JohnC

What you are basically saying is that because you still are paying taxes even after the deduction that you are not receiving a benefit. That is a stupendous amount of twisted logic in your argument. You are paying less in taxes because of the deduction. That is a subsidy! You are receiving a benefit that a renter doesn't get. Your argument can be reduced to because you are not receiving a total subsidy that you are not receiving any subsidy. Your peculiar reasoning makes little sense to me. I am also making the same case for your twisted logic on the real estate tax. You get a direct subsidy by being able to write off your real estate taxes from your income when computing your taxes. In other words you are paying less than you would without the deduction. That is a subsidy! Again, the renter is not getting the benefit that you get as a homeowner. You act as if you are being unfairly burdened by paying any tax on your house. If you aren't paying taxes then who is going to pay for the fire department to respond to a fire at your residence? If your house is burglarized and the police respond to your 911 call who is going to pay for the police response? Your neighbor? Whether you like it or not it is a shared financial obligation. As I said in my first post the position you take on stadium subsidies is reasonable and understandable. But not acknowledging the fact that you, as an individual, also receive subsidies in some form is willful blindness to the reality of living in a community with public benefits such as police, fire, education, public works etc. I say this with no harshness intended but it is a very narrow and self-centered perspective to take. Make no mistake that I'm not arguing against your position of having smaller government compared to a more expansive government. But going back to my original point you are receiving many subsidies that you are not aware of or unwilling to acknowledge.

Whatever your views are on a publicly financed stadium they are valid. But you, like almost everyone, is being subsidized one way or another. If you buy or build a house and borrow to pay for it the interest you pay on your mortgage can be deducted from your income. The real estate taxes you pay also can be deducted from your income. Those deductions are very much a subsidy that renters don't have. Another example is if you have children who go to public schools and your neighbor who doesn't have children is paying taxes for the cost of educating your children while they don't get any direct benefit from their taxes going to the school system. Again, I'm not challenging you on your view about public financing. I'm simply bringing up the point that there are subsidies that most of us get directly or indirectly.

You well cataloged the history on this issue. Where I have a slightly different take on your history is that it really doesn't matter what Chan's outdated thoughts were on the qb position because ultimately it is the GM who is the primary driver in assembling a roster. The owner's views on football were clearly not the wisest but I don't think even he would be against drafting a legitimate franchise qb or securing one in a trade or from the market. Nix and Whaley can conjure up whatever excuses they want. It doesn't matter. The bottom line is with respect to the qb position they didn't get the job done. You are right that Whaley was just as influential as Nix in selecting EJ and then standing by him too long. The coach who is often vilified, Marrone, made a quick assessment on the FSU qb. He loudly and belligerently expressed that he wasn't willing to tolerate EJ being his starting qb. On this critical issue the insufferable HC was absolutely right. There were a number of reasons why Whaley's tenure was average at best. One of the major reasons is his misjudgment on EJ. That's on him. As I stated in a prior post after his departure Whaley stated in an interview that if he had to do things all over he would have been more aggressive in finding a franchise qb. Sadly for him the light went on too late.

I agree with you that as a GM he was saddled with tremendous obstacles not of his own making because he didn't select the HC. It was widely reported that he wanted to select a qb in the first round this year but didn't have the authority to do so because the owner's choice of a HC included the role of de facto GM for him. If he would have acted sooner on the qb imperative when he did have the authority things maybe would have been different for him. If he would have selected Carr or maybe even Prescott whom he favored over Cardale in an earlier he might still be working from his GM perch in western NY. While it doesn't seem that Whaley made the hire for Marrone or Rex he was still in a position to make qb decisions during their tenures. That's on him. In the end he sabotaged himself by not being resolute and acting on the qb issue.

Directly and indirectly you are making the point that the organization had no discernible strategy in how to build a franchise. Whether BB was a nemesis to be challenged or not the organization had no underlying theme or philosophy. Individual personnel decisions were simply individual decisions with no thought given to the whole. Nix and Whaley both had an inexplicable casual attitude toward the qb position. The one position that could most quickly elevate a team was a secondary consideration. Nix stated publicly stated that he needed to build up the roster before he would focus on that position made no sense as demonstrated by him bypassing credible prospects when they were available. Shortly after Whaley was dismissed he acknowledged in one of his first public comments that if he had to do it over again he would place more emphasis on acquiring a franchise qb. This odd reluctance reached the point of nonfeasance/malfeasance. It makes no bloody sense! Where I slightly disagree with your take is that I don't think that BB should be the focal point. Even if the Pats were not a force to be reckoned with the Bills needed to be smartly and wisely run. A second-rate organization is going to be a second-rate organization regardless which opposing team is going be the hurdle that needs to be jumped over. With respect to the Rex hiring that in of itself is a testament to the dysfunction that prevailed within the organization. It was an owner mistake that he quickly realized and corrected after a relatively short period of time. Hopefully, that interlude of chaos is a thing of the past and a period of stability and competence will be exhibited.

Kirby, As with you I have not read the whole thread but you pose an intriguing question. The answer is absolutely! Why wouldn't we do it? Many people are claiming and encouraging that the Bills use their two first round picks next year to be in position to get a good prospect. Why not get a qb who is not only a legitimate franchise qb but one who who is already a border-line all pro? There is no compelling reason to keep TT because (in my view and not yours) the team desires to upgrade the position. If you want to immediately energize this slumbering franchise getting a better than good qb like Russell would certainly make an impact. Wouldn't it be refreshing to have a well-rounded offense instead of a stunted offense? Wouldn't it be exciting to have a qb that can maximize the talents of the receivers, especially Watkins and Clay, instead of extravagantly spending on players in the hope that it would buttress the limited qb? Your question is simple and the answer is simple. The Bills have not had a franchise qb for almost a quarter century. The answer is obviously yes.

The attached link is a WGR interview with Mike Morreale discussing the hockey draft. http://www.wgr550.com/media/audio-channel/5-26-nhlcoms-mike-morreale-brayton-wilsonmp3

The key is to use him properly. He thrived under Schwartz and Petine. Rex wanted players to adjust to his scheme while a smart coach would have a philosophy underpinned by the notion of putting the player in the best position to succeed. In my mind Dareus is a top five or better interior lineman. Under Rex his production didn't match his talent level because he wasn't wisely used. Dareus plays a position where stats don't always reveal how well a player plays or how important he is to the defense. Dareus's biggest talent when he is playing well is applying pressure up the middle. Not many interior lineman can consistently do that. He can when the right defense is called. Using him as a nose tackle is wasting his special talents.

Sunday, Sept 10 - Bills vs. Jets W Sunday, Sept 17 - Bills @ Panthers L Sunday, Sept. 24 - Bills vs. Broncos L Sunday, Oct 1 - Bills @ Falcons L Sunday, Oct 8 - Bills @ Bengals L Sunday, Oct 22 - Bills vs. Buccaneers W Sunday, Oct 29 - Bills vs. Raiders L Thursday, Nov 2 - Bills @ Jets Sunday, Nov 12 - Bills vs. Saints L Sunday, Nov 19 - Bills @ Chargers L Sunday, Nov 26 - Bills @ Chefs L Sunday, Dec 3 - Bills vs. Patriots* L Sunday, Dec 10 - Bills vs. Colts W Sunday, Dec 17 - Bills vs Fish W Sunday, Dec 24 - Bills @ Patriots* L Sunday, Dec 31 - Bills @ Fish L 4-12 The owner rotted out this team when he hired Rex. Now undoing the damage is going to be a painful and laborious task. It's going to take at a minimum three years before this team becomes a serious team. The apologists are going to be in an extended period of agitation and delusion. The free flowing of lame excuses will not mask the reality of the earnest but inadequate play on the field.

The attached WGR link is from a Shoop and Bulldog show interviewing Luke Fox from Sportsnet. It is an eighteen minute segment discussing the expansion draft and the the potential for deals for defensemen for a number of teams. It's good hockey talk. http://www.wgr550.com/media/audio-channel/05-25-luke-fox-sportsnet-joins-schopp-and-bulldog

In the long run getting cut from Buffalo may be the best thing that happened to him. He needs to get healthy and have a fresh start. When he is healed and cleared to play I'm sure that he will be picked up and then start the process to earning playing time. He comes from a tightly knit immigrant family and appreciates his good fortunes. He is not the stereotypical pro athlete who has an attitude of entitlement. People forget that he was very young when he came into this league. He started playing football later than most players. Having a brutish and impatient HC who immediately dismissed him as a player certainly didn't help his development. In Buffalo, he was on a team that was churning through coaches and systems. With a little time and stability he should become a credible player.

With respect to the highlighted segment you make a legitimate point that the "incident" was a factor, maybe a very decisive factor, for his release. You also pointed out that the coach quite possibly was trying to send a "message" to his team that his approach to coaching is dramatically different from what has previously gone on with the prior regime. If those factors are considerations in his release then what is wrong with him being let go? You make the reasonable argument that he is better than some players that are currently retained. But so what? Apparently from the new coach's perspective as a lineman not only wasn't he a good enough of player but that he was also a very replaceable player. By releasing him it gave the coach an opportunity to send a clear message to the rest of the roster that the way he was going to run his shop was going to be much stricter than what they have been accustomed to. There is no confusion as to the environment that McDermott wants to quickly establish. He wants a roster full of high character players without distracting issues who are committed to their profession. I believe that Kujo actually is a high character person but he also has some issues he has to work out. The new coach is not interested in those type of players, especially players who are not considered to be essential. Anyone who has a heart wants to see Kujo succeed. On the other hand I do understand the reasoning behind the coach's decision. I have no problem with it.

I agree with you that the Giants controlling the clock through the run game was a key factor in that loss. But as you noted Kelly forced throws into an eight man pass defense instead of using Thurman and Davis in the running game when the Giants were using a two and three man line. If Kelly would have been more patient and taken what was given they could have won the game. I never understood why the coaching staff under Marchiboda (sic) didn't intervene and force the qb to adjust his play calling? The Giant coaches had the better strategy and our coaches/qb didn't adjust. This was a SB that we should have won.

The first year he played for the Bills I thought he was one of the best guards in the league. Last year, he had a good to solid season but there was a noticeable drop off from his exceptional first year.

I'm not saying that those players are going to be immediately dispatched because as you say there are cap considerations. But what I am saying is that unless those players fit in with the framework that the coach wants then they won't be part of the long term plans for this coach. This coach wants a certain profile of player/person. I'm not sure that especially Dareus falls within his profile.

Whaley simply lost confidence in him. He wanted him off the roster. He probably felt that he could get a cheaper bridge qb for the short-term.

I'm not speaking to the Kujo situation because it is a unique situation. But whenever a new regime takes over there is a lack of loyalty and attachment to the players brought in by the prior regime. If players such as Dareus and Hughes don't alter their approach to the game they will also be dispatched. I cite Dareus for work-ethic issues and Hughes for his lack of discipline and control on the field.

Do you really believe that the reactive owner is thinking he is involved in a quick fix with a completely remade football operation? Everything was replaced from the previous regime. The scouting department was summarily dismissed; the front office was wiped clean and the HC completely took over the operation before the GM was even officially fired. Pegula is not a fool. He wanted a new slate and he got it. Some might consider him incompetent as an owner but he isn't a fool. From an organizational standpoint this is a start-over. It's not a complete start-over for the roster but it will steadily be culled. He knows it's going to take time because that is the stark reality that he placed himself in when he went full buy in with the wrestling coach.

You're off the mark. But that's okay. On this issue I'm in the corner of 26CornerBlitz. As was stated by him Pegula did a complete reconstruction, not a quick rehabbing.

I've said it in other postings that this is at least a three year project to get back into being a relevant team. I strongly disagree with those who believe that the Bills will be a playoff team this year. In my mind they are not close because this roster is simply too thin and lacks depth that a grinding season requires. If the Bills draft a qb next year then that prospect is going to take at least another two to three years to get acclimated to the pro game. If the pressure gets too strong for a more immediate result then the free agent or trade market could also be an option to help this team become respectable. I still strongly contend that the Bills made a big mistake not selecting either Watson or Mahomes in this year's draft. Avoiding an issue is not addressing an issue! I agree with your assessment.

Whaley didn't push the EJ project to the end. He made a decision to get past EJ and TT and was ready to draft a qb in the first round. He just waited too long to come to that realization. And that was a fatal mistake of his own doing.

When the light finally shines the curtains are pulled closed and darkness again envelops the room. It would have been interesting to see if Whaley remained and worked with McDermott how that would have worked out? To a great degree it was the owner who set up Whaley to fail. If the owner would have allowed Whaley to hire his preferred candidate for HC, Hue Jackson, I think Whaley would still be on the job. Or if the owner would have hired Jim Schwartz to be the head coach after Marrone abruptly left this team would not have fallen off the tracks. The Rex hire set this franchise back.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Buddy move up in the third round to take Graham, the track receiver from North Carolina State? He could have selected either Wilson or Cousins with that pick. It's my view that when a team doesn't have a franchise qb it is better to draft for that position a round sooner rather than later. It was reported that Whaley rated Prescott higher than Cardale. Wouldn't it have been smarter to draft the preferred qb in the third round instead of gambling to wait for another round to go by? It's not surprising that Whaley stated in an interview after his firing that if he had to do it over he would have been more aggressive in securing the qb position. For a franchise that hasn't had an established franchise qb for almost a quarter century not aggressively addressing that issue makes little sense.

Ultimately what did in Whaley was the drafting of EJ in the first round. When you make such an investment in a qb you are to an extent committed to the player. If EJ would have been a third or fourth round selection then the finances and dynamic of the situation would dramatically have changed. There were better qb prospects after the EJ draft, such as Carr, who would have been better qb prospects but having him on the roster made it more difficult to commit another high pick for the position. That was a miscalculation that haunted Whaley and was a major factor in him losing his job. What's disappointing is that finally Whaley came to the realizaton that he had to take a qb in the first round in this year's draft. It was too late because he was stripped of his authority to act. It's not surprising that in an interview after his firing he acknowledged that if he had it to do over he would have been more aggressive in seeking a more credible franchise qb.

With a little higher tender the Bills could have kept a very productive player. The difference in contracts for keeping him wasn't that great as to not keeping him. The Patriots structured their deal so that it would have been too prohibitive to keep him. But the mistake was placing themselves in a position that another team could poach him without us being able to realistically respond. Or another way of saying it is that the Pats outmaneuvered (outsmarted) us or the Bills outsmarted themselves. The Bills are a marginal team that doesn't have an excess of talent. They needlessly allowed a very productive player to leave. Overspending on players isn't usually a smart approach to take. But spending a little more than you want to for someone who is productive isn't such a damaging proposition. The McCoy/Gillislee tandem was a dymanic duo. They complimented each other and were collectively the centerpiece of our offense. The point others are making is that this departure didn't have to happen if there would have been more foresight in handling the player and his contract. It seems to me when all is said and done the Pats strategically acted while the Bills sloppily functioned. They got a little better and we got a little worse.