Buffalonian-at-Heart

Wow now you go off on another tangent. You must have ADD. Go back to my original post you ding a ling. "These experts really don't know the teams. They think of two things, Head Coach and QB when they sit around their proverbial round table. From a far I can completely understand their view. I don't agree, but I do. Heck my neighbor the other day is from Dallas and he said "hey didn't the Bills strike out on getting any of those good coaches". The perception is that we failed to get a top coach and settled for Chan Gailey. The casual observer see's Gailey as someone they've heard of, but isn't very good. And everyone knows we didn't sign or draft a QB. That's why our optimism (for those who are) is our little secret. They don't see the attitude of this team evolving into something that the fans are getting on board with. For the outsiders we just have to win. Show them the baby if you will." Does this sound to you like I don't understand the consensus? You get so caught up in being argumentative, you forget what you're arguing about. Now I understand why so many have put you on ignore. I'm close. You're such a simpleton.

So you think Marshall Faulk really knows our team? You think he's studying them with "due diligence" giving him total credence to criticize? You can't be that naive.

Now that was funny!!!

I think you guys are getting caught up in semantics and aren't seeing each others point. Dean's point is to say the Packers had absolutely no interest in Brohm and were "perfectly happy" to let him go is not accurate and an overstatement based on their actions. The fact they wanted him on their practice squad in and of itself means you have an interest in keeping that player, albeit slight interest or certainly less than those you chose to keep on the 53 man roster, it's still interest. Furthermore, a player they wanted on their practice squad when he received interest from another team offered something else in dollars. Hence your not perfectly happy to let him go, you did attempt to keep him around your organization. Dave Mcbride's argument (with others), is that if you don't keep a player on your 53 man roster, he has to clear waivers before you can attempt to bring him back to the practice squad. The notion you would be willing to risk loosing the player during the period he is on waivers carries it's own implications. I think you are both close to agreeing. Here's my take. The Packers wanted to keep Brohm around, there's little doubt about that, but he wasn't important enough to go beyond making a small counter offer to keep him on their practice squad. All in all, I don't think the Packers lost any sleep over loosing Brohm. But If you're getting technical, if the Packers were asked "Did you want to keep Brohm around to see if he can develop?", they would answer yes.

These experts really don't know the teams. They think of two things, Head Coach and QB when they sit around their proverbial round table. From a far I can completely understand their view. I don't agree, but I do. Heck my neighbor the other day is from Dallas and he said "hey didn't the Bills strike out on getting any of those good coaches". The perception is that we failed to get a top coach and settled for Chan Gailey. The casual observer see's Gailey as someone they've heard of, but isn't very good. And everyone knows we didn't sign or draft a QB. That's why our optimism (for those who are) is our little secret. They don't see the attitude of this team evolving into something that the fans are getting on board with. For the outsiders we just have to win. Show them the baby if you will.

Ray Ray went to Nashville?

I know no one will be quit like him, but in a lot of subtle ways he reminds me of Barry Sanders. You're looking for him, but then shooting out of the other side of the pile is Spiller. Look at 2:38 of this highlight, just when you thought for sure you had Barry trapped behind the line of scrimmage he would make a move like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxkNT9IxEu8...feature=related

what if we win and the starters look good?

I'll grant you he had 6 when he went out in week 10, but that's hardly a big improvement.

I don't see why he wouldn't give up 15-20 mil per season to play in the NFL.

1. There is an obvious opening for a #2 WR- In fact when we let TO walk we actually are letting go our WR that finished 1st in receptions and total yards and Evans finished a mere 1 TD ahead of TO whom we let go. Lets take it as a given that Evans is the #1 WR (even though statistically he was not) but this merely even more sharply identifies we are missing a #2 WR. Though you skirt around it, the true issue is that we are missing a #1 receiver and maybe a #2. In fact, Lee All-Star Evans has had just 3 or fewer catches in 16 of his last 32 games. 4 or fewer catches in 25 of his last 32 games. And only 3 games with more than 5 catches in that same period. Looks, sounds and plays like a #3 WR to me. I agree. I believe we have some real options at WR fortunately. Unfortunately we need one of them to be the #1, I hope there's one that manifests.

What does Bell have to do with it? One or Two false starts a game kills drives no matter who is doing it.

This may be the dumbest post i've ever read.

But you said the NFL won't let it happen, so why are you pondering how you would feel?

Are you serious? I think what you mean is when did we not try to build through the draft. All boils down to knowing how to draft and evaluate. We'll see if this regime knows how to.

He didn't say building through the draft was exclusive, he mentioned signing veteran free agents that will play the can start and play the entire term of their contract. In other words stop signing guys to 5 year deals that end up playing 2 or 3 for you. In regards to the fans that don't want to wait until 2013, I'll submit they would have waited a lot longer than that if we hadn't changed our mindset to the Nix and Whaley philosophy.

So you want us to give you our thoughts about a far fetched idea the NFL will never let happen anyway?

You can't blame the past on the current front office.

I hate to be so blunt, but 95% of all FA's do not go to whoever offers the most money. That just flat out isn't true. I'm not saying it doesn't happen or it isn't a factor, but most free agents have more than one team that will offer them the money, so they go where they have an opportunity to win. That's why most of the bottom teams don't get better. It's a long process to build a team and when you are one of the bottom teams and your draft picks don't pan out, you can't get out of the bottom. Take Detroit for example. They get Calvin Johnson and Stafford and all the sudden free agents come because it appears they are on the up swing. This is EXACTLY what the Bills have to do, and is the philosophy finally of our front office. Draft well, coach up, start building a winner and the free agents to start closing the gaps will come.

You can live with one or two false starts a game? To me that would be totally unacceptable.

I can't believe you think weather is the "main" reason people don't sign with Buffalo. That point just isn't consistent with other bad weather City's that sign and trade for players under contract. Money doesn't talk when your both offering the same money and you don't get the player. This has been even more evident this year, when we couldn't land our top coaches of choice and couldn't convince Mcnabb to come. It isn't because it snows at the tail end of the season in Buffalo. It's because we have a tradition of loosing and poor management. Money has almost nothing to do with it. We could have offered Dansby more money and he wouldn't have signed with us. (yes promo I agree with your assessment of signing over priced free agents, but I'm making a point) The point is he would have gotten the money from several teams, so now its just a matter of choosing where you want to play. There are a plethora of factors higher on the list than weather, even being near your home town would be before that. To even have a chance at quality free agents at this point the Bills have to grossly over pay ie Langston Walker. The players that are signed but in contract disputes won't come either. They are telling the Bills they won't sign an extension if they trade for them, so the Bills can't even get into the trading for players conversation. The only way to change this is to build a team through the draft, pick the right mid level free agents that fit, and start winning. In saying all that I think our current FO and coaching staff can get us there. I believe in what they are doing, I'm just saying it isn't going to be done by signing guys like Mcnabb, Vincent Jackson, or Mcneil. The proof has to come before the pudding.

This is a post about why the Bills shouldn't and can't trade for or sign Big Name free agents: Signing guys like McNeil and Jackson just aren't possibilities for the Bills. Both guys are in the middle of contract disgruntlement. Hypothetically lets say the Bills call their agents and say we will trade for your clients and offer long term contracts paying them among the highest in the league if not the highest. Have we not learned from McNabb? The agent will say no, we have several other teams that he'd rather go to offering the same scenario. High profile free agents aren't coming to Buffalo folks and it's not because of the weather. It's because we have a reputation as an organization that doesn't know what their doing. Anyone that knows me from my posts, I am not a Bills basher, I just believe this to be our current reality. I think Nix understands that not only is it a good strategy to build through the draft it is also our only viable option (for now). The days of overpaying for mid level free agents like Dockery are over, under Nix. They were very clear we will begin to build through the draft and sign depth type players in free agency. They have done exactly that and you know what? Nix knew that was his only option, and I for one think he's smart for realizing it. You know admitting what you are is a strong quality. Look at the Chargers, in 2004 Eli would not go there. Now they have created a culture of winning and can add pieces through free agency. The problem with the Bills is they have not built through the draft, been active in free agency with players that haven't gotten them over the proverbial hump because the foundation wasn't there. And if you keep trading draft picks to get players the foundation never will be. When this team is ready to sign free agents or trade and sign players, they will. It's just not the right strategy now. Nix and Gailey need to evaluate what they have this year and go to step two of the rebuilding process. The Bills have to win, then the free agents will come.

Incognito

I think you're right Promo, if the Bills were to sign him it would be a desperate move. But since its the all knowing Jets, its a brilliant move by an organization that with its structure can turn this young man around. I swear ESPN is getting as bad as MSNBC.

Yawn