Cynical

Con: Letting Marrone hire Danny Crossman as ST coach.

Sure. Just make sure mine has some vodka and orange juice added to it. That way i will be ready to either drown my sorrows or freaking celebrate.

A one time incident. During a game. Was there anymore incidents prior to or after that one? No? So, it was a one time occurrence. An outlier. If you need a good point of reference, think about the 1989 Bickering Bills. Kelly calling out Balllard? An eyebrow raiser for sure, but not really an indicator in itself. Thomas calling out Kelly? Another eyebrow raiser. Again, in of itself, not really an indicator. Coaches getting into a brawl? Yet, another eyebrow raiser. In of itself, not really an indicator. If only ONE of those instances had taken place during the season, nobody is referring to the 1989 team as the Bickering Bills. But all 3 happened (including other nonsense). That means there was a pattern of behavior that pointed to something bigger that was going on. The comments by Jackson by themselves are nothing. The first comments by Hughes by themselves are nothing. The whole team running sprints because of fighting by itself is probably nothing. The incident of Hughes directly challenging/disagreeing with Marrone by itself means nothing. All of these happened? Something is going on. It may not manifest itself into anything more, but something is going on. Feel free to individually analyze each and every incident separately. In doing so, feel free to conclude that since each incident by itself is minor, as a whole, it's minor. Some of us will continue to look to see if anymore minor problems keep popping up. Because we realize, a bunch of minor things can suddenly turn into something major.

Its called a pattern. Hughes and Jackson are not Terrel Owens or Ritchie Incognito. So when players like Jackson and Hughes start voicing their concerns, they will catch peoples attention. Why? Because that usually indicates something bigger is going on. Just to clarify. I am not like OP. I do not think this team has gone off the deep end. IMO, Marrone has the team on a line that defines being on the edge and going over the edge. And he is pushing on that line pretty hard.

You honestly want to believe Marrone had zero input on the Steelers practice? Feel free. I'll choose the reality where the HC has some input on those type of decisions.

IRC, it was more screwed up than just Modrak/Guy. I remember when Levy was hired as GM he stated he was leaving all player personnel decisions to Jauron. Then when Levy stepped down, the reports came out that Brandon would get the GM title, but when it came to player personnel, Wilson went with a multi-headed cluster !@#$ that included Modrak, Guy, Jauron, and himself. Did I miss the memo showing/stating otherwise?

IMO, this comparison is pretty spot on. It's amazing how many posters are trying to brush this off as being nothing: There are fights in other training camps Tom Coughlin - 1995 In another thread - used to play 6 pre-seaon games Herb Brooks They all have big flaws in their argument. This isn't 1995. Marrone is not Coughlin or Herb Brooks. These are professional athletes, not collegiate. And it sure as hell not the 1970's. As for the fighting? Yes, there are TC fights on other teams. Happens every year. But on those teams that have them, how many instances do the players openly criticize the coaching staff? Or the HC is willing to punish the whole team for the actions of a few? The next few weeks are critical for Marrone. If he continually keeps the team on the edge and the team opens the season 1-3, it will be on like MOFO, IMHO.

Except the Bills are a professional football team and not part of the military. The Gunnery is not going anywhere if the recruits attempt to quit on him. If the players quit on Marrone, Marrone is going to be the one being shipped out.

Different age level also. Being a hardazz to high school and college athletes is one thing. Professionals? Different ball of wax. It's the HC responsibility to get the players to buy in to his system. If the players don't and/or refuse, they know the HC will be gone before they are.

That's like calling the cops and saying, "While looking to solicit a hooker, I found one that worked out of a hotel near my house."

Found a longer version of the same video: At the end of this version, he describes the Matrix on Men for Women http://youtu.be/hKWmFWRVLlU

:lol: Nice freaking find. I admit, I busted out laughing at the end.

No, you still have missed the point. Just because Bulldog "crossed the line" on HIS show does not allow you to break the rules on THIS board, even with a disclaimer.

I'm sorry, did Bulldog make a political post on a football board? He didn't? But, you admit you did. IIRC, SDS and the moderators have no control on what Bulldog blathers on about on his radio show. Bulldog may have crossed the line on his radio show, but he did not cross the line here. You appear to be the only person who has crossed a line here.

Seriously? The Ravens were the Cleveland Browns, but after a legal tussle, agreed to leave the "Browns" name and legacy in Cleveland. You really needed someone to tell you that?

Bucknell University has a football team? My bad. Apparently they do. Their nickname is the "Bisons". I see the connection now: BUFFALO Bills -> Bucknell BISONS

Wow, such logical rational thought. We must ban you. The irrational must get their "meat". Even if Reed did not mean the "pay me" quote to be tongue in cheek, I still wouldn't fault him. How much does it take the present BUFFALO Bills for him to support the team? Bumpkis sounds about right. What will it take for Reed to support the theoretical Toronto Bills? Gonna have to pay the man.

Means the Kool Aid is very addicting. Psh. The last time the Bills had so much "young and hungry" talent was during the Jauron years. That worked out well, didn't it?

The only thing "fishy" about the party was the NCAA. The NCAA is a corrupt broken POS that needs to be tossed to the curb.

There's one in every crowd. 47

You have missed my point. This can said about any team during any close game at any point in the game. We both made assumptions about the same game. Assumptions in regard to game outcomes are meaningless. Good or bad. So, no, the Bills were not a team that could have been 9-7 or 10-6. Lets take a closer look at the Jets lost. Everybody wants to blame Rogers. Did he have a good game? No he did not. Neither did some of the other players. The Bills offense that game was marginal. Third down efficiency: 22% Fourth down efficiency: 0% Red Zone efficiency: 0% * Goal to Go efficiency: 0% * EJ 's completion rate: 45% * Disclosure: efficiency based on scoring TDs from that point. The Bills made 3 trips into the Jets red zone and walked away with 3 FG. Think about that. 3 trips into the red zone, ZERO TDs. Rogers did not lose that game, the team lost that game. Agreed. Looking forward to seeing the young players develop. It was the case. But what idiot bets the season on a QB that is one concussion away from retirement?

Possibly. Crossman has a history of producing bad ST. What makes you think a couple of players will all of a sudden fix that deficiency? QB's: There were question marks going into the start of last season about this group. By the end of the year, the only question that was answered was that EJ has the highest potential. Beyond that, question marks still remain. Continuity is only valid if the situation is good. Continuing in a bad situation is still bad. IMHO, Hackett was part of the problem last year. He still remains a question mark. Despite no longer being a rookie, Marrone still has question marks surrounding him after making numerous questionable decisions last year. The biggest being running an uptempo no huddle attack with a rookie OC, a rookie QB, and 2 rookie WR. Watkins: The homers have already classified him as a significant upgrade and play maker. Over who? Watkins hasn't played a single down yet in the NFL. It is possible Watkins could be "that guy" from day one, but it is not very probable. Even Megatron and J. Jones took a year or two to develop. Watkins will become a great player, in a year or two. Just probably not this year, even "on paper".

This is purely a case of delusion or of people flat out choosing to live in fantasy land. The Bills were 6-10 last year. The Bills were not "almost" 9-7 or "almost" 10-6. They were. 6-10. That's the record. Trying to claim anything different is playing the "if only" and "shoulda, coulda, woulda" game. The reality of playing the "if only" and "shoulda, coulda, woulda" can be applied to any game by any team at anytime. Atlanta? If only the Falcons had not fumbled the ball. No overtime needed. Patriots? They punted six times that game. If only they converted one of those third downs. No late drive and FG would have been needed. I could produce more examples, but I think I got my point across. Let's stop deluding ourselves into believing last years team was really a "10-6 team disguised as a 6-10 team". Here's hoping (at the very least) they are a 6-10 team on the verge of becoming a "winning team" this year, and a playoff(+) team next year.

Was it a mistake? Or was it a transition/evaluation thing? Actually, if Pegula does in fact become the team owner, regardless of the team record, I could see him granting Whaley/Marrone at least one more year to show him they are the guys to turn it around.

Very well could have been. Stadium capacity is listed as 47,000 and MLB was looking to expand around the time the drawing was made. http://www.hardballtimes.com/smart-growth-and-mlb-a-virtual-history/ According to the original article, the stadium drawing was done in 1958, but the Bills were not awarded until 1959.