MDH

Yeah, let's bench JP for the easiest games left on our schedule and throw him to the wolves on some road games! That's the way to handle a young struggling QB.

Young QB's would never start if every coach went by your rational. Aikman, Elway, both Mannings...all of them (and many many more) struggled and their teams sucked their first year as starters. It’s what happens, but the payoff is well worth it. And actually, I really don't have a problem with them sitting JP down here and there...but you don't do it when the team is entering the easiest part of the remainder of the schedule. You do it if for the road games at Oakland and New England. You protect the kid, you don't prevent him from having success. Look at the success he had against a weak Texans team at home? You think he couldn't replicate that against the Jets or the Dolphins at home? That's how you build his confidence and let the kid learn. This move reeks. Do you really think they’ll sit Holcomb if the team wins these two games? Holcomb is getting to start vs. the 2nd and 3rd easiest games on our entire schedule (the Texans game being the easiest). If the team does well (which is should) JP isn’t going to sniff the field again until this team is officially eliminated from the Playoffs which should be somewhere around week 13-14. That makes this move a giant waste of the season. Yeah, we’ll have fun next year when we have to suffer through JP’s growing pains again. This move is horrible, period.

I didn't even read the rest of your post after this gem. The only way this is a one or two week thing is if Holcomb sucks. You think they may bench JP for home games against the Dolphins and the Jets only to put JP back in a road game in Oakland and a prime time road game at New England? Only a moron would do tha...wait, well, come to think of it, yeah, maybe that is the team's plan after all!

He's not going to be worse than JP, but he's not going to be a world beater either. He'll be the guy that has us in the game until the end (which, JP also did...). He's not good enough to do any better than Bledsoe did though, which makes putting him in the lineup pointless. If the coaching staff/front office wasn't going to stick with JP through thick and thin getting rid of Bledsoe made no sense whatsoever. We'll go 2-0 through this home stretch and Holcomb will be the starter for the season. The sad part is, even as poorly as JP has been playing, he could have led this team to a 2-0 record through this home stretch.

NS, they'll run McGahee against the two of the easiest games on our schedule and then JP won't get to step foot on the field again this season. As much as I generally dislike Sullivan, he was spot on in his article this morning: These two games were the perfect spot for JP to regain his confidence. Wow, a young QB struggled on the road, what a surprise. I know, let's put the vet in for two of our easiest home games and see what happens! This team didn't think Bledsoe was good enough but somehow Holcomb is? Hell, I don't think much of Bledsoe but he's better than Kelly friggin' Holcomb. If JP isn't getting reps this season is a total waste. I can't wait until next year when we have to groom our young QB...again. I liked Mularky's approach last year after starting 0-4. Stay the course, don't panic. This year, its pure panic. Putting Holcomb in is wasting this season. It's almost as if the coaching staff and front office fear for their jobs so they're taking the short term approach instead of the long term. Why should they care if JP matures into a great QB next year if they're not here? Sadly enough, I'm almost hoping Miami lays the smack-down on us this weekend.

Heh, last week I saw an article say that Jonathan Smith is the Bills third string running back.

In the past few days I've seen posts ripping/questioning Mike Williams, Losman, the entire offensive line, Moulds, Evans, Adams, Schobel, Edwards, Clements, Posey, Vincent, Lindell, Mularky, Clements, Gray, Ralph Wilson...and that's just off the top of my head from the posts I've actually read. I (literally) think the only Bills employees I haven't seen negative remarks about this week are Fletcher, Milloy and the water boy. So, who's going to do us all a favor and take a shot at them? Come on; let's finish the entire team off! I know if we put forth the effort we can do it.

I think most kickers would have a 87% if their coach rarely called for them to kick from beyond 40 yards (which was a disturbing trend last year). What's Lindell's % from 40+ yards out?

Do you even realize how dumb your posts are? That's like saying, "I've seen RBs take a hit on the knee and get back up, fine. But that McGahee guy, he took a shot and missed a year. I've seen through his charade, he's a weak player that just doesn't love the game." Every injury is different, if the guy can't play on an ankle, he can't play on it. It's not a charade, he's not a "wimp" because he can't play on it, it's just part of the game. Some guys are more durable than others, I’ll give you that…but MW is not a guy that spends most of his time hurt, despite what you want to make it sound like.

Getting about 13-14 games a year (on average) from each offensive linemen is pretty much the norm. There are very few guys that play every game every year. MW missed 1 game last year, 3 games the year before and 2 games his rookie year. He got rolled up on this year which is a classic way for Olinemen to get leg injuries. I love !@#$tards that post on this board while sitting in their underwear eating Doritos and drinking a beer calling a guy that slams into 300+lb. men 60-70 times a week "soft". You'd do it once and fall to the ground crying for your mommy. The guy takes so much abuse on this board for a variety of things when, truth be told, from about game 5-6 last year on, he's been the best linemen on this team.

Not that I disagree with you about the Bills needing to run more, I think they should commit to it a bit more as well. However, the last thing the Bills braintrust needs to do is listen to the fans "collective wisdom"?

I don't have to ask Parcells, I saw the game. On the fade Bledsoe didn't give his WR an opportunity to make a play (which is what the fade is all about). Every fade I've ever seen has good coverage, but the QB puts it up, gives his man a chance to make a play and he either makes it or doesn't. It's one of the easiest throws in the game and Bledsoe put it out of the endzone. Parcells can explain it any way he wants but the bottom line is Bledsoe didn’t put the ball where it needed to be. As for the last play, yeah, whatever. That ball was thrown so low the guy had no shot at getting his hands under it to prevent it from hitting the turf. Even if he did catch it he was short of the first by at least half a yard (which isn't Bledsoe's fault, but it also illustrates how full of sh*t Parcells can be).

The line isn't playing well, that much is obvious. However, I still don't think the line is as bad as it's made out to be. An indecisive QB makes the line look much worse than it really is. Drew was indecisive and unable to make the quick reads and throws that solid QBs do that make their lines look much better. JP is also an indecisive QB (which isn't surprising at this stage of his career). The thinking on JP was his mobility would help this out, which was a falsehood. Once JP can make quick decisions and get rid of the ball there won't be many people bitching about the line.

The current situation is better than Drew starting, the Bills missing the playoffs (like we've done the past 3 years with Drew) and having JP struggle next year. Like it or not, at some point JP was going to get his chance and he (like just about all first time starters) was going to struggle, no matter how many years he had on the bench. The way you propose has the Bills missing the playoffs for at least two years. Though I’m assuming when it came time to bite the bullet next year and start JP you'd hedge again and want to stick it out with Drew because it "isn't his fault". After years and years of this we'd eventually have a 70-year-old Bledsoe on the field who still hadn't gotten the Bills to the playoffs and there'd be a faction out there that still wanted to keep him over a young QB because they don't have the patience to watch him struggle. After all, a veteran gives us a better shot at winning.

Except Super Bowl Sundays...

The good news is they can't play any worse, so there's nowhere to go but up.

Yet, despite this, if the Cowboys lose to the Eagles this weekend (likely) and the Bills beat the Dolphins at the Ralph the Bills and the Cowboys have the same record...

I'm not going to bother looking it up the stats by quarter, but find the halftime stats are easy enough to find. Pittsburgh Rushing Yards: Week 1 1st Half - 71yds 2nd Half - 135yds Week 2 1st Half - 73yds 2nd Half - 62yds Week 3 1st Half - 53yds 2nd Half - 26yds Somehow the above stats don't look to me like the rushing yards are "doubling in successive quarters". In fact, in 2 of the 3 games Pitt has played they've run for more first half yards than they did in the second half. As for your yardage stats, of course teams are going to get more yards out of the passing game than the running game, that doesn't "prove" that the pass sets up the run. Let's look at Pittsburghs rushing attempts vs. passing attempts in the first half of games: Week 1 Rushes - 16 Pass Att - 9 Week 2 Rushes - 16 Pass Att - 15 Week 3 Rushes - 14 Pass Att - 10 Pittsburgh appears to run quite often in the first half, despite your claims to the contrary. Through three games Pitt has rushed 46 times in the first half compared to 34 passing attempts. Yeah, that sounds like the pass setting up the run to me...

But right now you're comparing an actual player (Clements) to some arbitrary players that you think might help us more. It's not that simple, you have to see who's actually available, how much he costs and then make the comparison. Just saying, "the money can be spent more wisely" isn't really enough. I'm not for locking up Nate at any cost but I don't think resigning him should just be dismissed either.

Yeah, I knew the Marvin Harrison arguement would come out. Harrison is a 1 in a million guy. How many other #1s out there are that small?

I agree, in principle, with what you're saying about building from the lines out...though there are a few positions on the field that are of equal importance: QB and CB. A very good CB can cut the field in half for your D and let a Safety slide over to help the other side more often. That's a huge benefit. A team needs a solid, fast, LB unit, but it can get by without a “stud” in the unit. It’s much more difficult to get by without a stud CB, he can cover a lot of deficiencies. Of course, the question is, “is Clements a stud CB?” Before last year I would have said no, but he played as well as (if not better than) anybody in the league last year. I’m not ready to write him off after four games this year. I agree though, he sucked against the Saints.

I agree with most of your post, except the above. Last week on a 4th and a foot the Bills tried a QB sneak and when it didn't work people wailed, "Isn't that what we pay Willis for?!?!" So this week they give the ball to Willis, he gets stopped, and somebody says the above? There's no pleasing some people. The bottom line is you have to mix it up on 3rd and 4th and short plays. I'd actually like to see them take more shots down the field using play action on these plays, particularly since the offense can't seem to move the ball doing anything else.

My point is that its not the WRs fault, they simply don't have a QB that can get them the ball or a OL that can sufficiently block for the QB so he can get them the ball. I’m not crazy about Moulds contract but I can guarantee you that Evans isn’t ready to see constant double teams and I’m not sure with his body type he’ll ever be ready.

Might as well get rid of Evans too, since his stats suck

True, the Bills O can't score. However, if the Bills D actually stopped teams on 3rd downs it would give the O more opportunities to score while, at the same time, letting the D rest. The two things go hand and hand. Obviously the O can help the D out, but this D could be helping this O out a lot more too (turnovers anyone?) I wonder what the average team score is when they produce zero turnovers? My guess is that it isn't high.