MDH

I actually thought it should have been co-MVPs for the entire crew.

Seattle had no flow because every time they moved down field and made a big play the refs brought it back. It's tough to get into a flow when that happens 4 or so times a game. That being said I've never seen such poor playcalling, QB checkdowns and clock management at the end of the half/game as with Seattle. I take that back, I've seen QB checkdowns that bad before...

It should be tax deductible when you lose then!

It's really not consistent crap. It happens on occasion but they don't normally call a PI on a WR unless its blatant. You might be able to find an exception or two during the coarse of the season but it's certainly not consistently called that way.

I'm not a big conspiracy theorist but this game is looking pretty fishy to me. That ticky-tack pushing off penalty, two penalties on big plays by Seattle (granted I'll give you that the hold was legit on the first down pass that was called back but I never did see the hold on the punt return) and a TD that wasn't a TD until the ref comes forward while Ben puts the ball over the goal line? The ball might have gone over the goal line but if it did so it did so way before the ref put his hands up. Had they called that no TD I don't think it would have been over-turned as there was no conclusive evidence. Seattle has dominated yet are going to be behind based on some iffy officiating calls. If I was a Seattle fan I'd be livid.

Unfortunately you are correct. Another instance of "look, something SHINY, I want it!"

So you'd choose to be Antowain Smith over Barry Sanders? Winning is great but I think I'd rather be remembered once I'm gone. Nobody is going to know who the hell Smith is 10 years from now.

Stats can be compiled by playing a lot of years. Personally I'm not a big fan of stats being the sole factor of who gets into the Hall. That being said, I too think Moon deserves to go but not in front of some of these other players. I think a bigger factor should be "was this guy one of the absolute best during most of his career?" Moon was not one of the very best at his position for most of his career. Thurman was. Irvin, while not a big stat guy, was also considered one of the best. I can see some people arguing about Monk as he was a guy that also put up stats over a long period of time and was never really a dominant player. I don't think Testiverde deserves to be in the Hall and I don't think Bledsoe does either. But if you go by just stats they'll get in. This is why people are making decisions about who gets in and not computers. If it was just a stat thing people could program a computer to make selections for us. It’s really the Gale Sayers thing. Is Jerome Bettis a better back than Sayers was? Is he better than Jim Brown? Granted durability counts for something but I’m a big believer is a player needing to be dominant to be considered a first ballot HoFer.

Here's something I just found on the NFL site that I found interesting. Both Michael Irvin and Thurman Thomas were selected to the 90s "All Decade Team" (and Monk is on the 80s team) yet Moon got into the HoF before all of these players. To be fair RB and WR each get 4 players while QB only gets 2 but even if the numbers were equal and the QBs got 4 does anybody think Moon would be on the team? I don't. Moon wasn't considered a top 3-4 QB at any point during his career yet he gets in over players who are considered top 4 for an entire decade? I'm still scratching my head over Moon's selection in front of these other players.

I don't think the question is whether or not Moon should be in the Hall. I think the question is should he have gotten in on his first ballot or in front of Thomas. Moon has the numbers (which, for better or worse, is usually what is looked at) to be in the Hall, I just have a problem with how it shook out this year.

That's because most credit cards will automatically decline transactions with gambling sites. You have to call to authorize it first.

I think a great example of what you're talking about is when JP is asked to throw the long ball. On these plays he makes a very simple pre-snap read and knows exactly where he's going to throw the ball before the snap. On these throws he is very accurate and looks very confident. This isn't because he's accurate at throwing the long ball only, it's because he's comfortable with what he's doing. The Steelers made Ben comfortable from day one by simplifying things for him.

Have you seen the interviews with Ben where he stated that he was making ONE READ last year and if the guy wasn't open he was throwing it away or dumping it off to a back? The Steelers were in the championship game last year with a QB that couldn't read defenses at all. Yet, somehow, people think that it is Ben that makes the Steelers and not the other way around? Don't get me wrong, Ben has make huge strides this year (particularly in the second half) and has proven that, if needed, he can make plays to win games. That being said he's not doing it alone. I have no clue if JP would be as good as Ben is on the Steelers but I have no doubt that if Ben was on the Bills he would be struggling and people would be labeling him a bust.

Somehow I don't think that will ever happen.

My main issue isn't the numbers, Moon has those (though he put most of them up in a gimmick offense that hurt the team overall but put up lots of numbers). My issue is how good each player was in comparison to his contemporaries at the same position. Thurmal was a top 3 back in the league for 5-6 of his playing years. The other backs in the top 3 were 2 of the best backs EVER to play the game. There was very little disagreement as to who the best backs in the NFL were during the early 90s: Barry, Emmitt and Thurman. Moon, on the other hand, wasn't considered a top 3 QB during his playing days, probably not even in the top 5 for most of his years with guys like Elway, Marino, Kelly, Young, Montana ahead of him. So how do you justify putting a guy in the hall on his first ballot who wasn't considered one of the top 5 QBs in the league for most of his career while at the same time keeping a guy out that was a top 3 RB? Another thing to consider in the Moon/Thomas debate is what their teams did. Thurman was the centerpiece to one of the best offenses the league has ever seen. An offense that led the team to 4 straight Super Bowls and played big when the team needed it most. Moon was the centerpiece to a very good offense that put up lots of numbers but also put it’s team in a position to lose games with its inability to maintain leads and a penchant for turning the ball over at the worst times. This was never more evident than in the playoffs. This numbers thing is just ridiculous and the selection committee can use numbers to justify pretty much any selection. A prime example of this will be Jerome Bettis. The guy deserves to be in the HoF, no doubt. However during the course of his career when the discussion of the absolute best backs in the league come up Bettis' name was never (or rarely) mentioned. Yet, because he racked up lots of yards over a long career the guy will be a first ballot selection. Can anybody really tell me that Bettis is a better back than Thruman in primes?

You must have missed this paragraph from the article:

Heh, I have those numbers as well. Unfortunately they're pretty bad numbers as 28-24 and 28-14 are the only realistic scores I can hope to win with, and both of those scores only have a shot in a single quarter, the 4th. My prediction Seattle 27 Pittsburgh 21

After reading that article is sounds like this team desperately needs a DE to play opposite of Schobel that can get consistent pressure. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bills selected Hali. It also sounds like Sam Adams would be a very good fit as long as we can get a wide body that takes up multiple OL in the run game. Vincent sounds like the ideal S for this type of D while Milloy's skills just don't mesh. It looks like Milloy’s days might be numbered. I also wouldn't be surprised if the team keeps Posey, he's not a physical player and struggles at the point of attack but he's pretty good in pass coverage. People have been putting Fletcher’s name out there as a possible cut as well. I doubt it as this team will need fast LBs with good instincts even if it means they’re not the most physical guys in the world. Fletcher fits that mould pretty well. Keeping Nate (particularly at the new, low cost franchise tag for CBs) seems like a given as well. He accels when he’s able to get up in the CBs faces and play physically, which is exactly what this D calls for.

That's a good point about the entirety of the bonus being recognized in 2006 I hadn't thought of that. That being said I don't think it's a wise move to push a lot of money back into 2007 and beyond hoping that those are uncapped years. The NFL realizes that a competitive balance is one of the reasons that it is the most popular sport in the county. Given this, I think they'll eventually come to an agreement and the salary cap will stay (and any team trying to push back money will be shafted).

The problem here is that Milloy's strength was playing near the LoS. Like you said, he was horrible at it this year and not just for the first 6 games. When a strength is now a weakness that doesn't bode well for the player. Milloy has never been great in coverage so the cover 2 coming to town makes me believe he'll get his walking papers. I can't say I'm displeased with this as I don't think there was a player on the team that displeased me more than Milloy this year. The guy was a solid signing for a few years but looks like he hit the wall.

It'll be a savings of roughly 8 mil next year and we'll take 12+ mil in cap hits for two players not on the team (if the cuts are done before June). What's amazing is that of the 86+ mil cap hit that the Bills take the salaries of Moulds and Williams represent roughly 25% of the teams salaries.

Yeah, I wasn't sure if it was my browser or the resolution I run. Either way I can't read the last line (I presume it's the last line).

Given this response I think it's pretty safe to say it was a ridicule.

Somehow aquiring guys that coached the Lions doesn't seem like an improvement over Pitt. We're taking guys that Matt Millon hired!

I almost always root for the AFC, but I just can't do it this year. I like the way Seattle plays and I can't stand Pittsburgh. There's no way in hell I want to see the Steelers win a 5th SB title.