SoTier

I think that some posters misunderstood the analyst's criteria. He's basing his picks on play/production vs cost. Poyer is best because he's played great at a bargain price. Lotulelei is the worse not because he's played so poorly but because he hasn't played well enough to justify his big $$$. In that context, I think he's probably spot on.

Success in the NFL is measured by wins, especially in the playoffs. The Bills haven't won a playoff game since 1995 or 1996. New England, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh all have as many or more Super Bowl victories as the Bills have playoff appearances in the last twenty years. Last year's team had some unexpected gifts -- the injury to Roethlisberger and playing the Titans before they swapped QBs come to mind. They once again failed to beat the Patriots in two tries. They did win 10 games but then they went one and done in the playoffs because they couldn't score late in games when they needed to. I'm not dissing Beane and/or McDermott because they've done a decent job, but I'm not ready to annoint Beane and/or McDermott as gods for only doing marginally better than some of their predecessors at this early point in their tenure. Measured against what other GMs/HCs around the league have done in their first three years with other organizations, Beane/McDermott are not all that impressive. This is the thing for me. Do they give Allen the support he needs to be truly successful if he's good enough? Are they smart enough to use their cache of cap money wisely to bring in the right players and then draft the right players to make the offense better? The Bills may make the playoffs but they aren't winning many playoff games without a significantly better offense. This is 2020 not 2000.

Economic models never deal with reality because they assume that everybody reacts economically rationally to every situation. Philosophical political models also fail because they don't account for human emotions. Economic and/or political ideologues are great at spewing wonderful sounding ideas -- and visiting misery on millions if they get opportunities to actually put their ideologies into action. The twentieth century saw that repeatedly.

I didn't vote because I need to see more success on the field. I don't care that the FO looks "competent". That means "nothing", especially when looking at a short time span of three years. Tom Donahoe looked "competent" three years in as did Doug Whaley. Beane and McDermott have looked good so far, but unless the team takes the next step -- winning playoff games -- then they aren't significantly better than predecessors.

In this case, just consider the source. Lewrockwell.com has been predicting the collapse of the US dollar -- and consequently, the world economy -- for all of its decades-long existence. It advocates an alternative economic system that's similar to Adam Smith's in Wealth of Nations, which was written in 1776. It supports a return to the gold standard and totally opposes any government intervention in the economy, which makes it a favorite of radical pepper types who hunker down in their bunkers (or would hunker down in their bunkers if they could only get off the internet) waiting for "the end".

Oh, just stop with the "we can't afford to acquire talented players" bull manure! The Bills have $82 million in cap space, so they can certainly afford to upgrade the team, especially when it might mean the difference between another one and done in the WC round team and a Super Bowl appearance. If Beane is the GM that so many on TSW claim he is then he'll be able to bring in the right FAs on good contracts that will enable the Bills to take the next step this coming season -- like actually winning a playoff game -- not wasting another two or three years or decades making excuses. Other teams -- Kansas City, New Orleans, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Minnesota, not to mention New England -- all manage to regularly win playoff games, including conference championships and even sometimes a Super Bowl, by bringing in key FAs on good contracts. Dawkins and Milano aren't going to get huge pay days. They are second tier FAs -- solid players in the right situations -- but not going to break any team's bank unless they're up against the cap. White is the real deal but he's a CB not a QB or an edge rusher and the best DBs come a lot cheaper than QBs or edge rushers. As first rounders, Allen and Edmunds have two more years to prove what they are worth as FAs as at present, they are both worth picking up their fifth year options. Without upgrading the offensive talent around Allen, the Bills will never figure out if he's a $10 million a year QB or a $30 million a year QB. The same is true with Edmunds on the defensive side, although top LBs cost about half what top QBs cost.

Seriously, ma'am, are you washing all the bags for your entire block every week? I think I could wash more than fifty reusable cloth bags in 1 load in my washing machine. Moreover, I didn't realize a person could get e-coli from a putting a box of crackers next to a sealed chunk of cheddar next to a non-leaking carton of milk next to a bottle of V-8, next to two cans of mushroom soup top by a box of tissue and a bag of Ore Ida shoestrings. I guess I learn something new every day even at my age. Your arguments are coming from the same place the dire warnings of the anti-seat belt crowd about the dangers of being trapped in a burning car by a seat belt: Hysteria via Exaggerationville.

I missed your original reply because it was gone before I returned to this site. No matter. Here's my thoughts on the "research" you presented as well as some of the comments made by some other posters. The numerous articles under this topic mostly cite the same article, often at second or third hand. It may be that the study's emphasis was misplaced or misinterpreted by the authors who used the data for their articles but I doubt that. In her quotes, study's author seemed convinced that she had "proved" that the bans are "bad". The most serious flaw with the study is that it doesn't account for volume of sales. I don't know what percentage of trash bags sold in the US are 30 gallon or higher, but my guess is that they make up at least 80 of the sales just from looking at story displays. For easy math, say that 100 represents all trash bags sold. 80% of that is 80 bags. Now, if that the sales of the large bags jumped 120% then that increase would be terrible ... the total bags sold would jump to 196, with 176 of them being large bags. A 120% increase in the small bags would yield an 24 bags however, so it's not quite as drastic ... but not all of the small bag market share went up by 120%: the 13 gallon bag sales increased barely 10% and the 8 gallon bag sales topped out at about 80% increase, so the 120% increase was for only 1 small segment of the total bag sales -- and at the end of the study period was trending downward. This study doesn't look at the differences in what happens to the vast majority of single-use plastic bags vs trash bags. Trash bags generally wind up in landfills. Single use plastic bags that are used for trash or thrown into trash bins also generally wind up in landfills. The bans on these bags aren't aimed at those. Landfills aren't the best thing in the world but it's better than single use plastic bags littering the environment and causing problems. The first word in the phrase "reduce, reuse, recycle" is reuse. A single reusable shopping bag can be used hundreds of times, significantly reducing litter in the environment and space in landfills. Some of my bags have got to be approaching 1000 uses as they're more than a decade old. Unfortunately, voluntary efforts to reduce the use of single use plastic bags haven't produced good enough results. The reuse and recycling of single use plastic bags have also failed to significantly diminish the unwanted presence of these bags in the landscape, waterways, sewage plants, etc. Unless you have some kind of leakage in your shopping bags, they do not have to be washed weekly since most of foods purchased in supermarkets come in packages of some kind, including fresh produce which can be put into small plastic bags. Look at the bright side: if bans on single use plastic bags increase the demand for paper grocery bags, the prices paid by recyclers for paper may increase, which would be a boon for all the Cub Scouts and other organizations doing paper drives. ?

I lived in Nebraska for two years in the 1970s. I was never actually was in a tornado, but they occurred in rural areas around Lincoln. A big one hit suburban Omaha the last year I lived there, killing three people. Some precautions: #1 - Get a house with a basement and outfit a corner (preferably in SW corner) as a "safe room/area" -- no windows/no wall shelving/seating/possibly a strong wall separating it from the rest of the basement. #2 - Build/install an in-ground storm shelter for a home without a basement. They are now available as prefab units. #3 - Invest in a NOAA emergency weather alert radio that can be programmed for your area. #4 - Take every tornado warning seriously, and get your family, your pets, and yourself to your shelter ASAP.

I second this. They are in desperate need of playmakers at WR, RB, and TE plus they could use upgrades along the OL. They simply don't have the offensive support for Allen to enable him to become a proficient NFL QB, and without improving their offense significantly, they really can't be competitive in the playoffs.

Are you talking any position or specifically WRs? Some positions are not considered valuable enough to warrant spending a top five or top ten pick on. Teams frequently don't start using their first round picks on interior OL positions until later, so the bottom half or third of the first round frequently produces Pro Bowl guards and centers. OTOH, it's pretty clear that QBs taken in the bottom half of the first round aren't likely to find much success. Right off, I can think of only 4 QBs taken at #16 or lower since 2000 who have had real success in the NFL: 2000 - Chad Pennington; 2005 - Aaron Rodgers; 2008 - Joe Flacco; 2018 - Lamar Jackson. I think if you look at success and draft position without regard to position, you are probably right that there's not a big difference in the number of busts from positions 1-10 and positions 22-32. However, that's a very simplistic and unrealistic view because some positions are considered more valuable, and the best prospects at that position get snapped up early even if they aren't as good prospects as other players at positions that aren't valued as much and are, therefore, much more likely to bust.

I think that's a false perception that results from the fact that we often focus on the first round guys who bust but ignore the second rounders who do the same. The further back in the draft a player is taken, the more likely he is to fail to become even a solid NFL player much less a star playmaker. A lot of it is perception, too. People remember the highly touted first rounders who crash and burn and the handful of Day 2 or Day 3 guys who become Pro Bowlers but the players outside the first round who don't pan out don't even make a blip on people's radar except for maybe personal reasons. Case in point is Zay Jones; the only reason we even recognize his name is because he was a 2nd round pick for the Bills who busted. On the matter of trading up in the draft, IMO, I'm okay with trading up to get into the top third/top half of the first round but I think trading up in later rounds is a waste of resources because of the increased chances of faiure.

Really? What evidence? Post a link or it's simply your opinion.

Exactly. This "banning single use plastic bags is worse for the environment" claim is bull manure. It's simply an excuse for people to continuing the same lazy, selfish, short-sighted behavior that they've indulged in since single use plastic bags became a retail staple in the 1980s. Environmental groups have tried for at least two decades to reduce the impact of single use plastic bags on the environment for two decades. The major supermarket chains like Wegmans and Tops in Upstate NY have been selling reusable shopping bags all that time while smaller shopping chains like Aldis have always had "bring your own bags or pay for our bags" policies. Unfortunately, the vast majority of single use plastic merchandise bags are NOT recycled or used for another purpose once they leave the stores but end up in landfills or littering the landscape, which is exactly why the ban was necessary. It's time for individuals to take some personal responsibility for their environmental impact. This is not an onerous burden. Remembering to bring in your reusable shopping bags when you go shopping is simply a habit like remembering to carry your drivers license with you when you drive your car. PS - Smaller, thinner plastic bags specifically designed for picking up dog poop have been available for years now.

If the Bills are going to trade up, then I'd prefer they'd do it for one of the top three, and if they don't acquire at least a solid veteran WR in FA, then getting one of the three pro ready kids is even more important. If they don't get better receivers for Allen for the coming season, when exactly are they going to do so???

As a group, Foster, McKenzie and Williams simply aren't good enough to make up 3/5 of the WR corps of a team that's serious about winning playoff games. Foster and Williams were UDFAs while McKenzie was a fifth round pick in 2017. In general, where a player is drafted -- or not drafted -- indicates what pro talent evaluators think of his talent, which is his potential to be successful in the NFL. The UDFAs or 6th or 7th rounders who become stars are the exceptions rather than the rule. The Bills need a bonafide WR1 and another WR that would compete with Beasley and Brown, not more WRs to compete with fringe players like Foster/McKenzie/Williams who ought to be competing against each other to determine which one makes the team. Competition isn't going to make a player better unless he has talent that he hasn't maximized, which is probably unlikely for most young NFL players, especially players who have actually made an NFL team despite significant odds against their success. Competition is not going to make a WR bigger or faster since those physical traits can't be changed. Competition isn't going to make a WR a better route runner or have better footwork on the sidelines or improve his pass catching ability; good coaching and/or experience can improve those to varying degrees. What's foolish is thinking that a team can win playoff games with regularity with a roster containing a couple of stars, some decent pros, and mostly guys who weren't likely to make most other playoff teams. The Bills need to upgrade the bottom of their roster, especially on offense, and they should start with the WRs and RBs.

This is what all the teams that are consistent playoff and Super Bowl contenders do with regularity. Think New England, Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Minnesota (a team that's repeatedly made the playoffs without having a top QB), New Orleans, Green Bay, Seattle. They don't all do it the same way, but their FOs are significantly better at acquiring the right talent at the positions needed to win football games, including on the coaching and scouting/player evaluation staffs. I don't care if the FAs or draft picks are "big names" but I expect them to be at least the same or better than the players they replace. This is especially true on the offense where the Bills are lacking NFL quality starters at a couple of skill positions and severely lacking in NFL caliber depth. Competition for starting RB would be a positive but there shouldn't be any competition with the current incumbents for backup RB. Gore and Yeldin are simply not good enough RBs for a team that's aiming to win playoff games. With the WRs, outside of Beasley and Brown, the same is true. Competition isn't going to make the rest of the Bills WR corps more talented.

My fear is that this may very well be considered "good enough" not only by many fans but by the Pegulas as well. Certainly if the FO fails to upgrade key offensive positions, it will be a strong signal that that's their mindset. A team can be beset by injuries (see Pittsburgh and Philly) or a team's QB may not be the guy they hoped he would be (see Trubisky and Mariota) but if the FO isn't committed to putting a serious Super Bowl contender out on the field every year by developing/acquiring playmakers, the chances of that team ever winning the Lombardi become slim or none (see Cincinatti). IMO winning the division because the rest of the division are bottom feeders means nothing. Winning in the playoffs is what counts, and unless the Bills improve significantly on offense, they're unlikely to do much of that. So, for me, minimum success in 2020, barring some problem outside the team's control, winning at least one playoff game and having a real chance to win the next one in the fourth quarter. I don't think that SF is that much of an outlier in the current NFL, which is what Happy Gillmore was referencing. San Francisco lost in the NFCCCG in Jim Harbaugh's first season (2011) and lost the Super Bowl the next year (2012). Seattle lost in the divisional round in Pete Carroll's third season (2012) and won the Super Bowl the next year (2013). Philadelphia won the SB in Doug Pederson's 2nd season (2017). Los Angeles Rams lost in the WC round in Sean McVay's first season (2017) and made the Super Bowl in his second (2019). Chicago won 12 games and lost in the WC round in Matt Nagy's first season (2018) but backslid in 2019 at least partly (and possibly primarily) because Trubisky hasn't developed as expected. Green Bay won 13 games and lost in the NFCCCG in Matt LaFleur's first season (2019). San Francisco lost in the SB in Kyle Shanahan's third season (2019). In the fourth season of a rebuild, barring key injuries, if the Bills do not do better than one and done in the playoffs, then it raises serious questions about Beane/McDermott's ability to produce a serious Super Bowl contender. If Beane doesn't upgrade the offensive talent then I'm not willing to blame Daboll for the Bills offensive failures. OCs and position coaches can't turn JAGs and non-NFL caliber players into playmakers, and that's what the Bills have had way too many of on offense in the McDermott/Beane regime.

As a retired computer programmer, I found the book the movie Hidden Figures was based on even better because it gives you more insight to the monumentality of Johnson and her cohorts' achievements. These ladies were literally human "computers" armed only with pencils, paper/chalkboards, and pretty primitive calculating aids like adding machines and slide rules. The computer (it was one room-sized physical behemoth called a "mainframe" computer) that guided and powered the Apollo missions to the moon wasn't even as powerful -- and certainly not as reliable -- as desktop computers from 20 or 25 years ago. The ladies in the NASA computing units literally had to manually do the same calculations as the computer to make sure that the machine got it right.

What examples of "great player evaluation" from Beane and his scouts are you talking about? Tre White, Dion Dawkins, and Matt Milano were all selections from Whaley/McDermott and the previous Bills scouting department. The jury is still out on the two draft classes that Beane actually had a hand in. Allen and Edmunds have been promising, both have been impressive at times, and Edmunds started playing significantly better in the second half of last season, but neither has yet earned a reputation as a top NFL player at his position. In the 2019 class, Ed Oliver and Devin Singletary seem like keepers but Cody Ford is very questionable. Dawson Knox has made some good plays but much too infrequently. Beane's "great player evaluation" of veterans has been singularly unimpressive, especially in 2017 and 2018. The list of Beane's mediocrity and outright failures in acquiring veterans include Jordan Matthews, Kelvin Benjamin, Corey Coleman, AJ McCarron, Derek Anderson, Star Loutelelei, Trent Williams, and Frank Gore. Only in 2019 did Beane and his scouts actually find some solid veteran players who contributed significantly to the team. Just how good or bad Beane is as a talent evaluator still remains to be seen. This statement is based on myth not fact. There have only been 2 times during Brady's tenure when the Pats have had to call on their backup QBs to play because their starter couldn't. That's not "wisdom" but rather luck. The first was in 2008 when Brady was injured in the first game and missed the rest of the season. Matt Cassel led the team to an 11-5 season but the Pats still missed the playoffs. In 2016, Brady missed the first four games of the season because of suspension, and Jimmy Garoppolo and Jacoby Brisett combined for a 3-1 record. Cassel was a fifth or sixth rounder, Brissett a third rounder, and Garoppolo was taken in the second round Belichick's "wisdom" came from off-loading these three QBs to other teams for picks while their values were the highest. Cassel was traded to KC in 2009, Brissett was traded to Indy early in 2017, and Garoppolo was traded to the Niners later in 2017. The QB who lasted the longest as a Brady backup was UDFA Brian Hoyer who spent 4 full seasons and part of another with the Patriots, never starting a game.

Dawkins isn't the best LT in the NFL but he's better than a lot of them, and a team needs at least adequate play at OT. The market rate is what it is, and the Bills don't have anybody else as good as he is, so pay him. You can't build a real Super Bowl contender with a roster featuring a handful of top players backed up by never-weres and never-will-bes.

My view of the Brandon era (2006-2018) is somewhat different. Wilson essentially turned over control to Brandon in 2006. Levy was a figurehead, and when he decided to say 'adios", tellingly, the Bills didn't bother to fill the GM position. Brandon and Jauron actually made personnel decisions, 2006-2009. Certainly the Bills operated with second and third rate FO and coaching talent (maybe scouting, too) from 2006 through 2014. I think Whaley's ability to identify talent, especially in unexpected places, masked a lot of sins. I think that the Rex Ryan hire was Terry Pegula exercising his perogative as owner, and that debacle led Pegula to turn back to Brandon, eventually giving him control of both the Bills and the Sabres. I think that the hiring of new offensive coaches and improved performance in FA in 2019 reflect Beane as GM without being under whatever monetary restrictions that Brandon, always the money-ball guy, seems to have imposed.

Brady wasn't even good enough to be a full time starter at Michigan. He played well when he got the opportunity but Drew Henson was the primary starter. If Henson hadn't chosen to play baseball , he would have gone higher than Brady. Part of the Henson/Brady "rivalry" was athletic department politics (the AD favored Henson in order to keep Henson playing baseball), but Brady was not clearly superior to Henson even without interference by the AD.

If we, as a species, didn't embrace change, we'd still be wandering naked in the warmer parts of the world, hiding from all the carnivores big enough to eat us, and grubbing/scavenging for whatever we could find to eat. Where do you think change should have stopped? With the use of fire? With the domestication of the wolf? With learning to cultivate crops? With the invention of writing? Where do you draw the line where you oppose more changes? Every change brings positives and negatives, but generally, those changes make things "good" for things better in the long run. That's a generalization that's totally unsupported by any facts. Why do you think that just because a player makes big $$$ that he would opposed to sharing the largess from the NFL's pot of gold with his teammates? NFL teams stress being "a band of brothers" rather than individuals, so it's more likely that opposition to a 17th game would stem from individual perspectives not from a general divide between the elite and the rest of the players. FTR, since the "union leadership" is answerable through elections to the rank-and-file, why would they favor the relatively few players making huge salaries to the detriment of the majority? If the NFLPA leadership opposes the new CBA, it's because it's not giving the rank and file good enough salary, health insurance, and retirement benefits.

Mea culpa. They did play him at RT. I think that maybe he was drafted with the intention to play him at LT and he just didn't play well enough to beat out Jonas Jennings.