BillnutinHouston

Since you apparently misread my post as a "suggestion" that we sign the exact list of players I mentioned, let me rephrase: there is some sense in the "building through the draft" philosophy, in the context of the new CBA that contains a cap floor. You pick a SELECT group of players who "produce" (to use the term Buddy used today), and pay them accordingly so they stay for a long time. Do you not see how (over a period of time and 2-3 drafts) that can build a solid roster and avoid key free agent losses that we have suffered in the past? To me that strategy works much better for Buffalo than trying (usually unsuccessfully) to lure a few high profile free agents away from the Washingtons, Miami's and New York's of the NFL. I know it's hard to think long term, but try.

Note to the thinking Bills fan: The interesting thing about the Bills spending philosophy is that while there may be no splash "now", they can (and almost have to, with the new cap floor) use the cap $ to build a solid foundation of young vets that (wait for it...) will be around a long time as the core of the team. Meaning, theoretically, they can lock up players like Kyle Williams, Wood, Levitre, Stevie Johnson, Poz, Byrd, Fitz, Spiller/Moats/Bell (maybe, if they develop as hoped) as their core group who can grow together over the next 5-7 years. This also means that potential young stars like Dareus and Aaron Williams will actually STAY ON THE ROSTER after they've played out their rookie contract. Wouldn't this be a refreshing change to the perpetual roster turnover that so many of us have lamented over the years? And deep down don't we all realize that this is how you build a winner? It's not the glittery instant gratification we all like, but there is some logic to Buddy's philosophy if you're into that boring "solid foundation" stuff. I think to see some evidence of this, we'll need to be hearing about some contract extensions being put in place relatively soon.

I agree that in this unusual year we'll probably re-sign Poz. I would imagine with such a "short" offseason and minimal time to prepare, incumbents (guys with time already in the system/with the coaches) come at a premium as opposed to bringing in new blood that the coaches haven't coached. If it's a toss-up talent-wise, you go with the known commodity.

Thanks. What you wrote makes no sense, but thanks.

I guess the OP and several others of you never saw this thread.

I was thinking (using best French accent a Bills fan can muster) he has a certain "Je ne sais quoi".

Elan - now there's a word I didn't expect to see here.

Just think about the average IQ level of the owners' side vs. that of the players' side. It's really an unfair fight.

Neither of us know the plan details yet, but I have 2 counterpoints for you: 1) The higher cap floor that you fear MAY very well be offset on the revenue side by the more favorable revenue sharing arrangement: with (relatively) more money shifting to the smaller market teams than had been the case before, it offsets the higher cap floor - thus putting the smaller market teams in a better position relative to their larger market rivals. 2) The establishment of a cap floor prevents any team from significantly underspending relative to other teams - thus NARROWING the competitive gap among the teams, not widening it. Good point. I'm sure THIS TIME the Bills were like EF Hutton. When they talked, people listened.

Albert Breer reported that he had just spoken to the Jags' owner (Wayne Weaver?) off camera. Breer reported that the Jags owner told him that while he was very unhappy with the last revenue sharing plan (from 2006), he was "very happy" with the one that the owners just approved today. If this perception is accurate and we extrapolate this news to the Bills, it could very well mean that the Bills as a business entity have the potential to remain financially strong and viable in WNY through the duration of the 10-year agreement. Good news as I see it - possibly the big news of the day for Buffalo fans.

Apparently JP Losman is driving the first tractor. Good to see he came back to finish "cleaning up".

Agree that it looks good. I'm not Facebook savvy so I don't know who the Facebook photos belong to, but I assume its the Bills. Not sure why they're so stingy with the photos. They post like 1-2 per day? Seems silly that we only get to see the 50-yard line logo from a mile away.

OK I follow things pretty closely and I do not recall that at all. Never heard Nix reference increased spending of any kind. Can you provide a link? Or can anyone else substantiate?

Since you asked about starters, I wouldn't want to see any cut. Maybe traded - then you at least try to get some value.

jw, Could you kindly provide a full list of jw-approved topics for discussion here? I want to be sure I don't offend. BTW, thanks for starting another Toronto thread - I can't help but enjoy the irony...and hypocrisy...in that.

Not sure what conclusion you can draw from that, when there's this.

This goes much deeper than selling seats, winning games and building new stadiums. I would submit that, due mainly to regional demographics (per capita income and not merely population), the Bills have to sell their product to the WNY market at a discount. According to published reports, Bills tickets are the least expensive in the NFL, and it's reasonable to assume that their rates for corporate suites, advertising, etc. are all similarly discounted relative to their competitors. Even if EVERY seat and suite were sold, the RATE that they are locked into is still low. This understanding of the WNY market is exactly why (IMO) Wilson has not in recent years asked WNY to build a new stadium - a new venue combined with the old demographics represents a financial step backward, not forward (Wilson would be financing at least some stadium debt without significantly increasing his revenue generation). He understands the futility of trying to charge more than the market will bear. You don't walk into a "Dollar Store" and expect to see the kind of merchandise that would be sold at Nordstrom's. If the Bills are trying to tap into some wealthier clientele, I would think that most thoughtful fans would recognize that as a factor that will improve our competitiveness on the field, rather than cursing Canada and longing for the good old days. It's true that most teams don't sell their home games, but most teams don't operate in a discounted market, either.

Not asking anyone to LIKE sharing our Bills with Toronto, but try to think with your head and not with your heart, just for a minute, and answer these questions: Can you honestly say you disagree with a business strategy that calls for regionalizing the franchise? Who are we to say "no" to regionalizing yet demand a payroll that rivals the big NFL markets? Do you really think you can have it both ways? Do we have a "right" to the Bills forever? Say YOU buy the Bills. What legitimate BUSINESS strategy for the franchise will you pursue that keeps the team in WNY long term, and does NOT include regionalizing? Discuss.

A good read on the uni details

Maybe it was the video stream but they look kind of boring to me. At least not "fashion forward" as John Murphy called the old ones. The home blue doesn't "pop" like the throwbacks did, and the road whites aren't nearly as nice as the throwback whites were.

This morning, Russ may be able to clarify things a bit.

Surprised that nobody yet has commented on this paragraph from the article: "The higher floor proposal could cause some problems for the lower revenue teams such as the Cincinnati Bengals and the Buffalo Bills. Along with the salary cap, teams have to pay an average of about $27 million a year in benefits."

Cap? What cap? I'd re-sign Florence as long as he promises to no longer commit 5 penalities a game.

Your OP stated "Look back at all the decisions he has made throughout the team's 50+ year history and try to not make any excuses for him while analyzing his decisions, and just see if it doesn't look like he was intentionally trying to fail." Of course your post couldn't reasonably have discussed ALL of Ralph's decisions, so let me ask this - how do seemingly illogical moves as scrapping and renovating the conditioning facilities and bringing in Dave Wannstedt as another high-priced defensive coach fit into your paradigm? Or would you argue that those, like his chartable endeavors, are "meaningless facts"? Just pointing out the silliness of painting Ralph's reign in such stark, black and white terms. Rarely do such simplistic arguments stand up to scrutiny.

In case anyone is like me and curious about how a supplemenal draft would work, if there is one, I'm attaching this: Can't vouch for its accuracy, but sounds reasonable