That's No Moon

Well, you'll be alone on that path because that's not going to happen. You know why they need that? Because someone else will give it to them. That's why. That's the only reason they need. And "someone else" is out there and it will happen. Rather than ***** footing around just come out and say it, you don't care of the Bills are in Buffalo or not. That is the choice. Either play the game and have a team or die on your principles and don't. That's your choice. None of your strawman examples are valid. They aren't going to happen. They aren't going to happen because they don't need to happen. There are several cities in this country with wealthy people who would be more than happy to write the check not only for the Bills but for a stadium also. Pretending there aren't and that you are calling some sort of epic bluff where the Pegulas have no options is ridiculous. You've set up a scenario for yourself where you will be unhappy either way, either the public will pay for part of the stadium and the Bills will stay or they won't and they won't. You get to be upset either way. Congratulations.

Then stop watching them now because that's where your proposal leads.

The question then is would you root for the Bills of they are not in Buffalo and I, personally, would not. Not would I have a reason to return to Buffalo and spend money so both entities would essentially be dead to me.

Yeah, I'm sure the cartel that is the NFL will go right ahead and vote in a super majority to change that rule. Keep dreaming.

Here's the problem. All of us know the economic argument. We know this. If that's the argument you want to stick with you are right, they should let the Bills leave. I'm not sure how many people actually agree with that because that is the real discussion. Enter a partnership where the public pays a significant portion and higher ticket prices, or watch NFL football on TV forever. Those are the options, no bloviation is required. There is no perfect world where the billionaires pay for their own stuff. Do you want it or not yes or no. They just said they won't sign a lease extension without a stadium deal. What do you think that means? That isn't an option. The NFL made it against their own rules after Green Bay. You can't do it so anything related to this line of thinking is a wish and a waste of time.

There isn't so the choice is do you want a team or not and that's not a bluff. If you think it is there are many cities you can ask how that works out in the end.

Which recent downtown stadiums are you talking about?

Terry is an older gentleman.

If not though a PS is a nice way to keep collecting a check while you are waiting for an opportunity

Ben Roethlisberger has entered the chat I wonder about that. Bills sold an awful lot of season tickets. Hard to imagine THAT many people will cash out on opening day.

On the plus, borrowing money is as close to free as it has been basically ever. You can build 12 months a year in Vegas. Buffalo is a little more challenging.

I was just explaining how the one reflects on the other. I have no idea if there is actual weight to it or not and I didn't make the original post. See above

Because Hollister doesnt have one.

Kaufusi from Green Bay and Yeboah from the Jets are both on waivers. I'd love to see one of them come in. Even if we dont have a roster spot I wonder if we could lure one onto our PS.

I guess my question would be why didn't he do that already then. Pittsburgh for example needs a better #2 than what they have and there is a much clearer path to future playing time there.

I agree with you. If he doesn't get a chance to play much he's going to have a hard time changing his market value from what it was last year.

He had to pass block one time and he looked like he was going to soil himself.

PEDs have consequences.

I like Isabella FWIW

Basically anything other than Grand Wizard will be fine for a white guy raised in the South.

He's slower than Singletary. Can we come up with a better title than Grand Wizard please?

Which is fine except Kansas City ran all over them and beat them handily, twice. Tennessee ran all over them and beat them handily. New England ran on them the first game and was a very unfortunate play away from beating them. Indianapolis ran all over them in the second half and nearly came back on them. The Baltimore he was two very unusual missed field goals and a historic interception away from being a different game as the offense only had 220 yards in the whole game. It's a really dangerous way to live, particularly when you play against competent defensive teams that ARE capable of slowing your offense down. They don't even need to shut you down, just slowing you down can be enough. They didn't fix it, and I don't think they can fix it this year which is why I said the solution is better offense. However, I'm not sure they did that either and their offensive flaws look to be the same. Maybe I'm wrong and the line is better and they will be able to run and protect a little better. Maybe the addition of Sanders will make a difference. Maybe I'm wrong about the defense and they won't be Charmin soft this year.

Though it is going to give me heartburn I think the solution to our defense issue is just going to have to be to score more points against the better teams. Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New England and Tennessee at a minimum are going to want to run the ball on us. A lot. Need to hold them to the occasional field goal and get 35+ on the board. Win the game 35-31. We aren't going to be holding many people below 24 I don't think.

I'm interested to see the list of players who don't have to clear waivers after they are cut before they can be signed.