GA BILLS FAN

Revisionist history ? --- That 1987 team had Conlan, Odomes, Bentley, Metz, Bruce, Hull, Kelly, Talley, Wolford, etc. etc. --- they went 7-8 and once they added Thurman in '88, they went 12-4 and the rest, as they say is history. So, MAYBE you could argue that Thurman was the final piece and Bennett was the 2nd from final piece, but hell, you have a team with a HoF QB, HoF DE, HoF WR and pieces like Conlan, Odomes, Wolford, Talley, Hull etc. --- PUHLLLEEASSE -- that 1987 team was VERY CLOSE ---- the Bennett trade at the time was viewed universally as a BOLD move by POLIAN ---- not a reckless move ---revisionist history, check the facts --- run Polian out of town ? --- I don't even know where to start on that one

We all WANT this, some of us are just looking at this more rationally, you can call it being negative or you can open your eyes and properly evaluate this trade and scratch your head. The GM said there wasn't much difference between Watkins and the next best WR, so why give up a #1 ? Do you really think EJ has proven that he's a franchise QB and we should roll dice to give him that last piece ? I applauded the move a few years back when Atlanta traded up to grab Julio --- but Atlanta had a solid O Line, a HoF TE, an All-Pro WR and a stud RB and they were a piece or two away --- that's the difference between BOLD and RECKLESS. Think back to the late 80's when Polian went after Cornelius Bennett, because he WAS the last piece to a near dynasty -- we had our core players --- BOLD vs. RECKLESS. It's not that reckless can't work, it's just that it usually doesn't. I'm trying to think about this rationally and can't understand why they would do it, other than what others have posted, panicked about their jobs. Build until you are close, than go BOLD

This move is akin to hitting on 17 when the dealer is showing a 6. Bad move. Can it work, yes, but you make moves like this over and over and you will bust. Again, big difference between BOLD and RECKLESS. I'm all for calculated risk, but I'd much rather have Lewan (or Mosley or Ebron) and my 1st next year than Watkins. Poor judgment, especially wen our own GM says there wasn't much difference between Sammy and the next WR.

Overthecap.com says cap hit would be a $25,000 savings if we cut/traded Stevie. At this point, might as well keep him and try and deal him next year. As for IQ tests, I'm all in, but let's start with the Bills FO.

I sure hope they can, but let's stop saying that this team needed to make a BOLD move to win and that's why they haven't won, it's simply not close to being the truth. You win by making good decisions and selecting and signing good players.

Not making the playoffs for 14 years had NOTHING to do with not doing anything BOLD it has everything to do with making bad choices and bad decisions. There is such a thing as a BAD BOLD decision, that's called being reckless. Love the player, hate the trade. If EJ showed he was a franchise QB and we didn't have glaring needs at RT, TE and need for upgrades at DE and LB, and Watkins was that player to put us over the top -- I'm all in. I just think this team is more than one player away and that EJ is still, at best a longshot to be a true franchise QB. High risk move that looks more like reckless than it does BOLD.

So, what your saying is we SUCK at picking 1st round players, so might as well trade them. Great testimonial to the ineptness of this FO

How is that negative ? --- if Whaley thought Watkins was clearly the best WR in draft he would just say it -- it doesn't denigrate the other receivers by any means ---

I don't think being cautious is what's keeping this team out of the playoffs the past 14 years. You've posted it yourself many times, it's making bad decisions. This to me, is a pick made out of desperation to prove to the new owner that they know what they are doing. It's a roll of the dice to make playoffs. I don't like the roll of the dice on a WR, I think it's the wrong position to go all in on. If it was Clowney (in this draft) or RG3 a couple of years ago, while I might not do it myself, I can at least understand and would call it BOLD, this to me, smacks of desperation and being reckless.

Whaley's direct quote when asked about the difference between Watkins and the next best WR on their board was "THERE WASN'T THAT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE" -- it's t the 5 or 6 minute mark of the presser

There is a big difference between being BOLD and being RECKLESS, this is closer to RECKLESS. I would applaud BOLD (going after Clowney) because the difference between Clowney and the next DE in draft was significant and DE was position of need. As for Watkins, Whaley himself said the difference between Watkins and next best WR was minimal. To me, this was not a good trade. I love Watkins, but I would rather keep my #1 and take Beckham or Ebron if I thought I needed another ball catcher. I would have preferred a OT.

Love the player, hate the trade ! That's my assessment in a nutshell. They gave up a LOT. You have to ask yourself what the Bills were looking at when they made this assessment. This is a DEEP WR class and the Bills already have Johnson, Woods, Williams and Goodwin signed and on their roster. They knew they would have had their choice of Beckham and Ebron at 9, so is the difference between those 2 players impact and Watkins worth a #1 pick ? Doubt it. While, I wouldn't have agreed, I could at least rationalize doing this for Clowney, since he was consensus BPA in draft and difference between Clowney and next best DE in draft was HUGE. Even Whaley said in post-pick presser that difference between Watkins and next WR was minimal, amazing comment when you send a 1st. This pick is out of desperation for Brandon to prove to new owner that team is a playoff caliber, he doubled down to make playoffs now and mortgage a bit of this franchise's future. I think it was too much and I question the motivation.

Above all else, I want to preserve our future picks. I don't think this team is in a position to trade away future year's draft picks because I don't think we are one or two players away. I would prefer to stay at 9, 41, 73, 109 etc and take the BPA that fits closest to our needs. Based on the "board" and the so-called experts that are mocking the draft -- I think we can land a top 4 OT or Mosley at 9. Get a very good TE in 2nd and add LB or OT in 3rd (whatever we don't get in 1st). In 4th, I'd add RB.

I stopped listening to Schopp and Bulldog about 3 years ago, Schopp knows nothing about sports, he should really be a DJ on radio station. I generally listen to Sion and White in am --- Simon is too much of a pushover for whatever Jeremy's rant of the day/week/month is --- JW can't let it go on Evans, it's starting to rival his need to remind us how important it is to get a Top 5 pick in NHL -- not that he's wrong, but we don't need to hear it 20 times a day -- we get it --- stop selling -- love the idea of pinning a permanent thread on GR --- overall, I like Joe B, would love to see him on show with someone who spends as much time on NFL, to challenge him more on his opinions ---

Good job. Definitely agree with Cowboys going after Barr, who has upside to be Demarcus Ware type player -- I'm much more bullish on Mosley, I think he is a Top 10 talent and 3-down LB, plays hard and with edge. I'm okay with the Bills trade if it's for a 3rd, even though I have my heard set on one of the Top 3 OT's. Donald to Minny makes a ton of sense.

Whaley was in the background making the picks !

While we don't know, all forms of logic and reason would suggest that Whaley acted in the capacity of a GM during the draft, i.e. making the final call on all picks. As others have pointed out, selecting a round 1 QB was definitely the most collaborative decision of any pick, as it should be given the person becomes the "face of the franchise".

TMI, which BTW, is the opposite of a Koshinski

No way does Ralph include his wife and niece on a 4-person trust that will decide fate of franchise if they are not given latitude to sell to local buyer. No way does Ralph want his legacy to include his wife and niece being responsible for the relocation of this franchise. No way do you need a 4-person team to simply accept highest bid and most likely to get approval from owners. This is a team of 4, who all knew Ralph to ensure the new owner is someone Ralph would have wanted to sell the team to.

I think we've stumbled upon another TBD term "to Koshinski" -- to have breaking news and hide it -- or the opposite of CNN which has no news and calls it breaking news

Koshinski wrote the article that lays out a HUGE part of the sale process that is vaguely mentioned in the first few posts.

This is BIG NEWS and very positive for the Bills staying in WNY. My biggest fear from the start was that the process would be a set of sealed bids and the highest bidder would be chosen. The fact that this 4-person group was selected means the process will include some judgment, emotion and thought, beyond PRICE. The fact that these 4 (at least 3, I assume the lawyer) all knew Ralph very well. They would all know Ralph hated when teams relocated and that he would want them to stay in Buffalo. In my opinion, if a local group comes remotely close to an outside group in terms of dollars, these individuals will award team to the local group. OP, any chance you can rename this thread so other posters don't pass by this ? maybe "4 member trust to decide Bills new owner"

NO. While I'm definitely not sold on EJ, I'm not sold on Johnny, either. I'd rather Bills wait until new owner, and inevitably new FO team and draft franchise QB in 2015.

I think given other choices, most of us feel Pegula would have deeper pockets, like he is showing as owner of the Sabres. Jacobs has a more proven track record of success with the Bruins, than Golisano had with the Sabres, having won 1 Cup and losing one final. Having said all that, Golisano saved the Sabres and deserves credit for that, he wasn't, by appearances ever a big fan or visible fan and that gave off a vibe that he didn't care or wasn't "into it" --- in the end, I would welcome him as owner ahead of the others being mentioned, except Pegula and Jacobs. My preference: 1- Jacobs 2- Pegula 3- Golisano 4- Trump 5- Milstein

+1, foster-father is good way to put it, we all should remind ourselves how precarious the situation was with the Sabres when Golisano stepped in. Hopefully, the Bills won't get to that point, but if it does, I'm sure TG would do what he could.