SuperKillerRobots

If you get caught using illegal drugs I believe tha tthe first step is to put you in the drug program, but no suspension. You get a suspension on the second offense. If it is performance enhancing, then you get suspendded right away.

My ideal season: - Trent Edwards throws for enough yards and has a good enough TD to INT ratio to allow the team to avoid being forced into taking a QB #1 in 2011. - 9-7 record and in the playoff hunt until late December. - No injuries to skill position players. - Roscoe Parish having a breakout year on offense. - D Bell shows enough promise to hold the LT job for one more year at least. - Spiller doing what we expect without getting seriously hurt or looking poor down the stretch. - Defense getting better every week. - Maybin getting 10 sacks. - McKelvin moving into the starting spot by end of year. - Play-calling on both sides of the ball catches teams off-guard. I understand the reason for wanting to go 2-14 to get the first pick and get a QB, but wouldn't it be better if Trent just turned into that guy and we could take a pass-rusher #1?

I saw that same article and thought pretty much the same thing - here's another mind-blowing insight from the idiots at the Buffalo News. I understand his point that the rivalry isn't what it used to be and that it isn't talked about anywhere in the NFL outside of these two cities anymore, but what does that matter? Is he writing this article to get it picked up by the AP? He's writing the thing for people in Buffalo to read, so why not include something abou the game? I think it's absurd that we're this far past roster cut-downs and there hasn't been one TBN article yet about what people might expect out of the offense and defense this year. This is year one of a new everythign on the team pretty much and it's like the sports-writers for the news can't think of anything to write about! I guess it goes to show how competent they are. I could see this type of article being a part of the pre-game paper on Sunday, along with 10 other articles abotu the Bills, but why the hell is it in Wednesday's paper instead of something about the actual game?

You are the worst type of person and should be burned at the stake for your heresy! The Beatles are the best.

She bones them with her tiny asian fingers... That's a classic, Dean. I have a problem too.

Thi sis my biggest hope for the upcoming season. IMagine how bad DJ would look as a coach if Chan wins 8 or 9 games this year! Not saying it will happen...

OK, so you just turned a thread about cutting a 7th round rookie QB into how the FO sucks and has sucked for the past 10 years, even though we now have a new guy calling the shots? No one cares if Levi Brown makes an NFL roster or stacks groceries except Levi and maybe his mom. So accepting the fact that the Bills over the past 10 years have been almost as horrible as you can be as far as drafting is concerned, what about cutting our 7th round draft pick QB because he was clearly the worst of the four QBs on the roster makes that point relevant or more valid? You two obviously are having a little spat judging by the insults leveled at each other, but in the first line of your post you say, "OK. You've drawn me out again..." and then end it by saying, "...now kindly leave me alone." Are you just reading his posts and getting more and more angry, only to finally lose it and have to express your anger/frustration via post? I think you need a hobby that doesn't involve the computer.

I think the main reason that no one declares the substance revolves around the privacy of said player. No matter how you look at these types of tests, they are medical tests and subject to medical privacy guidelines. The only times you get that information is when the player tells the media or gives the OK for the team to do so. For all we know it had nothign to do with football or training. Maybe he's taking penis enlargement pill san dthey have a small amount of a banned substance, which over time built up in his system and caused a positive test. Understandably, he doesn't want to entire world (including his peers playing football) knowing what he's taking.

I don't know about anyone else, but the thing about these predictions that gets me is the record, not the rank in the league. I can accept that we are a bottom 4 or 6 team in the league right now and could not argue that at all. However, I don't think that we'll go 2-14. Furthermore, I don't think any team will go 0-16 this year and I'd expect the worst record in the league to be 2-14 or 3-13. The only reason people talk about teams going 0-16 or 1-15 is because it happened recently. Looking back through the history of the league, it is obvious that only wining 1 or 2 games in the year is hard to do. Miami and Detriot are definitely exceptions instead of rules. But since those teams did so poorly, people think that suddenly every year a team is going to go nearly winless. In addition to the three or four games that look to be winable to even the most pessimistic observors, there ar ethe divisional games, which are generally closer than most give credit for. In division games, the best team doesn't always win. It should be a given that a team at least wins one division game, if not two. I can't see them winning less than 5 or 6 games this year. I wouldn't bet that they'd win more than 7 though.

I think I read last year when we were looking for a new coach that no (or very few, like one or two) Super Bowl winning coaches have gone on to coach in or win a Super Bowl with another team. If that's true, then Gailey was definitely tihe better choice, given he hasn't coached a Super Bowl yet.

I think Gailey alluded to not wanting to keep a QB on the PS because fo the way he runs practices. Maybe he just doesn't want a fourth QB in practice over another player that can work on the scout team to help the starters perpare. I think most of the time the third QB runs the scout team in practice, so maybe they felt he wouldn't get enough work to make it worthwhile.

Please do post those charts. I would be very interesetd to see those.

**** man, that's a pretty sobering post. I kind of feel sorry for you. Good humility. So now who do we lynch for Die Hard leaving? I think it's definitely Lee Evans' fault - trade his ass ASAP, he's a bum. <just kidding if you're reading this, Lee>

Thanks for your posts - I've always liked your point of view and demeaner on this board. Interesting that you were a former player - I never had an inkling. I don't blame you for not putting your real name up there - it's not fair honestly. Why should you be the only person who identifies themself on the board (or one of the two or three people who do)? I'm kind of surprised that current players would come on this board to read the posts, since I couldn't begin to imagine what that would do to your psyche. I think a lot of people who post on this board are truly Bills fans, however I think they are just tired of losing. The problem is that they are expressing it poorly. It's kind of like getting into an arguement at a bar and then deciding your going to go to your car, get a gun, and shoot them. It's just plain overreaction and a lack of clear thinking. I personally get tired of hearing fans talk about why a team is goign to be terrible, how everything they do is crap, and how that casual fan's opinions are the gold standard for how a football team is built. There are too many teams and different ways of doing things to say one way is the only right way. As a result, I don't know how you can second guess every single move the club and players make.

I guess the thinking would be that you make it loko like he's crap, so no one else signs him and then you can get him on the PS. The problem with this is that why the hell would another team sign a cut 7th round pick a week before the season starts? Maybe he was jus tthe worst OT on the team, so they cut him...

So if they had drafted David Nelson instead of Calloway in the 7th round, you'd think they did a good job? Who the hell cares if a 7th round pick makes the team? It's not like this guy was going to start or even play this year. You can't pick a Steve Johnson every year.

OK, admit it - you didn't watch the game, you just re-created it with balled up pieces of paper towels in your bathroom... Seriously, I think Stroud has looked great this preseason - better than he looked all last season. I've seen him get eaten up inside - as you pointed out - but I've also seen him be pretty dominant at times as well. He had a great game against Indy. Not to mention, he looks like a 5 tech DE, which has to say soemthing considering he never played it before. On top of all that, he's a lock to make the team just because there aren't any other options. Do you think they'd cut Stroud to keep McCargo? Maybe Rashard Duncan? Give me a break. You might be the first person ever on this board to, in one post, both defend Kelsey and knock Stroud. Someone ding the bell.

Not to pile on - or take anything away from peters, who I believe is still better than Bell at this point - but wasn't this basically the same criticism of him while he was here? Potentially dominant all the time, but very inconsistant. I guess the money didn't change him at all.

I'm pretty sure the original poster who you were quoting was referring to the draft pick compensation and subsequent choices made with those draft picks versus the player traded for said draft picks. I think the total compensation ended up being Wood, Nelson, and either Batten or Moats this year. I think the legend of Jason Peters is twofold - he wasn't as good as his most ardent supporters make him out to be and he was nowhere near as bad (when in shape) as his most fervent detractors would like everyone to think. If you take an objective look at the trade however, I would say at this point it's pretty even. Peters played well last year until he got hurt and then his play tailed off. On the other hand, we got Wood, who was pretty good, albeit not as good as Peters prior to injury, but he does have more upside at this point in his career than Peters, who should be entering his prime. Wood will get better than he is right now. Since Nelson is out, and neither Batten nor Moats are going to do anythign this year, the jury is still out. In two years or so, when it we know about Nelson and have a better idea of Moats/Batten everyone will know who got the better of this trade. Right now it's even, but if Peters has a big year, then the Eagles definitely pull into the lead, regardless of what our two players do this year (aside from both being Pro Bowl starters, which is unlikely). One part of this trade that might be interesting (and which I have no idea of at this time) is how trades of one player for multiple picks/players work out for each team from an historical prespective. It seems like all the ones I can think of off the top of my head end up better for the team trading the one player, but there has to be examples going both ways. The first that comes to mind Herschel Walker being traded, which was a big boone for Dallas and a flop for Vikings. Maybe one that fits mroe closely to the Peters' situation is the hodlout and trade of Sean Gilbert in the late 90s/early 00s. He held out and then was traded the next year to Washington, where he did nothing for a while. Anyone else think of another senario like this trade?

Good post and very interesting parallels. I hope to hell that it works out that way. I'm with what seems to be the majority of posters on this thread so far that Bell needs time to play to see what we have in him. It's certainly possible that he's fine at LT for the foreseeable future. I do think that eventually Hangartner and Green will be replaced, as the seem more like stop-gap types (Green moreso obviously). I don't share the optimism on Meredith, but do think he deserves a chance to play at RT efore we make any final judgements. It seems like most good offensive lines start out somewhat good and add more pieces over a few seasons to become dominant. To put it another way, I don't think teams go from having a terrible o-line to having a great o-line in one season. I think you go from having a terrible o-line to having a decent o-line with one or two deficiancies (i.e. pass blocking, run blocking, need RT/LT/G/C, etc). Not to say that last year because we could run sometimes, we had a decent o-line - I think right now we're in the stage where we could have a decent o-line this year - but I think if they can be competitive, not lose anyone to IR, and identify whatever weaknesses that line has, they will be able to go after players to fill those deficiancies. When everyone on the line is hurt or out of shape, it's hard to tell exactly what you have, which makes it difficult to identify the weaknesses. For instance, does anyone really know how good of an RT Butler was? It's impossible - he wasn't on the field long enough to make any judgement and I think the same could be said of Bell, Wood, and potentially Levitre.

He definitely got burned a few times in that last game, but I don't think that out-weighs what he did last year, when he looked pretty good. Maybe if he sucks it up all year you havesomething, but one preseason game does not a problem make.

Cocaine's a hell of a drug! I think the wins you listed are right, but I also think we at least win one division game, if not two and win one of the Chicago, Cincinnatti, and Baltimore games. I'm guessing 6-10 this year.

But your word on Trent is law, right? So what NFL team did you last work for in the personnel department?

I think this is a SAD mischaracterization of what happened. I've never gottent he impression from Chan that any pressure has gotten to him yet. I think it was probably a calculated move on his part to do it on the last day of training camp and was probably more for the team than anything else.

Not to hijack the thread here, but stop with the political side jabs - people who think they understand politics because their fourth grade teacher broke down the differences between capitalism/socialism/mercantilism/fuedalism/early societies/etc using one and two syllable words and a lot of pictures need to get a clue. There is nothing going on in this country right now that anyone with any sort of understanding of world governments and economies would compare to any other governmental or economic situation that has happened anywhere else in the world. Obama isn't Stalin or Lenin and Bush wasn't Hitler. They all love big business and it's need for government, none of them want more than 60% voter registration, and they'd all rather debate (and do for anythign meaningful) behind closed doors. The real rub is that every partisan idiot (on both sides) has been hornswaggled into thinking that of the two possible sides, one is actually better than the other. Statements like yours in the first line of your post help to perpetuate thinking that it is red v blue, dem v rep, me v you when it's actually us v them (being people with money and power). The reason this country has lasted so long is that the people in power and with money have done the best job in history of making the populace believe that they have a chance. (that was my political rant for the day - and yes, it did feel good)