Fan in Chicago

You need to factor in the league's desire to make games look competitive by matching up two similarly (un)talented teams. They can't do this in the regular season so treat the preseason as their sandbox

If you were here to debate, you would provide counter-arguments to the various rebuttals to your original post. You posted minimal evidence to support your contention which you were called out for. You were offered plenty of points that presented a differing point of view to which you have no solid response. And yet, instead of accepting other people's contentions and the vacuity of your own argument, you stubbornly seek to stick to your point of view. That is no debate.

Very well written post and response. Followed ofcourse by nothing of substance, by the OP. The first post definitely postulated that the major cause of the Bills being the worst in the turnover department, was Fitz. Fitz is not the most accurate of QBs and does not have an elite arm. But, by jove, he maximizes what he has to work with. I would love to see how he performs if he is given a couple of extra seconds in the pocket.

Jasper

Good catch. We really should prevent newbies from starting new threads till 30 days after registering or 50 posts - whichever comes later.

Bills opponents always suck. If we lose to them, it is "OMG, Look how pathetic we are, we even lost to <insert team name>". If we win, "Its really no big deal, the <insert team name> is prety bad"

If he can play RG effectively and if he is healthy, I won't mind him as a stop gap.

I hope we are not one of those teams. Our greatest need is tackles followed by RG. While I understand sliding Wood back to RG and using Gurode as a C may be tempting, it is not a good idea in this case as Gurode is quite old. Using a stop gap for a position where we are grooming a promising guy (Wood) as the long term answer is not ideal. We are better off using stop gap solutions at the above mentioned need spots where we currently have low talent levels.

Parrish Corner Wang

Yes, he was a very good signing. Based on what we have been seeing in the pre-season games, we may not need to depend on him for the base defense. If his health is a concern, we can play him sparingly and yet get very good impact on the game. Also, his veteran presence will benefit the locker room. Frankly, I am quite excited about our D in general. We have loaded up on talent and so far it looks like we are better at drafting than we were in the past (lost) decade

With all due respect, Kelly, your post affirms how his presence on the field affected our offense in a positive manner. I don't think that is the argument here. The point is that his production - catches and yards - have been very low. NO matter what the reason - perhaps he couldn't beat the double team, maybe Fitz was pragmatic in not having the arm and accuracy to fit the ball in tight spaces, the line did not allow enough time for Evans to make his breaks before Fitz got splattered. The bottom line is his numbers sucked. And given that not much has changed since last year, they would suck again. Your point is that the Bills offense as a whole will suck more with his absence and that very well might be the case. But to say that his numbers would magically be better this year is being in denial. So to that end, his production is much more likely to be better on the Ravens as compared to the Bills. In fact, I think he is in an ideal situation to relive his best statistical years. It will be telling if he cannot, but for sure he would not on this Bills team.

.... and that good OL to protect him while he sits back for a few seconds thinking about who he should throw to.

I agree about the first part - he did not have good production last year and it is unreasonable to believe he would have this year with pretty much the same cast characters on the O. However, I am not with the camp that belittles him just because he can only go deep (not that I support that contention but let us go with that for now). Having a deep threat can be incredibly valuable if we have corresponding medium and short range threats also. If Roscoe ever fulfilled his potential and Stevie/a Tight End could cover the short to medium range, the offense would be multi-dimensional and potent. Evans could do his thing deep and defenses would be forced to account for that. For a myriad of reasons - lack of a good TE, lack of adequate pass protection, lack of a strong armed and highly accurate QB - did not allow this situation to unfold last year. And it is no different this year which means Evans' production would likely have been similar with the Bills. I think Nix recognized this and traded him not because he thought his value was that of only a 4th rounder, but because he felt that given the condition of the offense getting a 4th rounder next year is better than the ~ 40 catch production this year. Something that Nix must have felt Gailey can get by compensating with the other receivers on the team.

As with security, you can make three questions: 1. As above 2. Which city is home to the Bills (you will be surprised that ignorant people may not know that or even that they may think its a trick question and answer stupidly) 3. Who is the owner of the team

Just got a text about it. Not sure who he is, but looks like a big dude http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/9451/ruvell-martin

Methinks you are in the wrong thread

- D has good blend of experience (Williams, Barnett, Merriman, McGee) and youth (Dareus, Troup, Batten, Moats). They should work together to vault our overall D to the mid-tier. Possibly right in the middle as averaged for the entire season - Spiller, Jackson, Fitzy, Stevie, B Smith, Gailey will keep the O humming (if the OL gives them a smidgen of time). My widcard - Easley comes on real strong by mid-season - We steal a win over NE (yea, I really think so) on the strength of an opportunistic D - Our DBs mature and while I dont expect much from McK, Byrd/Aaron Williams/Scott should do quite well with the DL's aggressiveness

Bob, good topic. Not sure about being the most negative time, but it is pretty damn depressing. Particularly after the way these past few weeks have unfolded, I feel partly cheated. As with every new regime, we are prone to give them the benefit of doubt. But, the FO came in with a keep your own and build through the draft philosophy. Well, they have thrown that first part out the window over these past few weeks and entrusting the team largely to rookies and second players on D. On the O side, excuses abound about why we have not upgraded the OL + got rid of a proven veteran in Evans. Finally, these confusing personnel movements and promotions are giving me the feeling that instead of competent football personnel, we have a dysfunctional and divisive set of people at the helm.

Normally there is no smoke without a fire. I personally think someone on the coaching staff reads TBD. We will see how it plays out, but I am not convinced the coaches are emphatic about FJ being the starter.

Maybe you were the only one awake. Seriously, hope this is not a big deal and all of you are okay.

In the eventuality that Levitre does well at the LT spot and going in with the logic of trying to put your best possible combination, I think the following should be the lineup: LT Levitre (assuming he plays well at that spot) LG Rinehart (cos he has shown some degree of promise and frankly we will have no one else) C Hangman (Wood may be better but we truly suck at the RG spot and Wood is needed there) RG Wood (see above) RT Pears (cos we have no one else) No one is optimized for each position but this may be the best combination

BTW, speaking of tackles, whats the reports on Chris Hairston ? I thought he was injured but cant find any links to validate that. Is he getting any playing time ? Is he not expected to contribute this year ?

Not quite. A few days back, when Chan said that Rinehart has earned the right to play with the 1's to see if he is better than Levitre, I was okay with that. In this situation, CJ has been annointed the #1 (or so it seems) with no real reason for FJ's demotion. If Chan instead had said that he will give both of them equal time with the 1's for the rest of the pre-season and then make a decision about who starts as #1 in the regular season, I would be fine with that. But CJ has shown little so far. I liked some brief flashes in the Denver game, but FJ still outplayed him. So, what has CJ shown that merits his promotion ? I think irrational moves like this could cause locker room strife.

Couple that play with a contrasting one made by FJ - a terrific block in the Denver game (cant remember the drive) and I can see this situation being unsustainable unless CJ totally turns the corner.

First of all, you know I agree with you that selecting a gadget/RB with such a high pick was the wrong thing to do with so many more glaring needs. But his selection and his recent 'promotion' are not CJ's fault. He may or may not have the commensurate talent but he is not the one making these decisions. Ergo, he is not the one causing the dissent (if there is any). I think this one is on the FO/coaches. This situation is not looking good - letting Poz walk followed by trading Evans has to cause some doubt in the locker room. if this action sticks despite CJ not performing, then it will really cause the players to question the ability of the coaches to select the starters. Ofcourse, if CJ plays up to his billing and lights it up then this is a moot point. Let us see how things play out but I am beginning to have doubts about the decisions being made the past 3-4 weeks.