Sisyphean Bills

He had a great tackle on Justin Tuck.

Not so much. He chooses how he is going to answer questions. For example, if someone asked anyone with a contract to appear on WGR when was the last time they had sex, are we to assume they are contractually obligated to answer to the millisecond?

Yes. (Terrible HC though.)

Good point. Put Orton in a Pop Warner offense, and it's going to be quickly apparent he doesn't have the talent to look like a superstar running it against NFL defenses. It might be quite difficult for a Hall-of-Fame caliber QB to look mediocre under the same circumstances.

I think you ought to shout out a BINGO! here...

Well, they did draft Kouandjio with a top 50 pick. He can't even get on the field with this group of trash.

Not much comfort in that. They could've been aggressive and dealt him on draft day after they took Spiller. There were interested teams and they had holes everywhere. Maybe there was just something in the back of Buddy's head nagging him that Spiller might not ever really be that every down guy.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. Can't Hackett's film shows a guy that seems to think good offense is all about reps and execution. It's like two guys looking at a huge stone wall. CH says, "If we run into it often enough, we might find a way through it." Meanwhile another coach might say, "Uh-huh. I think we'll be running around this here wall."

My question is who are they going to draft to replace CJ Spiller?

He's stealing money. Feel better?

Average would be a massive upgrade.

Impressive... yawn. Seriously: it would've been good to see the line play improve over the course of the season. Never happened though.

Hackett is using the same laminated play card he was using week 4. Maybe it is cost-effective?

As Marrone is an OL coach, I am really surprised at just how putrid this unit plays.

To elaborate on what I meant above. 1. The Ryan Fitzpatrick contract was generally sold here as "no big deal" because it could "just be renegotiated", etc. Your post brought that whole line of argument back to mind. Fitzpatrick refused to renegotiate and the Bills ended up rolling the dice on Kevin Kolb last year as a result. Oops. The premise that a team can unilaterally renegotiate is simply false. It takes both parties. 2. Jay Cutler is extremely talented but it is plainly not enough. His ridiculous talent may actually be a liability to him. As he is getting older and more beat-up, the idea that he can force balls anywhere at anytime becomes more and more incorrect. And that talent to get away with things has perhaps meant that he has never learned how to manage the game or make the best play. (This is second hand speculation.) And, I completely agree that the Bills are the wrong situation for Cutler. And Cutler is the wrong QB for the Bills. Assuming Marrone and Hackett are kept another year, I see no evidence that they are going to be able to coach up Cutler where others have failed. To point: Trestman was a QB and has a long resume of coaching offense and QBs in the NFL and other levels. I do not see Hackett being anywhere near as competent. So I don't see the Bills as having the coaches who can get the most out of Cutler. And Cutler would be very bad for the Bills. Maybe the Bills make the playoffs this year, but if they don't then they extend their already ugly streak. Does this team really have 3 or 5 years to try to "fix Cutler"? I don't think so. I think they might come out further ahead with a guy that can manage games until they find the next Jim Kelly. If the goal is to win a Super Bowl, then don't get sidetracked with the goal of "fixing Jay Cutler".

It's dirt simple, really. Nobody is questioning Cutler's talent. That's a straw-man. The problem is talent by itself is not enough.

Ryan Fitzpatrick is smiling at this. He has talent. Ryan Leaf had talent too.

I wonder how the block parties are going in their 'hood.

How would a team sell taking on a contract that makes an interception machine the highest paid guy to the rest of the roster?

Let's take another entertainment business: the movies. Would you expect the industry to market a new movie by telling us to go see the new movie XYZ and hyping how good it is, or how hard the director worked because he had to work through technical problems, script problems, bad weather, etc.?

It's a very good line of questioning... Is it likely that someone who just shelled out $1.4B for a franchise is going to be passive? Passive to the point that they accept the former owner's right-hand man at face-value and continue to run things his way (allow him to continue to play owner as you put it)? From the other side, how likely is it that an employee, who spent 17 years working his way up to the very top rung of the power ladder, is going to a leap backwards and vacate a large percentage of his power? How often does that sort of transition in power in an individual's career work out perfectly smoothly for everyone? As to the expertise and replacement cost point, if the position is defined to be executive management of the business side of a sports entertainment franchise only (which is what the consensus appears to be), then what are the chances the Pegulas do not know any highly capable and extremely intelligent business people with executive management pedigrees? It's true that we should not discount Brandon's very successful work to leverage Ralph's asset. As the highest bidder bought this franchise for a record price, there is no doubt that Brandon "won the Super Bowl" for Ralph's heirs. On the other hand, what value do the Pegulas place on the work of positioning the business for sale going forward? Does the cancelling of the Toronto deal say anything? It would seem the Pegulas do have a decision as to whether they want to plant the seeds of their own culture change sooner or maintain the status quo on various fronts within the organization. It could be a very interesting off-season. Or not.

I have absolutely no doubt he has lobbied hard for the status quo. (The variable that we don't know is exactly what the Pegulas are thinking. It does seem a little strange that Brandon, as an employee, is giving the appearance that he may be incautious about making sure he is fully aligned with his new bosses' vision. As owners, they are allowed to form their own after all.)

Well, he is working at getting his own "brand" out there, for sure. That he is blowing his own horn on this hire and extremely brief stint as the proxy-owner with this statement is undeniable. What seems like it could be walking out on a limb is to say these things with two games to go and on the radio. Maybe he is confident that he already has the Pegulas 100% bought in to his viewpoint and strategic vision and direction for how things will continue to be run and regardless of what happens.