1990's Buffalo Bills Appreciation Thread

[Shallow]

I will never forget that game against the Bills, Bo Jackson was a beast, but was taken out the week before against the Bengals. To this day, I feel that had the Raiders had Bo Jackson, they would have won the whole damn thing that year. True story, the Bo Jackson Raiders were better than the Buffalo Bills. I will never let it die, and I will be honest, as a lifelong Raider fan, I still hold on to that like I still hold on to the Tuck Rule and that fat fuck Tony Siragusa's foul on Rich Gannon. Don't debate me, just know I still hold on to that Raiders/Bills game and say "only if Bo Jackson was there."

I will never forget that Bills game....that shit was fuckin terrible. I hated the Bills for so long after that game lol. And yeah, having Bo would have made a huge difference. People forget just how good he was. He was basically Steven Jacksons power mixed with Chris Johnsons ellusiveness. I remember somebody telling the story about how at Halftime, the Raiders were down 41-3. And Tim Brown stands up trying to get the team pumped up saying..."They scored 41 points in the first half....we can go out there and score 41 in the second!", and everybody just lookin at him like...wtf...lol

Huge difference? So what then? The score would have been 35-17 Bills instead of 51-3? Bo has a some great highlights but dude was splitting time with Allen and Allen didn't do shit in that game. You guys are letting the nostalgia of your youth get the better of you. Too bad the 85 Pats didn't have Bo, because they may have beaten the Bears. C'mon now. I watched and loved Pro-Stars too but the Raiders would have been as likely to win that game with Bo holding the rock as they would with Gretzky holing it. At least Gretz can play in cold weather.

I said huge difference. I didnt say they would win. You ok?

In my defense, you were agreeing with an M Dogg post that stated the Raiders would have won the game with Bo. Forgive me.

[M Dogg™]

As I said, in my eyes, it was like the Tuck Rule, the Immaculate reception. Doesn't mean my opinion is right, it's just me being an Al Davis level Raider fan. Let me just have this for me, if Bo was there, we would have won. Don't argue me, just let me be in my ignorance bliss.

[M Dogg™]

Side note: I know for sure we could have won with Bo because in Tecmo Bowl, I would score 50 points with Bo by the half.

[Shallow]

As I said, in my eyes, it was like the Tuck Rule, the Immaculate reception. Doesn't mean my opinion is right, it's just me being an Al Davis level Raider fan. Let me just have this for me, if Bo was there, we would have won. Don't argue me, just let me be in my ignorance bliss.

I know, I was just teasing.

But you're right about the tuck; Brady had finished the throw and the tuck back to the body with one arm, and when he was hot the second hand was already by the ball in a stance any QB would have before making an attempt. The tuck rule is in place to protect the ball from QBs that can't hold onto it in pump fakes. Actually it's to protect the ball from a fumble when a QB decides against a throw and instead looks for another WR. In Brady's case he had made the attempt to throw, decided against, and re-established himself completely when the Raider hit him. Had he never pump faked, he would have still fumbled. This was a clear sack, strip, fumble, and the refs will never say they got it wrong because in doing so they'd admit that a dynasty never should have happened.

Tom Brady's career would have ended if the refs called it right, and I knew that long before I started hating Brady. Bledsoe would have not been traded that year, and would have started the next year, or at the very least would have gotten the job back after the 4 straight losses in October. I'd imagine that if Brady started in 02 he would have been benched after the Green Bay game before the bye and Drew would have finished out the season. Brady would have been cut, because no trade would be offered, and Bledsoe would have ended his career with back to back Superbowls. They probably would have drafted a QB in between 02 and 04 or traded for a back up to be Bledsoe's replacement.

Tommy boy would have held clipboards and come in off the bench on teams like Buffalo, the Jets, or the Cardinals for the next few years and he'd have been at home by now, like his more successful in college teammate Brian Griese ended up.

[.:DaYg0sTyLz:.]

As I said, in my eyes, it was like the Tuck Rule, the Immaculate reception. Doesn't mean my opinion is right, it's just me being an Al Davis level Raider fan. Let me just have this for me, if Bo was there, we would have won. Don't argue me, just let me be in my ignorance bliss.

I know, I was just teasing.

But you're right about the tuck; Brady had finished the throw and the tuck back to the body with one arm, and when he was hot the second hand was already by the ball in a stance any QB would have before making an attempt. The tuck rule is in place to protect the ball from QBs that can't hold onto it in pump fakes. Actually it's to protect the ball from a fumble when a QB decides against a throw and instead looks for another WR. In Brady's case he had made the attempt to throw, decided against, and re-established himself completely when the Raider hit him. Had he never pump faked, he would have still fumbled. This was a clear sack, strip, fumble, and the refs will never say they got it wrong because in doing so they'd admit that a dynasty never should have happened.

Wrong. It was to protect the Patriots from missing the Superbowl. 

[Shallow]

As I said, in my eyes, it was like the Tuck Rule, the Immaculate reception. Doesn't mean my opinion is right, it's just me being an Al Davis level Raider fan. Let me just have this for me, if Bo was there, we would have won. Don't argue me, just let me be in my ignorance bliss.

I know, I was just teasing.

But you're right about the tuck; Brady had finished the throw and the tuck back to the body with one arm, and when he was hot the second hand was already by the ball in a stance any QB would have before making an attempt. The tuck rule is in place to protect the ball from QBs that can't hold onto it in pump fakes. Actually it's to protect the ball from a fumble when a QB decides against a throw and instead looks for another WR. In Brady's case he had made the attempt to throw, decided against, and re-established himself completely when the Raider hit him. Had he never pump faked, he would have still fumbled. This was a clear sack, strip, fumble, and the refs will never say they got it wrong because in doing so they'd admit that a dynasty never should have happened.

Wrong. It was to protect the Patriots from missing the Superbowl. 

That's why they used the tuck rule in that case. I'm talking about why it was invented in the place, and what it was meant for and what Brady did was not the same thing. Personally I think it's a BS rule, because if a QB with big hands wants to ensure he doesn't ever take sack in pressure all he has to do is keep pump faking it and let go of the ball as he gets hit, because it'll be a called an incomplete pass everytime. I actually hope someone does that once, gets sacked 8 times for a fumble, and have it called back and with no yards lost, just so they review the rule and change it. But Brady wasn't tucking, the ball was already tucked when he was hit and stripped.

[.:DaYg0sTyLz:.]

As I said, in my eyes, it was like the Tuck Rule, the Immaculate reception. Doesn't mean my opinion is right, it's just me being an Al Davis level Raider fan. Let me just have this for me, if Bo was there, we would have won. Don't argue me, just let me be in my ignorance bliss.

I know, I was just teasing.

But you're right about the tuck; Brady had finished the throw and the tuck back to the body with one arm, and when he was hot the second hand was already by the ball in a stance any QB would have before making an attempt. The tuck rule is in place to protect the ball from QBs that can't hold onto it in pump fakes. Actually it's to protect the ball from a fumble when a QB decides against a throw and instead looks for another WR. In Brady's case he had made the attempt to throw, decided against, and re-established himself completely when the Raider hit him. Had he never pump faked, he would have still fumbled. This was a clear sack, strip, fumble, and the refs will never say they got it wrong because in doing so they'd admit that a dynasty never should have happened.

Wrong. It was to protect the Patriots from missing the Superbowl. 

That's why they used the tuck rule in that case. I'm talking about why it was invented in the place, and what it was meant for and what Brady did was not the same thing. Personally I think it's a BS rule, because if a QB with big hands wants to ensure he doesn't ever take sack in pressure all he has to do is keep pump faking it and let go of the ball as he gets hit, because it'll be a called an incomplete pass everytime. I actually hope someone does that once, gets sacked 8 times for a fumble, and have it called back and with no yards lost, just so they review the rule and change it. But Brady wasn't tucking, the ball was already tucked when he was hit and stripped.

I gotcha.