leh-nerd skin-erd

forget fred jackson and his money. i haven't had wings at duff's in so many years...i gotta go next time i'm home.

i don't post a heck of a lot, try mostly to pick up a tidbit or two along the way from those who seem to have a keen eye for football, and have been reading your articles and/or posts here along the way. all i can say about your response here was... priceless. personally, i rarely invite people over, or go over to their house, to kick 'em in the chops.

i think you're overthinking your thinking. when the pats actually have some success on the field, than it will be time to worry about what they do or don't do. it's pretty obvious they've just been really, really, really, really lucky the past decade or so.

d-double-oh, dogg, there's no way to know if he's 100% correct even if he's correct in that peter's signs for 11 mill+. what leverage might he have had if he played a full season last year? not the full season where he started coming around game 5 or game 6, but the full season where you show up, play your ass off for 16 weeks straight? i'm still amazed that of the roughly 1500 guys in the league, peter's was only one of two that was so cheated that he had to sit out. i'm amazed too that a guy playing on a 7-9 team for the third year in a row, a guy who was a project part of the way and was signed to a nice contract felt so badly screwed by the organization. i got to thinking that as bad as peter's is getting screwed at $4+ mill, Tom Brady must be the most under-appreciated guy in the history of sports. Here's a guy that's actually won something, been a leader, and that poor bastard is making minimum wage for an elite qb. If Cassel was franchised for $14mill, Brady should by all rights be holding out for $24 or $25 million. But, he just plugs along at his $5 mill and restructures his contract for the team. business is business.

Promo, thanks for the recap. i sometimes think the whole media experience is a waste. the guy is young, has thus far made several mistakes and pretty dumb ones at that--would they expect him to fly by the seat of his pants? isn't that what gets him in trouble to start? of course it was coached, and if he's smart, he's a hired a pr firm to help him get his act together. he should be coached. he should try and project an image other than what he is---a dumb ass. doesn't mean he's a bad guy, lot's of people fit the mold.

dawg, ax and PTR-- we're all passionate bills fans, obviously. rational thought ultimately has to prevail, especially when we're not involved in the transactions. we don't know which cards are being dealt and who's posturing and who isn't. seems pretty clear to me that the Bills want JP on the team but don't agree with paying three mill more than they see he's worth (at least for now). it seems pretty clear they didn't want to re-structure his contract last year, that he felt it should be, and he handled it accordingly. seeing TO come to Buffalo is a prime example of sometimes things happen that you don't see coming. there are so many working parts to the NFL, it's kind of dangerous to get too passionate on issues we have only the most basic knowledge on, and even that knowledge isn't verifiable. does your opinion change if the Bill offer a lower contract back-loaded with incentives? let's say they have kickers in for Pro-Bowl performance and playing x amount of game? What if JP is concerned about the number of years on the contract more than the money? of wants it up-front in case he gets hurt? i have to tell you, just like my job, it's pretty hard to judge issues of equity on what someone else got. until the day comes that the player's union can enforce a contract that once player X gets $Y, based on performance/opinion player Z automatically get's a contract restructuring at $Y plus $500,000, this kind of thing happens. o the flip side, until JP completes his contract, his hands are somewhat tied. sit and run the risk of underperforming, play at a cost you feel is below your true worth.And as for paying the man----if he was getting what he considers big-time money, and his contract was up, is he honor bound to to take a reasonable offer from the Bill's based on market value and their investment in him---or does he free lance and get what he can for his family? or free lance to a contender for a chance at the ring? what about his obligation to all the little people who clothe their kids in JP jersey's? still sounds to me they want him back. sounds to me like he can re-negotiate and find common ground, or play out his remaining contract and take his chances. there's down-side risk for him there, too. of course, they could franchise him later on, and/or trade him along the way. speaking of that, i wonder if TB demanded a restructuring when Cassel got franchised....he certainly outperformed him substantially over an extended period of time. even with the trade, you gotta figure Brady is 2 times more valuable than Cassel, and it'd be unreasonable for him to play for less. same with Rothlisberger. And Manning. Sorry for the algebra.

so....the bills clearly should have signed him with three years left on a new contract, and he clearly had no choice but to hold out? if he had no choice but to hold out, why come back at the beginning of the season? make all the arguments you want about the shelf life of a player and the team's ability to cut a guy, but how do you see it as he had no choice but to sit? and if he had no choice, why "risk" and injury and come back for the season? sit the season, you're the aggrieved party. he blinked, they didn't. he underperformed at the beginning of the season, he wasn't worth the money they had already agreed to early on. how about the team aprpoach then? did he help 'em win? this whole argument that they have to do the right thing, and comparing it with other players on the team never made sense to me. if they give him $12mill, and the next draft choice signs for $14 mil, he'd have no choice to sit out again? or, if they renegotiate someone else, you weight the relative value of that signing in comparison with what you did a year ago for another guy? if you're always reacting, how do you ever control it? as for dockery and walker, seems to me they signed them to make the team better. i'd assume aprt of the analysis had to do with peter's role at L-T and the moneyt hey paid him. maybe they weren't convinced he would hold up through 16 games, maybe they felt his contract demands at that point were absurd, or mayeb they wanted to use the savings on his contract to pay some other guys to build a very good line. didn't work out that way, and part of that had a lot to do with peter's holding out. finally, maybe it's just that they felt the money they gave schoebel was a higher priority than renegotiating a contract for a guy with three years left. looks like they're trying to work it out, why not let it play out? put another way--the guy STILL has a lot of time left on his contract, he STILL stands to make an exceptional payday if they didn't offer one dime more, and he could play out his contract and get his crazy money elsewhere, right? i see this negotiation and i see hope for the future.

but you have a history of a guy holding out with multiple years left on his contract, and you'd have to at elast consider the possiblity that history would repeat itself. would you agree that's part of the consideration during these negotiations? you also have to consider the risk that he gets hurt, past injuries, etc. i fault the bills for a lot of things, but credit them with holding the line on that issue.

Absolute garbage. Not the importance of the position part, but the "do you guys want to win, or not?." what do the specifics of the negotiations of Peter's contract have to do with ultimate win/loss record? there's no way of assuring anyone that Peter's signing results in more wins, that he'll play in all 16 (and God forbid, more) games, that he won't sit out next year or the year after for $15.5 million because Moley Russelswart comes out of college and gets more in the draft etc. If you always use a sliding scale, many guys are never going to be happy. We don't know if there are incentives to build his contract to a more palatable number that he doesn't like (Show up and play at trainig camp, pro-bowl, etc), and since it's a negotiation, what his bottom floor might really be, or what the Bill's top floor might be. I'd really like to see them win, certainly as much or more than anyone on the board, but you can't deal in extremes in situations like this. It'd be great to have him back and playing well from game one, I'd love to see him earn every dollar he makes. I'd love him to be happy playing, but he held out last year, nothing to suggest he won't do it again. maybe the question should be whether JP wants to win?

Philly isn't ripping Buffalo, one douche bag writing a column ripped Buffalo. You have to discredit a guy who has this type of animosity, maybe he's concerned about where his job will be when the philly inquirer folds? I've enjoyed Philadelphia when I've visited, but you're right that there are some less than desirable places to go if you're not a serial killer (like every city, even Detroit, a "major" city). I honestly don't care if TO likes Buffalo or not, lives there or not. He can live in the fetish/bondage room in Bill Belichick's basement (a guy wrapped that tightly surely must appreciate a good cattle prodding) as long as he plays well for us. It'd be nice if the writer took a moment or two and analyzed why the Bills might have taken a guy like TO as it relates to our passing attack, maybe then he'd understand why the gamble was taken.

here's the real truth about the euphoria and drew bledsoe. maybe he wasn't ultimately going to be the answer, but conventional wisdom holds that if you bring a heavy-footed pocket quarterback and hang the mantle of leadership around his neck---give him a pocket to throw from. instead, we brought him over and after the initial 8 games, it was like a one long National Geographic documentary on the proud wildebeast and how the lions just seem to always catch 'em. if you're going to have a player like TO come to town to draw double coverage and catch 70 passes----let's be sure Trent has some protection in front of him so that he can actually get the ball to Evans, Owens etc. I love the move. We've been so vanilla for so long....Does it really matter if the Pats jack us twice without TO or with him?

you got soft hands and speed to burn?

actually, i thought Ajke was kind of cool, like Takeo.

i think FA is often treated like the NFL's version of a Washington stimulus plan. Many have specualted that Jackson was tendered to meet a contractual deadline, that certainly doesn't mean his contract won't be addressed. Frankly, I'd think it would be in Jackson's best interest to negotiate his deal after a better picture shapes up on what is happening with Lynch, but I could be wrong on that. Jason Peter's situation has been debated at length, but he had boatloads of time left on his current contract when he sat out, his play certainly reflected his hold out, and his play hurt the team at times. We can debate the merits of re-doing his deal at that time---but let's be honest. You re-do his deal with three years left, nothing prevents him from holding out at any other time when that new deal no longer looks good to him. It would seem logical that with an emphasis on rebuilding the o-line, he'd be an important part of the plan. Just like all the players say...it's about the money, and that goes both ways. as for coles, coles hasn't signed anywhere, i'm sure that there is a price point the Bills don't want to cross (perhaps saving some money for Peters of Jackson), and it would be foolish for them to cross that line. why pay more for a guy than you beleive he's worth? they've apparently made a play for him, but he's not ready to sign up. nobody is indispensable in the game now the issue of overall managment of the team, well, that's another subject entirely. you can't help the weather in WNY, you can't help the size of the market, you can't help the lack of nightclubs for players to go hang out and maybe shoot themselves in the weener, you can't do much about ANY of that (for the record, i live in Albany, grew up in Kenmore and love the area and will always consider it home)---but you can work toward establishing yourself as a franchise that wins consistently over time and as a well run football team. absent a few good times along the way, my humble opinion is management has abjectly failed in that regard. using the pats as an example, they sign players to their squad because they have established a tradition and expectation of winning, they don't throw money at them (in most cases), and they work a solid plan (all shenanigans aside). were players flocking to the pats when they sucked? here's the burning question for me---if we had a chance to win a frigging playoff game and maybe, just maybe had a shot at the big game again--would Buffalo be an attractive place to play? i think it would. it'll never be miami, of course, but players leave there too. my benchmark for the Bills has been this for many years now---enough about being a players coach, enough about being a hard ass, enough about salary caps, etc. win the games, win more than you lose, and win enough to play into January. if lynch rolls over some hapless pedestrian, if he carries a gun in his car, but plays and runs for 1,800 yards and gets us to the playoffs, keep him. if he's a distraction who can't get it done due to off the field issues or his running style, move him on.

hindsight is 20-20, but reaching for a guy, even one as gifted as favre, after he retires from a storied career as THE Green Bay Packer, then decides to come back, never made much sense to me. forget the picks, forget the cannon arm, etc--why bring a guy in who's 56 years old and has been waffling on retirement for the last couple years? brett should have stayed retired.

we're one week removed from the Losman roll-out and unfortunately, this game displayed a bit of the promise that this team had. while not a great team, they were certainly good enough to win 3 more games along the way, or at least they appeared to be good enough. I struggle getting past some of the situations our players were put in this year (never mind their maddening inability at times to exectue), and i have to fault coaching for much of that. end of the day, if he's back next year, i'll start the WHOOOLE prceoss all over again. it was nice to see josh reed play well this year, it was nice to see marshawn play very well the last few games, it was nice to see freddy impact the game yesterday, mckelvin looks like a keeper, corner and mcgee made plays, and trent COULD be the next barrack obama... all in all, it's a Christmas Miracle!

i think you say "El Deano est muey fablisimo". Spanich is the new English.

yeah, there is that, if you're into micromanaging what people say and all...

Oh--I agree with the concerns on replacing him and starting fresh, I've been over that many times. To answer your question directly, I expect him to manage the football game, utilizing the talent he has around him, and getting the most out of his OC and DC. I don't think they do a particularly effective job managing the game, time-outs/challenges etc. I don't think he's particularly good at maximizing what he can out of his talent. I don't think he's set it up so they can play to the talent of the offense. All that said--I'm not a student of X's and O's, I'm just a guy who'd like us to play well. So, the players may love the guy, but at this point it is what it is. They love palying for a guy who's team has lost a boatload of games. It is what it is. So, what I'm getting at is just this---he doesn't seem to be a very good head coach, though not all the problems fall on his shoulders. In the final analysis, he'll probably be here next year, and if they play well and make a run at it, I'll acknowledge I was wrong (at least to myself) and move on. If he's here and they suck, I'll figure I was right. It's a beautiful thing, this being a fan...

if the Bills keep DJ and make the playoffs next year, it will prove to me that they made the right call. if next year is the year it all comes together, it will prove to me they made the right call. if jp goes elsewhere and struggles the way he did here, it proves to me they made the right call. as head caoch---the problems are all his fault, and he's the one who can fix 'em. that's the great part and the horrible part of being head coach. from what i can see---if the players work their ass off for the guy and drop 7 of 8 mostly winnable games, maybe they should play their ass off for someone else.

you can debate the merits of the play calling forever. if it's executed properly they look great, etc. in my opinion, the problem is we seem to have a coaching philosophy that can't seem to get their arms around the challenges that they have to deal with in the moment. the play in question, if you have brady slipping it to welker (no pun intended), you have to figure you have a high propensity to be successful. with our team, it's fair to suggest we have a low propensity at that point in time. the number of reasons not to call this play seem to outweigh the reasons it makes sense. 2nd string qb. 2 or 3 backside pressure strips in the last 8 quarters, one earlier in the game. Marshawn killing them on the ground. Designated receiver has one reception this year. Losman struggled with accuracy yesterday. On the road. Losman has issues holding the ball too long. That's not to say it's an absurd call to make in theory, it just doesn't make a lot of sense on this team at that time. i don't think they are heros if it works, because there was a lot of football to play and given our season, i was pretty convinced we'd play it safe and the jets would have another chance to score. And---if this were one of just a handful of plays that backfired in similar situation, fine, you live by the sword, sometimes you die by the sword. In the end---they've lost 7 of their last 8 games and while exectuion is extremely important, it's fair to question coaching decisions that seem to imply your coach is seeing square pegs and trying to fit them into round holes.

i'm not sure about your hatred for lindell (guy's been largely money), and that's your business as there are certain players i dislike, but...."glass gets cold and brittle in the winter i guess?" leaves me asking one question: huh? followed by my mostly dr. philish synopsis of the overall problem: when you start anything with "i put my fist through...." you pretty much eliminate the capacity to suggest that the cold weather may have impacted that which shattered when you put your " fist through it...". here, look: "i put my fist through his face..." takes away "his skull must have been paper-thin...". no fist, no broken bones. i would caution you on where this could ultimately lead, but at time this season i have been dangerously close to throwing my remote at my television screen.

I can't recall being down as low as I was last night in quite some time. I think you're always concerned when you see the Bills on a big game on Sunday or Monday night, because they typically underperform by game end. As poor as the executuon was at times, I can't get past the coaching issues any more, and Lord know, I want to try. I want to believe we're within spitting distance of being respectable, note: Not dominant, just respectable. There have been times this year where we looked like we could be competitive, and while the teams we beat are what they are, you gotta play who's in front of you and not apologize for it. Of course there were many issues last night, and 4 turnovers is just unreal (coupled with our two near-miss interceptions), but the one major galling issue I have is this. Trent's third pick of the night. 3 and 1 from your 9, you go empty backfield, with a 2nd year qb who has turned the ball over multiple times over the past 3 or 4 games, abnd two times in the last 9 minutes. You think the kid might be a little rattled? A little gun shy? So....you dial up a pass play in that scenario? 27 feet from your end zone, blowing a time out in the process? In a close game, with what has been a non-existent offense for the past 3 weeks? Against a team known for surrendering more ground than the French in WW2? As I've said so many time over the past decade, I know you CAN do it, I just don't know why you DO it.

I don't disagree that they played with emotion, but they also blew an 18 point lead at the end of the first half, and a 7 point lead with two minutes left to go, and (according to Collingsworth and my quick review of the Moss TD pass) changed the strategy to contain Moss on the most important play of the game. If this went a different way, Mangini and the boys looks like chumps.