a bargain basement outfit from the beginning. They've lost Woody, Andruzzi, Koppen and Light - probably their four best offensive linemen since 2001. Yet, the line still manages to get the job done with an undrafted wrestler, two rookies, a guard playing center and a backup guard. They've used the exact opposite strategy of signing high priced free agents or spending big time draft picks at that position. The coaches know how to get these under the radar guys to operate as a unit. Throwing money at the problem isn't likely to be successful for the Bills.
For the Bills to be successful, they have to beat Belichick and Saban. Both guys have the type of involvement in personnel that allows them to get players that can succeed in their system. I think that after five years it is clear that the Donahoe model is never going to be able to compete with them.
Pats Rodney Harrison still crying about the refs
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Actually, no. HD was correct. As someone who went to lots of games in 1993, I can assure you walk ups were still available. They almost sold out the 1993 (actually 1/2/94) game against Miami and the game was on TV (as noted below) because the sellout was presumed. From the Patriots' website....
Carroll ran the team into the ground? They were 27-21 under Carroll, and 32-32 under Parcells. Carroll was not anything more than an average coach, but the brunt of the blame for the decline in the team lies with Bobby Grier, who whiffed on three straight drafts after the Tuna left and is now working his own form of incompetent magic in Houston.
Also, can you substantiate that the waiting list dropped during the Carroll years?