FloridaSnow

I do; we are now enemies. @#$@ face

Bills trade 5th for Campbell on day 1 when Skins realize that is all they can get for him.

No, he provides information on the 49ers, Raiders, and sometimes the Utah Jazz.

ZING!

How did this turn into a thread about college professors and whether or not they are overpaid? Has anyone done the math to figure out how many seats it would take to replace the revenue lost from downsizing corporate sky boxes? I'm for no longer subsidizing the corporations entertainment expenditures regardless, but I'm not sure if what the writer suggests is viable.

In a heartbeat. For that price, why not? (assuming he can be gotten cheaply of course)

Does this make Campbell available then? Cue the threads in three, two, one...

I don't think there is any reason to get too upset by Mort's comment. He probably just threw out some teams who haven't performed extremely well of late on the fly; is it really that surprising that we were one of the go to teams?. It's a tweat so who knows how much time went into composing it. His comparison is more a way of feeding into and generating interest in the current hype surrounding the Raiders and McNabb. When the Bills were playing well, everyone was saying the same thing about them. In short, saying football is better when "x" team is playing well has become an overused sports cliche. The same thing will be said about Buffalo as soon as it looks like we have a chance of turning things around (in fact, as noted above, this is what happened when we were 5-1). (Edit) P.S. Can one of the political commentators please create a new thread for the political conversation and link to it? It's not that I don't care what you're talking about or think it is unimportant; this just isn't the place.

Hell no, it isn't. He'd either punch you In the face or fall into a fatal attraction type of love with you; either outcome is bad.

Even if we discount the fact that quarterback rating is an overrated stat, a good quarterback rating in college does not necessarily transfer into success at the pro level. If someone is playing on a great college team, the average opponent defense will be far inferior to your offense and your skill players will be able to dominate an opponent more often than not. Playing on a team that runs a pass heavy offense, especially if they run a lot of short, quick routes will up the rating too. When you remove the system benefits, a supposedly great quarterback can become very average. I know this is an apple to oranges comparison in terms of style, but here's an example: J Russell (college stats) See QB rating: http://espndb.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=146755 J Russell (pro stats) See QB rating: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=10446 I'm not saying that Tebow isn't going to be a success in the NFL; he certainly has the work ethic. However, he has greatly benefited from being on a great team that uses short, quick routes (the high completion percentage boosts the QB rating).

Hmmm... Now that you mention it...

What is this NBA you speak of?

Aren't they a completely different type of quarterback? As I recall, Bledsoe's issue wasn't so much his passing as his lack of mobility, which is not a problem for McNabb.

The alternate models look kind of strange but the main model (in the first post) doesn't look too bad at all

Awesome, thanks for posting this.

Agreed

The NFL will really push and want to culminate the Saints storyline. Don't be surprised if the calls keep it close.

I know I'm going to catch some heat for this, but I'd like to see Croyle in an open competition for the QB job next year. If we don't resign TO (as is most likely the case), Chambers or Bradley would be a nice addition because Hardy will need some time to get into a rhythm, assuming he gets it together at all.

Why do we want to make ourselves thin at the position? We have two backs with complimentary skill sets.

! I really hope this is true, but there's so much BS floating around it's hard to know who or what to believe

Don't shoot the messenger. They mention it just above their list. I'm guessing they didn't want to discount the area from their study. I would have liked to see them include US territories too. Not that I place much faith in this study, it just would have been interesting to see where they fell.

The study counts D.C. as it would a state.

True, but at least they can make an argument for why TCU and Cincinatti will eliminated. How would they have justified picking between those two teams if Texas had lost?

Seriously, the controversy would have been intense if the Longhorns miss that kick.

Great googley-moogily (at least, that's what I remember him saying). To answer your question, beating the Chiefs will not make many optimistic about this team but losing to them would increase the already hysteric pitch of the board. However, if we beat the Chiefs and the Pats, I can see some becoming optimistic on the teams chances next year. Also, if Brohm is kind of a wild card in the whole equation. If he starts and does well, I can see a lot people generating a plethora of "this team is on the rise" threads.