BigBuff423

That's a fair statement for several reasons, all of which I think are obvious and don't require elaboration on my part. That said, while Allen may be the starter in Week 1, I think McD / Daboll and Beane have already decided. IMHO, unless Allen exceeds a really high bar for what the coaches / execs are going to consider "standard" - i think they feel his long-term development is MORE important than putting him in this year, regardless of how the other two play. That is to say, if he's still showing signs of Rookie-itis, even if that puts him above Peterman and AJ, I don't think he plays. I also think that if they deem him ready to start by Week 1, then he has exceeded their expectations by a wide margin because if it's close, again, I don't think he starts until they're damn sure he's going to be the starter for the rest of his career...no benching, no games where he's in one half and out the next. Just my .02...

Don't let his mother hear you say that.....that's probably more than she can hear, when you start talking about his diction.

My Dad never really loved sports...he'd watch Syracuse basketball more than anything else and some Syracuse football, but not much else. But when he'd see me watching the games as a teenager he would do his best to talk to me about them and sometimes he'd spend a little time watching it with me. We did watch Syracuse games together more often and we went to one SU basketball game, but not much else. We've always bonded more over movies and food than anything else. I came to love the Bills and Sabres despite my step-brothers and step-sister being a NY Rangers fan, Giants and Cowboys fans. There was just always something about the mystique of WNY and the way I identified with the team and it's fans more than I did the Giants. Once I latched on, that was it....I was hooked for life even when I truly wished I wasn't.

I don't think Holmes is guaranteed IMO and neither is Streater....I do think Zay and KB aren't going anywhere. However, Foster, Reilly, and Proehl are the three I think will make the team along with Kerley, Zay and KB. I just think Daboll values shiftiness in the slot and want Foster / Proehl for that while Zay I think does much better in the slot, his size kind of puts him on the outside. I wouldn't be surprised to see more 4 WR sets with two guys in the slot being Kerley and Proehl / Foster....who knows, but I think Reilly is making some noise plus I think Holmes is done and Streater probably is just going to be overwhelmed by the younger, faster, cheaper guys already mentioned.

I wish I could make it, I think it's cool that you put together these kinds of events mead....I think more of this when possible, would cut down on the board vitriol towards fellow members and help us all keep in perspective that we all have real lives behind these opinions with families, jobs, etc. It personalizes the experience...

fixed it for ya.....

In 1985 as a kid I moved to a very small town in deep South Georgia, about 40 miles from the Florida border in the middle of the state, and the town had just opened a Piggly Wiggly. First, I couldn't stop laughing the first time I saw the pig's face with the butcher's cap on, and second, you'd of thought Christ himself was serving up samples in that store. The buzz such a store got was mind-boggling even for me as a kid. Every time I see that face, I still chuckle.

Ummm....wow....glad you stopped by. There's a kid in a wheelchair that needs to be pushed off the back of a moving bus, want to volunteer? The pay is crap, but the joy in your heart does wonders. First, we don't know her true value yet...that's fair. But, when you say she's earned nothing and that any such respect is only due to being Terry's wife, I'm not sure there's a more provincial cold take on this board....It's pretty well-documented that she and Terry run their businesses as a partnership and she has a strong voice in many of them. Now, as to being "incompetent" sports owners....I find such a statement to disqualify any other comment you make to be worth a scintilla of time. Hard to believe people such as yourself, find the joy in getting up in the morning with such a dark and melancholy outlook. Be brave...take the positive and run with it. It's easy being negative....it's much harder to see the good. And, the Pegulas (yes, that includes Kim, sorry but it does) erred on the side of caution and let people earn their way out of jobs when they took over the franchise. They didn't want to be rash or rush to judgment....so, they figured it out as they went. And, there are some good things pointing to both franchises moving in the right direction. But hey, there's an old lady trying to cross the street, she could really use a violent hip check to put her in her place and let her know, the street belongs to the young and if you can't make it across the road in under 5 seconds, you don't deserve to be outside.....maybe you could pitch in? We need good people like yourself for jobs like these.

You must work in Oneida County....

You’re missing a few components like trading Cordy Glenn to get to 12 and then trading assets up to 7 go get Allen. And the assets acquired as part of the Mahomes trade were part of the total evaluation because the forfeited the option of Mahomes knowing this was their QB selection year. So it’s more a part of the whole set of circumstances rather than direct link to what was actually traded.

Just like my pessimism was tempered by "Trusting the Process" my optimism is tempered by, let's just wait and see. Is it encouraging? Well hell yeah! But, I just want to be patient, for better or worse. There will be a day at some point, OTAs or training camp, where he throws like 3 INTs, misses guys wide / low / high, and takes too many sacks and we'll all be looking for the exits on the Josh Allen bus. But, we just need to be patient and allow him the grace and time to grow into the NFL QB Beane and McD believe he can become. If he starts week 1, fine then the Bills believe he is absolutely ready. If he doesn't then I'll just assume they're being cautious and planning for the future by giving him the time most Rookies need to adjust to the NFL. If it's year 2 and he's not starting, considering there's not Favre or Montana on this team, then we can start to sweat and hover over the panic button. Until then, good start, like what I'm hearing...but I'll wait to make too much of it, good or bad.

This was a well thought-out post with some good information, thank you OP for providing something more than "Buffalo sucks, we'll never get a dome!" or "NOOOOO! The weather advantage!!"..... I'm not sure where you get your information from, but it does sound like you're at least somewhat of an authority on the subject given how you present the subject and how to consider all factors. If you're not, you're faking it well....kind of like Peter Pan's girlfriend. For my personal take, I've been advocate for a dome - no retractable piece - for years. I think Buffalo is a fantastic venue and the dome would provide a truly great experience. Yes, those of us that lived and recall the glory years of Kelly-Thurman-Bruce-Reed and others, remember knocking the stuffing out of Oakland in freezing weather, but honestly, it just doesn't appeal to this generation anymore (by and large, just in general). Taking my 5 year old daughter to a snow-pocalypse type of game is not my idea of a good time with her. I want her to enjoy the game, not get frostbite. And yes, if I go with pals, it's rockin' good time. But, and this is a giant rear end here (think Rex), the outdoor venue in December and / or January does NOT enhance the game, IMO. I like the idea of being able to build a super slick, quick tempo Offense - like Greatest Offense on Turf 2.0 - and know that it's also comfortable. The Vikings type of stadium would be ideal, IMHO - but to each his own.

IF he makes it through this year, I think that's it...but I wouldn't put it past this FO to trade him during the season depending on how some of the unknown guys play, where the team is in terms of standing, and how he's producing.

The best way to see Tyrod Taylor on Hard Knocks....on, another team.

If Richard Sherman can be a 5th Round selection, there is sure to be some UDFAs who can turn that corner and become quite good to great. I too like stories such as this one and hope for a truly great ending, ala a long, illustrious NFL career with the Buffalo Bills.

I'm not sure what the reasoning was of course, but it's pretty evident that Tua was more prepared than Saban gave him credit for, with the outcome of the NT game now known to us. Regardless, for me what was enlightening was that Daboll recognized this in November and stumped for Tua to be the starter or at least to play much more than he did leading into that game. Which, shows me he can recognize how a player's ability can translate to the field without needing proof of it beforehand. Also, it tells me Daboll is willing to be vocal about his convictions regardless of who the coach is - since Saban's legacy is all but written as one of the greatest college coaches of all time. That takes a set....to do that. Go toe to toe with one of the greatest and essentially tell him, you're missing an opportunity here....bottom line for me: more confidence in Daboll since there's no way to think his lobbying for Tua didn't AT LEAST play a part in Saban's decision to let Tua start the second half of that game. I found it on Twitter, it was a screen shot by Cover1 regarding a write up, but that write up is missing the article link and / or author. However, Cover1 doesn't essentially quote people without proper linking or credit given:

What is equally interesting in this Daboll discussion is where I read on Twitter (and it was from a reputable source, but I cannot recall which one) a couple days ago that Daboll and Saban had it out over starting Tua. From what I could infer from reading the bit, Daboll wanted to get Tua as the starting QB in November when the Offense hit a lull and pointed to his ability to actually pass the ball. Saban resisted and it became a point again in the National Title game obviously. But, that to me means Daboll recognized the need to move on and fought Saban to do so, which also means his assessment probably played a role in getting Tua in the game in the title game.

At this point, I'm over the "talk me into" or "talk me out of" or any of the pre-Draft stuff. I'm all about what he does in a Bills uniform. If he out-right wins the job to start in week 1, fine....then let's go. And, let's see how he *improves* because that's what he'll need to do in the first two years playing in the NFL. But, if he sits for the whole first year while AJ and Nate hold it down, fine....I would understand as the Bills want to make sure Allen is ready to be their franchise guy and don't want to put him in a bad spot. But, in year 2, he should start. There's no Favre or Montana holding the team in place, so Allen gets a year to grow and develop - by year 2 - you're the guy come hell or high water. But for all of the opinions on Allen....it's horse excrement from now on, until the big lights go on and he's wearing the red, white and blue Bills uni on Sundays. I honestly do not care anymore about what he did or didn't do in college. Why? Because it's moot. It is now on McD and Daboll to develop him. That's what they Drafted and that's who they wanted (clearly!), so you've got him. Now, what are you going to do with him? How are you going to mold him into the Franchise QB you determined he's worthy of becoming? Do it, and make all of Buffalo proud and fans everywhere who live, bleed, and love this team.

I thought Murph was actually funny....and of course, Fitz nailed it.

Um, actually in the NFL they do....take a look at teams who cut bait with players in contracts all the time. Patriots are unfortunately notorious for this and other teams have taken aging, very good players, and either traded them or simply out-right cut them to save money or to get younger. In this case, the Bills were willing to keep him, but at a reduced price and we have to realize that some of what NFL players get paid for (if not MOST) is for what you project they will do, not what they have already done. Their history of success obviously points to what they can do, but the FA wire is littered with guys who were believed to have been great signings or "gets" only to find a year or two later, they're looking for a job. Richie is not immune to this effect.

Now, the NFL is "investigating the matter"....oh dear God. Ray Rice knocks a woman unconscious in the elevator and it's on video and he gets a lame suspension, but what is impossible to prove 20 years later, *that* the NFL will take seriously....woof! I'm all for justice, but it should be according to due process and Constitutional limits as decided by the Supreme Court. This man is being crucified for something that is "alleged" to have occurred so long ago, those born that year and just now buy alcohol legally. The title is also misleading. The 5 witnesses are not actually "witnesses", they are professionals brought in to the investigation based on their role, with the exception of the potential victim. Additionally, the Chief of Police said what most of us are thinking: it's not really about the sex, it's about the consent. And like I posted days ago, there is probably some degree of truth on both sides but here we are....a legally innocent man's name dragged through the mud for something that *might* have happened. This is the kind of stuff that I really disagree with as it provides no true value to society at large due to the legal restraints and timelines and yet, continues to be a hotbed of discussion and possibly tarnishing a man's reputation.

What's equally perplexing to me is the "Court Activity"....[NONE FOUND]....in NY at least, when a grand jury is impaneled and the charges and case presented, under court activity, it would show "Grand Jury" with the charges and the date because often the charges change. They're either escalated or reduced based on additional collection of evidence, such as witness or victim testimony and evidence received in the interim. But the fact that it said, NONE FOUND, makes even less sense to this twisted scenario. On a side note, I'm from Oneida County....don't know the man or his family but put that out there in a sort of, full disclosure notice.

I have no idea what happened, and I support any victim's right to seek justice within the boundaries of the law, but the bold portion of your statement is inaccurate. A grand jury indicts, which means there is sufficient evidence to substantiate the charges, as in a preponderance of evidence but that says nothing about being enough for a trial. Trial level evidence requires so much more than a "preponderance of the evidence" which is only intended to substantiate the charges so that willy-nilly and false charges can't be constructed to falsely accuse and punish innocent people. But, as I noted there is probably some truth to the story no matter what....the problem is, with any of these types of concerns there are always layers of truth and misinformation and it's in those details that often determine whether a crime was committed or whether someone made unethical or in some cases, immoral (by someone else's code, not mine) choices.

I can tell you from professional experience, that while not at all common, it happens more often than most people realize. A witness is upset, contacts police, and there is some evidence of a potential crime, the person is arrested, and the grand jury hears the facts presented as the prosecutor edits and shows just their side and an indictment is handed down. Often, plea deals occur because the Defendant knows he / she is guilty and when they see the evidence, in their mind it all makes sense on how their guilt is essentially guaranteed. When someone refuses a plea deal, they are typically either truly innocent, have a long criminal history and have nothing to lose to try and create doubt in jurors' minds, or they have a bad lawyer who fails to explain the criminal justice system, i.e. they don't understand how the law works. By the last point I mean, that the Defendant may truly think he / she is innocent, like buying an illegal gun from a newspaper ad and not realizing all of the documentation and bill of sale required to show an attempt at a legal purchase so the police can trace the sale back to the seller (not that that's legal either, but more likely to gain leniency), but fails to see the nuances of how the law works. Another example, in New York State, there is such a thing called "constructive possession", meaning if it's within your immediate vicinity of control - even if it's not yours - and the item is illegal, eg. drugs / gun, then you are as guilty as if it were yours. In this instance many times people say, "It wasn't mine and you can't prove it was", fail to realize what it means to have constructive possession and how that type of possession is proven. I had a case where two men in the same vehicle were convicted of possessing the same firearm because neither took responsibility for the gun. They both got 8 - 10 years, even though obviously it had to belong to one of them. Point being here is that the victim may very well have had sexual relations with Patricia and / or someone else that evening, and it may have progressed further than she wanted, but the details about storming into her hotel room may not have been accurate and she may have been required to testify that she invited them and that there was discussion of sex but she changed her mind and then it would appear she "invited" this incident on herself - even though that's absolute garbage - she may be embarrassed to admit she had more than one man in her room and the original intent was for sex, making her want to avoid open testimony before her close friends and family. One more example of how this isn't so cut and dry on either side was a case where a 17 year old young man had sex with a young woman who was 14 and intoxicated and after she had sex with one young man, a friend of his, he thought he could just slide in (excuse the pun) but not only was it rape due to age, but she was unable to consent due to her intoxicated state so he maintained his innocence until the judge explained the amount of time he was facing. Although in NYS at 17 he would be adjudicated a Youthful Offender and given a shorter sentence and he wouldn't be required to register as a Sex Offender. He ultimately took Probation on a misdemeanor because the victim and her family did not want to testify in open court about her actions on that evening - and believe me, she did everything wrong in terms of decisions but at 14, there's no way you can hold a child accountable for things she fails to foresee. Blurring the lines of fact and perception in situations like these is problematic for everyone. I get your point, but that's not necessarily true. If he was indicted, in nearly every single case he would be arrested first. The types of indictments that occur first without an arrest are extremely rare and usually held for reasons of larger good of public safety. The fact they couldn't find a police report just means due to lack of pursuit of the charges, and that it was so long ago, they were probably destroyed.

I'm hoping the Twitter account, Old Takes Exposed is taking note of each of these and IF and when Josh Allen becomes the legit franchise QB of the Buffalo Bills, everyone one of these ninnies are brought back to their freezing cold take. Josh Allen may NOT be the QB answer we've long been searching for, but I love when people make these concrete statements as though they're fact. I was not an Allen guy prior to Draft, I wanted either Rosen or the Bills to wait and get Rudolph in the 2nd - and not trade away picks b/c I think the team really needed them - but to say definitively one way or the other at this point, is foolish. Now that Allen will be wearing a Bills uni, I am fully on board the Allen train and hoping he proves ever doubter wrong and that he commands a prolific Bills Offense for the next 15 years to multiple Lombardi trophies. If he flames out - then so be it but the Bills did what many on this board wanted: go and get your guy, no waiting, no hedging, no letting him "fall in our lap"....go get him. They did that and we now know, they didn't "luck" into him because if they had really liked Rosen more than Allen, they could have just chosen him. This means they got the guy they wanted and since no future picks were surrendered, they have the Draft capital and Cap space next year to build around him, after he's had a year to get the Rookie dust off his shoulders.