leh-nerd skin-erd

you have to build your own team before you can expect to contend for the division crown. i think the recent success of the patriot's had more to do with what they were able to accomplish as a team, than specific individual efforts standing alone. it's like dating a really hot girl, and then running into a buddy who's got one slightly hotter. you can sit and wonder about all the great stuff he's going to be doing later that night, or invest some serious time into making sure your own night is good. besides, the pats still looked dangerous before FA. they have a kazillion picks, they'll be good again. hopefully, we'll be gooder.

i used to do a lot of jigsaw puzzles. i always hated them, they were so ugly. big holes in the middle, mine never looked like the picture on the box. the store wouldn't take them back, some b-s about the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. i just stopped doing them. there may be a parallel here, but i can't see it.

ahh, so you feel positioned to be the trier of fact as to when it's acceptable for people to dump their seasons and when it's not? the guy from Virginia who decides he's not going to buy the product is ok to do so, but the guy from WNY who decides the product is substandard is a quitter? i spend money, time and effort to support the Bills, and if someone wants to get rid of their season tickets to send a message to Ralph, what's the problem to you? it's self-serving? this board is alll about self-serving statements. Pompous? Maybe in some cases, but no more so than someone suggesting that someone else "shut the f##ck up". i support the Bills on every medium I can find---home games, away games, network television, local bars, etc---but to suggest that's it's ok to dissect every play/player/coaching decision/owner statement and yet not toss out an opinion about the pro's and con's of season ticket purchases seems unAmerican to me. No soup for you!

i'm asking for some assistance here. i've done a bit of research and can't find an article where clements says, or levy is quoted, as saying that there was an agreement not touse the franchise tag again. i have read alot of speculation that a likely reason nate came back to camp when he did was perhaps because there was a verbal assurance re: it, but virtually every article i can find suggests marv's response was "no comment". i can only find quotes of nc saying something alon ght lines of "we;ll see what happens...". has anyone seen anything different? from what i gather, it appears that the Bills have positioned themselves to do what they want to do when this issue comes to a head, regardless of what nate wants. perhaps that involves moving on without him, but maybe not. he had a good year, it'd be good to see the defense step up a couple notches this year, and he'd certainly help.

hmm---i was kind of going off his reference at the time. i've never been much into metal, and big hair was descriptive. thanks for the feedback.

"but you're definitely using the lube, right Doct....arrrggggggg!"

on the bright side, you guys have been our BESTEST ally since the early 1800's! this post reminds me of when a girl i worked with got a new hairstyle. at the time, say mid-1990's, it was not what all the other girls were wearing, kind of a throwback big hair look popularized by your basic heavy metal band. she asked me what i thought, and of course i told her i thought it looked very nice. she went then to the next guy in the office---a guy with moderate hearing loss and a large booming voice, asked the same question, and he responded "JESUS CHRIST---I HATE IT! WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING? ARE YOU JOINING A METAL BAND?". some of these replies were brutal. funny, but brutal. nick--you are creative enough to come up with a logo, don't give up on the process. everyone said van gogh (sp?) was crazy while he was painting, and it look how it turned out for him!

i was speaking with a friend yesterday, a 'skins fan. he was mentioning the penalty trend that seems to nudge the pats in the right direction, unsolicited by me. he mentioned specifically the personal foul on the p.a.t. after the chargers went up by 8. this gave the pats a 15 yard bennie on the ensuing kickoff. i recall being surprised at the call---a couple of linemen pushing back and forth. i can't specifically recall it---but my recollection is it was the kind of after-play scrum you see routinely. anyone remember it? IF i'm correct ,it seems like an odd time to call a penalty for something like that. again--is it a push in the pats favor?

seems reasonable. i was just wondering, in no particular order. but--i swear i've seen quotes from marv on the importance of building strong lines on o/d. one quick thought that both perplexes and torments me in the recesses of my sould when, after midnight, the dead rise and walk the cold dead streets in search of souls to feast on: how could any coach/scouting staff/gm NOT come to the conclusion that ignoring the line(s) is done at your own peril. it's like working out and having some pretty cut up arms and shoulders, and skinny legs and a fat flabalanche belly. with a multidue of people giving input, even if you had one or two guys pushing for other positions, you'd thinkl one would say "hey guys, i was just thinking, our running backs are rotinely hit a yard deep on running playsm, and our qb is sacked every 8 times he drops back to pass--what's up with that?". yet it seems that it's done by many teams year after year. i never played organized football in my life, and yet it seems like it should be as basic as breathing. not necessarily looking for a response, just pondering.

it's hard not to count the pats in the mix based on past experience. it could easily go the way you suggest. a not-totally-objective observation is that much of what you attribute to the pats d holding the Chargers to 21 was more a result of lack-of-execution by the Chargers than execution by the Pats. Of course, you could infer that the multitude of dropped passes by the bolts, the mindless penalties and questionable decision-making by certain Chargers during the game were a result of the defensive show put on by the Pats and their coaches. I want the Colts to win to the extent that i care, and honestly I'm sick to death of the Pats winning, but this is not meant to be a negative "you got so lucky" post. much luck is made by the team on the field. the heads-up stripping of the ball to turn the game around by tb certainly has elements of luck (decision by the back to interecept v. knock down, the fact that he didn't have a clean pick and was boblling the ball on the run) combined with some damn good defense by an offensive player. to be fair, the Pats executed when they needed to and won the game. that's the mark of a good team, and will keep the Pats in the hunt as long as they can do so. on any given sunday, any team have a great defensive game. the probability that the pats will do so is substantially higher than most due to their coaching, execution, etc. if they bring it sunday, and get on a roll against peyton and the boys, they'll win. it seems to me that they've lost a step or two on defense, but they never roll over. could be a good game.

i'm of the mind he has taken those things into consideration and has a plan to address the needs. he's on record as stating the importance of solid line play on both sides of the ball. your analysis of a 'bush league' draft seems strong to me, but if you're disappointed in both the caliber of player and the decision-making that went into selecting the player, i guess bush league is as good a critique as any. i think the draft was a goos one in retrospect, and we'll see what happens in year two. so what's your read on why they didn't go the correct way on draft day?

tyson-holyfield? the infamous ear-biting fight? you may be right on this one---if you position the pats as the ones to beat, the ones who rarely back down, who rarely lose, and step up and punch them right in the face----maybe you get rid of that old history and make some new memories. i don't think they have to come out of the box hot, but control the game and put some points on the board. that was something the chargers struggled with. i concur as well, a good but not great team is coming in from new england. the house will be rocking...

i can't recall---did marv say he said it, or did nate or nates people say he said it. there's a lot of posturing in these negotiations, always. if marv said he wouldn't, he won't, but it seems like a strange thing to say to a marquis player when millions are at stake. and, assuming at the time nc had a big season, they'd have to want to pay him, or let him test the waters (or tag him and buy them some bargaining room).

"Here's the deal, Mike. I'm going to give you just an incredible amount of Me-given talent, and it will make you popular. Popular with the ladies, popular with the fellas, pop-pop-popular. If you take this talent, and work hard, you'll more than likely make just a boatload of money, and the boat will be big. One word of caution, these middle eastern kids I gave a pretty sweet deal to a few thousand years ago blew it by eating an apple---but I don't want to go there. Stay away from anything that could jeopardize your future. I don't give these gifts to just anyone. For example, when you're making it really really big, for My-sakes don't try the old double-secret-water-bottle-hide-the-stash trick and if you do, for the love of me DON'T ACT SUSPICIOUS!". ----God to Vick, as told to me Millions and millions of dollars to employ scapegoat drug mules, and this dope has to carry it through an airport, when they make you toss the travel-sized scope bottle. Does he read the news??? Unreal.

i don't have any problem with it was a "great" pick, but would agree he has not established himself as a "great" player at this point. i do think any discussion on him being a bust on the other hand, you're revising what jauron said just a bit, here's the quote from one article: **** BuffaloBills.com reports: '"He's talented, he's fast," said head coach Dick Jauron. "He likes to play the game and he'll hit you. Those are all things that translate well to our sport. He's still learning how to play, but one of the reasons we did like him is because he likes football. He likes to talk about football, look at it, study it and he likes to play. He's going to work out well for us because I see him improving all the time."' **** on this quick quote, and assuming dj didn't mean "he'll hit you" wasn't a reference to a "oh no you di'int" biatch-slap paris hilton swipe, i'll assume he meant he hits your hard. he's got to develop the proper technique, how/when/where to hit a brotha.

i would have said it, but had to get some sleep. i never had a beef with holcomb the way some others did, by the way, i will keep going back to the same thought as before---in the correct system, i think the guy has skills he brings to the table. he's more likely to thrive in a short passing game, possession-type receptions, nickle and dime a team to death. it can work, and has, and regardless of how exciting it is, i'd take a boring offensive team winning a super bowl any day. i favored letting losman take his knocks, but to be fair almost jumped out my office window by mid-season, even though we all recognized the line was not playing well. i'm greatful they turned the corner when they did, although my office is on the first floor. to answer your question regarding mangold and a second rounder--no, i agree, a tradgedy it would not have been. on the other hand, there are no guarantees they saw mangold as the most pressing need #2, for reasons i'll never know. ultimately, i'm pretty much a "let coaches coach" guy (and a horrible, darkly depressed indivdual when the coaches/player deliver a poor performance on any given Sunday). i like the approach, and try not to worry about what else might have been. there are too many variables that i don't know enough about---leinhart and the wind in buffalo, how many legitimate options were available on draft day and what were the strings attached, etc etc. certainly, many of you on the board do much more draft analysis than i do, or ever would. oh, and i can't read "patriot's reign" but follow the concept. i'm sick to death of them. tim

oh, it was a good rant. the d*** even fooled the censors. have a good night. dibs-good work. i enjoy your posts. God bless us one and all.

i had forgotten that he was a junior. i'm seeing a movie for you, too, though. "anger management". you can't let it stay all bottled up, brother, it'll tear you apart. get a dog to beat...a sail boat to sail...drink hard liquor. better yet, watch some movies. stay away from george clooney stuff though, he's a total hollywood liberal....and that will just make you angrierer.

you're a good sport, as i recall from prior posts. i followed the math, and i follow your point. here's my take on it. flip the coin 1000 times, and the law of large numbers dictates a certain likelihood that it will come up X times on heads and Y times on tails. but to find out what actually happens in your 1000 coin tosses, you have to have a system to flip the coin. if you get the coin to flip end over end some random number of times from when it leaves your thumb until it hits the table, you'll get your result whether you use your left hand or your right. but--with no system for flipping the coin, you have a 100% probability of failing to get the result. i just reread this and think i made my point...you can decide. using the coin flip analogy, i'll spot you that, say, ngata (or whomever) might eventually be a difference maker and dw/jm may not (at least to the level i think you're talking about). i assume you'll spot me the same. the problem i always have with the theoretical for any player is that the outcome is difficult to predict if you're not running the same systems with the same level of talent around you. in most cases---all other things being equal---things are not equal. but, if marv and dj have a sound system in place to identify talent and build a disciplined team, i'll take that over any particular player. r. seymour is a good example---a difference-maker on a team where he's been out quite a bit---but other members in the system step up to take his place. i respect your opinion and i had profound moments of disappointment this year myself. i closed the year out thinking we were going in the right direction, but next year is a whole new year. it was nice to see, however, romo blow the hold in dallas and miami in shambles. now, if new england gets knocked out, it's as good a situation as i feel we can be in assuming we're not in the mix for the SB.

i'm reminded to the movie "a beautiful mind" with russell crowe. he spends a fair amount of scribbling complex equations on the blackboard, wall, window, door frame and so on. he also speaks to people who aren't really there. h.a.---are there people there with you now? can other people see them? if not--don't despair. the movie is ultimately a story of hope and triumph, and he scores a pretty nice looking wife. downside---before the hope and triumph, he takes a spin in a straightjacket to get his wits about him. it's not so bad, i'm sure. i assume the brain trust assessed needs of the organization and the multiple layers of need on the team they inherited. i can only assume they felt the best place to start the rebuilding was with a strong candidate on the defensive side of the ball. in retrospect, they got a gamer who delivered. ngata plays on a substantially better defensive unit than the Bills have/had, perhaps in part due to his contributions. on the other hand, perhaps--and likely we'd agree---the level of his game is raised by those around him. regardless, he was there and the bills opted to go a different direction and there really are only two logical options on what they were thinking: a. he was a better fit for our defense at this time; 2. they thought ngata was not as good a fit or perhaps would not fit the scheme we're looking to play (not the right guy/character issues/takes plays off/whatever...) defense seems like a logical place to start, although the Good Lord In Heaven knows that the o-line could have fit for the Bills just as well. Mangold? He appears like he'll be a great player in the league. there are other potentially great players in the draft as well that were taken after the DW pick. Conventional wisdom suggests that you follow the status quo--picking position-players at the normal range they typically go for in the draft. but, if you always do what you always did, you often get what you always got. I like the balls they exhibited in going the direction they felt. Good for them. And if they fail, I'll grab the tar---someone grab the feathers. Such is life in the NFL. last, i don't think anyone anticipated draft number 1 was going to solve the problems of this team. and, it didn't. but, the trend is going in the right direction, and being a realist---you don't need specifically ngata or mangold or anyone else to go to the playoffs and beyond. ultimately, the question boils down not to the 2006 draft, but the collective efforts of multiple drafts and free agency acquisitions, plus effective coaching and disciplined play. toss in there some common sense decision-making on who to keep and who to let walk---let's use pat williams as an example---and it boils down to the system you employ, and finding the correct players to fill the positions. i think too often, specific names are tossed about as the next best answer for a team, when there ae other options available. coaching wins championships. let's hope our is able to do so.

the problem with lewis is that they annointed him before his time. he brought toughness to the team, initially, and started on the road to better things. i think there was a significant portion of the media out to root for the guy---new head coach, reputation for toughness, passed over by other nfl teams, and look what's happened---HE'S TURNING THE BENGAL'S AROUND!. it's a good story, and if you take the angle that there are not enough minority head coaches in the league, and this obvious gem was passed on by other teams, a good story gets even better. alas, as so often happens, getting the good teams to elite status is tough. so, they annointed him the next eric mangini before his time. let's see what next year brings to mangin, and for that matter, dick jauron. marvin's had a tough year. does bail money count against the salary cap?

i'm a Gulderlander too, originally from Kenmore. Jillians is 15 mins door to door...

Jillians in dowtown Albany is a great place to watch the game. When I go, I take my 12 year old son, we go downstairs where the video arcade is and usually get a seat directly under a tv. Bartenders have been good guys, leave you alone, but get you a cold one (pop or beer) if you need one. So, I have my little Bills fan, I get some wings, a beer or two, and every now and again there is another few bills fans to watch the game with. In fact, last weekend, the bartender mentioned the game was on a big screen tv in a sitting area with leather couches and chairs. The picture was not great, but definitely good enough to see how Joey Harrington's earned his 0.00 passer rating! This last game was little loudbecause there are alot of video games down there, but usually there isn't a problem. Direct TV next year for sure, but Jillians is fun. Sorry I can't help you out this year with that this year. I'm not 100% sure if I'll be there this weekend, but if you're going let me know. Tim

leadership is indeed the key. it's one thing for the fans (correctly or not) to be clamoring for a change, it's another to be unable (situationally or otherwise) to position yourself as a leader of the team. when you look at the roster's of many teams, you're dealing with a pretty interesting cross-section of America, and you have to have special skills to be in charge. you look at TO goofing off, f'ing around, alienating many teammates and yet he ends up on a team and has to be managed--or he manages you. you look at the tank williams story, that has to be managed (and both those guys being slapped on the wrist for respective infractions is ridiculous). you got the bengals and a 48% felony to average joe ratio. it has to be managed. it's not even so much what you do, because there are all sorts of different styles, but it has to be managed. and, where it gets ugly is when: the fans think you don't know what you're doing. you say one thing and do another. your second-in-commands are fighting. players are openly defying your direction. the owner has his nose in things. and--most of all--you're losing. i'd say a good coach in the nfl can handle the adversity attached to some of the above issues and work his way through it. but when you have all those issues in one season, coupled with a once-proud franchise that hadn't sniffed respectability in almost a decade, more often than not you become the sacrificial lamb. in retrospect, one of the biggest faults i find with MM is that he failed to see the big picture, beyond the end of his desk. case in point- in his last weeks, specualtion was rampant that he'd be gone, or that some of his staff would be gone, etc. so, they bring him in, offer him a deal straight out of "goodfellas": you whack your friends, we keep you alive a bit longer. at that point, i figure a guy responsible for a multi-million dollar organization should have been prepared enough to have an answer ranging from "f u" to "ok i'll stay and try it" and everything in between. in the end--he exhibited a lack of leadership when he needed it most. hindsight--yes, but indicative of what his problem was as hc. imo, there have a been a few success stories for coaches the second time around, and maybe he can learn and grow from it. the knock on dj in chicago was his unfailing loyalty to the oc schoop, who was not getting things done. different oc, different result--but let's remember one season does not a great hc make. hopefully, dj is the right answer and we get better next year and beyond. at least i'm enjoying the ride again.