klos63

he may not be a third string back. He's capable of more. If Jackson fades this year, Brown is 2nd string.

Neither Spiller or Jackson are workhorses, they can't carry the load. If one of them goes down, we need a back who can be a number one type back. That is why this trade makes a lot of sense. Also, for the future because of the status of Spiller and Jackson.

You won't trade a 4 th round draft pick for a RB, but would you draft a RB with a fourth round pick? Possibly. Lynch was a bad trade, also one more mistake away from suspension. Blount was a guy on a one year deal, so that diminishes value. Sproles will be 31 this season, coming off a poor year.

Moreno signed for over $3mm for this year, Blount about $4MM for 2 years, hardly peanuts. And maybe they wouldn't want to play here with Spiller and Jackson ahead of them. Why is it strange to trade a 3rd rounder for a RB, would you have a problem drafting a RB with a 3rd? In limited playing time, Brown has shown he can play in the NFL, that's more than anyone drafted today can say.

no

would rather have a NFL player than 'guys off the street'

I understand it's your opinion.I agree you are entitled to your opinion. I read a lot of these comments and wonder what many of them are based on. You obviously don't share the same viewpoint as the Bills do. They feel he can be a 3 down player according to Whaley, you don't. You think all the other teams would have passed on him one more time. I am just curious as to how you formed your opinion. I don't follow the draft like others do. I just wait to see who they pick and then wait to see them play. Then I judge the pick.

what makes you think he would be there some 30 picks later in round 4?

exactly, which is why he is now on the outside.

I'm not saying they did things correctly with free agency, but do you think it's reasonable to sign Campbell, Miller, Vanek , Briere, Drury, Tallinder... as free agents and still have cap space to put a full team together?

Actually, it wasn't 4 consecutive first round picks, i would have been every other year and to assume they all would have been number 1 overall would have been quite a stretch. At the time, it wasn't a bad idea to sign vanek.

why were they good when he bought them? Regier must have built a good team and Ruff coached them well. Who hired Regier? Quinn.

This means nothing, everyone who posts here thinks they can run a team, a draft, free agency, coach in games.....

let's look at the record when Quinn was around compared to when he wasn't. First go around with the team they reach the finals in 1999 after he brought in Ruff. Then he came back after the Regis episode and they were successful again. He leaves when Pegula arrives and now we stink... really bad. Not saying it's all on him, but there might be something there. The Sabres told Drury they would match any offer he got. Drury said they would give the Sabres an opportunity to counter an offer. He did not give them that opportunity. This comes from Quinn. You can believe your source or him. This is not my assessment. Although I am accurate in that they were cup contenders and if we were not down 4 defensemen in game 7, there is a good chance we win the cup that year.

Whatever your feelings are, the facts are the were Cup contenders and my point about the bottom line relates to your Drury/Briere comment. They did not sign Briere because of money, they did not sign Drury because he renegged on a deal with the team. But with the Bills/NFL, this is a huge money maker even in a small market and spending up to the cap. Those situations don't need to happen with the Bills.

The Sabres were legitimate Stanley Cup contenders for a couple years under these 2 guys. I'll take that over what we've had recently. And Golisano is worried about the bottom line - can't lose money owning an NFL team, a far cry from NHL.

Seems like this could only be positive news. My guess, like others have said , is that a lot had been done behind the scenes for some time now. I think Ralph knew he was nearing the end, how could he have not. If our best hopes are true, even though the success on the field has been limited, Wilson's legacy will be that he kept the team here long after he passed.

If we had more talent we would have made the playoffs. Jackson is a wonderful player, but to assume he will be affective for 3 more years is unrealistic. If it happens great, but don't plan on it.

Wasn't he with the team for 3 seasons? Seems like a pretty fair shot to me.

What the hell is a blue collar team? Stadium? I know the phrase blue collar, it does not apply to a multi billion dollar sport where it's lowest paid players make close to $1 Million per year. This is a phrase I really can't stand in reference to sports teams, also 'lunch pail' players - who brings a 'lunch pail' to work anymore ? Nobody since Archie Bunker.

The NFL seems to be doing quite well with their TV contracts, I'm guessing the networks are quite pleased with the 'flawed slate of games' . So you won't watch games that don't involve the AFC or the Bills? How many fans out there want to spend their Thanksgiving or stay up late Monday night watching the Bills? Be serious, the Bills high TV ratings are for local viewership - Buffalo fans watch the Bills games. The rest of the nation probably isn't too hot on them right now. I doubt the networks want a MNF game with Tim Tuel at the helm.

Exactly, this is such a useless discussion. We are now analyzing the percentages of AFC / NFC matchups on primetime. Seriously. I wish my life so free of obilgations that I can worry about things like this. I'm looking forward to the season, I really won't give the schedule a second thought except- who do we play next week? It's not really very interesting. Better matchups, more high profile teams for better ratings. It's just like Yankees / Red Sox always on ESPN - it's what the majority of viewers want to watch - viewers = $$$$. It's really quite simple.

you are assuming the weather won't suck in Buffalo when San Diego and Miami vist. That's a big assumption.

I don't believe I have contradicted myself, but my personal preference is OT. I think it's a higher priority than any other offensive position.

I would hope the new owner has a better understanding of the draft and the importance of the offensive line than you do. I doubt GM's get fired for making 'safe' picks, if that means building a great offensive line. They get fired for making bad picks. Picking a strong OT is never a bad thing to do. You can get all the great WR you can find but if you have a crappy offensive line, kiss the season goodbye. It's that simple.