Delete This Account

i wasn't in that room, but since you have all the answers, what's the point of arguing. jw

the glue factory's calling and it wants that dead horse you're beating. as for your lack of imaginative use of the English language, well, we can't all be perfect or civil. jw

NFLPA is doing all it can to say veterans do NOT want rookie cap, however that remains to be seen. as for how this is going to go down, i really can't fathom a guess other than to think it will go down to the wire and possibly a few days beyond much like most labor talks. DeMaurice Smith has followed Gene Upshaw's lead by saying if the cap is removed the union would be against bringing it back. could be posturing. but i think the true thrust of talks won't begin until after this season and dependent on whether the economy shows signs of turning around. based on what i've seen so far, the owners have won the opening round in part because the union was rudderless in seeking a new executive director. Smith bounced back by settling one lawsuit with retired players, but NFL smartly countered by announcing it would not cut benefits to retired players in the event of uncapped year. right now, both sides are trying to grab support of the retired players in a bid to gain momentum. i think that'll be a wash, which would be one for the union's loss column. but we'll see. this will eventually be determined by who blinks first, and i think the owners, at this point, seem more united than they were in the past. stay tuned. jw

to make a long story, ahem, short ... if you read my posts in this thread, that's exactly what i've been saying. and yet posters have persisted to lay all/most of the blame on Mr. Wilson while overlooking other factors. jw

i blame Ralph Wilson. jw

i don't recall Tom ever discussing what constraints he was under. in fact, Mr. Wilson made is sound as if Tom acted without restraint to the point he didn't keep the owner in the loop on certain developments. it's a he-said, she-said argument. the fact that Tom was paid handsomely also undercuts the argument that Mr. Wilson won't pay executives top dollar. and there is also a belief that Tom Donahoe had the opportunity and approval to spend more on a coach during both searches and failed to do so. jw

you make very valid points, and i think this is all open for debate and discussion. jw ADD: as for my thoughts on Ms. Moran's lawsuit, they're discussed in other thread on this board.

in covering the NFLPA elections over the past year, i've taken on a bit of a side role as NFL labor writer, having established certain contacts within the union. part of it had to do with having Vincent, the former NFLPA president in Buffalo, and another had to do with a few other connections i've made along the way. the only real news to come out of the lawsuit at this point is the Department of Labor probe with which Ms. Moran is involved with and brought to light in her court papers. the investigation has been confirmed by the NFLPA, which has stated it has been cooperating with authorities since the beginning. as far as the lawsuit goes in specific, many allegations have been made. none, to my knowledge have yet been proven. and much of that depends on what the investigation finds or doesn't find and whether Ms. Moran and her representatives can provide further proof as this case progresses through the legal system. jw

i've read the lawsuit and Ms. Moran has yet to provide evidence to substantiate her allegations. jw EDITS to be specific.

righto! weaseled. with this statement, you pay disrespect not only to Mr. Wilson but to the Hall of Fame voting committee, which has historically done a tremendous job in making the Pro Football Hall of Fame one of the toughest places to be inducted in all of sports. so now everyone's wrong but you. very good. jw

the reason no one answered your question is because it was a self-serving question, as in: if you were thirsty, would you consider drinking a glass of water? well, sure! and then you proceed to answer your own question as if proving some marvelous and insightful point. from whom do you keep hearing that Bills fans would rather have a crappy team than have not at all? c'mon. and you can't get off saying we'll agree to disagree, when you fail to provide any quantifiable points -- beyond supposition, phantom posts from yesteryear that may or may not exist, and blind repetitive rhetoric that nothing will change until he's no longer owner. these are all unenlightening comments and include more questionable speculation in regards to Golisano being told to mind his own business. that was not the case, when considering the two met cordially afterwards on several occasions. and won't spend money? speaking of Golisano, how's that Sabres team doing without Briere and Drury? the Bills, by comparison, have done far more in securing their top talent and adding players, from Lee Evans, to T.O. to Aaron Schobel ... now, you can argue all you want whether the Bills overpaid for those players or should have spent so much money on Dockery and Walker. but the argument can't be made that the Bills do not spend money on talent. front office talent, that's another story and open for debate. what's intriguing is once the Bills announced their "cash-to-the-cap" philosophy, numerous teams followed suit. everybody in every town thinks their town has the worst drivers. and most every sports fan in every city thinks they've got the worst owner. someone's gotta be wrong by process of elimination. jw

so, you're saying that Mr. Wilson needed to meddle more. thanks for arguing my point. jw

where are these reports of which you speak of? where are these phantorgasmic quotes from the likes of Smith, Butler and Donahoe? these are news to me. and i've had several long discussions with certain former Bills players who have high regard for Mr. Wilson and hold at least one former executive on your list in great contempt. please, do come forth with these allegations and substantiate all these claims that you are making ... quotes, stories ... rather than gossip and fear-mongering. you've been really good at throwing mud, but how about catching some? and once again, there is this constant theme of Mr. Wilson is wrong when the outcome is negative and Bill Polian or someone else is praised when the outcome is positive. how can you discount one without the other? and in regards to your final line. when Mr. Wilson is no longer owner, then everything changes. this is not news. but, to that end, you will finally be able to say `i told you so.' jw ADD: and of course you refer to John Fox, the person who was in the running for the head coaching job in Buffalo, but somehow overlooked by Tom Donahoe. i guess that had to be Ralph Wilson's fault, too.

you mean the guy who, last i heard, was coaching high school football in texas? ok, now it's time to share all the stuff that's being smoked, because this whole thread has entered some delusional state of foolishness. ... really, you're giving me ronnie jones. jw

there's room up in Canada, and I might have a connection or two ... jw

right, Ralph Wilson is to blame for Donahoe hiring Gregg Williams and Mike Mularkey ... uh, boy. i'm done. jw

i love this. when the move turns out wrong, it's Ralph Wilson's fault, not John Butler's or Bill Polian's or anyone else's. i guess it was Mr. Wilson who told Tom Donahoe to not re-sign Pat Williams. i guess it was Mr. Wilson who told Wade Phillips that the team was out of the playoffs in 2000, or to not cover the kickoff properly against Tennessee a year earlier. right, meddling: this is an owner who was fined for speaking up for his team after the blown called in New England in the late 90s. this was the owner who had the forsight to see the 2006 CBA as being wrong. c'mon. all i'm seeing is people cherry-picking negatives and pinning them all on Ralph Wilson. guess he should've meddled when Donahoe hired Gregg Williams or Mike Mularkey. ... sonofa ... jw

can someone explain to me where all this meddling has happened. -- in dismissing Wade, Mr. Wilson asked Phillips to fire Ronnie Jones ... i guess the Bills fanbase was all in favor of having Ronnie back. -- not sure if anyone really knows how much Mr. Wilson was offering John Butler, but it's a moot point because according to Ralph, Butler refused to enter into negotiations. "i never got anything definitive from him," Wilson said at the time. Butler, in response, acknowledged that by saying, "Mr. Wilson, I guess, wanted an answer a lot faster than I was prepared to give one at the time." and there were reports that Mr. Wilson was offering to double Butler's salary, which was in the $600,000-700,000 range. -- in relinquishing his duties as president by hiring Tom Donahoe, Mr. Wilson allowed Tom to essentially run the show, land Drew Bledsoe in a trade, lure Takeo Spikes in, allow Pat Williams to be let go, draft Mike Williams and J.P. Losman, hire Greg Williams and Mike Mularkey ... it wasn't until the Mularkey-Moulds feud and after Moulds called Mr. Wilson directly, did Mr. Wilson become involved in settling that. -- when Marv hired Dick Jauron, Wilson had his reservations but went with the recommendation of the person he hired to find a coach. -- Mr. Wilson was so meddling that he suggested the Bills might bring back J.P. Losman for one last season even though Mr. Wilson was on the record as not being a big fan. -- Mr. Wilson did meddle in landing T.O., because it was his decision to have Russ go after him. based on all the No. 81 jerseys i saw at training camp, that was a horrible move. it's his team. he's allowed to "meddle," and yet i've encountered little evidence of this. jw

that's one for the old Marvel Comics "What If?" series. given the rate of pro sports expansion in the late 60s and 70s and, the flurry in the 1990s, you're more than likely correct. and who knows about Buffalo? what i find intriguing, and maybe i'm a sentimentalist or merely an underdog rooter, is how this group of businessmen (and they were rich, no doubt) proudly took on the mantle of The Foolish Club and gave the NFL a run for its money. few upstart leagues -- the World Hockey League and the ABA, are the few that come to mind -- that managed to make a dent. that earns them something. and considering that Mr. Wilson is the only owner still around with the same team in the same market, well there's something more to it than longevity, and that's where the debate begins depending your point of view. jw

from the tone of your post, it's become obvious that you'll find fault with whatever response i provide you, so i don't see a reason for wading in for another round of your accusations and name-calling. it's quite evident your mind is made up, and you're very much entitled to that. jw

and i stand by what i know, but i'm not accusing you of being "absolutely incorrect." jw

i think he's done well as a CEO, managing his company. you made a point earlier that the Bills are reaping the benefits of the TV contracts, fox/direct tv etc. ... well, if not for Mr. Wilson, who played a role in upping the ante in helping negotiate a TV contract that provided AFL teams $900,000 each in the mid-60s, and helping ensure that revenue sharing was part of the merger, perhaps the NFL wouldn't be here as it is today. with all due respect, GG, i'm not saying Mr. Wilson doesn't have faults, and shouldn't be questioned on them. but based on the vitriol on this board in which some posters are openly rooting for Mr. Wilson's demise, i argue his case a little strenously in an attempt to provide balance and some sense of perspective. but that doesn't stop some posters -- and despite the insights i've provided and arguments made -- accuse me of making no case in supporting "the worst owner in the NFL." when confronted with that type of over the top baloney, i refuse to sit silent. jw ADD: oh, and GG, you did make reference to rhetoric, when writing that you could not "fully buy into Wilson's commitment & rhetoric" in previous post.

i guess you were here in the building during the Donahoe years, which would make you an expert on these things. and if Mr. Wilson didn't call to check in on his franchise, he would then be accused of not having interest in the franchise. it's a damned-if-do and damned-if-you-don't argument you present that provides no value. but then i'm absolutely incorrect. thanks, Tom. jw

wow, you got all that out of what i wrote. i was simply unhappy with certain posters calling me names ... but we are doomed, you know. doomed! jw

no, i think this is the new history being provided by young and new posters who fail to even check the intrawebs for facts, because it's easier to make them up to go forward with their own inept agenda. this whole discussion is getting tiresome because the posters making their cases -- GG excluded -- can't seem to deal with reality and history. if that's the case, i can't believe Hank Bullough was dismissed after getting the Bills to the Super Bowl, and how the Bills lost the NFL title in 1958 is beyond me. sheesh! jw ADD: exceptions also to New Hampshire, BillNYC , who have provided relevant arguments in this discussion.