MDH

My guess is that TD would take Eric Winston OT, Miami. He's from the U and has had a knee injury. He’s also fairly new to the position, which makes him somewhat of a project. All of these things make him irresistible to TD.

It's amazing how the media put the word "suspension" in Mularkey's mouth when he obviously never uttered it before.

DT

From CBS sportsline:

And top it off with Mularkey then stating that he the word "suspension" has never come up. It sounds like he wanted to suspend him, found out that Ralph might not go for it and then backed off it for fear of looking like a coach with no power.

You don't expect much out of MM if you think he's handled this "well".

I'd say Mularkey has more interest in winning now than Moulds. Moulds is gone after this year plain and simple. He'll get a contract with somebody and moderate signing bonus no matter what transpires the rest of the season. If Mularkey doesn't do something to stop the bleeding (i.e. win now) he has a shot at being canned at the season's end and might never get another shot to be a head coach again.

Hoping for more than this is like hoping for more than a colonoscony.

As LT is on my fantasy squad I've found myself watching quite a bit of San Diego this year and love watching their offense even more so than the Colts. LT is like Barry Sanders with a nose for short yardage in addition to his fine open field running, Brees distributes well and uses the entire field and McCardell is a quality WR that doesn’t get the recognition he deserves. The key to this offense is Gates though, he’s nearly unstoppable. No CB is big enough to cover him and no S or LB is fast enough. He has the softest hands I’ve ever seen on a TE and always catches the ball away from his body. As much as I like watching LT I enjoy watching Gates even more. If he ever improves his blocking he’ll be the most dominant TE the NFL has seen in a long long time. If the D was mediocre I'd give them a shot at upsetting the Colts. As it is, the Colts will ring up 40+ points against the Chargers in a few weeks.

The guy ended up being a sh------- QB, but that was a hell of a play. RJ might not be considered the same QB today had that game turned out differently.

I'm not sure which quote you're referring too, but this is the only thing from Vincent I've heard: That doesn't sound like he's siding with management to me...

As long as it's not sweet ANYTHING goes with Beer. That being said, popcorn wouldn't be my first choice.

You most definitely have the right to say something if you're not being used the way you feel you should. And if you continue to be disappointed with your job...you move on. I guess your idea of "loyalty" has the employ doing whatever the employer asks and staying at that dead end job for the rest of their life? I think you're confusing "employ" with "slavery".

I think the main issue we're having here is you don't care for Moulds so you're not willing to cut him any slack, whereas I do like him and am willing to let a few small things slide. Is not listening to the coach on game day insibordination? Absolutely. Should it be punished? Again, absolutely. However causing this circus isn't the way of handling it and that is what I have issue with. Mularkey should have also considered the ramifications of this move considering the thin ice his career in Buffalo is on. A major dispute with the team’s longest tenured player and one most fans, and the owner, love. It also gives the impression that he has lost control of the team. How many coaches with control of a team have one of the team’s most respected players refuse to listen to him? Bottom line is this move isn't going to help Mularkey keep his job. Perhaps he's not concerned about that, or concerned about creating a circus and a distraction for a game against New England this weekend, but he should be.

Mularkey is not going out of his way to avoid a public spat. Any coach with a clue would have to realize the circus he'd create by suspending Eric Moulds. If he didn't realize the repercussions he's even more clueless as a coach than I thought. The way of handling this quietly was to fine Moulds and sit him for part of the game on Sunday. Nobody would know a thing about it until after the game started. But instead we have MM suspending Moulds, the owner flying in tomorrow and the media circus. Yeah, he's handling the situation "quietly". There are more ways of communicating that saying “no comment” in front of the press.

I have no problem with Mularkey criticizing players...in private. That's his job. But I can tell you that players don't like to be taken to task in public and their teammates don't like to see it happen either. It rubs them the wrong way and give them an “us against them” mentality, which can pull a team apart. Certain guys can get away with it (Parcells comes to mind) but a coach had better have a great track record before he tries to pull this stuff on his players. Mularkey doesn't have that track record. The only track record he has is having public spats with his players when it should be taken care of behind closed doors.

Well, Mularkey is "right" in that he's the coach and what he says goes. However, I believe he's totally wrong in how he's handling his players and in attempting to suspend Moulds and thus create a huge public spectical over it. Fine the player and bench him for the first quarter of the next game. But Mularkey creating this circus is overkill and points to a coach who is losing his team and his fan base.

He also called McGahee out in public early this year. McGahee, Adams, Moulds. Three very public spats. That's once a month. That's way too many. For a coach that says he likes to keep things "in house" his actions speak louder than words.

I think it's seems fairly likely, based on what I've read, that Mularkey pulled Moulds out of the game and after a few series when he went to put him back in Moulds refused, probably saying something along the lines of "if he thinks this team is better off without me then so be it". If this is the case then both of them are lying in a sense.

Yeah, he "knows" players so well that he's had three very public spats with players this year. Getting into it with a player once a month in the press isn't going to win players over. The fans, and players, might accept this type of "coaching" if the guy produced results. But coming after some of the most pitiful 4th quarter playcalling I've ever seen I'm surprised there's anybody out there that will defend him.

Actually, it's my understanding that Ralph is partial to the Eagles cheerleaders. This is what my inside source tells me.

Perhaps, but given the fact that MM has made it common practice to alienate many of his players I'm not going to give him the benefit of the doubt over Moulds. I have no doubt that Moulds is, most likely, at least equally at fault in whatever transpired here. But trying to suspend a guy that's been here 10 years for part of his last four games in a Bills uniform (and his second to last home game) is just wrong. MM has no clue how to manage players and it’s becoming more obvious over time. It seems like every single week the guy is having problems with a different player.

It doesn't happen overnight but we don't need it to as we're on the 7 year plan. Next year is our year!

I think you'r correct that Moulds has already received much of the cash. In addition he'll get a signing bonus with his new team, combine that with whatever salary he agrees to next year and I'm guessing he's not going to lose much, if any, money.

I predict that Ralph Wilson will pull out an Uzi and lay waste of TD, MM and the rest of the Bills coaching staff then hire Johnny Cochran's corpse to defend him at the trial (where Ralph is aquitted of all charges). He'll then hire Ron Wolf to GM the Bills who will talk Bill Belichick into quiting his job in NE and come to coach the Bills. Wolf will swindle Bill Polian in a deal for Peyton Manning and the Bills will win the Super Bowl next year. I really think this is going to happen.