Delete This Account

not sure what you mean by "same question." -- Marrone was asked for an update on injury or report in hand. Told he had no contact with anyone regarding Mario. -- Asked if he knew when Mario would return. Said he didn't know. -- Asked if he was still being evaluated. He said yes. -- Asked if it was odd he hadn't been contacted by Mario. He said they have a great relationship. -- Asked if he had been excused by the team to leave campus. Of course. Otherwise, he was asked questions on 17 other topics not involving Mario. Otherwise, we can continue giving this team a pass if you'd like. oh, and by the way, Mario's returned to campus, per AP. http://bigstory.ap.o...liams-questions jw oh, and i've lost track, who does this make me a shill for now?

also, glad to play up and or down to everyone's standards. always a pleasure. jw

Thanks very much. Appreciate the knocks and the support. jw

and he's clearly dropped down the list at No. 3. not a good sign. jw

i'm just wondering if the fix might have been in and the Bills tipped EJ off that they were going to draft him before they announced the pick. that, to me, explains how the Bills were able to have his No. 1 jersey ready even before they got on stage. jw

good point. and the reason the Bills were forced to make the switch is because they lost Peters the season before. as a result, Demetrius Bell and Jonathan Scott took over as LT. the following season, the Bills plugged the RT spot with the one and only Mansfield Wrotto. jw

i'm thinking EJ's going to have to pay Dareus for the right to wear No. 1. http://media.al.com/...869f7e24ac1.jpg and upon further review, Spiller's now on his third number in Buffalo after he wore No. 1. http://fantasyfootba...ler-drafted.jpg i'm sensing a trend here. jw

i'd start with questioning how Flutie and Bledsoe got lopped into the "great" category along with Elway. jw

that's all i'm doing, attempting to provide input and perspective. i could be wrong. heck, i was particularly wrong last year when i went out and wrote here and spoke on numerous radio stations of how i expected the Bills to be a playoff team. you're a fan. you have every right to hope and support this team and terms of having turned the corner under this fresh start. me, i'm trying to stay objective. and as i told someone recently, i won't start judging the makeup of this team and the new front-office until after this season and, perhaps, another offseason. while some things have changed, they've changed in title, name and talk only. the question remains whether all this change translates into creating a winner. we won't know that for at least another 18 months, i think. jw

what, being unemployed? ... jw

side question here: when K-9 writes "Bills," he/she is actually referring to the "Buffalo Bills" and not some other team that has actually made the playoffs, right? jw

hey, you asked what the difference was. i provided my opinion. you still seem to miss the point. before modern free agency was introduced to the NFL, it was much easier for teams to retain talent because of the heavy restrictions on free agency. in the years since free agency was introduced to the NFL, it's much easier for players to switch teams. you keep saying you don't seem to understand my point, so let me spell it out as easiliy as possible. since the inception of modern free agency, and especially over the past 13 years, which happens to coincide with the Bills playoff drought, the Bills have had more difficulty retaining talent. i can go down the list of good players the bills have lost to free agency, who proved capable elsewhere: as a result, the Bills seem always to be placed in the familiar position of having to plug some of the same holes every three-four years. jw

they didn't make Mark Anderson the 4th highest paid DE, but they certainly threw money at him despite questions of his ability, and whether his production was a result of scheme and fit in the Patriots' defense. but i think you miss the point of the matter here. what the Bills are being accused of at this point is lacking the foresight to manage their self-imposed salary cap limitations. too often, over the past 6-7 seasons, the Bills have lacked experienced depth at several positions at which they could've used some of the players they cut. Langston Walker and Geoff Hangartner were valuable assets to a team that elected to instead go thin with youth on the O-line by releasing both players. the same could be said in regards to Spencer Johnson. and then there was the absolutely wrong decision to not re-sign Pat Williams -- something that no one is using hindsight to argue. many cases were made at the time that Pat Williams was too valuable of an asset to lose. and i think you'd agree that Byrd and Levitre were far more valuable assets than the decision to spend and waste money on Mark Anderson. heck, given how thin the Bills were at receiver last season, they could've used Anderson's contract to bolster that position. jw

that's not what either Byrd or Levitre told me a year ago, or last October for that matter. they both became interested in testing free agency the closer the season came to a close. jw c'mon. what's the difference? it's free-agency. since 1993, after Plan B free agency was struck down, the Buffalo Bills have won a grand total of 3 playoff games. and they've not appeared in one playoff game since the final core of the Super Bowl era teams was dismantled in February 2000. it seems to me you're proving my point. jw

that said, i don't understand the point K-9 attempts to make in regards to criticizing Sullivan's point. Jerry suggests the Bills would rather waste money by over-paying and then cutting a free agent after one season, rather than over-paying on a player who has proven himself in Buffalo over four years. am i missing something there, given that the money the Bills are in for tagging Byrd plus the money they lost on Anderson all could've been used toward retaining Byrd to a long-term deal, no? jw oh, for those keeping track, i can now be accused of "shilling" for Jerry.

but every team in the NFL has made the playoffs at least once since 2000. the one exception is the Buffalo Bills. not sure how you repeating this "every team" claim is justifiable in this instance. jw

funny, went with my first and last name and got: "Inigo Threat." didn't like that one, so added in my middle name to first line and got: "Mario Menace." jw

question is, what happens now with Eric Wood? ... Two years ago, Buddy Nix was looking forward to having his offensive line intact for the long run. This year, it's unclear. this is but one symptom of the Bills never-ending carousel of change that's dominated the past 13 seasons. new GMs are so busy filling the needs of their new coach, that by the time things appear set, a new GM and coach have arrived. so, a case could be made that Mark Anderson and Fitzpatrick's contract ate up some of the room to re-sign players such as Levitre and Byrd a year ago. Barnett and Merriman, too. jw

what's convenient to forget, too, is how the decision to switch Langston Walker to left tackle and then cut him 10 days before the start of the season created two holes on the offensive line. right and left tackle. The Bills could've have used him that season at his natural position, RT. and yet, i'm not sure how anyone can explain why Spencer Johnson was cut, or Geoff Hangartner. Hangartner's release was particularly curious after he was informed by Chan Gailey days earlier that his job on the team was safe. turns out, the Bills could have used depth on the O-line that season after the line was decimated by injuries. i know Jerry Sullivan's not popular on this board, and yet he makes a perfectly valid point in today's column regarding Anderson's release. and i quote: "The Bills squander more than $18 million on Merriman and Anderson, but they play contract hardball with a home-grown star and Pro Bowler, safety Jairus Byrd." jw

thanks. others disagree. jw evidently, anything and everything can be said. have at it. jw

nope. i'm still here. family just got into town so been busy with them. as for this thread, i stand by it and what i've written. obviously Chandler81 does as well, which, i guess is to his credit. as for any previous bad blood, there was a small exchange a few years back in which Chandler deleted his post. evidently, he's become more emboldened and as pompous as accuses me of being. i personally think his comments make this board a lesser place, given their vitriol and animosity. he'll of course accuse me of playing the victim. trouble is, i'm not entirely sure what i did wrong except to express my opinion, which he most certainly disagrees with, leading me to think he's either a frustrated writer or small-minded and/or likely both. jw what's worse, is it's not only open season on me, it's open season on the moderators. given Chandler's statements. how, in good faith, can they justify banning anyone when one of their own acts out like this?

speaking of thinskinned hacks, your assessment of my so-called tirade is curious given that i was asked to explain what i had stated on the radio. it was not made with the intention to create ill will. it was simply my take on the situation, one that i shared on Twitter the night before and was asked to share it once again on WGR. that you took at as being mean-spirited and, perhaps, somehow, directed at you is essentially the pot calling the kettle black in regards to being thin-skinned. evidently, your idea of moderation is using a sledge hammer, having no patience and holding grudges. i can certainly be accused of having similar qualities, but then again, i'm not a moderator but a mere member of this board. you, sir, have instead shown your true colors by bringing up vague references to posters and moderators past, perhaps others with which you held grudges and appear to be glad their gone. i guess, you won't have it your way until all of us "Lori-philes" have been rid of this board. nice to have such an open-minded moderator on board. i'm not lamely or unlamely attempting to capitalize on anything. i'm mere bringing up a point of decorum. you seem to revel in your own opinionated self. good for you. i won't hold that against you. but it's evident that you have to at some point choose to either be a mere member of this board or a moderator because it's quite evident you're not cut out for one of those jobs. but that's just the shill in me talking. jw and as for you being "out," i could only hope and pray it to be so.

i don't know who you are or what you do for a living. and i'm not asking you to reveal it. jw

so i should accept it and understand that it's open season for me on this board. no point having moderators then, no? jw

i'd rather have this settled out in the open. this is a community board, no? given that the comment was made on this board, i'd rather hear a moderator's response as to whether it was appropriate or not jw