Lets see what the media thinks about the 3-3 Buffalo Bills:
"Revis Island was a lonely place. Sammy Watkins had career lows in
catches (two) and targets (three) Sunday, but the Vikings' defense
should be good for a bounce-back performance."
Someone watched the game or at least the stats and the schedule. A small three spot drop.
"The new owner got off to a tough start with a bad home loss. They just aren't good enough to beat the Patriots."
Pegula crack back and a true statement with a three spot drop seems appropriate.
"So much for the Bills being competitive."
"Fielded many complaints about Buffalo being too low in
last week's Power Rankings, but the thought here was that the club reached (and knee-jerked) with
-- and, generally, was not playing all that well. Well, the offense
does look better with Orton under center. But while I understand gripes
Bills being lower than the
(both of whom Buffalo beat), both of those teams won in convincing
fashion Sunday and are still better at pro football's most important
position -- quarterback. What we need to see from
Doug Marrone's team is
consistency, even if it is just for two games in a row."
You know someone messed up a week ago if you move up a spot after a bad home L.
"Like the Cordarrelle Patterson situation, the Bills are well aware how
many touches they give to C.J. Spiller. And at some point, you have to
wonder what's wrong with Spiller that the Bills don't want to involve
Good question, I'd add Watkins.
"What I wrote last week: "I have a feeling that Buffalo fans will be the
next group of people to flood my comment board now that the Cincinnati
backers have been silenced."
Sure enough, Buffalo backers pounced on the comment board below even
though I picked the Bills both in Weeks 5 and 6. Buffalo ended up
costing me four units, but the silver lining is that the team's annoying
homers can shut up until the team's next bogus victory."
U Mad Bro? Why would you bet on the Bills when you are such a hater?
Highest 16, lowest 24, pretty boring week