Cash

That Hard Knocks segment with his teammates calling him "Big Weirdo" was the first thing I thought of when I heard about this. (I believe Incognito was heavily involved.) When I first saw that, I predicted that Martin's time in Miami wouldn't go well, because it was immediately clear that: 1.) Martin did not find this kind of teasing to be good-natured or funny, and was quite upset by it; 2.) His teammates seemed to be completely oblivious to Martin's discomfort, and thought they were being cool. The fact that the teasing/bullying/whatever was coming not just from his own teammates, but his O-line mates, probably made things even worse. Football, like almost any team sport, is very very "team" oriented. The players usually have an intense camaraderie, almost to the point of brotherhood. (Even our crappy Bills teams have been very close in the locker room this past decade.) Now, men often fight, or tease each other, or find other ways to give each other a hard time. But when they're close, like teammates or close friends or brothers, it's usually coming from a place of love. My friends bust my balls all the time, but never in a way that cuts deep or makes me feel uncomfortable. What Martin's teammates were doing on Hard Knocks was not good-natured ribbing or ball busting. They might just be emotionally clueless and can't read a teammate to see that he's not okay with you calling him a weirdo. (Also, "Big Weirdo"? That's such a lame nickname. At least be funny if you're going to make fun of someone.) Or they might be a-holes who decided to keep riding him for the sake of it. Aka, bullies. Maybe they'd never before had a sensitive/thin-skinned/mood-disordered/whatever teammate like Martin. I don't know, but I do know that if the coaching staff was smart, they would've seen the same thing I saw and put a stop to the teasing/bullying. Whether they're bullying Martin or he's being a baby is irrelevant from a coach's perspective. The bottom line is that Martin is a valuable resource (2nd-round pick, starting OT, seemed fairly promising as a rookie) and can't be wasted. Sorry for being so long-winded on this, but that's ultimately the point I wanted to make -- the coaching staff needs to be held accountable for what's going on in their locker room, too. And for the record, I tend to think that the Bills wouldn't stand for that kind of thing if it was happening here.

:lol: Bwahahaha! Beat me to it! I can't believe the lack of respect this Canadian has for "Dr. Sack"!

Dunno if it's been updated or what, but I just clicked that link and the Bills were -10.5.

Meh, I don't have a huge problem with how they've handled things. My two main complaints are 1.) thinking you'd get anything out of Kolb and 2.) cutting TJax before training camp. Marrone has basically admitted that #2 was a mistake, so I've moved on. As for the Tuel/Lewis situation, I think we need to consider just how short-sighted coaches are always going to be in their thinking. When finalizing the 53-man roster, I'm sure that Marrone's chief focus regarding QBs was to give himself the best chances in Week 1. From everything I've read, coaches are almost always focused only on winning the next game. So heading into Week 1, the Bills had Manuel as the starter, but he was looking unlikely to play. Lewis had just been acquired that week and was way too green to be thrown into the fire. (See Josh Freeman this past week.) Tuel is who he is, but at least knew the offense. So they kept Tuel over Lewis, but kept Lewis around. If they made a mistake, it was failing to find a spot on the active roster for Lewis, so he could eventually take over backup duties from Tuel. But they probably overestimated Tuel's abilities based on his preseason performance, and talked themselves into thinking that he wouldn't kill them if he had to play. They were wrong, and tacitly admitted as such by demoting Tuel after the Browns game and signing Matt Flynn to back up Lewis. I'm not really sure why they're bothering to keep Tuel on the active roster still, but maybe they think demoting him to the practice squad would wreck him forever. Or maybe they're no longer comfortable with only having 2 healthy QBs on the roster, and are waiting till EJ comes back before cutting Tuel. Yeah, I guess the rule is that any sign of positive play is a guarantee of a HoF-caliber career, but any sign of negative play just means you have to wait until 3 years have gone by. And then once 3 years have gone by, and you want to talk about how Torrell Troup was a terrible pick, you get yelled at for trying to dwell on the past. I'm not sure when the flip comes from "can't evaluate yet" to "dwelling on the past". Maybe we're only allowed to evaluate draft picks on exactly the 3rd anniversary of their draft?

The first 3 years of a rebuild are usually crappy. Years 4-6 are up & down, with no consistency. It's only about year 8 or 9 that you can reasonably expect to contend for a playoff spot. And remember, the second anyone gets fired, the slate gets wiped clean! So team president Russ Brandon or GM Buddy Nix can't be held accountable for anything that happened under GM Russ Brandon and Head of Scouting Buddy Nix.

I thought the spread was 12?

I'm waiting for some of the TJ Graham True Believers to show up and yell at everyone for evaluating a draft pick before he's been in the league 3 years.

Great stat -- I never thought to think of it that way! Getting back to the OP somewhat, it does seem to me that there are some legitimate concerns here. I'm very encouraged by the turnover per drive stat that MDH posted, but I still feel, just based on watching the games, that our takeaways will probably drop in the 2nd half of the season. That's not to take anything away from the D, who have generally done an admirable job. It's just that most of the takeaways we've gotten have required both a bad play by the offense (usually the QB) and a good play by the defense. I don't know if we can necessarily count on QBs to continue to make these kinds of mistakes. Mario did a nice job forcing a quick throw on Robey's pick 6, and Robey obviously made a great play, but what if Tannehill had been less accurate and put the ball too high or too low? Incomplete pass, 3 and out, which is still a win for the D, but might not have resulted in any points for the Bills. So I do think that we should be concerned about "unsustainability" in our record. But there are also mitigating factors in the other direction that should give us some hope. For one, the secondary has been hit pretty hard by injuries, and with the returns of Byrd & Gilmore, will probably be better going forward. For another, our schedule gets easier the 2nd half of the year -- we may not need as many takeaways to be in games, because our opponents won't be as good. As for the offense, that could go either way -- Lewis has been about as good as Manuel was, but if Manuel comes back rusty, our QB production will be way too low. The hope is that our rookie QB will get better as the year goes along, but I wonder how much this injury will set him back?

When that organization is run by Greg Schiano, you can go ahead and question their intelligence all you want. Freeman looks like he might be a flameout, but it was definitely a risk worth taking. Kerry Collins and Kurt Warner come to mind as successful QBs who had bounce-back seasons after being cut by their original teams. Collins might be the best comparison, as he had a number of off-field problems, including substance abuse.

I don't know if many people want us to run less so much as be less predictable in running. I think we run on first down too much. If your run game is super-successful, like it was on the one drive last week, then that's fine. Just run all day till they stop it. But that won't happen very often, and if you're too predictable, it'll be tough to succeed. I actually thought the playcalling was significantly better last week than it had been throughout the year. More first-down passes, some playaction, some screens... I liked what I saw. Hopefully this is a sign of Hackett getting better at his job. Way too many 3 and outs. And as much as fans love to hang their hats on that 20+ points/game stat, it's kind of a paper tiger. Here are our offensive outputs (ignoring defensive TDs): Week 1: 286 yards, 14 points Week 2: 436 yards, 24 points Week 3: 328 yards, 20 points Week 4: 350 yards, 23 points Week 5: 343 yards, 24 points Week 6: 322 yards, 24 points We're 16th in yards/game, 17th in points/game, and 28th in yards/play. If that's "fine", then the bar is set pretty low. Just because the O might not be as bad as the D (and that's debatable) doesn't mean that it's good or doesn't need to improve. There's definitely some things to build on on the offense, but it's a long way from a finished product. Huh? https://www.profootb...car-buf-week-2/ "However, like last week, his biggest struggles came against the run." I don't pay for their full stats, so maybe he somehow redeemed himself in weeks 3-5 despite posting another atrocious grade in week 3?

Good post! I'd like to add that another issue (or maybe part of #2) is that the Bills depressed his value by taking Spiller. It was a problem of their own making. If they knew they wanted Spiller, they should have looked to deal Lynch before the draft. (For reference, there were 2 RBs drafted after Spiller in the 1st and 4 in the 2nd that year -- good chance at least 1 of those 6 teams would've rather payed a 2nd or 3rd for Lynch, or at least what Seattle gave up.) On top of that, Nix struck me as a pretty bad negotiator as well. His tenure as GM is a pretty good argument against hiring a 70+ year old "rookie".

Wonderful post! Put a smile on my face.

While technically true that Fred's on pace for a career-best season, his 5-game start in 2013 is significantly behind his 5-game start in 2011 -- which would have been his career year if he hadn't gotten hurt. His numbers through 5 in 2011 (this year's in parentheses): Rushing yards: 480 (309) Yards per rush: 5.3 (4.75) Rushing touchdowns: 5 (4) Receiving yards: 232 (153) Yards per catch: 12.2 (8.4) Receiving touchdowns: 0 (0) Yards from scrimmage: 712 (462) Total touchdowns: 5 (4) Fumbles: 2 in 10 games, can't find game-by-game data (3) So Freddie is clearly not as good so far as he was in 2011. But he looks a lot better than he did last year, and it's great to see him making those shifty little runs and bursting through the line again. Love that guy.

The running game has been solid but unspectacular, and I think a lot of fans were counting on spectacular before the season. I do have some beef with the playcalling (way too many 1st-down runs, e.g.), but I don't think it's horrendous. Hopefully it will improve as our OC learns on the job. As for Spiller himself, he hasn't been nearly as good this season as he was last season, and it's not just the fault of the OC or Colin Brown's horrible play. Spiller himself acknowledged that he played poorly in week 1, and he's been banged up for the last couple weeks and mostly ineffective. Football Outsiders isn't the greatest, but I do find it useful to look at their ratings for the run game. They have the Bills' run offense ranked 14th in the NFL. In terms of RBs specifically, they rate Fred Jackson as having been the 3rd-most effective RB in the league so far this year, with Spiller down in the low 30s. That more or less agrees with the eyeball test for me -- Freddie has looked almost as good as he did 2 years ago, and Spiller hasn't been very good. In case anyone's curious, FO's O-line ratings are interesting when comparing this year's Bills to last year's. Last year they rated our O-line as 7th in the NFL for "first level" success, and 3rd/4th respectively for 2nd level/open field yardage, both of which are much more dependent on the RB than the O-line. They also had us at 8th best in terms of not getting stuffed, but only 26th in "power rank", converting short 3rd or 4th down runs only 57% of the time. This year's numbers: 20th in first level success, 18th/8th respectively for 2nd level/open field, which says that on a per-play basis, the line is worse than last year and so are the backs. They also have us getting stuffed more -- down to 15th in that ranking -- but doing better in "power" situations: Our success rate is up to 69%, which ranks 10th in the NFL.

My confidence was never super-high to begin with, and has dropped a bit, but I would still put it more towards medium than low. I've seen some good things and some bad things, pretty much across the board. I think my confidence level in the organization as a whole is lower than the coaching staff on its own. I think the roster-building is still very suspect, particularly with respect to depth/backups, and that's only partially the fault of the coaching staff. How much of it is their fault is a whole different post. In terms of game-planning, schemes, game-day management, player motivation, etc., I still feel like this youngish staff will have its ups and downs, but I'm willing to be patient for now. Regarding the QB thing, here's my take: The current explanation is a spin-job, but Marrone probably believes it in hindsight. (Usually people talk themselves into their own narrative rather than lie outright.) I think what happened is that when Kolb got hurt, they thought they could get by with Manuel. (Definite mistake in hindsight.) Maybe if TJax hadn't been picked up by the Seahawks they would've re-signed him at that point, but maybe not. Anyway, once Manuel got hurt, then they got desperate. Brought in Lewis & Leinart and gave them playbook cram sessions. Remember our timeline here -- L&L played in the 4th preseason game about 4 days after joining the team. As we all know, Leinart was garbage in that 4th preseason game, and Lewis showed some promise but was generally bad. The Bills didn't play Tuel at all because they wouldn't have been comfortable starting either new guy with so little practice time in any case. So Tuel had to be on the active roster because he was your week 1 starter if Manuel couldn't go. Remember that it was a bit of a surprise when Manuel was activated for that first game -- most people expected Tuel Time. I'm sure the Bills thought about keeping Lewis on the active roster, but ultimately decided that given Manuel's improving health, they could skate by with him on the practice squad. Given how many inactive players we had to start the year (Gilmore, Byrd, Legursky, Hopkins), it makes sense that they'd feel they couldn't afford to keep a 3rd QB. IMO, the 2 real mistakes they made were: 1.) Thinking EJ wouldn't get hurt. (Hope is not a plan -- what if he DOES get hurt?) 2.) Thinking that Tuel wasn't that bad. To their credit, once Tuel was forced into a real game, they quickly realized their mistake on #2, and tried the best possible option available -- sign Josh Freeman. Reading Marrone's comments with the benefit of hindsight, I think they definitely wanted to sign Freeman and have him start until EJ came back. They maybe hoped that White or Dixon would impress them enough to be a backup plan if Freeman turned them down, but didn't see much in either workout. Once Freeman went to the Vikings, they decided to go with Lewis. They may well have thought Lewis was a better QB than Tuel right from the start, but since he was acquired so close to the first game, they didn't have the option of playing Lewis over Tuel.

Interesting. I was never a fan of the signing, but Brown has been bad enough that we might as well see what Legursky has. It's a low bar to clear right now.

Well, Marrone did definitively say that they would be signing a QB "from outside the organization" before they struck out on Freeman. And they immediately brought in White and Dixon for workouts. So I don't think this is really an example of Marrone pushing that mantra so much as trying to sign an outside guy, missing out on the 1 decent option (Freeman), and deciding that the guy on your practice squad is more palatable than the other scrubs out there... ...and make no mistake, Pat White is a scrub. The only thing I can really fault the Bills for here is how the new plan is to sign a QB to the practice squad. We've already established that Tuel is not good enough to start or really to be the backup either. (I think he should be cut and signed to the practice squad if he clears waivers.) But whomever they sign to the PS probably won't be much better than Tuel -- anyone with much meaningful experience isn't PS-eligible. So how much benefit do you get from signing that guy? I'd rather them try to swing a cheap trade for a veteran backup (I know, easier said than done) or sign a veteran scrub like Dixon or even White, any of whom would likely be an upgrade over Tuel. Tebow? Ugh. For the first time ever, I wouldn't hate it if my team signed that guy. Shows how desperate I've become.

Pat White is a media-free version of Tebow -- neither can throw. I think I would rather have Tebow than White, but definitely don't want either. Freeman remains my first choice, but Dixon would be interesting. I thought he had some potential in limited action for the Steelers.

I for one am psyched to have Moorman back in the fold. I never like the way he was treated last year and thought it was BS. Let him have one last hurrah, riding off into the sunset in a blaze of punting during the Jeff Tuel Era. I could be wrong, but I think he'll be a little rejuvenated by this redemption shot, and I think he'll be solid the rest of the way. Hopefully he gets a chance to retire as a Buffalo Bill this time.

I called this, and it wasn't that hard. Marrone is a fairly conservative coach in many ways, including wanting his players to practice fully before playing. One of his quotes regarding this matter said as much: something along the lines of needing Byrd to have a full week of practice before he plays, and "maybe if it was a Sunday game..." I fully expect Byrd to play against Cincy, although I don't know if he'll start.

I'd be shocked if the Bills signed him. Very un-Bills move.

Agreed with the "no Graham" sentiment -- Leonhard is sure-handed and unlikely to muff or fumble, even if it's unlikely he'll get you much more than 10 yards. He actually had a few nice moves to avoid tacklers last week, but unfortunately couldn't quite get going quick enough to make anything out of it. On the one return, he broke 3 tackles but only got an extra 5 yards. If we're looking for a spark, the better option would be Nickell Robey, who actually showed some nice speed and PR instincts in preseason. He also showed a severe tendency to muff punts, so I don't expect to see him on the job when games count, and I'm fine with that.

Great post, as was the OP. I won't defend Josh Freeman, because he's been truly terrible this year and down the stretch last year, and does deserve to be benched based on that alone. (Although it is incredibly puzzling -- how could he have been so good a couple years ago, and even really good during the middle part of last year, then fall off a cliff like this? I don't get it.) But this really seems like a personal vendetta at this point, and all of the leaks coming out are complete bush league. Schiano is a disaster. Everyone who longs for a Parcells-style hardass coach should keep in mind that sometimes you get Tom Coughlin, but more often you get Schiano or Todd Haley -- a tyrant whose whole regime is a house of cards. The real shame is that they've got some talent on that team, and could turn it around with some better coaching (and a new QB at this point -- maybe Freeman can be salvaged somewhere else, but not there). Good D, potentially legendary secondary if Mark Barron plays to his potential, 2 good wideouts, a really good young RB in Doug Martin, some talent on the O-line... if they had the Freeman of a couple years ago, they'd be a playoff team. Do you have anything productive to contribute to this thread, or are you just here to B word at other posters? It's annoying enough trying to ignore their irrelevant posts without trying to ignore yours as well.

I believe he played through the injury last year in the hopes of securing a big-money long-term deal with the Bills (or another team). I also believe that this year he is unwilling to play through the same injury because he sees no incentive to do so. Again, just my supposition, but I believe that he no longer feels that the Bills have any loyalty towards him, and thus doesn't feel any loyalty to them. If it's true that Byrd doesn't want to play for the Bills anymore, then what purpose does franchising him again serve? Unless it's solely to trade his rights to another team, I don't see the point. Why pay >$8 million for a guy who you think dogged it or faked or embellished an injury? There's no reason to expect that a 2nd year on the franchise tag will produce a more loyal or motivated Byrd. There's also no reason to expect his contract demands to come down. And if it's about sending a message, how good a message does it send to the rest of the players on the team? "If you don't play by our rules, we will do everything we can to ruin your career." Sweet.

He was on the scout team during the "open to the media" portion of practice, but according to post-practice quotes, worked "some" with the real defense during practice. Based on Marrone's quotes, I'll be pretty surprised if he plays Thursday. I get the vibe that if it was a Sunday game and Byrd could have a full week of practice, Marrone would be a lot more comfortable playing him.