Why I am not optimistic about this team

[JohnC]

Actually the Patriots owner stated that they offered Welker more...

 

 

""When you come right down to the bottom line, he accepted a deal in Denver that is less money than what we offered him.

“In fact, he has a one-year deal in Denver for $6 million. Our last offer, before we would have even gone up and before we thought we were going into free agency, was a $10 million offer with incentives that would have earned him another $6 million if he performed the way he had the previous two years. But in Denver, he’s going to count $4 million against the cap this coming year and $8 million the second year. There is no guarantee that he plays the second year there. He will get $6 million the first year. Our deal, he would have gotten $8 million the first year, our last offer to him.

“So in fact, our offer was better than what in fact he got from Denver.”

 

 

It was Welker's choice to leave New England, and is more then likely very happy to be out from under Belichick's thumb. Brady is probably still fuming over this move

 

 

 

 

You are giving the Patriot owner's version of the contract negotiation saga. Welker and his reps have a different take on the negotiations. In the end Welker felt that his loyalty wasn't appreciated as much as it should have been during the negotiation. After a difficult contract fight it is not unusual for each side to frame the issue in the most favorable way.

 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000151816/article/wes-welkers-representatives-respond-to-robert-kraft

 

The Buffalo Bills overpaid for Super Mario because they didn't have the ability to find a pass rusher in the draft. Arakpo over Maybin Clay Matthews, JPP, JJ Watt, or even Ryan Kerrigan.

 

You must have misread my previous point or I didn't clearly make the point. It was that each team has their own unique situation. What you just stated underscores the point that I was making. Go back and reread it. Apparently I wasn't clear on that point. If so then it is my fault.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I disagree with BillfromNYC's earlier post about the Mankins comparison.

 

But I agree with his later post about drafting Levitre in a high spot and then letting him walk.

 

The disconnect in his drafted value and his free agent value comes down to a change in regime.

 

Keeping in mind we're talking about the Bills here, a logical explanation for letting Levitre walk would be to guess that the current regime wouldn't have traded back up into the 2nd round to pick Levitre.

 

The instability of the organization has hurt many times because there hasn't been a clear organizational doctrine around how to build a team.

[first_and_ten]

I disagree with BillfromNYC's earlier post about the Mankins comparison.

 

But I agree with his later post about drafting Levitre in a high spot and then letting him walk.

 

The disconnect in his drafted value and his free agent value comes down to a change in regime.

 

Keeping in mind we're talking about the Bills here, a logical explanation for letting Levitre walk would be to guess that the current regime wouldn't have traded back up into the 2nd round to pick Levitre.

 

The instability of the organization has hurt many times because there hasn't been a clear organizational doctrine around how to build a team.

 

The logical explanation for letting Levitre walk is that they didn't feel 8 million dollars a year was worth the price to pay a guard, especially since they tied so much money up in Mario Willaims and then have to worry about signing Wood and Spiller. Not to mention the situation with Byrd. I'm sure they would have loved to keep Levitre, but I'm guessing after intitail talks with his agent , they could see right away that his asking price was too high. And seriously, can a team build a winner paying their guards 8 million dollars a year?

[Bill from NYC]

>>>>I disagree with BillfromNYC's earlier post about the Mankins comparison.

 

But I agree with his later post about drafting Levitre in a high spot and then letting him walk.

 

The disconnect in his drafted value and his free agent value comes down to a change in regime.<<<<

 

Look again SJB.....it wasn't me who brought up Mankins, but I do get that poster's point.

If Levitre had been drafted in round 1 rather than Wood, his play would have justified this to be on the better end of first round picks by the Bills in the last 20 years. He did all that was asked, and more.

Moreover, who were the 2 best guards on the team since the superbowl era? Ruben Brown and who?

 

This team sends out bad messages. The re-signed McKelvin, a #11 pick in round 1, who is a lousy corner. They franchised Byrd, who is symbolically sticking out his middle finger to the Bills, and wants far more than he is worth. If they sign Byrd long term, Mario Williams will have a better chance of living up to his contract than Byrd who is good, far from great.

 

Levitre only got 10 million guaranteed. This was not a tough deal to match, especially if they used imaginative cap strategy. Now we are breaking in a rookie behind a big hole at LG.

 

It never seems to end.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Bill from NYC

[JohnC]

 

Levitre only got 10 million guaranteed. This was not a tough deal to match, especially if they used imaginative cap strategy. Now we are breking in a rookie behind a bjg hole at LG.

 

Don't be surprised if the Bills add a veteran guard off the street. Some times you can get good value from dumpster diving.

 

It never seems to end.

 

When you ride on a merry-go-round or ferris wheel the direction of the ride is very predictable.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

The logical explanation for letting Levitre walk is that they didn't feel 8 million dollars a year was worth the price to pay a guard, especially since they tied so much money up in Mario Willaims and then have to worry about signing Wood and Spiller. Not to mention the situation with Byrd.

 

And I'm saying that if the current administration didn't view Levitre as worth the contract that he got, that they also probably would never spend the 51st pick of the draft on a guard.

 

JMO.

 

Don't be surprised if the Bills add a veteran guard off the street. Some times you can get good value from dumpster diving.

 

Actually they already did.

 

They signed Doug Legursky who started 13 games over the past two years with the Steelers.

[8-8 Forever?]

I think this is going to be a weird transition year but hopefully manuel finally shows the stuff and keeps us in games we weren't in before. The only rough lost was levitre and I guess potentially Byrd. I really liked our draft class though this year and think the additions more than make up for the subtractions. Just gonna have to wait and see.

This is a polite way of saying we will lose 12 games and get utterly killed in a half dozen of them.

[Tiberius]

Well, who knows? It's sports, perhaps we are on the verge of a new era of Buffalo sports greatness!

[BADOLBILZ]

No way is the NFL more QB "friendly" now! The NFL is much faster, players hit way harder as they are grown men and not boys still developing into men. The NFL is also less forgiving when you make a mistake. Those players you mention are on some pretty good teams and not doing it all on their own. Both Newton and Tennehill still haven't gotten past 7-9 yet and the latter's number kinda stink at 12 TD's & 13 INT's. Kaepernik plays behind the very best O line currently in the NFL. Wilson is also on a very very good team.

 

Two things you seem to not to get. First, EJ and his footwork and throwing mechanics need further development or he will look very bad in an "NFL" pocket Lets not forget that EJ was graded as a 4th round "project" QB by most teams before the senior bowl. So because EJ got the MVP of the game in a very weak QB class doesn't mean this guy is another Kaepernick or Wilson. Like I said, the NFL is much less forgiving when you make a mistake. Not getting protections right, not reading the defense, not finding the proper receiver, over throwing or under throwing will make this rookie look really bad. Should things not go so well it could ruin his confidence very quickly. AKA Losman & Edwards.

 

Second, we certainly don't know what kind of team Marrone will field, nobody knows. I can tell this for a fact, there is no way the Bills offense is going to be as good as either the Seahawks or the 49ers. In fact, that line probably won't even be as good as last years line without Levitre. Lets be realistic here, this is the 6-10 Buffalo Bills were are talking about, with bad bad teams the last 13 years.

 

Go back to 2010 when Gailey first got to Buffalo, and every one here thought there was no way Chan could possibly do worse then skeletor. Then the Bills went 0-8 to start the season with Fitz virtually running for his life game after game, and Fitz was pretty good at running for his life. Now think about what an unprepared rookie QB would have looked like in that offense. Look what Trent Edwards looked like!

 

 

New set of receivers, different line, and an entirely different offensive scheme the entire team needs to learn. Kolb is very familiar with that new scheme, and I'd rather see the experienced QB out there finding the flaws and weaknesses in the offense so that the rookie doesn't get pounded into dust while the coaches figure things out. So, why put undo pressure on a rookie QB to perform unless you have the proper conditions for him to succeed and excel?

 

Perhaps I'm being overly apprehensive about the situation. Perhaps the coaches will have the team operating like a Swiss watch. They will have EJ's flaws corrected in training camp as he picks up the new offense and how the NFL works fast enough to have Kolb getting splinters in his butt. (We can only hope!)

 

But ya know what, I'd rather the coaches err on the side of caution and take things slowly with a rookie QB playing in a new scheme with new players, new coaches. Rather then have that 1st round pick end up concussed and running for his life. I've seen enough of the already. I'd much rather see Kolb out there getting his a$$ handed to him then the rookie.

 

You are far out of touch if you don't think it is MUCH easier to be a QB in the NFL today than it has ever been.

 

The league didn't just strike gold with all of these young QB's......they have simply made the position easier to play. The stats tell this story. Look all-time individual season passing yardage records and how many of them are from the past 3 years since the league started flagging virtually any QB contact and, just as importantly, the defenseless receiver rule. 7 of the top 20 individual seasons were established in 2011 alone. Seven different QB's in just one season.

 

Five years ago, a guy like Tannehill would have performed like Heath Shuler performed as a rookie. He would have been a bust and playing him further may very well have ruined him for good. That is how it USED to work. Not anymore. Instead Tannehill showed the Dolphins he was a strong "maybe" and they are good with that.

 

And as for the ascertion that Manuel is a project because someone thought he was a 4th rounder.....Tannehill was not highly regarded during the college football season either. He rose up draft boards after the season.....a season where he had A LOT of bad tape. Reason? Because the physical ability of your QB is more important now that the position is no longer rocket science.

 

And it's not going to change. The league has to get less violent to survive and that violence has always been the equalizer for pass defenses.

 

I will take it a step further and say it's even flipped how teams view QB's in the draft. Five years ago, there is no way that Matt Barkley wouldn't have been the first QB off the board in this class of QB's. But now, teams know they don't need to find that guy who might have that Peyton Manning-like mind at the expense of things like athleticism and arm talent. You can compromise on the mind if the body isn't up to the standard and that was the case with Barkley. I myself, liked Barkley, but I get the reasoning.

[PromoTheRobot]

The Pats don't even pay their best player a market deal. Remember the hubbub Ton Brady caused when he signed an extension that was millions lower than deals by other lesser QBs? Supposedly it was to free up money to sign/keep talent. Jokes on you, Tom.

 

PTR

[BADOLBILZ]

>>>>>Plus the Patriots don't really spend money on anyone who isn't Brady or one of a very select group of guys like Gronk and Willfork. They identified Mankins as one of those select core guys to give that kind of money to.

 

Just because New England gave crazy money to their LG doesn't mean it would have been smart for the Bills to.<<<<

 

Then why draft him at all? They traded up to the 2nd round to select him and since then he has outplayed everyone on the OL, including the beloved Wood. In fact, it isn't close. Was the purpose of taking him to merely help win a few games for a lousy team? The Bills, especially since Levy/Jauron, whiffed on pick after pick. This time they really did click and just let him walk.

 

Yeah a lot of fans here don't seem to get the fact that they money they saved by not signing Levitre will almost certainly not be spent elsewhere. I'm not a "Ralph is cheap guy" but the Bills are always 8 figures under the cap. The problem with that approach is that such a prolonged era of failure demands drastic action. This was the time for drastic action....if you would even call signing one of the best players at his position to a market contract drastic. The Bills are never in a hurry to get anything right. Marrone and Manuel really need to get off on the right foot this year, and taking your best blocker........and the only guy on the line without durability concerns....out of the equation was penny-wise and pound foolish, IMO. Levitre was no Larry Allen but he was the glue that held the Bills line together...if only because he was the only one out there every week.

[uncle flap]

Yeah a lot of fans here don't seem to get the fact that they money they saved by not signing Levitre will almost certainly not be spent elsewhere. I'm not a "Ralph is cheap guy" but the Bills are always 8 figures under the cap. The problem with that approach is that such a prolonged era of failure demands drastic action. This was the time for drastic action....if you would even call signing one of the best players at his position to a market contract drastic. The Bills are never in a hurry to get anything right. Marrone and Manuel really need to get off on the right foot this year, and taking your best blocker........and the only guy on the line without durability concerns....out of the equation was penny-wise and pound foolish, IMO. Levitre was no Larry Allen but he was the glue that held the Bills line together...if only because he was the only one out there every week.

 

I agree about the cap management in the past, but it's painfully obvious that they were/are prepared to spend some serious bank this year.

 

They let Levitre walk, moved the majority of Fitz's dead money to next year, they looked at Fred Davis, and franchised Byrd. EDIT: And signed a budget QB in Kolb.

 

They signed Branch, Lawson, and Legursky. I think the Hughes trade indicates they were looking to further upgrade at LB, but happened to find a way to do so while getting something for Sheppard. EDIT: They got Dotwin, too.

 

Just because they didn't make that big splash doesn't mean that they weren't trying.

 

All signs point to the Bills being prepared to spend big on Byrd and possibly another contributor (in addition to the signings they've already made).

 

The hiccup in the plan is Byrd not accepting a big contract (yet), but something will get done since the Bills can't afford to waste that surplus. They can't roll the majority of that cap savings over to next year. They put themselves in the position to "use it or lose it," and I fully expect them to do so.

Edited July 21, 2013 by uncle flap

[PromoTheRobot]

 

 

I agree about the cap management in the past, but it's painfully obvious that they were/are prepared to spend some serious bank this year.

 

They let Levitre walk, moved the majority of Fitz's dead money to next year, they looked at Fred Davis, and franchised Byrd.

 

They signed Branch, Lawson, and Legursky. I think the Hughes trade indicates they were looking to further upgrade at LB, but happened to find a way to do so while getting something for Sheppard.

 

Just because they didn't make that big splash doesn't mean that they weren't trying.

 

All signs point to the Bills being prepared to spend big on Byrd and possibly another contributor (in addition to the signings they've already made).

 

The hiccup in the plan is Byrd not accepting a big contract (yet), but something will get done since the Bills can't afford to waste that surplus. They can't roll the majority of that cap savings over to next year. They put themselves in the position to "use it or lose it," and I fully expect them to do so.

Amazing how the Bills can spend $100 million on one player and still be called cheap.

 

PTR

[Heitz]

I'm amazed by the number of fans that already KNOW the Bills are going to be bad.

 

Can't we at least see training camp, or maybe even the pre-season before we write the year off?

 

Live a little, enjoy the fact that we're currently 0 - 0 with no real clue as to what the season is going to bring...

 

[JohnC]

Yeah a lot of fans here don't seem to get the fact that they money they saved by not signing Levitre will almost certainly not be spent elsewhere. I'm not a "Ralph is cheap guy" but the Bills are always 8 figures under the cap. The problem with that approach is that such a prolonged era of failure demands drastic action. This was the time for drastic action....if you would even call signing one of the best players at his position to a market contract drastic. The Bills are never in a hurry to get anything right. Marrone and Manuel really need to get off on the right foot this year, and taking your best blocker........and the only guy on the line without durability concerns....out of the equation was penny-wise and pound foolish, IMO. Levitre was no Larry Allen but he was the glue that held the Bills line together...if only because he was the only one out there every week.

 

I understand you and NYC Bill's disappointment in the team letting Levitre walk. However, you are taking that single company judgment and extrapolating it beyond it's actual level of impact. You and Bill are making the Levitre transaction a test of faith of the organization when it is simply a cost/benefit judgment. You may disagree with the judgment but there is a rational basis for it. There are many other organizations that are reluctant to over spend for the guard position.You might disagree with that view but it is not a unique (if not prevailing) view within the league.

 

Is this backwater organization in the process of changing into a more forward functionion organization? I believe so. Although at this very early point it is based more on speculation than on action. You are essentially suggesting (my opinion) that because the organization made the Levitre decision that was no doubt based on money that it signals the same old way of doing business. If I am correct in how you are interpreting this particular player transaction then I think you are reading too much to that single transaction.

 

The owner is no longer involved in the operation. There is a younger and more modern GM. There is a new HC with a more sophisticated staff. This draft had a different feel to it. (Simply my impression.) And most importantly this frustrating organization finally has used a first round pick on a legitimate franchise prospect. That is a sign of progress for this lagging franchise.

 

My underlying point is that overall this new team has made a number of medium range personnel moves that make a lot of sense. In general this new staff has competently acted. Don't over analyze a particular deal but look at the totality of the transactions. I'm not naively optimistic about the short term but in the longer term I feel this franchise is moving in the right direction.

[thewildrabbit]

You are far out of touch if you don't think it is MUCH easier to be a QB in the NFL today than it has ever been.

 

The league didn't just strike gold with all of these young QB's......they have simply made the position easier to play. The stats tell this story. Look all-time individual season passing yardage records and how many of them are from the past 3 years since the league started flagging virtually any QB contact and, just as importantly, the defenseless receiver rule. 7 of the top 20 individual seasons were established in 2011 alone. Seven different QB's in just one season.

 

Five years ago, a guy like Tannehill would have performed like Heath Shuler performed as a rookie. He would have been a bust and playing him further may very well have ruined him for good. That is how it USED to work. Not anymore. Instead Tannehill showed the Dolphins he was a strong "maybe" and they are good with that.

 

And as for the ascertion that Manuel is a project because someone thought he was a 4th rounder.....Tannehill was not highly regarded during the college football season either. He rose up draft boards after the season.....a season where he had A LOT of bad tape. Reason? Because the physical ability of your QB is more important now that the position is no longer rocket science.

 

And it's not going to change. The league has to get less violent to survive and that violence has always been the equalizer for pass defenses.

 

I will take it a step further and say it's even flipped how teams view QB's in the draft. Five years ago, there is no way that Matt Barkley wouldn't have been the first QB off the board in this class of QB's. But now, teams know they don't need to find that guy who might have that Peyton Manning-like mind at the expense of things like athleticism and arm talent. You can compromise on the mind if the body isn't up to the standard and that was the case with Barkley. I myself, liked Barkley, but I get the reasoning.

You keep referring to Tannehill as a QB who made the transition from college to the NFL quite easily, and yet ignore the fact that his college head coach is now his offensive coordinator at Miami. Something which greatly helped in his transition. That is also something that has never happened in the history of the league afaik. Besides, like I pointed out Tannehill didn't have that great a rookie year, not with a 7-9 season, and 12 TD's 13 INT's. Miami also has a pretty decent defense and O line with 2, #1 picks at tackle.

 

Cam Newton, RG3, Russell Wilson,and Colin Kaepernick are all super gifted player athletes / QB's that are playing in the new vogue read option offense, and its because of their duel threat ability to run on any given play that is also making them so successful. Two of those QB's are playing on very, very good teams with some of the best O lines currently in the NFL in SF, Seattle, and Washington is ranked #7 in run blocking.

 

Now, lets look at the QB's trying to play mostly from the pocket on somewhat decent teams, Ryan Tannehill, Matthew Stafford, Josh Freeman, Christan Ponder, and now the bad teams, Jake Locker, Blane Gabbert, Brandon Weeden, Mark Sanchez and Sam Bradford.

 

Which tells me that success in the NFL is determined by the quality of the team each QB plays for, and not simply because the NFL is now easier then college. Which really is an utterly absurd statement.

 

The reality is that it is MUCH easier for a young QB to succeed in the NFL now today than it was even when JP Losman and Trent Edwards came into the league. In fact, it may be a little easier for some to succeed in the NFL now than it is to shine while playing on their college team.

This is just simply not true, if that were really true then why did Tim Tebow fall on his face, or Vince Young, or JaMarcus Russell? Some of the greatest college QB's ever! Also, tell this to Jake Locker, Blane Gabbert, Brandon Weeden, Mark Sanchez, Sam Bradford. The QB's playing on bad teams with bad coaching, schemes and players.

 

Matthew Stafford suffered his first two years in the league, playing only 10 games his first, and 3 his second year. Michael Vick is always getting injured, and beaten up. QB's on bad team have just as much chance as getting beaten up now as they did 8 years ago.

 

Have the NFL rules changed over the last 20 years to allow more passing and to protect the QB more, in a word yes! Have they changed that much since 2005 when JP Losman started at QB or 2007 when Trent Edwards started playing, not really, not that I've seen. Players on bad teams still get their a$$ handed to them every year, game after game.

 

And as for the ascertion that Manuel is a project because someone thought he was a 4th rounder.....Tannehill was not highly regarded during the college football season either. He rose up draft boards after the season.....a season where he had A LOT of bad tape. Reason? Because the physical ability of your QB is more important now that the position is no longer rocket science.

Its not assertion, previous to the Senior Bowl EJ wasn't even ranked as a top 5 QB by ANYONE. EJ moved up because of his play in the senior bowl and by getting senior bowl MVP honors in a very, very weak QB draft class.

 

Cmon man, here are his stats for that game... 7 of 10 for 76 yards, 1 TD passing, 1 TD rushing, 1 INT http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/0ap1000000146289/article/mike-mayock-alters-position-rankings-for-2013-nfl-draft

 

 

Wow, that last bolded statement is another utterly absurd statement.

 

QB Andrew Luck was the #1 overall pick as he was ranked as the next John Elway / Peyton Manning because of his ability as a pure pocket passer, and not primarily because of his physical ability. Actually one of his weaknesses was not having a cannon for an arm.

 

"Player Comparison: Peyton Manning. The main reason why pundits, analysts and evaluators liken Luck to Manning is the intelligence. Both quarterbacks are play-callers who have a fabulous understanding of defenses. Luck is the most advanced quarterback mentally to enter the NFL since Manning, and the Stanford product may be ahead of where Manning was coming out of Tennessee.

 

Luck does not have Manning's arm strength, but he makes up for that with excellent mobility. Manning has never been one to scramble well or run, but Luck is phenomenal at moving out of the pocket, throwing on the run or picking up yards with his feet."

 

It isn't fair to expect Luck to be as good a quarterback or have as prolific career as Manning. However, he's a future franchise quarterback who has the capacity to be one of the elite players in the NFL."

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012aluck.php

[Kemp2Warlick]

The Bills were pro-active in addressing their QB and head coaching positions this offseason, their two primary areas of failure over the past 13 years.

 

So why shouldn't we be optimistic? IMO an old joke about convenience stores sums it up:

 

Open 24 hours.....but not in a row.

 

Over the last 13 years the Bills have shown that sooner or later, they get around to addressing each of their problems........but there is such a decided lack of urgency. By the time they address one....another one or sometimes even MORE problems pop up.

 

Turning around an organization is no longer about 5 year plans. It's not even about 3 year plans. It's about getting competitive right away.

 

The ideal situation is bringing in a new coach and giving that coach the tools to be successful while the message is still new and before a lack of results compromises that message.

 

Teams like San Francisco and Seattle are the standard. While strong coaching has helped those two fast turnarounds, the personnel departments of those teams have been very aggressive.

 

IMO, the Bills personnel department was tentative this offseason. It seems like they are still working in the era of 3 year and 5 year plans.

 

They somehow came away with a net loss of personnel this offseason, which is just not what you want your rookie head coach coming into. Marrone is confident, but ALL new head coaches are confident.

 

I hope I am wrong and EJ Manuel is a revelation and Marrone and Hackett/Pettine take the league by storm but on paper this team looks a disfunctional mess waiting to happen. Maybe Marrone can pull it together.

 

What I AM excited about is the tailgating. Can't wait for that!

...No reason to be optimistic or negative. Too many changes. So i'll choose optimism. Makes me feel better. Mmm..the koolaid tastes great!

[San Jose Bills Fan]

...No reason to be optimistic or negative. Too many changes. So i'll choose optimism. Makes me feel better. Mmm..the koolaid tastes great!

 

Less filling…

 

[K-9]

You are far out of touch if you don't think it is MUCH easier to be a QB in the NFL today than it has ever been.

 

The league didn't just strike gold with all of these young QB's......they have simply made the position easier to play. The stats tell this story. Look all-time individual season passing yardage records and how many of them are from the past 3 years since the league started flagging virtually any QB contact and, just as importantly, the defenseless receiver rule. 7 of the top 20 individual seasons were established in 2011 alone. Seven different QB's in just one season.

 

Five years ago, a guy like Tannehill would have performed like Heath Shuler performed as a rookie. He would have been a bust and playing him further may very well have ruined him for good. That is how it USED to work. Not anymore. Instead Tannehill showed the Dolphins he was a strong "maybe" and they are good with that.

 

And as for the ascertion that Manuel is a project because someone thought he was a 4th rounder.....Tannehill was not highly regarded during the college football season either. He rose up draft boards after the season.....a season where he had A LOT of bad tape. Reason? Because the physical ability of your QB is more important now that the position is no longer rocket science.

 

And it's not going to change. The league has to get less violent to survive and that violence has always been the equalizer for pass defenses.

 

I will take it a step further and say it's even flipped how teams view QB's in the draft. Five years ago, there is no way that Matt Barkley wouldn't have been the first QB off the board in this class of QB's. But now, teams know they don't need to find that guy who might have that Peyton Manning-like mind at the expense of things like athleticism and arm talent. You can compromise on the mind if the body isn't up to the standard and that was the case with Barkley. I myself, liked Barkley, but I get the reasoning.

 

Very interesting post. Echos many of the thoughts I've heard over the years as well. When I think of how the QB position has evolved, the rules changes that help spur that evolution, and the virtual removal of all playcalling responsibilities, it's like an entirely different game than the one I first saw as a kid.

 

I understand the argument of superior athletes and the evolution of defenses, etc. But that's all relative.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[PromoTheRobot]

There in lies the problem.

 

Bills fans go to the game regardless of what the organization fields because they are afraid of losing the team to another city. I say who gives a **** if the team blows and the organization focuses on profits rather than building a championship contender.

 

Ralph wants to win. His problem is he had no idea how. He groped around looking for the answer to no avail. Plus he would stick his nose into everything or let his daughter act as a scout etc. And the older he became the less he trusted people he didn't have some connection to. Now it is true he did not wan to lose money, but what NFL team owner does? The Bills rarely were the cheapest run organization. Just the most mediocre over time.

 

So if I understand you correctly, you say if the Bills can't field a winner, then just let them leave town? Curious, especially since you have been here for years, along with the rest of us, following the team. The Bills don't have to leave Buffalo. You can just leave the Bills as a fan. So what's stopping you?

 

There is no "problem" as you put it. If you like having an NFL team you buy tickets and go to games. If every fan threw a tantrum and held their breath every time their team didn't win it all there would be no sports. Living in New England I listen to spoiled fans piss and moan about the Sox, Celtics and Bruins "not being committed to winning." I want to punch people like that.

 

I stand by my statement. Cities like New York can afford to be blase about their teams because no one is moving the Jets or Mets to Las Vegas or Raleigh. Buffalo is in no such position. So if you'd rather there not be a Buffalo Bills or Buffalo Sabres then by all means stay home. Just don't come here crying about it when they are gone.

 

PTR

Edited July 21, 2013 by PromoTheRobot