JohnC

If you think the level of discourse is too rough and uncivil in this thread you should avoid the topic on Brady and the four game suspension. That topic that runs into the thousands is laced with vitriol. As the saying goes: Water on a duck's back.

You make the salient point that Badol is constantly reminding others: The Bills took a position of strength and then let him go and replaced him with players who made that position not only a position of weakness but a position of vulnerability that affected other positions on the offense. Even for those people who are arguing that he was too costly from a cost-benefit ratio it was a significantly better return on value than what the dismal replacements gave the team.

There is no doubt that Cassel is better at getting the ball out more quickly. But his arm strength is so limited that the DBs and LBs are going to tightly press our receivers right off the line of scrimmage, with little fear of the deep throw. That's not going to happen with TT because he has a strong enough arm to be a threat on the intermediate and deep routes. Not only will that create more space for the receivers but it will aslo open up more space for the backfield on runs and passes. We have a good receiver corps with Watkins, Woods, Clay, Harvin and including McCoy. Having a qb who can use all the field and throw with velocity would create a lot of options for our offense. From everything I have heard about Cassel he is a terrific teammate and would be a good mentor for TT. If TT earns the starting position then he will have good sincere support from the backup.

I don't want to get carried away but in styles of play he does resemble Russell Wilson. They both have good arms, are accurate and throw nice balls. Wilson is most impressive because as a young player he exhibited maturity, athleticism, good judgment way beyond his experience level. With TT its been recognized by his teammates that he knows how to read defenses and he knows the roles of all the players on the offense. In other words he has a good grasp of the mental side of the game. My main concern with TT is his tendency to take off. He has good instincts in running away from pressure but I would prefer that he would run less down the field for self-preservation reasons. If he can master the art of going down and not taking the hit when he runs a la Wilson then I would be less concerned with the durability issue. When I watched TT last night I witnessed some ability that I haven't seen in a long time from a Buffalo qb. Cassel has a placid game while Taylor has some sparkle to his game. Am I being too wishful? Probably so, but maybe not??????

The organization trades Jason Peters because of contract issues and then acquires Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker at outsized contracts relative to talent level. They then move Walker from the right side to the left where he is not suited, and then cut him because he can't play a position he himself knew he wasn't suited for. The decisions that have been made over the years were not only not smart decisions they bordered on being peculiar decisions. The Chris Williams addition at his price tag never made sense because not only was his prior performance level mediocre but the price tag gave the team little value for the dollar, especially (as you noted) his chronic back issues were well known. Compared to the past history on addressing OL issues Whaley's acquisitiions of Incognito and the drafting of Miller were smart and value laden transactions. The bottom line (as you noted) is that the Littman and Wilson business model is no longer in effect under Pegula. The reality is that under the prior regime the central problem was not always associated to money issues as much as it was simply incompetent staff making dumb football decisions.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/john-mara-wanted-no-part-deflategate-settlement-talks-article-1.2332729

I agree with you that Cassel is an Orton caliber of qb. If Orton would have come into the season last year prepared and without his "retired state of mind" the Bills probably would have been in the playoffs. No one is suggesting that Cassel is our qb of the future. But as a temporary solution he might be the team's best option to start. That is not to say that TT won't eventually surpass him during this season. And there is still a good chance that TT will be the starting qb when the season starts.

I like you believe that Cassel is going to be the starter when the season starts. (I think that is your viewpoint???) The reason being that he is the safest way to go at the start. What Cassel does better than the other qbs is that he gets the ball out quicker than the other two qbs. But the more I see of TT the more I believe that he is eventually going to become the starter. With the Jets Rex was subjected to a lot of bad qbing and a lot of bad decison-making. I suspect that he would rather go with a more prudent and conventional qb who can manage the game and make good decisions. That is not to say that Rex isn't impressed and intrigued with TT. There is no doubt that Rex was influential with the organization and with TT in getting him to sign with Buffalo. The Ravens wanted to keep him but TT wanted to seek a better opportunity to play. The more I see of Taylor the more I am impressed. He has surprised me with his accuracy, arm strength and touch. He throws a really nice ball. He also possesses a lot of football smarts. He is not a raw player who doesn't understand the game. The only reservation I have with him is his excessive inclination to run. Without a doubt his legs are a major asset of his but over relying on his legs is going to affect his durability.

On this issue we go in circles to the point we get dizzy and stagger away from each other. My position from the start is simple: Whatever Brady did or didn't do with respect to his involvement with the balls is a trivial and insignificant matter. The alleged ball deflation had no bearing on the game or anyone's performance. Whatever infraction happened (or not) was not worthy of this multi-million $$$ bogus independent and shoddy investigation in which the league office was involved with and then ruled. My central focus from the start has been on the disproportionate response from the league and the process in which they handled this case. Whatever you think of the judge and how he has conducted himself he has done a public service by demonstrating how unfair and heavy heavy handed Goodell has behaved in this case. Even if the judge rules in favor of the league the judge exposed how inept and foolish RG has been. On disciplinary issues Roger is incompetent and has little common sense. I don't expect to change anyone's mind on this issue. But for me the issue has been about the distorted process of this ridiculously inconsequential case and has little to do with Brady. I'll go even farther than most people who are against the league's position. I believe that Brady never ordered anyone or encouraged anyone to lower the balls below the allowable level. When Wells was asked by the judge if he had direct evidence of Brady's participation in any ball conspiracy he answered no. Brady is adamant that he didn't do anything wrong regarding the balls. He stated his position under oath. I believe him.

Can we both go back to our fallback positions? Impasse! I think the both of us can agree that we would prefer the judge put a stop to this legal dance/charade and make a ruling sooner rather than later. Although I have felt that the league was better positioned on the overarching legal issue before this judge I see the pendulum swinging to Brady's side. With the judge's many pointed question directed at the league he is building a case from their weak responses that would support a ruling against the league. Not that it matters with respect to how the judge will rule but most of the legal analysts who are covering this absurd case are saying that the league is not making a good impression in the courtroom.

That the Wells investigation was not competently done and not independently done.

There are few conclusive facts in this case. That's the point. Without wasting your time regarding the ball inflation levels the method of measurement was sloppy and their claimed science was not supportable or at the minimum couldn't be replicated. From what I have read on this case the judge is mostly focusing on the process of how the league handled the case. Other than giving lame answers to the judges pointed questions the league's fallback position is that it believes it has the authority to do whatever it wants and do it in the way it wants. For them the issue of fairness is not a consideration. The judge as demonstrated by pneumonic's link is not impressed with that arrogant response. http://sports.yahoo....tons&soc_trk=tw

As you perceptively noted the judge is publicly putting pressure on the league which is in the dominant legal position to yield a little from their hardened position. He is doing it publicly in his court, an open court, by demonstrating that their position is not without flaws. I have said it many times in my posts that the league has a great deal of lattitude in disciplinary matters. The question becomes did it squander it's strong hand by acting way out of line.

Marrone playing Pears at guard was an act of desperation. Our guard play (RG&LG) before his insertion was a disaster. Sometimes a replacement player is inadequate. In this case this inadequate replacement was an upgrade. Pears is a respectable reserve RT. He is less than a mediocre starter at any position along the line. He was a serviceable and useful player as a reserve. His departure is of no consequence. I wish him well because he was a trooper.

You made the point that you believed the judge was grandstanding. How so? What questions has he asked (mostly to the league) that you find problematic and make you believe that the judge is behaving inappropriately.

Of course he does. But in determining that issue it is intertwined with the process in which the determination is made. The judge is directly asking the league what is your standard and what is your process. Their response can be boiled down to we have the authority in disciplinary matters to do whatever we want regardless of the facts and regardless of how prior cases were handled. The judge seems uncomfortable with their arrogant stance.

Determining if the league abided by a process that it was supposed to follow is a relevant issue. Having an authority to act does't equate with doing whatever you want regardless of the facts and regardless of the established guidelines. What you and many others are essentially saying is that having an authority to rule allows you to do whatever you want without challenge. The judge isn't buying that reasoning. There is no doubt that the boundaries of the law favor the league. But what the judge has to decide is did the league go beyond the expansive boundaries to nullify its own ruling. What questions is the judge asking that you find troublesome? He is asking pointed questions to the league about their conduct and their prior standard of discipline. The league's responses are very unimpressive. This judge is a tough no-nonsense judge. He is not going to be stampeded by a hack commissioner and his high priced army of attorneys in such a stupid case. Without a doubt this is a high profile case. Without a doubt from a legal standpoint it is a waste of his time. That's why he is exhibiting so much irritability.

If you are strong and lack agility you are better suited inside. You can adjust your blocking schemes to a more power type style that Pears is suited for and to a degree mask his mobility limitations. What you can't do is hide the lack of mobility and slow feet to contend with quicker outside rushers when playing on the outside as an OT. It is futile arguing whether he is best suited as a RT or guard. Regardless what position he plays at best he is a functional backup player. He being a starter on any team is an indictment to the talent level on that team. Bill, I'm not challenging you that he didn't play better as a RT compared to the guard position. What I am saying is that he is a mediocre player at RT who was called on to fill a dire hole at the guard position. It was the right thing to do because there were no other options. Last year's guard play before his insertion was not only poor, it was a catastrophe!

The investigation has not met the threshold. (That's my opinion.) The league has made the argument that the Wells investigation was independent. When it was demonstrated that it wasn't true the league's position changed to it is irrelevant whether it was independent or not. The judge has basically discredited not only the basis of the Wells report but also the conclusion of the report. When the judge asked the league attorneys what direct evidence did they have regarding Brady's participation in the alleged conspiracy in the deflation of the balls their response was that they had none. The league has reduced their argument to this: We have the authority to make a determination regardless of the facts and the guidelines used in prior cases. In the San Diego "stickum" ball case no player was fined. The franchise was fined $25,000. In a cold weather game in Minnesota where the balls were heated (against the rules) the team was fined $25,000. No player was held accountable. Let's put things in perspective: the alleged ball tampering had no bearing on the game and no bearing on anyone's performance. The league has spent reportedly $5 million for an investigation that was a sham and it has dragged out this moronic case for more than half a year and still counting. Whatever happened wasn't worthy of the league's incredibly disproportionate response compared to the level of the alleged transgression. The only smart thing that the league has done on this issue is to standardize how the balls are now inflated and now maintain control of the balls instead of allowing teams to handle the balls. In other words the problem has simply been resolved on this inconsequential issue that has distracted the public from the game.

How has he contradicted himself? Under oath he has stated that he was not involved in a conspiracy. On that issue he has not deviated from his position. I am not wedded to any specific amount of games, although I consider the four game suspension absurdly unfair. If there is an agreement of one or two games that would be fine. The issue from Brady's standpoint is that he is not willing to acknowledge that he participated in the deflation of the balls below the acceptable limit. I have no problem with him maintaining his position.

How many teams has Harvin played for already? He is on is fourth team. Ask yourself why! In addition, he is injury prone. I prefer Goodwin. If you prefer Harvin then so be it.

There is an avenue to a resolution. The league suspends him for a game and then it can spin it the way it wants. Brady accepts the suspension and then he can spin it the way he wants or simply say nothing. The problem is that the league is so heavily invested in this manufactured fiasco that it feels that it has to save face with Brady's acknowledgement that he was involved with the ball conspiracy.

Even if he is not a full time player he is the type of player that the defense, because of his world class speed, has to account for. Whether the ball goes to him or not he opens the field for the other receivers. An interesting question arises if the Bills have to decide between Harvin or Goodwin which would they keep? Harvin has a tendency to be fragile and fractious while Goodwin may not be as good of a player he could be considered a more dependable person and teammate.

My understanding is that he is not willing to accept a suspension for the ball deflation while he is amenable to accept a suspension for a lack of cooperation.

The judge is leaning more heavily on the league to settle. He is sending non-subtle signals to them that their approach and process to this case is problematic. From a legal standpoint I still believe that the league is in a better position than Brady is. But the judge is letting the league know that they shouldn't assume that by taking a hard line and uncompromising stance that it will work out for them. This link is only a few hours old. So it is an update. http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/deflategate-back-court-brady-goodell-talks-fail-33170511