MDH

Had the Bills used this year there shouldn't have been a need for another one...

The only two games I've been to at the medowlands are the two mentioned above. Riemersma made a spectacular TD catch right in front of me in the '97 game. I thought about going to tomorrow's game (err, today's) figuring tickets would be easier to come by but changed my mind when I learned that Check Down would be getting the start.

I don't know about best ever as I don't really have the knowledge base needed to make such a claim but they are the best I've seen in the 20+ years I've been following the Bills. A silver lining in this giant toilet of a season.

Yeah, he must not have enough to qualify. Funnily enough even if Roscoe got 0 yards on his next 7 returns he'd rank #14 in the league. Parrish is doing a good job considering he's coming off an injury and had never returned punts in the NFL before. However, after that muff in the Miami game I cringe everytime I see him move up to make a fair catch.

Shhh, Tom Brady sucks...at least that's the word on the board.

Clements has had two years in which he's returned more than 10 punts, in neither of those years has he averaged more per punt return than Parrish has this year. There's absolutely no point in risking Clements on punt returns.

There's also a method that the Eagles have used to great success in which they do end up with a higher cap figure than the league sets. I don't recall the specifics of it though.

It's a matter of mortgaging the future for the present. The way it is done is giving out huge signing bonuses to players and then signing them to long-term contracts that they have no intent of completing. The players get all the money up front in the bonus and it's spread out evenly over the entire contract for salary cap purposes. The team can basically stretch the deal out over any number of years they want to ensure that they can get the player under the cap...though it will cost them down the road when they cut the player and have to deal with the dead cap space. For instance, let's say the going rate for a top flight DT is 5 million a year. The team could give a player a $20 million dollar signing bonus right off the bat and then sign the player to a contract that was for the vet minimum for the first 4 years. To keep is simple let's say the team signed the DT to a 10 year contract with 500k a year salary in each of the first four years then 5m a year salary in the last six years. The 20m signing bonus would be spread out evenly at 2m per year. The cap hit for the first four years would be 2.5m per year (2m from the bonus and 500k from the salary). The way this contract is set up it makes it pretty obvious that the team is going to cut the player (or rework the contract) after year four. If they cut the player after four years they'd have the option of taking the full 10m cap hit (what is left of the bonus) in one year (if they cut him before June) or to spread it out over two years (if they cut him after June...I think it's the 6th). I'm no capoligist and it gets way more complicated than this, but this is the basic idea behind it. It's not a bad idea if you think you're team is one player away from the SB and you need to do this in order to sign that player but otherwise it's generally not a great idea. TD is (rightly) not a guy that likes to work the cap this way so I don't see it happening.

It's not only a matter of the cap (the cap can always be fudged to get guys under), it's a matter of RW springing for 2 of the best (if not THE best) OL in FA this year along with the best CB in FA. That just isn't going to happen, the Bills are not going to be able to outbid the rest of the league on the two best OL in FA.

I was about to say the same thing...though I would have gone with accuracy as his primary problem.

Obviously you need to pass effectively as well, nobody is arguing otherwise. I take issue with your idea that running the ball isn't important. As for the attempts thing if you have lots of attempts it means you're picking up first downs. A lot of 3 and outs doesn't equate to a lot of attempts...

I love the idea that people have that teams throw the ball to get ahead and then run the ball with the lead, as if teams suddenly go into a shell with a 7 point lead in the 4th quarter. Games in the NFL are generally close and teams that rack up lots of rushing attemps don't do so by simply trying to control the clock once they have a lead. They do so because they show a commitment to the run both early and late.

Also, let's take a look at the top 15 teams in the league in rushing attempts this year. 1. Falcons 2. Steelers 3. Broncos 4. Cowboys 5. Seahawks 6. Redskins 7. Chiefs 8. Jags 9. Bears 10. Colts 11. Panthers 12. Chargers 13. Bengals 14. Giants 15. Bucs 11 of those 15 teams are going to make the playoffs. That leaves only ONE team not in the top 15 in rushing attempts in the playoffs (the Pats). Let’s look at the leaders in passing attempts 1. Cardinals 2. Packers 3. Eagles 4. Rams 5. Titans 6. Raiders 7. Patriots 8. Giants 9. Ravens 10. Dolphins 11. Saints 12. Bengals 13. Chargers 14. Lions 15. Colts Only 4 teams are in the playoffs that are in the top half of the league in passing attempts (and 3 of those are in the top half of the league in rushing attempts) Yeah, screw the run!

Smash mouth football means commitment to the run. If you call 8 and 12 rushes in games "commitment" then I guess we run a smash mouth offense. The Bills have ran the ball 398 times this year, good for 21st in the league. Compare that to real smash mouth teams like the Steelers and Broncos which have each run the ball over 500 times.

Zero.

I guess I've seen a different player than you have. I'll agree 3/4 of his first four starts were bad. However once he came back from the benching I saw a QB who made better decisions, threw the ball more accurately and used the entire field. While he didn't look spectacular he looked good for a young QB. The stats don't tell the entire story. I'm wondering how many of the games you listed above by other QBs you actually watched or are you just looking at a stat line? Also, I don't see how you think Grossman's game was better than Losman's game against Houston or his game against KC, but whatever (and yeah, I saw the Grossman game you listed).

Rob Johnson's career QB rating is 83.6. Kelly Holcomb's is 81.4. Stats don't tell the story, one has to watch the games to understand the value of a player. I've seen enough of the guy to know that he's not what I want in a QB.

What you're forgetting in all of those examples (except Grossman, but I'd hardly call those stats "good the whole game") is that each of those players had a larger sample set from which to draw their "good" game. If JP had gotten to start 16 games this season I'd guess that he'd have a few flashy number games too. Who knows what the kid does for the entire KC game. It's unbelievable to me that anybody has given up on a first round draft pick who has only gotten to start eight games. There are maybe 2 QBs in the history of the NFL who have looked good in that number of starts. Until JPs last start the kid had shown much improvement over his last 3-4 games. It might not show up in the stats but that's why you actually have to watch the games. The way this team has handled the QB situation this year has been a complete joke. You either show full commitment to the 1st round draft pick and let him play hell or high water or you don’t cut Bledsoe and see if JP can beat him out in camp. If he doesn’t you go with Drew. Cutting Drew and not showing a full commitment to JP was a huge mistake and we’re reaping the “rewards” of it right now.

Or maybe they're willing to accept the known commodity of a below average QB rather than risking a season while waiting for JP to come around (if he ever does). These guys don't want to wait to win but I wouldn't take their backing of Holcomb to mean that they think the guy is anything more than he is: A below average QB that doesn't bring much to the table. As a fan I'd rather roll the dice with JP than go with Check Down though I can understand why the vets on the team don’t want to roll the dice.

Bottom line is Moorman's one of the league leaders in TBs which equates to him not doing his job that well this year.

So a third of his kicks that he attempts to pin a team end up in the end zone (and 13% of his total kicks). Mooreman's 9 TBs ties for 5th most in the ENTIRE league and his 13% in the end zone gives him the 6th worse % in the league. Compare that to someone like Stanely of the Texans who has pinned 24 inside the 20 yard line with only 1 TB. Stanely's ave of 38 yards is the worst in the AFC but I'd take a guy that will pin a team and not overkick into the endzone (thereby padding his numbers) You also have guys like Nick Harris of Detroit who has pinned 28 inside the 20 and only had 2 TBs or Mitch Berger in NO who has pinned 26 inside the 20 and only 2 TBs. You get the picture. Mooreman's 9 TBs is horrible when compared to the league's other good punters. Don't get me wrong I like the guy but he was better last season.

He inherited a SB winning team. He rode that roster to some impressive winning seasons. Once that roster faded what has he done? Had 3 non-winning seasons in the past 4 seasons. Really impressive. And yeah, I tag this abysmal season on him. He's obviously a better coach but I compare him riding that roster to Barry Swtizer riding the Cowboy's roster...yet somehow Switzer managed to snag a SB win before being run out of town.

Whoops, I missed his name when I went over the roster earlier.

He puts points up on the board but at the expense of the rest of the team. How many years did he ignore the running game when he had the best back in the league in Faulk? His philosophy is a risk taking one that equals a lot of short fields for the D and not a lot of time taken off the clock meaning the D is left out to dry. Putting up a lot of points is good and the surface it appears that if you do so you're doing your job as an OC but there's more to offense than simply scoring points (as odd as that may sound). The last guy I'd want coaching this team is Martz. He seems so obsessed with being considered an "offensive genius" that he puts everything else at risk.

Agreed, I'm not that happy with how he's played this year actually. Way too many touchbacks for my liking.