Alphadawg7

Bills might be facing a tough decision heading into 2025 if Cook has another good year this year. Cook will be on the final year of his deal in 2025...so do you think if he keeps playing at a high level they commit to him with an extension or do you think they avoid having an expensive RB and either try and trade him or just let him walk in FA?

I think I would phrase it different… They hit a grand slam with Allen and I would say they have several home runs on the roster too. I think the thing is more they haven’t hit another grand slam, drafting that elite impact player that is one of the best players on their side of the ball in the league. Kincaid though has the potential to be (I won’t include anyone from this draft class since they haven’t taken a snap yet). There are a lot of guys I would say fall into the triples or home run category on the roster between their on field performance vs draft slots. Taron for example is a home run IMHO.

I never changed the topic because I never commented to you or things you said. I joined a side convo where there was discussion of real estate vs index funds on why I think people should do both. Then you decided to start commenting at me under your previous context even though none of my posts were directed at you or what you had previously proposed. But since you brought it back to your original thoughts, technically all I’m discussing is really a 3rd option where a player does both…rent and buy. Now it’s ok that you don’t agree with me on the 3rd option, but my part of this convo was never directed at you or your original comments. But given you have brought the two discussions together multiple times now, I will say it’s not only a viable 3rd option to your original 2, but also a great option to both preserve and grow newfound wealth for these rookies. For example, If Chris gamble would have done it 20 years ago as the 28th pick in the 2004 draft, his assets and portfolio would be almost double the gross value (even before agents and taxes) of his entire 5 year rookie contract today with permanent significant monthly income for life. So feel free to dismiss it or disagree with it, that’s fine, but doesn’t change the fact that a young player getting early assets as a rookie into long term holdings could literally set him up for life after football. And as an investment property, it doesn’t have to be KC, it can be anywhere they feel best about.

I don’t know, it’s not 20 years later. And when it’s an investment property you can buy anywhere, not just KC.

It takes more than physical traits to make it in the NFL. This isn’t the kind of start you want to see from your first round WR if I am KC. Keon is not only physically gifted, he has all those other qualities that you can’t teach…those qualities you need to be great. Kobe Bryant knew he wasn’t the most talented player coming into the NBA, so he made up for that by out working everyone else to become the best. From what we have seen and heard from Keon, I feel like he’s got that kind of drive and mindset where it’s not about flash and bling…it’s all football all the time for this kid. What kind of potential and what he becomes in the NFL is yet to be known…but what I do know I am confident in is that Keon will reach what ever his potential is, because he will put in the work to make sure he does. Keon is the kind of prospect I always want and root for.

I get that…but last year…Maybe that had more to do with Tre, Milano, and Bernard all missing the playoffs and being forced to lean on people like Von…who was a ghost of Von. Not to mention Jones had just gotten back after a long injury stretch and wasn’t back to peak form either.

Well remember the subject person here…a first round draft pick with substantially more means than necessary to buy 20 properties with 10% down. I’m not suggesting someone stretch themselves thin, and would never suggest to over leverage oneself. In 2004 the 28th pick was Chris Gamble who signed a $7.5m rookie contract with a $2.75m signing bonus and annual salary of $1.5m. He could have easily bought those homes with 7 figures left over and $1.5m salary coming every year after.

No offense but your math is wrong here. He didn’t invest $330,000 in 2004, he invested $30,000. Had he invested $330,000 (that would have bought 11 homes in that scenario) it would be with $7.271 million which is a lot more than $1.28 million from your fund.

I get that, but I introduced a 3rd option because he can do both…rent and still buy long term real estate property, and quite frankly it’s by far the better option IMHO. Plus I joined into the discussion when index funds and real estate were being discussed.

Agree to disagree on whether investment homes are worth it or not. I’ll take the permanent income for life from the rents which are all mostly profit once other people pay your mortgage which is also something you are not considering in your comparison. Player buys 20 houses putting 10% down that’s $600k outlay and would be worth $12.6M today based on the earlier parameters. And once the mortgages are paid off the rents would be earning him an additional $800,000 to $1,200,000 annually in income on top of the future equitable gains. Again, good to do both and be diversified.

But the money gained on real estate is not just the equitable property gains, that was only 1 of 3 ways property brings returns. It was a 17.5% annual rate of return...$30k into $661,000 in 20 years...and that was being conservative on rents and not factoring in larger gains if they bought in growth areas. It also doesn't factor in leveraging the equity gained into additional property. This is a common oversight that comes up all the time when people want to discuss real estate gains vs funds. They forget or overlook the equitable gains from someone else paying off your mortgage, only the capital gains above the acquisition price. For example, just the equitable gains from the mortgage pay down from someone else paying your mortgage over 20 years alone in the example above was $143,000. Which that aspect alone returns more over 20 years than a fund at 8% annual return (which was $110,000), and I think most people would love a fund that had an 8% annual return for 20 years. Expecting a fund to match or best a 17.5% annual return feels unrealistic to me. Again...not against investing in the funds by any means...you should always diversify. But my personal trust for growing wealth is in real estate. But honestly, if Worthy and these athletes just did either of these they would be wise...but most unfortunately aren't wise with their money.

I have been saying this all offseason. The vast majority of SB winners didn't have that elite WR1 everyone swears we need. Some did sure...just like some won on defense and a run game because there is more than one way to win a SB. But most SB winners don't have that elite WR1 and it's in no way a prerequisite to win a SB like some seem to think around here.

Definitely wise to diversify your portfolio, so things like an Index Fund are never a bad idea...however, over long term, an index fund should honestly never outperform real estate unless you buy really bad real estate. And while putting money into a fund is obviously easier, real estate really isn't hard to manage as you can just hire a property management company to handle it. Avg home value in the US is 242% higher today than 20 years ago. You buy an investment property 20 years ago for $330,000 it would be worth $800,000 today based on the national average. And lets say you carried a $300,000 mortgage at 6%, the balance today would be $157,000 giving you another $143,000 in equitable gains from someone else paying your mortgage. And that is all before you factor any earnings from the rents. Rental prices have also gone way up over 20 years, but if you keep it modest and say over 20 years your avg net monthly gain (Rent - Mtg, Tax, Ins, Repairs, Vacancies, etc) was just $200 a month (and over 20 years it would very likely be much higher than that) that would be another $48,000. Their original $30k investment would be worth $661,000 in 20 years...or basically equivalent of getting a 17.5% annual rate of return. Now compare that to a fund...if that fund averaged an 8% return it would be worth about $140,000 in 20 years. Thats $521,000 less in gains over that time. And as you can see the gap is so wide that you don't even have to have the real estate equal the national averages for it to greatly out perform a fund, and if you buy in an area that outperforms the national average the returns would be even greater. And keep in mind these are athletes we are talking about, so affordability isn't a question and they could buy 10 or 20 of these houses to start. And as they make more money along the way, keep adding more properties to their portfolio as they made more money if the chose. If I was advising these athletes, I would highly encourage them to rent and get their money diversified into both long term real estate holdings and long term securities. They did that, they would still have plenty of money for their lives now and would be building wealth and income for retirement. Once those properties are paid off, the rents are mostly profit, and with the kind of holdings they can have by then they would be looking at tens of thousand, to even well into 6 figures in MONTHLY income for the rest of their lives. But...then there are idiots like Worthy.

I do agree in years past, but last year when we were 3rd in sacks, entering the playoffs we were without Milano and Bernard plus other injuries in our secondary and Jones just coming back from a long injury layoff. Furthermore Von was a ghost of himself. So, I think last year had to do more with injuries than personnel.

People forget...Bills were 3rd in sacks in the entire NFL last year, only 3 behind the top team too. And that is with Tre, Milano, and Jones all out for most the season and Bernard missing the end of the season. Our pass rush isn't as dire as many fear IMHO.

Is it though? If they are willing to send him home now, he wasn't making the roster anyway. At least now, he has a shot (whoever gets released) to try and latch on to a different roster, maybe one easier to make than a perennial SB contender too.

Lawrence just isn't as good as what people thought he would be. He was the most hyped prospect since Luck (also overrated but at least played some seasons at a high level). Trevor is a mediocre starting QB at this stage whose best season is on par with Derek Carr's meh season for the Saints last year. Heck he hasn't even proved he can be as good as Carr was during Carr's better seasons. But you know his agents are going to try and leverage as much of the "potential" hype from his draft to still pursue top end money. Now, this is his 4th season, he still has a chance to put it all together and finally breakout to closer to what was expected of him coming out of college. But, if it is more of the same, then I think Jags would be foolish to pay him a big deal and should instead look to trade him to a QB desperate team that thinks they can get more out of him (like maybe the Jets who I could see being dumb enough to do so given Rodgers is likely gone after this season). He's not even a Derek Carr yet let alone one of those two much better QB's.

Lol, I haven't changed anything. And again, you are just making more things up. Show me one time I said things will go swimmingly. I have spoken on LAST year. You can't seem to understand LAST year vs future performance. I mean I literally said nobody knows what this offense will or wont be this year because last year it was Brady coaching out of Dorsey's offense, not his own. This offseason Brady is installing is both his OWN offense and doing so with a lot of turnover on the starting offense. So Brady still has to prove he is THE guy moving forward. But...last year, he was by far the better OC for us over Dorsey. If you can't see the difference then it makes me question if you even watch the games or even understand what you are watching. The object of the game is to WIN football games, not compile stats. And Brady put the offense in position to win more than it lost to the tune of 6-1 for a team with the exact same roster that started 5-5 (and should have been 3-7) and lost to bad teams. And did it with the pressure of every game essentially being a playoff game for the Bills as losing anymore than 1 guranteed no playoffs and did it against the hardest stretch of our schedule. There is no universe where Dorsey was a better OC for the Bills than Brady was last year. There just isn't. Now...does that automatically mean Brady is the long term answer? Not at all...Brady still has to show he is up for the task long term.

Well, thats not the entire story. Lesnar was in the combine that year and had a great showing and a lot of teams were interested in him. The buzz was real at that point. However, he got into a motorcycle accident when a van hit him a couple months later and that messed him up. He ended up with several injuries, and that had most teams out on Lesnar at that point until the Vikings decided to still bring him in even though he wasn't fully recovered from the injuries yet. Because his groin was not yet healed, he didn't officially sign with the Vikings until late in the offseason at the end of July. So he was way behind, especially having not played football since high school. Vikings had no choice but to cut him a month later when finalizing the roster. Brock didn't try football again after that, he had already turned his sights on MMA and started training for that where he went on to be champion. So we will never know what could have been for Brock in the NFL, the accident wasn't even his fault. It was an unfortunate development, but he wowed at the combine and flashed signs for the Vikings. But he was just too far behind to make the roster and he also had equal desire to try himself in MMA which is where he went instead to great success.

6-1. 4 Playoff Teams defeated. 5 of those 7 games against top 10 defenses in yards allowed. Bad weather. Coaching from someone else's playbook. Playoff pressure every game as we were in can't lose another game mode. But hey...you go right ahead and be mad about that...I choose to appreciate what was accomplished and appreciate that he came in and we found ways to win games. There is no world where 5-5 is better than 6-1 except apparently yours...good luck with that.

Real reason was my dad was a die hard Niners fan and we always had a fun rivalry and competitive nature, so I was always a fan to teams that were a rival like Rams for example. And back then Chris Berman picked Niners vs Buffalo for 20 straight years to be in the Super Bowl, and as a kid Chris Berman was NFL football. So I always thought there was like this Niners connection. Then, when I was a kid, my grandfather for the heck of it bought a Buffalo and put it in the corral with our cattle and thought that was the coolest thing I had ever seen. And this happened at a time when I was just starting to get old enough to understand football more and it’s when the Bills got Kelly, Bruce, etc. Became an instant fan and soon after the Bills became the most exciting offense I had ever seen and was a die hard fan ever since. Shortly after they would make their SB runs and even with all that heartbreak it just never left me, was a die hard fan for life.

Pulling chicks.

So what you are saying is that Brady did a much better coaching job…therefore the offense responded better…and we won more games. Seems that’s just further making my point that Brady and the offense were better during our hardest stretch of the season.

I literally said Chargers NOT one of the top 5 defenses in those 7 games. So what are you even talking about here. Literally none of these opinions above have anything to do with the facts I provided nor refute them. How about this. Why don’t you go take out all your he easiest games and only count them he tougher sections of every WBs schedule and see if there numbers go up or down hen facing harder competition vs the easy competition . I mean Tua put up 70 on the Broncos who we lost to and we managed to only score 22 against the same team a few weeks later. You are comically delusional if you believe think we were a better offense under Dorsey than Brady. Again, I’ll stick to the facts…feel free to just rant all you want outside those facts, to each their own. And for the record, neither or, or really anyone has said Brady has proved anything other than being the correct decision last year. We don’t even know what his offense will be as last year you do realize he coached Dorsey’s offense. You can’t install a new offense midseason. But to pretend Brady was bad compared to Dorsey last season is utterly ridiculous unless you prefer losing over winning.

No disrespect at all bud…but…Hard disagree on this. We are not talking about 11 players deep on the bench, we are talking about 11 starting players. You can't say that the best player is magnitudes more important than the worst player, that makes no sense. For example, if the best player is the Center and the worst player is the QB, that Center is not magnitudes more important than the fact the QB isn't good, it will make almost no difference. And in 2020...and 2023...the number 1 player on the offense was the same. Josh Allen. When your number 1 player on the team is the QB, it makes everyone else better. And while 2020 Josh was seen as a better version than 2023 Josh (mainly over the turnovers) its not like Josh was a disaster last year, he was still the only person not named Lamar to get an MVP vote. Once again...1 individual person (in this case 2020 Diggs) does not equal a whole offense either. How many times did Calvin Johnson sit home and watch the playoffs from his couch? Almost every year of his career despite having a top 10 QB. How many SB rings does Megatron, Moss, Julio, Fitzgerals, and Hopkins have combined? Zero...despite being the best player on their teams most of their careers. This notion that one offense is better because it had the alleged "best single player" on it does not at all equate to best overall roster. And as far as last year goes...it was still Diggs as the best player not named Allen…just because his usage changed does not mean his skills went away. Under Dorsey Diggs was on pace for 1,475 yards and 12 TDS which would have been his 2nd highest career total in yards and career best in TD's. Brady completely changed the philosophy of the offense and Diggs usage changed with it. So this idea that Diggs was some shell of himself like people like to say is just not accurate and Diggs was still the best player not named Allen on the offense. Ive already shown this to be false. The top end talent of 2020 wasn't even much different. Allen was still an MVP finalist, Diggs was still on pace in his feed him the ball role under Dorsey. Then you have better and more efficient targets for Allen in Kincaid and Shakir, you have the best RB of Allens career behind the best OL of his career to go along with the best TE group of his career. I will take the 2023 roster over the 2020 roster personally, and its an easy choice for me. That roster got wasted by Dorsey to start the season, I thought he had a bad 2022 and hated him coming back but also hoped he would be better...he wasn't. Brady saved the season but was still handcuffed to Dorseys offense and did a stellar job despite that. I can only wonder what could have been last year had Dorsey been fired after 2022 and Brady installed in the offseason.