Jump to content

Doc

Community Member
  • Posts

    66,107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Doc

  1. there is a difference between scoring 20 points in the whole game as opposed to scoring 20 in the first 17 minutes....My God...

    Teams don't average their final average on every carry. Hence the reason the Raiders couldn't score on every possession by running for almost 5 yards on every play (they failed to score on 6 of their 11 possessions, not counting the Ford fumble or the last clock-killing drive). And this was against a weak Denver defense who had as bad a rushing defense as the Bills did last year and did NOTHING to upgrade it in that area, and were the worst defense in terms of scoring, again with little to upgrade it.

     

    Your team has no real receiving threats, which means a lot of attention will be paid to McFadden (Bush averaged just 3 YPC so he's no major concern), which means he'll be shut down. Again at least the Chefs have a great WR in Bowe, along with a good one in Breaston, and they were at home. And my point was that the anemic Denver offense scored 20 points against your team.

  2. Just a figure of speech. In this case, all a player has to do for some people is put a Bills helmet on and he is GOD, doesn't have to accomplish anything, could have been a hated enemy prior to this, but automatically he is great and it is a crime that the rest of the free world doesn't think so.

    Conversely, all a player has to do is leave the Bills and he's GOD. And he was let-go because of money. Even though he at best was the 2nd leading WR on the team, is still being used as a decoy by his new team, and oh yes, his old team won without him. <_<

  3. i'm not sure which party has the highest incidence of genital warts but this issue is really becoming a problem for perry. of course, i agree with mandatory hpv immunization just as i do for other common, serious infectious diseases. seems like a rather obscure reason to vote or not vote for a presidential candidate, however.

    Certainly more embarrassing than, say, Solyndra. <_<

  4.  

    Of course financial considerations are factored in player transactions for all teams. But the difference is that with Evans and Hangartner, both players from a salary standpoint, fit under the Bills more stringent cap/cash payroll. The players replacing Evans are less talented. Releasing Hangartner hurt the OL from a depth standpoint. My point regarding these two players is simply that their departures were primarily due to financial and not football considerations.

     

    As I have already stated Evans is in a much better situation for himself because he is now with a better run organization. He is now on a team that will probably be in the playoffs and have serious SB aspirations.

    My point is that your point would be wrong. And looking at the Chefs game, the Bills didn't miss Evans. So it was a win-win for both teams, at least in the short-term. Whether Evans is the key to get the Ravens (back) to the SB (they've made the playoffs the past few years without him) and the Bills' passing game can continue to not miss him, remain to be seen.

  5. Both players were traded for salary reasons. The organization couldn't trade Evans sooner because there was a lockout, precluding player transactions in general.

    Anyone who believes that the player or players replacing Evans on the field is better is way off the mark. Hangartner was making starter money. Even as a backup the versatile player could have been a valuable utility lineman who can play both the center and guard positions. Anyone who has followed the Bills recognizes that a number of player transactions are dictateded by the financial side of the business rather than the football side.

    Neither Evans nor Hangman were in the Bills' long-term plans. So they traded Evans and cut Hangman. The money savings was a side benefit but not the major driving force behind moving them.

×
×
  • Create New...