hondo in seattle

CSH, good post. Roster turnover is inevitable. When only one, maybe 2, of our six lost starters is still starting in the NFL, it doesn't sound like we got weaker. Especially when one of the newly gained starters is a future HOFer. My only concern is that neither of our starting CBs from last season will be playing against Cooper Kupp and the Rams.

It's a valid question but, for me, a little too granular. We can hyperanalyze Beane's hit and misses but the fundamental truth is that he's built the best roster since Polian was here. All GMs make mistakes - player evaluation is not an exact science. But Beane's overall body of work has been strong.

Reaching for need ("necessary") doesn't usually work out. The Bills did get a CB in the first round and filled their biggest need right away. After that they picked guys who thought could contribute. Maybe you have lice??? I didn't scratch my head at all.

It's interesting how much Cosell - a national media guy - knows about the Bills. Good watch.

If we had the 5th oldest QB, I'd be worried. Franchise QBs are extraordinarily difficult to replace. Other players are not nearly as hard. As GunnerBill said, Beane will soon - and continually - need to reload but not rebuild. If he's as good at his job as I think he is, the Bills will be competitive for a long time.

I'd feel better if Tre was playing. Still think our chances are good.

I see both sides. It's a 17-game season so to reach 1,000, Motor only needs to average 58.8 yards/game. And while I do think Moss and Cook will get touches, Motor will be the feature back. On the other hand, Josh is the cornerstone of the offense. Motor is just a supporting actor among three supporting actors in the backfield. I vote no - but it'll be close.

I had to look this up... Hodgins ran a 4.61 at the combine. I didn't remember he was that sluggish. I was one of the people disappointed that Hodgins was cut. But I just went back and looked at some Marquez "Speedy" Stevenson college highlights. The Bills probably think, with his acceleration, he's more likely to make plays at the NFL level.

Setting the Kroger jokes aside, I mostly agree with the OP. The OL has more depth than it had pre-Beane but it's still not a stellar unit. Maybe Beane isn't a great evaluator of OL talent. Or maybe he hasn't prioritized the OL. There are only so many draft picks and only so much cap money available. You can't prioritize everything. Alternatively, it could be that McD didn't have the right OL coach to maximize the performance of the players on the roster. I'm probably more curious about this year's OL than any other position group. Josh just might be superhuman but even he struggled statistically in games last year when the OL collapsed. And while we're not a running team, it's nice when we give the backs some daylight which happened too infrequently last season. I'm hoping for better things this year, but entirely sure what to expect.

I'm hopeful of your middle statement but not convinced yet. New starters, new OL coach... let's see.

Happy Birthday! It's a very cool gift!!!

Here's what's classy: They didn't throw anyone under the bus. They articulated compassion for all parties. They were humble and admitted they made mistakes. They acknowledged how difficult the decision was given they didn't have all the facts. They seemed genuinely and deeply affected by the events. Contrast this with Jane Doe's attorney, Dan Gilleon, who just keeps throwing grenades everywhere criticizing everyone but his client. Not the only blemish. His poor hang time was also a real concern.

I don't get the Baker-Kelly comparison. I do get Allen-Elway. But, as crazy it might be to compare Allen to a HOFer, I believe Josh will become the better QB: better runner, better passer, better leader.

Shaq, Shak, Duke, and Hodg.

As Beane said, they're human and make mistakes. I'm sure if some reporter does a deep dive into this, they'll find them. And if it turns out Araiza is 100% innocent, there will be some second-guessing. In the army we used to talk about the "fog of war." Even when the situation is cloudy and you don't have all the information you want, you still have to act. While I may have sought additional intel, I think Beane and McD are good guys who truly tried to do the "right thing" in a bad situation. I'm personally thankful this duo is in charge of the Bills.

For the sake of argument, let's say Araiza is innocent. Imagine his level of distress. The hurt of a false accusation. The media storm. The loss of reputation in the eyes of his teammates and coaches. Going from excitement over making the team to the fear of losing his job... The kid may have been an emotional wreck at gametime. McD may have benched him because he wasn't fully capable of playing.

I wonder if the Bills investigator(s) didn't go to Jane Doe and her attorney because they were satisfied with what they got from the police who have reportedly been very thorough in their investigation.

I'm not suggesting this is true, but it is possible that Araiza played a more peripheral role in the true story. But when Jane Doe thought through the financial opportunities, she decided to make him the main character. And it's possible that Dan Gilleon gave her some hints to help her in that process.

That's true. But I also suspect it's also this: Jane Doe's attorney already said he tried to negotiate a settlement before this went public. I'll assume that he made some offers and threats to induce a generous settlement. When Araiza refused, he had to carry through on his threat to take it to the media.

Why I think Araiza is innocent: * He rebuffed Jane Doe's offer to settle out of court, knowing that his refusal meant a media storm. * Presumption of innocence is an American value What I think Araiza is guilty: * I read the account in the civil suit. It sounds believable and most rape allegations are, in fact, true. * I saw the pics of the injuries she sustained. Something really bad happened. I hope the Bills quickly get access to the evidence collected by the police during their long investigation so they can make an informed decision rather than a knee-jerk reaction.

I don't know this young lady but Brian Bank's false accuser didn't shy away from the scrutiny. Maybe 90% of rape allegations are true but not all are. Araiza's lawyer says it's a money-grab. Maybe so, maybe not. I'd love to see what the police have.

There are ifs and buts... "A statutory rape case is a California “wobbler” offense. This means that the crime can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the facts of the case." www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/age-of-consent/

Mango, it's not that we don't respect woman. But I've personally seen people falsely accused of things and suffer immeasurably because of it. We all know the Brian Banks story - he went to jail for a false rape accusation. Sadly, sometimes people tell terrible lies about each other. I don't know if she was raped. If she was, I don't know if Araiza was involved. I'd love to see all the evidence the police have collected. Some of it may be damning. Maybe it's exculpatory. Let's see. But if he is guilty, you're right for calling him "trash" and I hope he goes to prison.

Thanks for sharing. The fact that charges seem imminent doesn't seem to bode well for Araiza. But if I were the Bills, I'd wait to see how much of the evidence I could review.

The accuser's lawyer, AP Gilleon, only had leverage before the suit went public. He tried to negotiate a deal with Araiza's lawyer, Kerry Armstrong, but was forcefully rebuffed. So Gilleon will now try to win his paycheck in a civil suit. Armstrong says he hired an investigator who found the accusations to be untrue. He also says that Araiza did not want to make a financial deal. Armstrong calls the whole thing a "cash grab." I personally reserve judgment.