I sincerely don't get all of the negativity.....

[Roundybout]

45 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

 

Russell Wilson is better than every QB the Bills have ever had, including Kelly. 

 

Its not close. 

 

[Happy]

3 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Ridiculous to say he's the GOAT? 

 

No doubt Marino would be awesome nowadays. No doubt. 

 

But Tom Brady has led how many comebacks? Has what TD to Interception ratio? Has been elite for how long?

 

And all of that is swept away with a flick of the wrist because its was more physical back then. Okay. 

 

Because Brady wouldn't be protected back then like he is now, and he sure as hell wouldn't be playing at age 40, which was unheard of back then..  Most of these rules protecting QBs are for the sake of keeping Brady around, who draws viewers and is good for NFL ratings.

 

The rest of your post is pointless.

[NoHuddleKelly12]

14 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Exactly.  Which is why it is ridiculous to say that Brady is GOAT, for example.  He might be the greatest of his playing era, but I suspect he would get demolished in 1990.  Marino might be GOAT if he played today.  People don't think about this.

TB12 getting "released" from a sure sack by Speaks, to instead rushing for a TD yesterday is definitely an exhibit to that argument--should never have scored there (and wouldn't have if Bruce Smith was in the process of wrapping him up on that play with the rules of his era)

[Happy]

1 minute ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

TB12 getting "released" from a sure sack by Speaks, to instead rushing for a TD yesterday is definitely an exhibit to that argument--should never have scored there (and wouldn't have if Bruce Smith was in the process of wrapping him up on that play with the rules of his era)

 

Yep.  Same thing happened last week as Hughes released Mariotta early since he didn't want to get flagged.  The players today are definitely more athletic than back 30 years ago, but the game is of less quality.  I really hope this changes and defense is made a little more prevalent.  43-40 final score games are boring.

[NoHuddleKelly12]

55 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Okay, so you believe all the Bills FO and Coach need is time?

 

And then the Bills will be winning in this league? Going to AFC Title Games?

 

I think the odds of that based on what we've seen out of this GM and Coach are microscopic. 

 

The point was Seattle and Denver, defensive led teams, had real HOF talent. 

 

The Bills have a few nice players defensively, and a couple of key cogs who are 35 years old.  

 

Big difference. 

Laugh it up Joe. 

 

Russell Wilson is better than every QB the Bills have ever had, including Kelly. 

 

Its not close. 

Straight up blasphemy bro. You can't possibly believe that Wilson's (or any of the other dudes routinely tossing 4K plus these days) stats would be magically the same playing against the rules-enabled D's of Kelly's era--or do you think that Ken Norton Jr. wouldn't have been able to take out Wilson's knees like he did Kelly's in SB XXVII? The point being, in the league today it's almost arcade game like and/or comical, the way the league has consciously moved towards sugarcoating the offense, and QB's in particular, since Wilson burst on the scene. Just ask Clay Matthews which era he'd prefer to play in. When even guys like Roethlisberger or Rodgers are saying it's gone too far, I'd say it's gone too far. Wilson is a nice piece to have, would love to see him as our QB right now in fact, but don't ever categorically state that he would then automatically be better than any Bills QB who's ever suited up ("modern" era excepted).   

[ColoradoBills]

13 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Yeah and Russell Wilson is a better athlete all around.

 

Brady has started for 18 straight years. 

 

In an era where Coaches have instantaneous film to dissect, computers to analyze statistics and trends, in an era with money to fund larger scouting departments and Front Offices. 

 

Ridiculous to say he's the GOAT? 

 

No doubt Marino would be awesome nowadays. No doubt. 

 

But Tom Brady has led how many comebacks? Has what TD to Interception ratio? Has been elite for how long?

 

And all of that is swept away with a flick of the wrist because its was more physical back then. Okay. 

 

There have been so many rule changes that a comparison cannot be made.

Brady playing for 18 years is a direct result of those rule changes.

 

Just the OL player rule changes would make a huge difference.

Linemen had to hold their fists to their chests to block.

There is a reason that great QBs in the 60's era only had 45-55% completion rates.

Everything from training facilities and equipment (shoes, pads, flack jackets) are night and day.

 

A player tore a ligament and his career was over!

[TheBrownBear]

Getting back to the OP, I am finally coming to grips that what you are seeing on this board is one of the following:

 

1) A board littered with at least a double digit number of trolls (who are doing a fine job btw); 

2) A board with a majority pre-teen membership; or

3) A board littered with mouth breathing imbeciles. 

[TigerJ]

I believe the negativity is the consequence of nearly two decades of futility on the field.  The moment something goes wrong, the negativity rears its ugly head.  Finger pointing begins.  There have been times when I would avoid message boards for at least 2 or 3 days after a loss because of it.  I recognize there are problems, and Beane/McDermott have misjudged some things.  I'm pretty sure they counted on AJ McCarron to at least be decent and able to start games for most of the season to give Josh Allen a chance to get acclimated to the NFL and develop the skills needed to be effective.  He wasn't, and Peterman was also ineffective, so Josh Allen had to step in before he could be effective.  

 

After it became clear Buffalo was going to lose their two best offensive linemen, (Incognito and Wood) Beane elected to stay with his original plan of finding a franchise QB and shoring up the defense.  He would use a bandaid approach for the offensive line and the wide receivers group.  The result is, Buffalo has an near elite defense and an inept offense.  Josh Allen won't be a franchise caliber QB, or even a starting caliber QB this year.  He might even be deficient next year in some ways (though hopefully will make a quantum leap forward over this year.  So the negativity is rampant right now.  A lot of it is just noise that I just screan out.  I figure the Bills are going to struggle this year, then in the offseason, with Buffalo's dead cap money woes behind us, a huge amount of cap room to play with and plenty of draft capital, we should see major strides made next season:

 

Josh Allen will be better (I hope).  Buffalo should be able to sign a couple quality veteran offensive linemen and one quality #1 receiver.  I think  they will probably draft another receiver, offensive lineman and defensive end in the first three rounds of the 2019 draft.  That would be a significant infusion of talent for the offense.  I hold out hope that Wyatt Teller is developing and will be ready to start at guard next year too.  I think Buffalo will be adding a running back in the middle of the draft, and probably in free agency as well.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

34 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Because Brady wouldn't be protected back then like he is now, and he sure as hell wouldn't be playing at age 40, which was unheard of back then..  Most of these rules protecting QBs are for the sake of keeping Brady around, who draws viewers and is good for NFL ratings.

 

The rest of your post is pointless.

 

I know you've been watching football since Jim Thorpe and Red Grange, but I think my comments have more depth than your one opinion about how the game was harder then than it is now.

 

Nobody disputes that it was more violent for QBs back in the day, but I also don't think the skill level of those QBs was too high for the best of today. 

 

No way was there only one set of men tough enough to play under those rules and now Brees, Brady, Roethlisberger, Cam, Wilson, Ryan etc, would be utterly ineffective in 1982. 

 

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

Straight up blasphemy bro. You can't possibly believe that Wilson's (or any of the other dudes routinely tossing 4K plus these days) stats would be magically the same playing against the rules-enabled D's of Kelly's era--or do you think that Ken Norton Jr. wouldn't have been able to take out Wilson's knees like he did Kelly's in SB XXVII? The point being, in the league today it's almost arcade game like and/or comical, the way the league has consciously moved towards sugarcoating the offense, and QB's in particular, since Wilson burst on the scene. Just ask Clay Matthews which era he'd prefer to play in. When even guys like Roethlisberger or Rodgers are saying it's gone too far, I'd say it's gone too far. Wilson is a nice piece to have, would love to see him as our QB right now in fact, but don't ever categorically state that he would then automatically be better than any Bills QB who's ever suited up ("modern" era excepted).   

I've acknowledged the rules differences make a tangible difference bro. 

 

Kelly did play is a much more physical era. 

 

But Wilson has also played in an era where tape is instantaneous, where analytics break down tendencies, where he has come in and started 16 games every season and won a Super Bowl in his 2nd year. 

 

Wilson's numbers would assuredly drop back in 1990. Of course, agree. But he doesn't go from 64% Completion, 25 TDs, 9 Ints to out of the league in 1990 either. 

 

 

[Happy]

2 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

I know you've been watching football since Jim Thorpe and Red Grange, but I think my comments have more depth than your one opinion about how the game was harder then than it is now.

 

I'm not quite that old...LOL.  I do remember Joe Ferguson, Jim Plunkett, Dan Fouts, Ken Anderson and players going forward.

 

2 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Nobody disputes that it was more violent for QBs back in the day, but I also don't think the skill level of those QBs was too high for the best of today. 

 

No way was there only one set of men tough enough to play under those rules and now Brees, Brady, Roethlisberger, Cam, Wilson, Ryan etc, would be utterly ineffective in 1982. 

 

It's not about skill level, it's about the rules today.  Today's players are better athletes then back then, in general;  except for Jerry Rice who was the greatest WR of all time, all things considered, and in my opinion.  The point I'm trying to make is that today's QBs and WRs, especially, would not have the big numbers back then like they do today.  This is because the NFL actually let teams play defense back then.  Could those guys you mentioned have done well in 1988?  Quite possibly.  But they wouldn't have the career numbers they do and 300+ yards passing on average a game.  The rules today have catered to big offensive production because the NFL *thinks* it draws fans, and they want to protect Tom Brady.  You seem to be missing that point.

[CSBill]

3 hours ago, warrior9 said:

When you look at our team/FO/ etc, etc... They came in with a pile of you know what as a team. They came off of  Rex/ Whaley regime that strapped this team against the cap and left it talentless. They took that team to the play-offs with none of us expecting it (while completely gutting it in 1 year).... while trying to fix the cap issues. 

 

Say what you want about Beane and McDermott but those that refuse to see the cap as an issue of talent acquisition are simply not seeing the big picture..... money = ability to acquire high end talent and/ or system role players. Where did they spend the available money? Defense... and that defense (which is essentially all Beane and McDermott acquired players) is absolutely balling out. 

 

I think this coming off-season and draft are going to define this regime. They absolutely have to address the offense in every aspect. I do believe Daboll has called some absolutely atrocious games this year, yet we are still competing. I sincerely hope that his inability to call an effective NFL game does not hinder the growth of Josh Allen.

 

Think about where we are as a team and the cornerstones we have....

 

Seemingly top 3 secondary (with a second year CB that is most likely a future All-Pro)

A 20 year old stud at MLB (and Milano growing into a nice player)

A young DT that has played well above where he was drafted and has been very impressive

A left tackle that is young and improving with every game

A young first round QB (and this regime believes it's their guy)

80+ Million in cap space next year

10(i believe) draft picks

 

 

We have many many important pieces in place for a promising future..... I think we need to be patient and look for the growth of this team and players throughout the rest of this year. 

 

Just my .02....

 

When we step back and look at the big picture, totally agree.

 

But in the moment, the frustration of our offense causes all the anger. We'll be over it by Thursday.

Edited October 15, 2018 by CSBill

[SoCal Deek]

I posted this earlier.  Everyone wanted Allen to start...and so did I when the alternative was Peterman.  Now we have to live with the growing pains.  I believe that this is actually the IDEAL scenario. Allen has had a month to get a taste of the NFL.  He'll now get a few weeks off and be spared the embarrassment of going up against NE and Chicago.  After sitting for awhile and watching a veteran run the same Offense, he'll re-enter the line up for the last month of the season, rested and well schooled.  This season was never going anywhere and every knowledgeable Bills fan was ready for it.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

12 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

I'm not quite that old...LOL.  I do remember Joe Ferguson, Jim Plunkett, Dan Fouts, Ken Anderson and players going forward.

 

 

It's not about skill level, it's about the rules today.  Today's players are better athletes then back then, in general;  except for Jerry Rice who was the greatest WR of all time, all things considered, and in my opinion.  The point I'm trying to make is that today's QBs and WRs, especially, would not have the big numbers back then like they do today.  This is because the NFL actually let teams play defense back then.  Could those guys you mentioned have done well in 1988?  Quite possibly.  But they wouldn't have the career numbers they do and 300+ yards passing on average a game.  The rules today have catered to big offensive production because the NFL *thinks* it draws fans, and they want to protect Tom Brady.  You seem to be missing that point.

I'm not missing anything. 

I've 20x in this thread that of course, clutching, grabbing and no flags would bring down the statistics. 

 

But I also argue that Russell Wilson doesn't go from 3,900 yards, 64% completion, 25 TDs, 9 Ints and 99 Rating 

 

to

 

2,700 yards, 54% completion, 16 TDs, 18 Ints and a 72 rating just because he is getting hit more and his WRs are getting grabbed more. 

 

Yes, it's not video game numbers back then, but today's top QBs could slice and dice old defenses too. What intrinsically made Dan Marino much tougher than Phillip Rivers? Randall Cunningham is just tougher than Joe Flacco? Aaron Rodgers wouldn't have won with the 1989 49ers because he would have been hurt Game 1? 

 

Kahlil Mack wouldn't have been able to handle Anthony Munoz because he's used too a soft NFL. 

 

Rob Gronkowski would be useless against Ronnie Lott.  

[BobbyC81]

3 hours ago, DasNootz said:

The negativity comes from the fact that we're "Trusting the Process" that they will suddenly become good and pro-personnel scouting when we have the money to go out and spend... so far that hasn't been the case.  HOPEFULLY we have the nucleus to build around, but there are other teams  including the Jets in our own division that will have  a lot of money to spend this year too, so we will still have to persuade or overspend to get FAs in the door.  If Allen can show something more than 100 yards per week down the stretch, maybe the persuasion would be a little more likely.

 

Their pro personnel scouting has been questionable.  Although the trade of a fourth round pick for Benjamin seemed to be a good one, they didn't seem to investigate the reasons Carolina was willing to deal him.  Same with Corey Coleman.

 

Star Lotulelei was rated as one of the worst DTs last season, yet they gave him a big free agent contract.

[Happy]

5 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

I'm not missing anything. 

I've 20x in this thread that of course, clutching, grabbing and no flags would bring down the statistics. 

 

But I also argue that Russell Wilson doesn't go from 3,900 yards, 64% completion, 25 TDs, 9 Ints and 99 Rating 

 

to

 

2,700 yards, 54% completion, 16 TDs, 18 Ints and a 72 rating just because he is getting hit more and his WRs are getting grabbed more. 

 

Yes, it's not video game numbers back then, but today's top QBs could slice and dice old defenses too. What intrinsically made Dan Marino much tougher than Phillip Rivers? Randall Cunningham is just tougher than Joe Flacco? Aaron Rodgers wouldn't have won with the 1989 49ers because he would have been hurt Game 1? 

 

Kahlil Mack wouldn't have been able to handle Anthony Munoz because he's used too a soft NFL. 

 

Rob Gronkowski would be useless against Ronnie Lott.  

 

Russell Wilson would go from running around to laying on a stretcher back then.

Today's QBs might have some success, assuming they were kept upright - yesterday's QBs took violent hits, not like the "don't put your body weight on them" sacks of today.

You forget that the WRs wouldn't have had the same rules protecting them back then, either.  They were hit at the LOS and there wasn't all the ticky tack pass interference then like there are today.  The numbers wouldn't have been so big, and they weren't if you go back and look.

Kahlil Mack (and pass rushers in general) would have done better back then - fewer rules on their play.  Bruce Smith's sack record will never be broken because of this.

Gronk would have suffered more concussions and would have been beaten to a pulp for the crap he pulled against Tre last year, back then.

[BobbyC81]

1 hour ago, TheBrownBear said:

Getting back to the OP, I am finally coming to grips that what you are seeing on this board is one of the following:

 

1) A board littered with at least a double digit number of trolls (who are doing a fine job btw); 

2) A board with a majority pre-teen membership; or

3) A board littered with mouth breathing imbeciles. 

 

You forgot:   4) All of the above.

Edited October 15, 2018 by LittleJoeCartwright

[Straight Hucklebuck]

1 minute ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Russell Wilson would go from running around to laying on a stretcher back then.

Today's QBs might have some success, assuming they were kept upright - yesterday's QBs took violent hits, not like the "don't put your body weight on them" sacks of today.

You forget that the WRs wouldn't have had the same rules protecting them back then, either.  They were hit at the LOS and there wasn't all the ticky tack pass interference then like there are today.  The numbers wouldn't have been so big, and they weren't if you go back and look.

Kahlil Mack (and pass rushers in general) would have done better back then - fewer rules on their play.  Bruce Smith's sack record will never be broken because of this.

Gronk would have suffered more concussions and would have been beaten to a pulp for the crap he pulled against Tre last year, back then.

 

Didn't forget anything, the post you are quoting references "clutching and grabbing". 

 

We get it - more physical in 1985 than 2018.

 

But the athletes are even better now because its Year Around training aided by science. 

 

Julio Jones is good in 1984. 

 

If Mark Bavarro was solid 1988, then Gronk at 6'6" 270 would be too. 

 

Just because you got hit more back then, doesn't mean today's players "couldn't take it". 

 

Phillip Rivers would take the punishment and get up just like Boomer Esiason did after a Bruce Smith sack. 

 

I agree his numbers would be lower, but I don't think Steve Young was tougher than Andrew Luck just because he played in 1993 as opposed to 2014. 

[Dr. Who]

48 minutes ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

Their pro personnel scouting has been questionable.  Although the trade of a fourth round pick for Benjamin seemed to be a good one, they didn't seem to investigate the reasons Carolina was willing to deal him.  Same with Corey Coleman.

 

Star Lotulelei was rated as one of the worst DTs last season, yet they gave him a big free agent contract.

3rd round pick for Benjamin. Pro personnel evaluation is an issue. Offensive player and coach evaluation in general, though I like Allen in spite of the growing pains.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

1 minute ago, Dr. Who said:

3rd round pick for Benjamin. Pro personnel evaluation is an issue. Offensive player and coach evaluation in general, though I like Allen in spite of the growing pains.

What has Allen done that makes you like him?

 

 

[Dr. Who]

1 minute ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

What has Allen done that makes you like him?

 

 

I was one of the few who liked him before the draft. I factored in the probable need for a redshirt year. If OBD had a decent veteran, he wouldn't have been thrown to the wolves with a porous oline, not very good wr corps, etc. I'm not shocked he's struggling early. I stand by my initial view that he has the talent, intelligence, and character to eventually grow into a solid qb. Fine if you don't agree.

[VW82]

I agree there's a lot to like about what McD has done with this team. I'm still a believer. 

 

However, most fans care about two things more than everything else put together: the coach and QB. Our coach hand picked our QB, and right now that QB looks like the worst player in all of football (except for maybe his back up who was also hand picked by the coach). It's only natural there will be some backlash.

 

We need to give this team until end of next year to know what we have. Given what we've seen so far, my guess is that we'll have a pretty good, playoff caliber team on our hands. Our defense is already there. But it all comes back to Allen. If McD whiffed on that kid, none of it matters and we'll be on to the next coach.  

Edited October 15, 2018 by VW82

[NoHuddleKelly12]

33 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

What has Allen done that makes you like him?

 

 

(1) He appears to give a crap, which so many of his predecessors through their body language alone, did not; (2) his ceiling in terms of his raw physical QB tools are off the charts, highest probably ever for a Bill; (3) His leadership quotient, intangibles are clearly present in how he commands the huddle, interacts with his D teammates, revs up the crowd; (3) Ability to bounce back mentally from bad throws, hits (extent of current injury unknown, notwithstanding); (4) Work ethic; (5) Moves athletically very similar to Steve Young; (5) "Minnesota Leap" shows he is willing to lay it out for his team and take advantage of the pieces around him clicking; (6) Despite missing some progressions as part of his rookie development, he has been able to hit his WR's on target plenty of times, but suffers from a targets to drops ratio of over 11% and otherwise all around poor anemic WR play (basement of the league bad). Take away the endemic drops, and he's on track. (7) He offers HOPE given the complete package. Let me flip the table and simply state that we haven't seen enough or surrounded him with sufficient resources to be able to write him off as the 2nd coming of Todd Collins. And all of this without the benefit of a proven QB mentor or capable OC in his corner to help him along, unlike these guys who might sound familiar: http://www.espn.com/blog/san-francisco-49ers/post/_/id/32623/sitting-behind-a-legendary-quarterback-means-learning-from-the-best   

Edited October 15, 2018 by NoHuddleKelly12

[ColoradoBills]

11 minutes ago, In Nate We Trust said:

The Bills are 2-4 and the schedule gets a lot easier with a ton of home games.  Playoffs still a real shot. They beat Indy and they easily could be 9-7 or even 10-6. Go Bills.

 

...........and Nate Peterman is leading the Bills there, right.

[Helpmenow]

Kinda sick of rebuilding for the past twenty years

[Helpmenow]

One year

[NoHuddleKelly12]

5 minutes ago, Helpmenow said:

Kinda sick of rebuilding for the past twenty years

I understand. I try to compartmentalize the regimes so that I don't always have to think about the previous ones failing. And remember that at the end of the day whether they win or lose will not change the course of my life (or yours) or even the weekend for that matter--other than Sunday afternoons. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Do the words 

 

fair and weather ring a bell.  

 

? 

 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

3 hours ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

(1) He appears to give a crap, which so many of his predecessors through their body language alone, did not; (2) his ceiling in terms of his raw physical QB tools are off the charts, highest probably ever for a Bill; (3) His leadership quotient, intangibles are clearly present in how he commands the huddle, interacts with his D teammates, revs up the crowd; (3) Ability to bounce back mentally from bad throws, hits (extent of current injury unknown, notwithstanding); (4) Work ethic; (5) Moves athletically very similar to Steve Young; (5) "Minnesota Leap" shows he is willing to lay it out for his team and take advantage of the pieces around him clicking; (6) Despite missing some progressions as part of his rookie development, he has been able to hit his WR's on target plenty of times, but suffers from a targets to drops ratio of over 11% and otherwise all around poor anemic WR play (basement of the league bad). Take away the endemic drops, and he's on track. (7) He offers HOPE given the complete package. Let me flip the table and simply state that we haven't seen enough or surrounded him with sufficient resources to be able to write him off as the 2nd coming of Todd Collins. And all of this without the benefit of a proven QB mentor or capable OC in his corner to help him along, unlike these guys who might sound familiar: http://www.espn.com/blog/san-francisco-49ers/post/_/id/32623/sitting-behind-a-legendary-quarterback-means-learning-from-the-best   

(1) Fitzpatrick really cared about this team and this area. Tyrod Taylor was a consummate professional.

 

(2) Size, Arm - The main reason he was drafted. 

 

(3) Okay, pumping up the crowd. 

 

(3) Okay

 

(4) Does Josh Allen's work ethic tangibly set him apart from any other starting QB, or top tier QB's in the league?

 

(5) Alright, runs in a manner that reminds you of Steve Young. 

 

(5) Yes, the Minnesota leap was hyper-athletic from a QB. 

 

(6) Okay drops of 11% of 25ish throws a game, means 2 more completions a game, nudging him. That's 85/139 instead of 75/139, 61% verses 54%.

 

(7) Hope mixed with not enough Coordinator/Coach help. This reminds me of 2013 EJ Manuel - Marrone was a rookie HC with Nate Hackett was a rookie OC, doubling as the QB Coach, EJ had to compete against UDRFA Jeff Tuel and Practice Squad journeyman Thad Lewis after Cardinals burnout Kevin Kolb slipped on a wet mat.  

 

For me the early returns are exactly what the Scouting Reports said he would be. 

 

I want him to keep playing. If its 82 yards, just keep playing. With EJ, had the Bills seen enough at the end of 2013 to know he wasn't the answer, they could have drafted Derek Carr or Bridgewater and been on their way. Instead another wasted year in 2014 with the Bills trading up for Watkins to help Manuel and that experiment lasted all of four games. 

 

The last thing I want to see is Allen getting pulled, putting in Anderson to eat games, then putting Allen in for 2019 after spending FA money and draft picks, just to get 5 games in and he can't play, gets pulled again. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Straight Hucklebuck

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

The truth is that it is depressing to have your team's season over by the end of October. Over 40+ years that many of us have been fans, we have seen this type of ineptitude for over 30 of these years. I've witnessed bad Bills teams with no chance at the playoffs at least 35 times in my life. I've seen great Bills teams 5 times and good Bills playoff teams 4-6 times. That's 75% of our football life wasted on crappy teams that are losers. Most of us are sick of it and long for something to cheer for. 

 

We thought we turned the corner with Marrone only to dive back in the hole with Rex. We thought the McBeane team was going to be competitive, only to see the horror show they trot out on offense. It's virtually unwatchable football, yet as a true Bills fan you tune into the torture no matter what every week, every year, over and over and over. We deserve something better than what we are seeing this year.

[MJS]

The offense is really bad. That's why people are negative.

[Bing Bong]

Listen I just fundamentally don't give a crap about the big picture. I care about enjoying Sundays, and let the big picture be Beane's job. I love the Bills and a good hard fought win. And we're clearly going places because we are already capable of it with at least a rudimentary offense. And we're in a position to have a better than rudimentary offense. And i'm looking forward fast forwarding 8 months.

 

I'm just impatient.

[Augie]

7 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

 Listen I just fundamentally don't give a crap about the big picture. I care about enjoying Sundays, and let the big picture be Beane's job. I love the Bills and a good hard fought win. And we're clearly going places because we are already capable of it with at least a rudimentary offense. And we're in a position to have a better than rudimentary offense. And i'm looking forward fast forwarding 8 months.

 

I'm just impatient.

 

Is this your approach to family and the work front as well? Kinda frightening. 

[Ol Dirty B]

11 hours ago, warrior9 said:

Exactly.... 

 

here's my thought... If you explain this to a person WITHOUT using a team name.. People would love to be in this situation.

 

Seemingly top 3 secondary (with a second year CB that is most likely a future All-Pro)

A 20 year old stud at MLB (and Milano growing into a nice player)

A young DT that has played well above where he was drafted and has been very impressive

A left tackle that is young and improving with every game

A young first round QB (and this regime believes it's their guy)

80+ Million in cap space next year

10(i believe) draft picks

 

 

 

No Oline, trading Glenn because Dawkins can play tackle also

The QB situation

No WR's for a year and a half

The Benjamin trade

Ths best offensive play maker and athlete being a 30 year old RB

Building the team the way they appear to.

 

Good defense, and awful offense constructed around the run for 2 years now. Coming in and effing up the run game.

 

For as well as they have done defensively, and we'll see if it is sustainable. They have offset that by mismanaging the offense and at an amazing clip.

 

I just look at the offense and they don't even have athletes at skill positions outside of McCoy and Allen. Everyone else is average to below average by NFL standards. I don't want to watch an offense of 5'11 4.6 guys, not at all. Hopefully the offense improves, but it is totally reasonable to question their ability.

 

They have only torn down on the offense and not done anything to build at all outside of Dawkins and Allen. And Allen is very much a question mark going forward.

 

[Bing Bong]

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Is this your approach to family and the work front as well? Kinda frightening. 

No because my family and work aren't entertainment. I'm annoyed we suck literally my only off day to unwind. And i'll be EXTREMELY annoyed if Beane is going nowhere with this. But I have no control over it, so until then I root for winning the Superbowl because I'm watching my favorite team in my favorite sport.

 

I have control over my family and work front, I don't over a commercia league run by billionaires and star athletes and millionaire GMS.

[BobbyC81]

3 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

 

I want him to keep playing. If its 82 yards, just keep playing. With EJ, had the Bills seen enough at the end of 2013 to know he wasn't the answer, they could have drafted Derek Carr or Bridgewater and been on their way. Instead another wasted year in 2014 with the Bills trading up for Watkins to help Manuel and that experiment lasted all of four games. 

 

 

Well, unfortunately for Raiders fans, Carr has regressed badly.  Rappoport was talking about players on trading block and I was surprised he mentioned Carr.   I guess Gruden likes McCarron.  Carr though was ready to play when he joined the NFL. Unfortunately for us, Allen is not.

[Fadingpain]

12 hours ago, Stank_Nasty said:

I totally get it..... but some moves should be weighted more than others. their decisions for the qb spots since training camp have been atrocious. Peterman taking anymore snaps is inexcusable. 

 

I like most of whats been done. I absolutely hate how they've handled the qb's.

Are QBs important in the game of football?

 

 

[Nihilarian]

While I like the OPs optimism it's very difficult for most fans to see considering that Texans game was very winnable...and yet it was lost by the backup QB who was the supposed starter going into the season. 

 

We Bills fans have seen this offensive ineptitude with Chan Gailey in that he states that QBs Ryan Fitzpatrick, Trent Edwards and Brian Brohm are all about equal and any one could emerge as the starter in preseason. Gailey named Edwards the starter and he was so terrible he was outright cut after two starts. Fitz took over and literally ran for his life the first half of the 0-8 2010 season.  Brohm got his shot and he was worse then Edwards. 

 

The point here is that Gailey couldn't tell jack **** about any of the QB's watching them in practice and it looks like Daboll is in the very same boat. The big difference is that Gailey could actually setup a functioning offense with not much to go with. Although he never did better then 6-10 in Buffalo primarily because of bad defenses. He did manage to allow Fitz to become a 3000+ yard passer, Stevie Johnson a 1000+ yard receiver and Spiller a 1200+ yard rusher. 

 

My take is the primary problem with the offense is the OC in Brian Daboll who has never had an offense better than top 25 with many different QBs. Juan Castillo the run game coordinator/line coach is another problem with that offensive line/run game that isn't anywhere near as good as it's been the last few seasons.   

 

The way this coaching staff has bungled the QB situation is difficult for Bills fans to deal with as Allen was supposed to sit and learn like Mahomes. Now because Peterman is so bad they might have to start the rookie with an injury which could end up ruining this players career. All that effort to move up to the #7 spot might be wasted.

 

This season didn't need to be a rebuild year "if" only a proper experienced veteran QB had been on the roster day one. The offensive line and WR corps were better and lastly the offense being the worst in the NFL because the OC didn't utilize the offenses best player in McCoy for a lot of the season. 

[Trogdor]

18 hours ago, sleeby said:

OP - I think it's ego and testosterone based mainly.  The odds that any given rookie QB will become a major franchise QB and see SBs is well under 50% - obviously.  So, going in early and trashing him is the safe bet for future 'told ya so" and generally I'm more NFL knowledged than you.

 

No one can predict anything after 5 games with this offense.  Just a bunch of boys who like pissing matches is all.  Very annoying though.

 

Or maybe some of us watch college football and realized he wasn't that good. He was completely shut down against quality opponents, and nothing has changed. When he misses, it isn't even close and there doesn't seem to be any improvement on his footwork. Add to that his tendency to roll to the sides instead of step up and you get poor play. 

[May Day 10]

Watching beazley or whatever his name is and the 49er offense put 30 up on the packers last night hurt my soul

[row_33]

7 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

Are QBs important in the game of football?

 

 

 

Some teams think a RB and D are all that matters, sadly 

 

only 40 years out of touch with success