Rubes

Thanks, Eeyore.

Oh please. I wish people would stop with the ridiculous "Bills fans can never be happy" garbage. We're just trying to be thorough and objective in our opinions, instead of just blindly accepting. Like I've said elsewhere, I could be okay with Lovie, but its not like the guy is the second coming. Some of us have concerns that he may not be the guy to get us a championship, given the glaring problems he had at his previous job. Nothing wrong with pointing it out.

It's about time folks like you made yourselves heard.

As critical as I've been of Lovie, I could be on board with this. The problem is that Lovie hasn't displayed the ability to suceed at #2 in his eight-year run with the Bears, so I'm not sure he can suddenly find a good one so easily.

Missed the playoffs five of the last six seasons. Four offensive coordinators in eight years of head coaching, offense never finished ranked higher than 23rd, four times ranked 28th or lower. Less-than-stellar record against teams with a winning record. That probably has something to do with it.

Sure, but after all that Philly has been through, why wouldn't the same apply to them and their fans?

I thought he might be referring to side boob pics.

It seems to me they did wait for the offseason, unlike what you said. They saw how the season went, and rewarded him. Hence, it was nothing like the Jauron or Fitz deals that occurred in mid-season. Freddie was playing like a beast and he was being grossly underpaid for it. At the time, everyone knew that and agreed. He deserved a raise, and the Bills came through for him. I think that speaks highly of the organization, and I'm betting the players took notice of that. It's a good thing. They could have waited yet another season before rewarding Freddie, but it's likely he would have been unhappy and maybe even held out in the preseason. Just because, in hindsight, you have the benefit of seeing the next injury and Spiller's performance doesn't mean everyone knew that would happen last offseason. This isn't even in the same stratosphere as the Jauron and Fitz deals.

Correct. No contract negotiations until the team is knocked out of the playoffs (or they win the Super Bowl, I guess).

What I find most interesting is that the talking heads on ESPN and NFL Network all seemed to agree that Reid's best fit was in Chicago, and they all expected him to end up there. He didn't even interview with the Bears, much less end up the coach.

I don't know. I've always been very wary of college coaches with no prior NFL experience coming to the NFL, but after seeing a few guys do it successfully, and then hearing and seeing Kelly's body of work, the idea of an innovative, highly sucessful college guy like him is starting to grow on me.

You mean the extension he signed last offseason?

Did anyone here know that Lombardi was an assistant coach with the Giants before coaching for Green Bay?

According to the Chicago Tribune: "After the Super Bowl, the Bears appeared set up to be a strong contender for a while. But they failed to reach the playoffs the next three seasons and have made only one postseason appearance in the six seasons since." More to know: Tribune Linky

Is there really a person called Optimus Klein? Seriously? How great is that.

I agree, this concerns me. The guy was around for 8 seasons and tried four different offensive coordinators. Only once did the team finish ranked higher than 23rd in offense. They ranked 28th or lower four times, which is half of his tenure. Great defensive mind, but he proved to me, over a considerable period of time, that he could not get the job done on the offensive side. That's not what I'm looking for.

I can't imagine a better 3rd down back. Blocks great, catches great, strong runner, great team player. Aside from a recent case of fumblitis, what else could you possibly want?

I'll give that an Amen.

Those are some fresh ideas, there.

Sounds good to me. Sanchez will play well, the Bills will get a better draft position, and maybe the Jets will be convinced enough to stick with Sanchez another year.

It has taken more years than I care to remember for this team to FINALLY build a decent offensive line. If they go and screw it up by letting the most consistent guy walk, then I just won't know what to say other than, "Check, please."

If nothing else, I've had a few good chuckles out of this thread. I'll have to remember the Febreze metaphor.

Gailey would have to go undefeated for three straight years to have a similar won-loss record as Tomlin. Think about that.

See, I can definitely appreciate this perspective, certainly much moreso than the typical knee-jerk responses about whiny fans who always want to B word and can never be happy. What the discussion has helped me understand is that this lease agreement is not about the years remaining for Ralph Wilson, and it's not about the Bills making a long-term commitment to Buffalo. It's about one thing, and one thing only: Ralph Wilson stadium. As it should be, since that's what the lease is really all about. I think there is a tendency—and I am guilty of this myself, but I also put some of this on the media and on the parties involved, since they also do this—to make this out to be more than what it is, that it's really about the Bills relationship with the Buffalo area. But it's not. What this lease is saying, loud and clear to me, is that the Ralph has a remaining useful life span of 7 to 10 years (with a few hundred million in fix-ups), and that's all the Bills are comfortable committing to as far as a stadium to call home. After that, there needs to be a plan in place for either a new stadium, or major upgrades to the Ralph (which I think is unlikely). I do think that becomes a serious bargaining chip for the Bills when the time comes, and it's going to be a political hot potato. And 7 years is going to come a lot sooner than it seems. But really, when I was considering the prospects of a new lease, I was really hoping for something in the 15-20 year time frame. I think we all were, because what I was thinking was that the lease was more about the Bills committing to Buffalo, and we want that to be as long of a commitment as possible. Upon hearing that it's really a 7 year (and, at most, 10 year) commitment, I think many people (myself included) thought, "that's not really much of a commitment." But it's really just about the Bills commitment to the Ralph, and upon reflection the Ralph is a really old stadium, and things are going to have to change in a major way. The lease is telling us that the change is going to occur in the next 7 to 10 years. That's what it's about. I made the leap to make it out to be more than that, which added to my cynicism. I'm still cynical, mind you—7 years isn't really long, Ralph is really old, do we really know what will happen with a new owner, and I mean, how do we really expect things to go in terms of a new stadium given the problems in New York state, and upstate in particular? But yes, I'm glad we have seven secure years to think about it. I wish it were more, but I have a better understanding now of the reasons why.

You did, thanks!