Sisyphean Bills

Pretty much. Besides, our line will get a statue-type QB sent to the hospital eventually.

The Bills got worse last year, whereas the other two teams that changed regimes improved. I did some research a while back (can't recall if I posted it here or not) and the fact of the matter is that most regime changes have a net positive effect on the W-L record. (Remember, even Dick Jauron improved the Bills his first year and you'd be hard pressed to find a Bills fan that is still high on him.) This last Bills regime change did not. One can call it a subtle sign that maybe things are not going straight down the master plan highway; or, one can dismiss it completely and look for the silver lining. Either way, it is what it is.

BTW, Gailey said he really didn't think there was an NFL-ready QB in this draft today.

Interesting question. What happens when one calls a black hole? [Peter King reference] Does the line actually go all the way to the bottom?

He's still running his 40.

Working the media to our advantage is all part of the master plan.

He did draft Donovan McNabb and ... Well, he did draft Donovan McNabb.

Save this link. (BTW, I didn't know Aaron Maybin had got cut.)

and the same "can't blame them" scouting department.

The timing is about right. McGee is broken, McKelvin is getting closer to wanting a second contract, etc.

On the other hand, they got the kid they really, really wanted. As to the OP: It's the Bills. The answer is self-evident.

Well, the obvious answer is to give the star players more money. That will trickle down into more research studies, no doubt. Living is a risk. But what's the alternative?

I read that as Chan just doesn't think he's good enough to play in this league. "Potential" is equivalent to talking, it's cheap and meaningless. If it's "free" to keep him, then it is free to dump him. And, I disagree that keeping a guy that can't play the game is a good move. If you're trying to change a loser culture, then going all-in loser mode and keeping a pure stiff just because of his draft status and/or contract isn't going to ever get it done. You can't load up your roster with a bunch of McCargos and Maybins and expect to compete, didn't the Packers show that last year?

Is that a joke? Because it's completely clear. TG: "Is it A or B?" CG: "It's not A." TG: "So, it's B." CG: "It's not A." The more interesting thing is that Nix said that Maybin is positively unreleasable regardless of his performance. Glad to know we're all on the same page and not flushing good money after bad.

The union's stance that they are not going to take a dime less than they would've under the old agreement means precisely that they won't take a dime less than the increase they were due under a contract that is no longer in force. That increase constitutes more real money, semantics quibbling aside. (BTW, it's understandable that they feel they deserve a raise.) I do not watch football to "watch the biggest stars." So, that argument may be true for other fans, but not me. Of course, I've been watching football longer than many here have been alive, so that may have something to do with it. The NFL is comparable to other entertainment businesses, such as Hollywood, however. We've all seen star actors that believe their fame transcends their business and makes them untouchable; they believe that they personally are the reason a movie does well at the box office, etc. Of course, if no one had ever written the great script, had ever believed in them, had ever given them the job, had ever poured millions into the movie and advertising, then the star doesn't exist. Their claim to innate fame is immaterial and controvertible. It wasn't comparing buying a car to watching football. I was knocking the legs out from under your apparently backwards claim that because an advertiser uses a football player in a commercial, fans want to watch the games. It's the other way around. Fans watch the games. Thus, advertisers pay to advertise their wares in front of those viewers. Further, some percentage of those advertisers may choose to use a football player in their ad in the hopes of resonating their product with the viewer. Even the NFL Network spots that feature star players, coaches, etc. saying mind-numbing simplicities such as "This is the NFL," are pushing the product of the NFL and NFL Network and are not truly a vehicle to sell jerseys or give Peyton Manning a little more face time. Do you know how much revenue, as a percentage of the overall gross, is tied to jersey sales? It seems like an anthem, but it's significance is highly dubious. Thanks for the discussion, KGS. We'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess.

And there you have it. No doubt about it, the guy has a thin frame. He actually does have some muscles already, but he doesn't look like this guy. http://img201.imageshack.us/i/bodybuilder.jpg/sr=1 And, even if he did look like that, it wouldn't mean he's suddenly a great football player.

Who does the touting? Obviously, there are stars and many fans focus on those players. Still is seems kind of weak in a way. Did you buy a Chrysler because Lee Iacocca's face was on your TV? Was he the product? Did those commercials make Tim Couch a better QB that people shelled out $$ to see? Still the cold hard fact is that the vast majority of the players in the NFL are interchangeable parts and are just taking their turn in the revolving door. Interesting statement. The NFL salary cap has increased each and every year. What the players are actually asking for is that the pay hike they believe they should get be given. Like always, both sides want more money.

One could say that the product is entertainment in the form of a football game. Do you go to watch a particular player, or do you watch the game? Most of the fans seem to be watching the action and not watching Ryan Fitzbeard sit on the bench when the defense is on the field, no? One could also argue that the players are a replaceable part of the equation. Roughly 5-10% of the jobs in the NFL are turned over every year and the average player's career is between 2 and 3 seasons. One could argue that the long-term health of the NFL and protecting future players interests is precisely the opposite of bringing antitrust litigation into the mix, which could have unforeseen consequences, but rather to give money back to the owners so they can invest it in the NFL and bridge financially rocky times. On the other hand, Tom Brady needs more money so he can go to the barber shop once in a while.

You like to see a kid that's played in the shotgun actually try to take a snap from center and make proper drops because it is not on film. It's part of due diligence. Some QBs have spent their entire life in the shotgun and have no idea how to step away from center, etc. The guy may have put up staggering statistics and all, but when asked to take a 3 step drop, he trips over his own feet. It doesn't mean he sucks and is undraftable, but it does mean he's got work to do.

On the other hand, you're giving too much credit to the "being a great athlete" part. There are plenty of drafted QBs that fail in the NFL. Many fail because of sloppy mechanics, inattention to detail, bad habits, and just thinking they can continue to excel based on pure athleticism, after all it worked to get them to the NFL. Mike Vick is an incredible athlete who could run and throw, but it wasn't until he got to the Eagles recently that he actually started working on his footwork and learning how to play the position.

I phrased the question poorly. I meant why would anyone want to watch people watching ESPN? Obviously, all the draft action will actually be happening in another place that will be televised; and, yes, it's taking the stretch and assuming the former union could get somebody to even put their cocktail party on the air. Still, it would be hilarious if they were watching the NFL Network.

Link?

It all depends on the judge's ruling. An antitrust ruling, and let's face it the NFL conducts business under a restraint of trade, may consider more than simply that the NFL wasn't handing out enough lollipops to the players in determining the extent of the damages and the punishment.

Why would you want to watch De Smith and a group of kids watch ESPN?