GaryPinC

Making a guy play out the last year of his contract is considered a form of insult to the players. There are so many ways to structure a contract, it is definitely the wise move. Freddy has never been unreasonable with his demands, either. He's a class act and deserves to be treated that way even if he hits the wall and he doesn't earn his money that year. He deserves that respect.

If the Bills are smart they'll treat him like he is and take care of it in the offseason.

He's immature, but forget about the kids thing. It's the beginning of his second year. What was CJ Spiller doing his second year? Having fans declare him a bust, right? I think Trent will have a good year for the Colts. I've seen him play and I think he's got talent. He's had to learn two new offenses in two years and now 3 in less than 2 years. I'm less than impressed with Banner and the GM but will reserve judgment until after 2014 season. As far as Weeden, he threw some great balls in preseason and is also learning his second offense in two years. He has a sprained thumb and I don't get why all of a sudden he's a condemned man. Just me I guess.

I haven't seen Trent this year but last year he looked damn good. I don't get this trade, he's second year. I do think the Browns see him as a big injury risk, I wonder if he's got a drug suspension in the works? I don't think much of their front office yet and they might turn out to be a train wreck. Time will tell.

You've gone to a bearded, middle-aged frog with ribbon-like ears????? Oy.

Chicago planners did an amazing job with their lakefront space. But is that stadium really what draws people down there? I've been to the park and museums 3 times, stadium was always shuttered and never cared. Cleveland's museum area has festivals, extras and is a good draw. No stadium there. If Soldier field were instead located 1/4-1/2 mile straight west of its current locale would that cultural and parks area fall on its face?

Have you been reading The Onion?

I've lived here in Cleveland for over 20 years and and still don't know what you're talking about. That area around the stadium hasn't changed much since the rock hall and science museum got built years ago. I agree that it's better the stadium is built downtown but not on the lake. The stadium, rock hall, and science museum are pretty isolated with the port authority loading docks to the immediate west and north of the stadium. To the east is Burke-Lakefront airport which kills any further development in that area. To the south is the highway and rail lines. The most they've done is develop the Voinovich park area north of the rock hall but that's just a park. They are trying to turn the west shoreway into a boulevard but the loading docks are going nowhere so there's little usable, expandable waterfront areas right there. But the bottom line is that Cleveland Browns stadium is there simply because it has been for a long time. It will play no significant role in any development in that area. It simply doesn't get used enough. Put a stadium downtown with proximity to the waterfront but not right on it. It's a waste of your waterfront space.

Seriously? Have you actually been down there and inside Cleveland Stadium? If you are way up in the nosebleeds and on the corners you can get a bit of a lake view but otherwise it's like any other stadium. The endzones are parallel to the lake so you really don't get much of any view. The wind in Cleveland is seldom like the winds in Buffalo, even next to the lake. There are not lots of restaurants down there, no stand alone ones I can think of. The rock and roll hall of fame and science museum are what bring people down there, and other than a couple special events, that's about it. The area is cut off from the main city by the shoreway (highway) and the rail lines. The stadium spends the majority of the time shuttered until football season rolls around. It's a basic NFL stadium not some multibillion football and entertainment complex. There's also a lot of port authority docks and buildings on 2 sides of the stadium for that "industrial look".

1987 was a rebuilding year too. Team finished 7-8

I think Brandon taking over and becoming the face of this franchise was most to do with the resurgence of head coaching interest. I am with you that it is interesting to know that the wheels were already in motion in January but not surprising looking back.

Considering all Leach's other quarterbacks (add Graham Harrel to the list) have failed despite a lot of hype from Leach himself, maybe this Tuel is the real deal.

It makes sense if it allows you to re-open negotiations so you can sign the contract the day after the regular season ends.

Yea, there are a number of reasons to temper our enthusiasm, thanks for posting this. It's a good first step, certainly better than watching our preseason offense struggle to execute like they did under Chan, but we have a long way to go. Definitely reasons to be positive but let's give it more time before getting the train rolling.

The Bills never really seemed that interested in signing Levitre. After watching them pay good money to the likes of Chris Kelsay partially because of his locker room presence, I was suspicious about the way they treated Levitre. I'm in the camp of people who think they had real concerns about the long term durability of his knee.

Not necessarily. Seattle Seahawks are the best example of a franchise that wouldn't rest until they found the right quarterback. And they're still not resting: http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2013/04/09/seahawks-annouce-deal-with-quarterback-brady-quinn/ Also resigned Tavaris Jackson. Remember Matt Flynn was supposed to be the man for them coming out of Green Bay? Let's just hope Whaley and Marrone understand this and it'll be ok.

I think the issue will be if/when the NFL knew of the danger of concussions and covered it up, as the tobacco industry did with their own internal studies. When did the NFL have conclusive evidence and when did they first start warning and taking safety steps? From my reading the true danger isn't the concussion but the vulnerability of the brain to permanent injury while still recovering from a concussion. It seems to me this evidence hasn't been known for very long (5, maybe 10 years?). I just don't think the players from 10+ years ago will get an award here, but if the NFL covered stuff up then maybe.

Well stated yourself in filling out the rest of the story. Congrats on your daughter and basketball. My girl is 10 and athletic at a lot of things so I get a lot of eyerolls also . My son is 7 and is a total middle linebacker, if he gets the football he gives it to someone else and then proceeds to tackle them. Just signed him up for tackle football, never bothered with flag because he would have been too upset not being allowed to hit anyone. But kids deserve to have experiences and choices so I ignore the coaches/eyerolls.

I disagree with you because as a parent of a 7 and 10 year old I have a different perspective. Sports are turning much more into a regimented development, squeezing out the spontaneous street and casual games of years ago. Gordio's post on page 3 also gives a pretty good perspective on what sports is like for kids these days. I'm 43 and when I was a kid neighborhood contests along with recreational league games were the norm. We played a lot of different sports in the neighborhood, 1 maybe 2 in a league. There were also some travel teams but that was about it. Kids sports these days are much more structured with recreational leagues, step up to select or travel teams, and finally pay $1000+/year to have your kid on a club team. Coaching at the rec league generally sucks and the rec leagues have taken the place of the neighborhood contests, just for fun with little pressure to win. Select/travel puts the emphasis to win with better coaching but not quite the commitment of a club team. Club teams pay their coaches and are very rigorous on the kids, not much about fun at this level. Any decent coach at the rec league level generally goes to select or club. Parents shuttle their kids to 1-6 sports and it's very taxing. Parents hire personal coaches (hitting, pitching) or go to sports camps if their kid has an interest. Sports these days is all about having your kids experience them in an organized rec league and develop them up the ladder if they show the interest and ability. Youth sports is becoming a money industry and will only get bigger as many parents such as myself feel that sports help develop kids for real life. There are even track teams and meets for grade school kids! I limit my kids to one sport at a time so they can play 3 different ones in a year, but other parents can be much more demanding. Coaches of travel and club teams all tell the parents that all the high school players came through their system and if you want your kid to play high school/college you'd better sign up. As a parent, it's great to be able to find a large number of organized sports for your child to try. It's also good to know I can find the organizations and expertise to develop my child if they really have an interest/ability in a particular sport. But it is sad that a lot of the spontaneity, curiosity, and bonding that comes from kids teaching each other sports on the street has been mostly lost. But make no mistake: youth sports has become a business that will only keep expanding for now and I highly doubt that pro sports will be dying even in the next 40 years.

I'm with you on this.

Just because it's changing doesn't mean it's going to die. It'll be interesting to see how successful they are with the lawsuit. Here in Ohio, state law says all coaches in any sport now have to be certified in recognizing concussions. Training was a joke but if a kid on your team shows any signs you must remove them, fill out the proper form, and they cannot play the rest of the day and until they get a doctor's note clearing them to play again. My daughter recently had a softball game where a girl got hit just above the eve with a thrown ball. Huge knot, she toughed it out but was a little dizzy and woozy at times during the game. None of the coaches ever considered whether she should be playing. I told the parents they were lucky because if I was coaching she would be out. They listened but didn't care much, all they cared was that their girl was tough, she's also the catcher and took a foul ball off the side of her mask! It's tough to change a mentality, but I don't think the NFL will be as liable as people think. It will come down to when there was enough credible evidence and how did the league handle this? And in a worst case scenario, liability didn't kill the tobacco industry did it?

Too bad they didn't trade him back instead of cutting!

Yea, nowhere near probing enough and you docs don't limit yourselves to one side <cough>.

Let's not forget that the players also agreed to the CBA. Rookie salaries were ballooning upwards and unproven rookies were reaping blind rewards limiting the salary pool for seasoned veterans. Everybody agreed to the system. Byrd has proven his value. For Parker to claim Byrd could or should have been paid more the last couple of seasons is BS. He gets paid now and for the future. That's how the system works. But it's on the Bills' negotiators to deal with Parker's opinions.

Agree completely. Fantastic article. Thanks Tim.