ATBNG

It is. My name is short for "Always The Bridesmaid, Never Gilbride!" I was screwing up people's main pages though every time I opened a thread, so I shortened it. Gilbride is and always has been awful.

Ah yes - Michael Bishop. Was there anything he couldn't do athletically? Not according to Boston talk show callers. I gathered from Belichick's press conference when they cut Davey that he really likes the kid personally. He was a little bit emotional about having to cut Ro'. Davey never played well in exhibition season - could never develop accuracy or consistency, and he had noticeable issues with his footwork. Davey is known as the man with the Golden Arm in Germany for his record setting NFL Europe season for Berlin in 2004. One article here

You should have doubt, and lots of it. Let's go back to January, 2005, and that gag job Drew threw up against Pittsburgh's (mostly) second unit in an elimination game. Was that solely his fault? No - lots of blame was available to be spread around that day. Did he play anything close to well? No. 2 fumbles and a pick versus no touchdowns. I just don't understand how you as a fan could watch that debacle take place year, and then similarly transpose an argument that that same guy would have won the Super Bowl given the opportunity. Forget the strength of the opposing team's defense and focus on the way Drew Bledsoe plays when the stakes are highest. If only Mr. October were a compliment in football..... He's got six TD's versus 12 interceptions and three fumbles in his seven playoff games. There's basically no such thing as Drew Bledsoe in a big game without a nut-crunching turnover, and he's averaging over 2 per playoff game. Drew Bledsoe is never going to start and win a Super Bowl as a QB.

I agree. The other point here is that the Patriots have a philosophy and personnel that have in part led to these numbers. They don't have a monster wide receiver like a CJ, Owens or Moss deliberately. Their best receiver (Branch) is very small by NFL standards, and the strength of his game is his route running (especially good at recognizing up blitzes and cutting off accordingly). Givens is a little more of an intermediate, physical guy, but he doesn't have a ton of speed (combine slow if you will) and is mostly used from 8-15 yards. Dwight's a slot receiver at best. Patten did a nice job for them but he's not a top level WR talent. Brown's production has slipped steadily since 2001, and is another guy that doesn't have blow away physical skills, but is smart, has good hands and runs intelligent routes. Because of that, they're not really trying to hit 20-40 yard passes in their offense. They will go up top with the 40+ tries a lot more using Bethel Johnson, who couldn't run a complicated route to save his life but can be effective as a burner on a fly route. Since Belichick has come in, they have not really paid big money for a wide receiver (Brown made OK money through his prime, but he also has had a great deal of special teams value). I think this is by design. Have more depth at the position, be able to go five wide and take advantage of your quarterback's ability to be able to make the right read to get a good matchup, and save the few million you'd be paying for that stud wideout for other areas of the team. This isn't a knock at Moulds (who I like a great, great deal), but I don't think the Pats would ever want him....at 6 or 8 million on the cap as he has been in recent years. While the NFL publicity machine and fantasy football owners drool over these loudmouthed big receivers like Owens and CJ and broadcasts eight different angles of their touchdown dances, the last five Super Bowl winners have not had a top ten receiver on it, and maybe not a receiver in the top twenty. I'll hear arguments for Branch last year (although he missed half of it) and maybe Brown in 2001, but there's pretty much no one from Baltimore (2000), Tampa (2002), and New England (2003).

The game wasn't as close as the final, but blaming Brady for the failure of the final drive seems a bit much. On the last series, he hit Givens in the chest with a perfect 20 yard throw that was going for at least another 10 yards and Givens dropped the ball. He also made a good throw to Branch on 3rd and 20 which was well defensed by the Broncos. The guy has played four full seasons, and has led his team to the Super Bowl in three of them, and you say with pride that you "know that he's really just a slightly better than mediocre QB." It's not really a defensible conclusion intellectually. No QB has done that in the history of the league in his first five years (even counting 2000). He's 9-0 in the playoffs. How on earth could he possibly be "slightly better than mediocre?"

Football is a violent game. Safeties and corners make plays like Samuel did all the time, and they make them for all 32 teams and every team in college too (like the shot Fasano took in the USC/ND game). That's how Lawyer, or Nate or anyone else should play that pass when defending it. Pretending that "MY" team is on the side of the angels, while "THEIR" team is out to maim, hurt and injure people is utterly pointless.

They also basically had two running backs available to them the entire game - one of whom (Zeruoue) has only been on the team for two weeks and is not a particularly good blocker. Bye week comes at the right time - that's for sure.

Not true (4-4 vs. 4-3).

Boston Globe I don't think a professional athlete has ever truly come back after having a stroke.

He takes too many hits and has had too many concussions over the course of his career. The mind is clear and the body is sound at the beginning of the year, but after sack 25 he starts to go downhill quickly. It's not just the sacks either - he takes a lot of hits on throws that he gets off because he's so flatfooted in the pocket. Another "Drew" factor is that the strength of his game - throwing those laser deep outs - get tougher to throw as the weather turns colder and stormier.

Well, not so fast. The books would go out of business if the public were right more often than not when they overloaded on one side. If the line doesn't move, usually having the majority of the public on your side is a bad thing. On the other hand, it takes more money to push a line off of "3" (the most common final differential) than other spreads because of the risk of the game middling. My read on the betting pattern for this game is that it looks like a normal game so far.

Just as the threshhold for receivers will be more stringent, so will the threshhold for QB's due to the emphasis in the passing game in the modern game and all of the rule changes that have opened the possibility up for super stats by modern players when compared to players of the past. Drew, despite his two AFC championships and one Super Bowl ring (they don't make rings for winning the AFC Championship, do they???), is not a hall of famer. It would be a travesty if Bledsoe ever got in and Ben Coates didn't. I agree with those that say Moon has a decent shot. He'll be helped by an inability to compare his Canadian numbers to anything tangible in the NFL. The other two should not be in. I had some Drew/Coates flashbacks when another Drew threw that floater to Antonio Gates Monday night. It was a superb catch by Gates, but enough of those and he too will see a promising career shortened by too many safeties that get free shots at him.

Utterly unnecessary comment there. HD interacts in a perfectly normal way with everyone here, except he's a Pats fan, so naturally he tends to comment in threads that involve that team (of which there are many on this site). He doesn't deserve that type of scorn from you.

Haven't gotten that impression from a lot of fans I know DG - most seem to be in the camp that the team is holding its own considering all that has happened and how tough a schedule they've had. I doubt you'll find anyone credible that thinks the Patriot defense is playing anything close to well - they miss those veterans for sure. They've only gotten one turnover out of the secondary so far. The middle linebacking has been atrocious. As the Tuna would say, it is what it is. Part of my enjoyment out of watching the team is the knowledge that with Belichick in charge, they're always going to be well coached and well managed and therefore very dangerous to make a run. That should be plenty for any fan, and it's more than enough for me. Fans who expect to win it all every year are living in a delusional world.

I think that the best way to look at injuries are that they are factual. They do get overused as an excuse, because they inevitably happen to every team, but the opposite can't be true either - the coaches and GM's shouldn't be taken off the hook as soon as someone goes down, because it is their job to see that the position is adequately backed up, that the replacement is coached up properly, etc.

The number of injuries that New England has sustained on defense has definitely affected how well the unit has played. Going into 2004, you'd probably say that the four best players on the NE defense were Law, Harrison, Bruschi, and Seymour. They're all gone. McGinest might be five; he broke his hand yesterday. Vrabel might be six; he was hurt throughout preseason. Their strategy of acquiring a deep roster of "matchup" type cornerbacks has also not gone as planned since Scott, Gay and Poole can't stay on the field, along with all of their safeties except for Wilson (who has had a poor year so far). They've worked in a defense where they play a linebacker (either Davis or Vrabel) at strong safety to compensate for this, but those two guys aren't quick enough to provide deep help. I'm pleased with how they've played considering all of these factors - 3-2 considering all the injuries, coaching turnover and the brutal early schedule is pretty terrific.

I think there is a marked difference between Pats fans who come here to gloat and ones like myself who come here because the quality of NFL discussion can be quite good and wish to participate. I furthermore don't think you comprehend that difference. Posters like McBride, KTFABD, Lori, Tuesday, BINYC, (and many, many others) etc. are interesting to read and talk to to see what their perspective is on the Bills and the NFL in general. I very much respect that they are passionate fans of the Bills and intelligent people, and this is why I joined this site. I think Scott does a terrific job. You I have less respect for because you are antagonistic and because you make posts that should not be left unchallenged because they are so far off base from reality. I called your post naive because I think it truly is - the idea that the Dolphins had no idea Holcomb might start this week and that their gameplan was rewritten and that would be an advantage is preposterous. Right, which is why you told Coach Tuesday on Wednesday evening after said press conference.... Naturally, no apology from you for being 100% wrong despite having been boldly insistent to the contrary. Instead, yesterday's mistake becomes today's argument. Tough to respect, man. You have no idea what Nick Saban personally thinks about either guy, just like you had no idea what the real reason was that Mularkey pulled JP from the press conference in the quote above. It's wanton speculation with nothing behind it.

Oh sure - I'm simple. As much as you'd like to think that being a Bills fan makes you super-smart, and that fans of the other 31 teams are morons, it really is, when you come down to it, a childish notion. This might be why other posters think you're 14 years old. You'd be well served to treat other people as individuals and not "group" them so arbitrarily. Let's look at Saban's press conference quotes from Wednesday. Not today...Wednesday. So, again, does this appear like a coach who wasn't prepared for Holcomb before the decision was made public today?

A QB or any player could get yanked at any time if he's not performing. Obviously Saban is aware of that possibility and would have been in this instance when the player has not been productive. Every single coach in the league prepares for contingencies in the NFL - otherwise they have no chance. Your point is very silly. I think it is pretty likely the Saints were ready for Holcomb, sure. If they didn't, then why didn't he cut through them like a hot knife through butter? The Saints, the Dolphins and 30 other teams in the NFL have gamefilm on every snap that Kelly Holcomb has taken in his last five years in the league. They knew how to adjust their defense and personnel to handle the different skills that Holcomb brings versus Losman. The same goes for Shane Matthews. You lack an understanding of just how much preparation goes into an NFL game. It is extensive. Teams get ready to play 45 guys, not 22 or 1. I also love how I'm living in a fantasy world when you're attributing absurd thoughts about what I'm thinking that have no connection to what I have written. Did I say the Saints "focused mainly on Holcomb?" I didn't even mention the Saints in my post. Why argue with anyone rationally when you can just make up stuff that they're thinking and then refute it I suppose. Really makes for productive NFL talk.

So you think Nick Saban was totally blindsided by this? You think he and the other Dolphins coaches watched JP's play over the first three weeks on film (and four through the start of this week) and figured that JP's a 100% lock to start in week 5 and prepared his team accordingly? I think your viewpoint is exceedingly naive. Now, if Wanny were still around, I might buy what you're selling.....

I think most bettors are not and have not been expecting the quarterback position to be the strength of this team. The defense is 31st against the run and the special teams has not been generating points (save for Lindell) like it was last year. Both of these facts are suprising. Losman's questionable play was expected - it is atypical for rookie to come in and succeed right away.

I think it suggests that the betting public sees Holcomb and Losman as equals at this point. The more troubling thing if you're a Bills fans is when a line opens at 2.5 and stays there throughout the week. It would be a good sign if the line moves to 3.

If I were you MBD, I'd start a "sun" thread and predict that it rises in the east tomorrow. You need a slumpbuster badly.

I agree with all of that - 100% - but "some speed" is incongruous with investing the last two years first two rounds exclusively on the QB/WR position. In today's NFL (including the implicit cap commitment that comes with making first and second round selections), that is an enormous expenditure of resources in one area. Your analysis is perfectly reasonable on what they are trying to accomplish, but I just don't then agree with the conclusion that it's all on the coaches and Donahoe is off the hook (while accepting the thought that the coaches would be better off committing to the run in these games). Too much of the money and draft picks available to go into this inside out power running offense has gone to the outside to say that Donahoe has given Mularkey and company exactly what they need to implement this power running game. Chargers are a good example - they are a run first team and because they run (extremely) well with LT and that line they can pass very effectively, but look at how they acquired their receivers. McCardell came for a 3rd and 6th round pick, Caldwell was a second round pick, and Gates and Parker were UDFA's. VERY different from the Donahoe track record/strategy.

Can't say I agree with this. Donahoe has not exclusively built a ball control running offense. Evans and Losman with his first two picks in '04, and Parrish with his first two picks (with #1 obviously invested earlier in the 2004 draft) in '05. Neither Evans and Parrish are running game oriented wide receivers (like a Keyshawn Johnson or a Hines Ward) - they're both downfield speed threats (in Parrish's case, maybe one who projects as a return man). Going back farther TD drafted Reed, signed Moulds to a big bucks long term deal, and traded a #1 for Bledsoe, who has been debated about ad nauseum but both detractors and supporters probably would agree that Drew needs above average skill position players around him to be successful. Tough to put this failure to commit to the run all on the coaches with the GM's resource management track record. Donahoe has oscillated for six years on just what type of offense he wants, which has left them with an offense that is designed to run at RB and OL, but not on the outside or at TE. Donahoe must share some of this responsibility.