Pyrite Gal

I think you are right on this one and the folks who seem to have their panties all up in a wad to cut Johnson because he has shown nothing in our exhibition games are likely misreading this situation.

Having our LT/RT simply look fine simply does not cut if we hope for lightening to strike and for us to make the playoffs this year. To the extent the cap allows (which looks fairly huge for the Bills even after resigning Evans) and of course contingent upon Peters getting medical clearance to show him big money the Bills should simply show him the money. The idea of this somehow setting a precedent beyond a demonstration that the Bills SHOULD give a big contract to any UDFA who merits making the Pro Bowl at an incredibly young age on the OL is ludicrous.

Show Peters the money! Certainly any huge payment to him should be contingent on him getting a medical OK, but I think any feelings the Bills dodged a bullet on this one is a miscalculation of whether we are gonna put the best team we can on the field after a long playoff drought.

I think the hopeful news for the Bills is also that though Stroud was clearly hobbled by injuries last year, the Bills plan is to rely heavily on a wave system of rotating DL players which should mandate that Stroud split duty with Spence Johnson whom the Bills also targeted to get as an FA and also likely with other DTs past starter Williams and 1st round selection McCargo. I have not watched the Jags enough to know how they employed Stroud, but given the rep he developed he seems to have been called upon to be the primary player with Henderson at DT for the Jags rather than use of him in a rotation which should lessen his wear and tear.

I hope someone does do this piece of research based on more knowledge of the situations than I have to make this more than a leviathan task. I agree that this is a unique situation because the Peters play strikes me as pretty unique. It seems relatively rare you would have a UDFA who was a TE get a spot on a roster at tackle and quickly prove not only to be capable of starting at tackle but at the difficult to fill LT position. In fact, this unique quality of play was so good that this youngster is voted in as the starting LT in the AFC on the Pro Bowl squad. This is one of the reason why the worry about setting a precedent by extending his contract so soon after extending his contract seems fairly specious to me. If some other player also makes the Pro Bowl after being taken as a UDFA then I suggest showing them the money and signing them long term as well. This precedent seems fine to me and if the Bills do this, it strikes me as not being a precedent which makes any sense for other Bills to demand we follow.

I would say unequivocally NO. It has been amusing for me to see a few posts on TSW that call for that or seem to want the Bills to emphasize using the Peters situation to develop a rep as tough guys dealing with players. I agree that yes, the Bills should be concerned about the potential for giving Peters a new deal setting a precedent. However, as far as the Bills developing a rep amongst players throughout the league, I actually would prefer as a fan to see us generally seen as a potential soft touch in negotiations as if that becomes a reason why players enter FA thinking of the Bills as a serious possibility I think that is good for us. At most, I think the Bills want to develop a rep as being tough but fair. Certainly as the Peter's situation was one of the first times in the modern era that a Bill who is under contract for several years actually launched a holdout I think it is pretty reasonable for the Bills being tough but fair simply refusing to negotiate until Peters came to camp. However, one of the things I am happiest about is that Peters and Parker actually have said nothing and not provided any fodder to the local press which folks like WGR or Jerry Sullivan would be happy to turn into a controversy which allows them to fill air minutes or column inches so they can sell some commercials. However, particularly to the extent that small market Buffalo would not strike many NFLers as the city they might want to come to, i would much prefer if we had a rep as a soft touch which attracted players here or convinced UDFAs like Peters to throw their lot in with us rather than some other city. I can understand why Brandon and Ralph as businessmen want to be tough in negotiations. However, as one who cares about the sport rather than the business primarily I actually like having the team develop a rep as a fair soft touch as seen in us overpaying Kelsay and paying to extend Schobel when we were under no real obligation to do this.

It depends. If my boss is actually the owner of the operation and I provide a service to the business which provides a reasonable chance that if this service will make a difference between whether the operation has a successful year or not, then my boss is likely a fool if he is willing to take the significant risk that the season will be a failure because he did not pay me resources which he has to get my service. In this case, there is judgment to be made whether: 1. Peters provides a service that makes a reasonable difference of whether this season we produce a successful product or not. -I believe he does because our plan Bs if he does not provide his service is that we move our RT to LT which means that our LT play may well be adequate (at best) but we now gave Chambers being inadequate at the RT position and depth is my big problem on the OL anyway so the loss of a starter puts me in pretty bad shape. 2. Whether my decision to give in to Peters and pay him a bigger contract when he just signed an extension produces such a bad precedent that I am having to deal with player after player trying to force me into redoing his contract. -I think this is a real danger, but getting a Pro Bowl worthy LT as a UDFA is such a rate occurrence I think I can simply put up with the pain of players being foolish in the future. I think Peters being extended to another big contract does set a precedent, but the precedent is that if a player is a UDFA who after he extends proves worthy of being named to the Pro Bowl at the LT or some other positioned judged of high import in the NFL (QB is probably the only other position in the NFL which is generally judged to be of such high import AND is difficult to fill (the best RB in the NFL seems to me to be of greater import than the best LT, but the RB position is so much easier to get extraordinary play from compared to the LT, I value a great LT if I got one more highly than the great RB). To me there is little question that the Bills have the cap room to pay Peters a deal which will satisfy him and likely make him the highest paid Bills player. To me this is a question for the Bills of conflicting principles. if ones principle is to be the best sportsman around then you show him the money. If one's principle is to be the best businessman around then by all means let him rot. It will make it harder for the team to make the playoffs this season after the have failed to make the playoffs this millenium. However, will make running this business much easier.

The worse thing about the non-discussion currently not going on between Peters and the Bills right now is that it has become all about the business and little about the sport. Peters is doing a disservice the Buffalo fans who want to see their team win and also to his teammates who he is taking a tack that may provide financial benefit to him but clearly has then put a less competitive product on the field. Lest some fool jump to the conclusion that since Peters is wrong then the Bills must be right needs to think about this using a little bit more than the Bills cojones as their measure of success. The Bills clearly financially have a deal where both parties contractually agreed to a deal where they get Peters' services for 3 years by the contract (and really 5 years if the Bills judge it to be in their interest to give Peters the franchise tag for two additional years if they judge it to be a financially good deal for them). In exchange for this Peters got the biggest check he ever got in his short life. Nevertheless, it seems pretty clear that due to his hard work and achievements, that Peters IF this were a free market (and it ain't no free market as the NFL and NFLPA have worked together to restrain free trade) that Peter would command a much larger salary for his services and his prospects as a very young LT who copped a Pro Bowl berth. I agree with Peters from a moral standpoint that in a world governed by morality he would simply be compensated for what he produces and what he is worth compared to other players. However, this is a situation which is governed by BUSINESS MORALITY (which those who have studied the philosophical presentations of the great human work Billy Madison know is just a contradiction in terms). The NFL and NFLPA have used the limited exemption from free market rules they have gotten from the government to restrain trade using the complicated rules set forth in the CBA. It makes perfect sense that Peters and HIS agent Parker are not saying anything as their goal is to try to change the reality created by the CBA. There is virtually nothing they can say (if you disagree then simply say what they should say) that will change a reality where the Bills have virtually all the leverage. They could whine to the press if they want, but the Bills under the agreement can simply say so what. By keeping silent Peters still generates about the same pressure on the Bills (probably more than if he said the typical player argument which is to accuse the team of taking food out of kids mouth). Ultimately, the Bills have little effective pressure to make a deal unless Chambers plays as badly as he has been playing (he ain't no LT starter), the Bills back-ups show nothing (which is where Murphy and Estes are due to injury) and the only thing that has not gone Peters way yet is that Walker has been OK (though a near sack by Harrison and a delay of game penalty in the first game mean he is OK at best as fortunately the blocking was very good last game). If Fowler shows the slightest limp then Peters has the leverage to force the Bills hand. However, the bottomline is that we fans are simply screwed by the actions of Peters which violates the rules (a moral as they may be the players are getting a good dime in exchange for restraining trade) but also we are getting screwed by a Bills team which is riding the CBA agreement to not pay Peters anywhere near what he would get in a freemarket. The Bills braintrust can easily tell itself they are holding out for the long-term good of the team (yeah right) but the result is that in the short term we fans are not getting the team putting its best product on the field.

If I am GM for a day I am working for Ralph and thus I do whatever Ralph says. If I am a Bills fan (which I am so this is my view) I show him the money and give him a contract which secures my Pro Bowl LT to be a Bill for the life of his career. This has hard implications for the team as it sets a precedent which makes future negotiations tougher. However, as a Bills fan I value the LT more highly than most other positions on the team (a great RB for example contributes more but is easier to find than a great LT. I think many folks do not seem to realize as much as we love what Ralph did for this team in terms of not only buying it (he did this because his first choice cities were gone) but because he kept it here and finally opened his wallet to pay Bruce and the team around him. However, there is a significant difference between what is good for the team as a fan and what is good for the team as a business. They interests converge a lot because winning it all is good for business, but they are not the same. Even worse when Ralph operates like a fan rather than making the best business moves, it often turns out badly for the team both as a sports enterprise and as a business.

Corner has looked okay but nothing special that would earn him the label of playmaker. Right now all there is is subjective opinion about him throwing his body around rather than objective evidence such as if he had recorded an INT or made a sack of Pitts hard running #3 QB. The good thing about your post is that you at least give Youbouty credit for being the teams leading tackler thus far in the brief pre-season showing. What is amusing is that a few posters seem ready to declare Corner as having beaten out Youbouty even though it is the Sheik who has provided the objective evidence of an INT and a critical sack to earn the label of playmaker.

I also do not see Corner/Youbouty as a simple direct competition. It is to the extent they both are CBs, but the Bills can easily use 5 CBs on the roster given the heavy emphasis opponents like NE has on having depth at WR. The key will be ST ability for whether either of these two players contribute to the Bills and deserve to stay. My sense is that Corner due to his youth and mutant jumping ability which shows athleticism and Youbouty having playmaker quality plays with his INT against the Skins and doing a very nice job in sacking a good running Pitts QB are both likely keepers. McKelvin has shown outstanding difference making ability as a return guy and likely may force April into coming up with a design which utilizes two return guys on KR. The jury is somewhat still out for me regarding Poz. He clearly was reasonably someone to be excited about in his brief appearances last year as he led the team in tackles. However, it really took rose colored glasses IMHO to ignore the sense he looked like a poor man's London Fletcher out there last year as this rookie could be fooled and he made the initial hit and tackle on the rusher but did this too deep in our backfield as he recognized plays later as a rookie tends to do. I think the good news in all of this was he was football smart enough to recognize quickly he had been fooled into a false first step and he had amazing speed in that the belatedly closed on the ball carrier but close and tackle he did. He is a player I think probably profited a great deal from not being able to play last year but still being able to watch the game and see how the pros do it. Its still too early to tell though from what I see against vanilla offenses we face. Edwards did impress a ton in the Pitts game, but what he needs to demonstrate before folks reasonably get too excited (many are easily unreasonably excited after a very good and actually outstanding debut at QB for a rookie) is consistency. So one good game is merely an episode, a second good game unfortunately may simply be a coincidence. I need to see three good starts before I can comfortably label this a trend. I think one has to be impressed with Ellis so far as he has shown he certainly is a playmaker. His game still needs to improve a lot as like most rookies he has shown he can be fooled, but so far so great and i would not be shocked to see him take a starter job in the rotation by mid-season IF he keeps on developing. Just show Peters the money. Depth is the OL issue for this team. Chambers does not cut it as a starter and moving Walker to LT is a band-aid at best. Kudos to the OL crew for great work against Pitts but as long as we do not get Peters on the field it is simply a matter of time until something bad happens. Overall, I think merely having two pre-season games earns NO ONe a legitimate designation as a phenom. In fact, the main conclusions which I think can be drawn is who deserves to stay rather than who is good I think 2 games can point to some potential great upside (all 3 of the top draft picks have shown great upside but for real its still too early to draw any conclusions.

I think the jury is still out on Scott. He led the team in tackles to his credit but this may be a sign that the Steelers were merely picking on this spot because the QB saw weakness there or the OC saw weakness to that side. He also badly missed a tackle in the backfield which could have set Pitts for a loss and Mendenehall seemed to score on draw plays where Scott left a hole Mendenhall exploited.

Exactly. The NFL (of course with the agreement of its partner the NFLPA which received 60.5% of the total gross assetsI will do whatever it judges to be in its best interest regarding a relocation fee or whatever. My argument is simply that the best interests of the NFL will almost certainly be what makes it the most money and thus it is hard for me to see why confronted with a choice of the possibility of big bucks from Toronto and the definitely existing big bucks currently gathered by the Bills in WNY, the NFLPA will chose both if it can.

Who did SI rank as the #1 franchise in all of sports last year taking into account a number of issues involving the financial status and prospects for a team (as well as a heavy does of other key important issues for fans like ticket prices, entertainment value, team playing quality etc which are not the financial aspect but do not devalue the financial aspects)? It was the Buffalo Sabres and I think this constitutes someone claiming that the Sabres franchise is making it work. Also as I said, CA is a hockey mad country and this clearly is a key part of why the Maple Leafs are also a solid franchise despite the fact the team has had a pretty sorry record of success for the most part over the last few years and the NHL and NHLPA muddled things so badly they could not even produce a product for a lengthy period of time. Despite this insane handling I do not know anyone who is even worried about the long-term commitment of this town to the franchise. These two facts constitute any reasonable person seeing these franchises as making it work despite the fact that the NHL is a Mickey Mouse league compared to the money machine of the NFL. Hockey is a great sport in my opinion and the run of the US Hockey team in the 80 Olympics is the finest achievement in sport by a team I have ever seen (which included incredibly hard hitting and incredibly tough work and no direct support for the goondom which is the stock and trade of an NHL which does a huge disservice to a great sport in my humble opinion). Do you disagree with my estimation and understanding that SI as recently as last year declared the Sabres to be a franchise making it work and see the Maple Leafs as easily a going concern? If you disagree then please lay out the arguments as to why and if not then please retract your previous questioning of this statement.

Definitely true on an individual game basis, but it is also true that selling out 40 games is a bigger load than selling out 8 games. The NHL and the NFL are not equivalent (total seat sales and their distribution and obviously selling hockey in CA is different than selling football) but the general concept of selling one of the world's greatest entertainment products to one of the largest markets in the world makes it quite doable the concept of having an operating NFL franchise in TOR capable of making a lot of bucks. We already know for sure that it is possible to have an operating NFL franchise in WNY capable of making a lot of bucks. The question is whether both can operate at the same time. The NHL example says probably yes. I think the question which folks who insist the Bills are gone should have at least some answer for is why would the NFL take less money when it can have more money. An individual owner be it Rogers, Paul Allen or whomever might easily make the decision to go for the bigger market (duh), but what the Benigni report seems to say is that the NFL as a whole will have a financial veto on any deal and my sense is the NFL will choose to have more money rather than less if it can.

I think the LB situation is going to be one of the big factors in which CB gets kept or more accurately whether our best ST guy to keep is a 6th CB or whatever the total of LBs we judge we need. The extra LB would show the best ST chops which allows you keep one less CB than the max you would keep.

Thanks for looking this up as it adds more data. I did rewatch the game but did this in passing while cable surfing to see Phelps win his 7th gold and other stuff so I did not look at it in detail. This "official" recitation though does provide an additional picture of the game though one thing it does point out to me is that the "official" stat line in some ways does not match with what I think is a fuller recognition of what was going on in the game. For example, I think this stat line does reflect to some extent which player made the tackle on a particular play, but some of the defensive player credit (blame) it assigns appears to be based on a standard NFL D and not on how the team may actually be implementing the Cover 2. For example, the stat line may list Youbouty as the Bills CB being responsible for Washington on the semi-deep pass being caught by Washington leading to a 24 yard gain. Yet in a classic cover 2, the CB may only have responsibility for the WR out to the Buffalo 46-41 and as Washington caught the ball at the BUF 36 it would actually be the safety or possibly the MLB in the Tampa 2 style D who actually is responsible for Washington at the point of reception. Likewise with the RoboQB TD to Santonio Holmes, Holmes was definitely the WR on Youbouty's side of the field. Yet, Tasker made a point of blaming George Wilson for being late to cover the WR the way the Bills assign responsibility on particular plays. I also found the stat line deceptive in that the worst play I thought Scott made was one where he whiffed on a tackle i n the backfield on a run by Mendenhall. Likely the statline gave credit/blame to the defender who made the tackle, but the true story was a bout the missed tackle. Overall, I can see why you might have judged Youbouty as having a bad game as their were a couple of plays where at the end he was walking around the pile of tacklers/runner who were on the ground. However, I think the key context in these two cases were that on both plays Pitts was stopped and the tackles were for a loss or denied the rusher the first down. There was no need for Youbouty to pile on and even risk a late hit and I think his responsibility may have been backside if the runner reversed field and his job mandate he not commit himself to the pile. Even on the Dixon run for the TD while it might have gone to the side the CB (Youbouty this says but I never saw him on this play) it was actually Wendling and Ellis whom Tasker seemed to blame for them not staying home. If the WR went in motion this might have explained why things were so open on that side and if this was the case the D braintrust will not blame Youbouty at all for this since he would have been doing his job to leave. Overall, I think it is also a bit farfetched to assert as you do that 4 tackles are not many by a Youbouty who played most of the game at CB. Actually between him not being the starter and the fact the Bills O had two 10 play drives to start the game Youbouty was not the player of record until the second quarter. Likewise it was Justin Fox and Corner manning the CB position for significant parts of the game so I do not think it is accurate to simply say he played a majority of the game/ Likewise one important thing the stat line reveals is that for his first tackle it actually came with him playing the gunner role successfully on kick coverage. As it is ST which I think will make or break Youbouty and also our desire to have playmakers it would not surprise me if Youbouty and the D braintrust view this as a good pre-season for him so far with a sack, an INT abd by definition him throwing his body around as he successfully got credit for a solo tackle on kick return duty. As far as position play as a CB it is hard to say whether he completely blew and assignment or played his role properly on several negative plays for us without knowing what his responsibility was on that play with our base Cover 2.

The one thing which I think is almost definite rule is that the NFL will support the option which makes the league the most money. I think IF this is the logic that drives the process that when given a choice of Toronto and Buffalo for a franchise the obvious choice for the NFL will be to choose BOTH. If a mickey mouse league like the NHL can make this work my guess is that the NFL can make it work also.

Many thanks for the observations. Despite my usual verbosity I do not see myself as some all knowing expert on the game as well. In fact, if I knew it all then guaranteed it would be boring and unsurprising to me. I was no way being facetious in saying I would be educated a lot by direction to some specific plays which I should have noted where Youbouty was tentative or Corner stood out. I agree as I said that stats can give a false impression, for example. though my game watching was somewhat hindered by my going off to Olympic land to be distracted, one of the things I felt will need more detailed review when I go back to the game tonight (my significant other is going off to see Hello Dolly at a community theatre in Tonawanda tonite so I will get some time to review and rewind the tape) was that I felt Scott missed a couple of key tackles so him leading the team in tackles may actually obscure a more true assessment of his game last night. I look forward to your and other observations and will try to find time amidst a wedding tomorrow and some gig with my in-laws on Sunday to comment.

That certainly was not what I saw and the game stats (stats are certainly not conclusive as they can be made to show almost anything but they are an indicator which without some clear examples being shown which contradicts them they are foolish to ignore). The game stats directly contradict your observations in that Youbouty was second on the team in this games for tackles he was credited with. The best argument to be made that he did not join in on tackles was that there was no one to join in with as he made the stops himself getting credited with 3 solo tackles out of the 4 he was credited with. On the converse, Corner seemed to have a pretty non-notable game ringing up 2 assists. In terms of relying on what one saw rather than only looking at what the stats say, Youbouty clearly had no problem being physical and logging a sack on a CB blitz which really sealed the game late. Even complaints that Youbouty needed to wrestle Dixon to the ground rather than simply lighting him up with a hit ignores the fact that Dixon is a great runner (note his massive TD scamper earlier in the game) and that it seems to me a player who was really tentative physically as you say would actually have not been able to stick with the tackle and ride Dixon down for a solo sack. I though Corner was adequate for a rookie but unless you can site the particular plays in question, i think he did not shine at all in this game and easily could be more of a PS candidate for development rather than a real contributor the 08 team so far. I need to go back and pour over the tape before drawing any final conclusions (for example, though Wilson was the player closest to the Pitt player who lit us up with RoboQB on a nice TD, it appears that it was a lack of help from Youbouty at CB which may have been the cause of Wilson getting burned. Still, based on what you saw vis a vis Youbouty and Corner you were looking at a different game than the one I saw and both the stats and the notable events (a sack by Youbouty and nothing memorable for Corner makes me wonder what you saw. I look forward to getting educated by your response as to which specific plays I should look for.

We need to see: 1. How will the lack of an imposing threat at TE impact the short passing game? The two TD catches by Royal last night were fascinating in that one possible (but incredibly unlikely since Royal will need to develop production as a receiver he never has shown in his entire NFL career) answer is that perhaps Royal can be a receiving threat at TE. I unfortunately doubt this will suddenly occur and the injury to Schouman raises additional questions at a position so lacking in even adequate past production and depth that a better bet would seem to be playing a base O which minimizes use of the TE than suddenly seeing one of these guys emerge as a threat. 2. Will we use the RB as an effective receiving threat? Seeing Matrshawn split wide was a good sign, but in order for this O to be imposing, we not only need to achieve great progress in using the RB simply somewhat adequately as a receiver, but we really need to realize some of the good collegiate work as a receiver Lynch and also Wright showed. Wright seems like a non useful player with two fumbles in the first two games and Oman proving to be an interesting bowling ball to develop, but this O needs to show a lot more productive use of the RB as a receiver and likely will not do this in a non-gameplanned pre-season. 3. What will be our solid answer at LT? Chambers erratic performances, a few miscues by Walker at LT reflected in penalties, and the injuries to the tackle depth we had simply means show Peters the money. The first two games show that the best we can do without Peters as we shuffle players out of position in search of a back-up LT is make do but it is a dangerous game not to put our best foot forward so show Peters the money. As a UDFA who rapidly ascended to getting voted to the Pro Bowl this is a worthwhile investment on the face of it and a necessary investment due to lack of depth on the OL. (note the positive rushing yardage we saw at the start of and late into the game was a very positive sign- the question of whether we can do that when we face a Polamalu is still an open question and you can only take on the players they send out against you, but the sacks suffered by JP when he held the ball too long though not an extraordinary amount of time and the need we had to rely on Edwards ability to release quickly was troubling). 4. Who will be the #5 and #6 WRs in the spread offense likely to be our best O? It was great that Royal stepped up yesterday and Huggins and Jenkins remain possibilities but no one has emerged yet to put their stamp on what are likely to be much used and needed contributions if we run the spread and we have the usual players such as likely #4 WR Reed missing due to injuries. 5. Will Edwards make this O his own? Last night was a very good sign after he had a pretty lackluster opener. I felt very good about his pace of operation last night after my buddy Cheesehead and I went to St. John's Fisher for Tuesday practice and Edwards looked markedly slower than Losman in getting the ball out (fortunately practice accomplishments had little to do with pre-season game accomplishments in this regard. Still what Edwards will need to show cannot be done in a pre-season game as the question he needs to answer is can he be productive and healthy at QB for a full season. We'll see.

Youboty is an interesting case as I suspect that his chances of making the team will rise and fall not on his position play at CB, but an assessment of who will make the larger contribution on ST among the reserve CBs. Right now, McGee and Greer get the starts. Its still too early to tell as the highlights for him are clearly return duty and the low light for him was not yelling folks away from a bouncing punt loudly enough (an eminently fixable problem so not a real worry) but he seems to be getting a good look at coverage duty and as I think it is going to be tough to not employ either McGee or Parrish as lead return guys McKelvin may actually get the primary nod as the nickel back. James and Youbouty then get to duel over the informal nod as the 4th and essentially dime CB. In essence, the braintrust probably picks the guy based on an assessment of individual match-ups and the key for who makes the squad becomes really who will contribute most on ST. Corner and Fox and Youbouty all have won some praise for particular skill sets (Corner is an active player with great athletic ability, Fox won praise last night for having surprising speed, Youbouty probably has helped himself a lot in the first two pre-season games with notable individual plays in each game with an INT in the opener and a sack on a CB blitz which sealed the deal last night. I did not notice Cox last night but found him unimpressive in the opener. We shall see as the plot thickens.

Royal's case tonight was made by his two TD catches. I was quite surprised he had it in him as the first TD showed great ability in gathering in this toss which had to be thrown hard to thread the needle created by three defenders and the second catch was all great hands as he plucked it out of the air. While two catches do not outweigh an entire career as primarily a blocking TE, he did reach a personal best last year so a reasonable case can be made that he can improve on this baseline. You called him out BFNYC, it is only reasonable that you say something about his response in how he produced tonight.

I still think folks are missing the natural outcome of what I think is true. The NFL owners are a bunch of Jerry Jones types who primary motivation is money. There clear goal is to move the league toward getting more eyeballs to deliver to the networks so that the nets pay them even more money. The motherlode of more eyeballs comes from having NFL teams in Mexico City, Toronto and in Europe and Tokyo if they can figure out how to work with the time difference. However, when given a choice involving Buffalo and Toronto, the obvious money making choice is to choose both. The key question right now is whether if a podunk outfit like the NHL can make it work with franchises in both Toronto and Buffalo then is it possible for the NFL to pull off this same trick. There is no doubt that there is a ton more money in Toronto than in Buffalo. However, the fact also simply is that Buffalo offers a bird in the hand with almost 40 years of advertising having produced the reality of between 50 and 60 K season ticket holders, untold business relationships with local advertisers and tie-ins, and other extraneous pieces of cash from parking sales. Zubazz pants, and other items the team gets a part or all of cash from. All of these things would simply be given away should the team move and dollars spent replicating it in a new town. Add top that when a team leaves Buffalo and thus NYS as a home for the generation of tax receipts to the state the team plays in, it is quite likely that Buffalo partisans and the Schumers and Clintons of the world will pull the same trick that the Cleveland folks used to extort a franchise from the NFL group when one of the owners looked out for himself as an individual which was threatening the limited protection for being a monopoly which the NFL and NFLPA enjoy. Such a threat is one that will create instability in their promising to deliver a product to the networks and likely is something to be avoided. In addition, the NFL will be selling itself to new municipalities and voters while at the same time undergoing a round of publicity about who no municipality should trust the NFL. Maybe the NFL will simply throw away the smaller than Toronto but not insubstantial amount of cash generated by the Bills but my guess is that when asked to make a choice the obvious NFL answer will be both.

Almost all of these posts seem to miss what will be the key factor on virtually any player who may or may not get cut (particularly the CBs) which is whether there is a clear role for that player as a contributor on ST. It is understandable how we fans can become almost psychotically addicted to assessing where a player fits in our ranks of position play because this is what we outsiders can easily see. However, the simple fact is that particularly with Bobby April and the ST having done so well and in fact April needed to be elevated to an asst HC position in order to keep him, the thing which almost certainly will determine who are the 50-53rd players on this roster is going to be their ST play.