The gap between the haves and have-nots is growing wider

[Augie]

There is nothing wrong with this........

 

 

.....if you're a “have”.  

[BillsVet]

1 hour ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

...pretty sad commentary to even offer it bud....

 

It is, but conspiracy theories attract the proverbial moths to the flame.  The refs being bought out, McBeane tanking in year 2, etc. I can't believe people actually think these ideas are real.  

 

The league demands teams who can be flexible and make changes when necessary.  Teams that don't are left behind, especially those who hire rigid management that wants to live in the past. Belichick is a prime example of someone who changed and sure, he's got Brady, but his teams aren't ordered to defense like they were.  

 

There's a lot of bad coaches and GMs out there teams are hiring.  Finding a good combination is incredibly hard, but the teams who can do it AND find a QB are the ones succeeding.  

[Steve Billieve]

I remain completely unpersuaded by the article.  It just sounds like someone who came up with a narrative wrote a few half researched anecdotes and published.  Every team already has a win and a loss, and there have been plenty of big upsets.

If any other year is an indication there are several teams that are going to suddenly pull it together just like there will be several who will unexpectedly collapse.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, ocemur said:

The League decided more passing and scoring would be a better product. They just forgot to check if they had the inventory. Ten years ago or more, a really good defense could negate a really good QB. When they shifted the rules to get more scoring they created a game where only a great QB can beat a great QB. Since there isn't enough great QBs for everyone, some teams are just plain left out.

 

So what do you do? You can't create more great QBs, and they don't want to give up the scoring they believe will make the product more popular. They can either change the rules to encourage QBs to move from team to team, which just means you have the same problem, just on different teams, or you change the rules to make the running game as productive as the passing game. I'm guessing they would need to change rules on holding, maybe pre snap motion or anything else they can do to give the non QB teams a boost. 

 

 

What are you talking about?   The NFL recently created Goff/Wentz/Mahomes.  Russell Wilson was there for anyone to take a few years ago.  Mayfield on a competently coached team could be the next star.  Even Garapolo may be a future great.

 

The biggest "rule shift" was those that changed how DBs could contact WRs---and that was what, 14 years ago?  

 

People are crazy over this.  The game is fine.  

Edited November 9, 2018 by Mr. WEO

[Agent 91]

2 hours ago, Heitz said:

Good article, though a summation of something I think all (ok, most) of us on TBD see happening.

 

Let's hope that next year we're one of those teams with a quality QB on a rookie contract, so we can spend on some O talent.  Time will tell...

I think next year we HAVE to get the offensive talent regardless of whether or not it Allen is quality. It's time to make it happen.

[Bing Bong]

2 hours ago, Hebert19 said:

The beauty of the NFL however is that ***** evens out.  And quickly.  When the rams have to pay goff they wont have the same talent around him.  Same with wentz in philly.  Saints will lose breed sooner than later and also will have to pay their very talented rookie class from last year about the same time.  

 

Seahawks and falcons are a good example.  When they paid their QBs...they became worse teams as a result.  Just because Brady takes the league average for a qb doesnt mean everyone does. 

Yeah I don't agree with the article at all they act like it's a new trend, but it's just a crazy year for the NFL. It points that out with the Quarterbacks itself. Why are the teams tied up with huge QB contracts and the teams with good QB s on rookie contracts at the top

 

? there's an obvious gap of years in QB talent. Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Phillip Rivers, and Big Ben, Rodgers not too long after were all drafted in short succession. And then we never saw anything close to great consecutive QB drafts until possibly just about now. That's not the norm, it just happened. Similar to the early 2000s when the Marino, Young, Aikman, Kelly years were over and Favre was the only bridge.. the 1990 drafted QB on par with the 80s legends with no peers at his generation of QB drafts. like Matt Ryan and Russell Wilson are right now: pretty much alone in age class as an elite Quarterback. Favre won it all with a favorable contract.

 

The guys win early when they don't hamstring talent and win late when they have the experience to compensate and are given some good drafts to reverse the contract  disparity at the beginning of their career. Rodgers, Big Ben, Brees, Manning early. Manning close at his best season, Brees close right now. Goff and Wentz enjoying what younger Rodgers and Brees had.

 

And Wilson and Ryan now betting on themselves and a good draft or 2.

Edited November 9, 2018 by PetermanThrew5Picks

[Utah John]

Success in the NFL can be self-sustaining.  Players want to win rings so up to a point they will sacrifice money to be on a great team. Players who know they're not on winning teams focus on money.  The exception that provides the rule is New England, where Brady could have raped the Patriots but chose only to make a fortune and not a king's ransom. This let the Pats put more quality players around him, and he gets to be regarded as the GOAT.  (The actual GOAT is either Montana or Peyton.)  

 

The Bills had this going a generation ago.  Their great front office brought in real talent and a deep coaching staff had them working together.  The Bills had fun, and other teams' players wanted to play with them.  Then Ralph, God bless him, lost it.  Fired Polian, fired Butler, brought in obscenely terrible front office people, let his Detroit-based beancounter determine whether the Bills could sign particular players, ruined the scouting staff, paid lazy guys tens of millions and let good players walk away.  Now they're fighting to get back on the winner side of the hill, and it's a lot easier getting to the loser side as they're finding out.

 

The draft is supposed to tend teams toward parity but that hardly ever works. When it does work, it's great.

[dpberr]

Free agency was always going to kill the league. It's a slow death.

 

 

[Bing Bong]

59 minutes ago, Utah John said:

Success in the NFL can be self-sustaining.  Players want to win rings so up to a point they will sacrifice money to be on a great team. Players who know they're not on winning teams focus on money.  The exception that provides the rule is New England, where Brady could have raped the Patriots but chose only to make a fortune and not a king's ransom. This let the Pats put more quality players around him, and he gets to be regarded as the GOAT.  (The actual GOAT is either Montana or Peyton.)  

 

The Bills had this going a generation ago.  Their great front office brought in real talent and a deep coaching staff had them working together.  The Bills had fun, and other teams' players wanted to play with them.  Then Ralph, God bless him, lost it.  Fired Polian, fired Butler, brought in obscenely terrible front office people, let his Detroit-based beancounter determine whether the Bills could sign particular players, ruined the scouting staff, paid lazy guys tens of millions and let good players walk away.  Now they're fighting to get back on the winner side of the hill, and it's a lot easier getting to the loser side as they're finding out.

 

The draft is supposed to tend teams toward parity but that hardly ever works. When it does work, it's great.

I think the Patriots / Brady are the only self-sustaining team that takes any sort of paycuts. Only other team that comes close to sustained success is the Steelers cause they draft so damn well. Like they never miss. Certainly don't take paycuts (see L Bell) but when you have Big Ben and constantly draft him Plaxico Burress then Hines Ward then Santonio Holmes then Mike Wallace then Emmanuel Sanders then Antonio Brown then JuJu Smith Schuster.. You're gonna be alright, not Pats level but what team has drafted consecutive receivers that well ever??

 

Old Bills were pre Free Agency. 

[iinii]

5 hours ago, PittsforDave said:

A good start would be to stop rigging games for the select few teams. 

 

Make it a fair and balanced game and it wont be so lopsided. 

 

 

How do you propose this happen?

1 hour ago, Utah John said:

Success in the NFL can be self-sustaining.  Players want to win rings so up to a point they will sacrifice money to be on a great team. Players who know they're not on winning teams focus on money.  The exception that provides the rule is New England, where Brady could have raped the Patriots but chose only to make a fortune and not a king's ransom. This let the Pats put more quality players around him, and he gets to be regarded as the GOAT.  (The actual GOAT is either Montana or Peyton.)  

 

The Bills had this going a generation ago.  Their great front office brought in real talent and a deep coaching staff had them working together.  The Bills had fun, and other teams' players wanted to play with them.  Then Ralph, God bless him, lost it.  Fired Polian, fired Butler, brought in obscenely terrible front office people, let his Detroit-based beancounter determine whether the Bills could sign particular players, ruined the scouting staff, paid lazy guys tens of millions and let good players walk away.  Now they're fighting to get back on the winner side of the hill, and it's a lot easier getting to the loser side as they're finding out.

 

The draft is supposed to tend teams toward parity but that hardly ever works. When it does work, it's great.

Brady has more rings than Montana or Manning. How are they better?

[Buffalo Barbarian]

8 hours ago, notwoz said:

An interesting story in the Washington Post. It doesn't add a lot by way of analysis (or at least what most fans already recognize), but the fact that the topic is being discussed is significant: 

 

"The deluge of incompetence and/or surrender poses a threat to the product. The league is littered with terrible teams that have either given up hope or dropped the delusion they had any to begin with. Those teams, time and again over the next eight weeks, will pollute the schedule. Ready for Giants-49ers on Monday night?"

 

Has the league killed the goose that laid the golden eggs?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2018/11/06/nfl-gap-between-haves-have-nots-is-growing-wider/?utm_term=.4db00ca19b77

 

Nope, we keep watching.

 

 

[row_33]

8 hours ago, BillsVet said:

 

It can't possibly be a team having bad management who make bad decisions and only continue the mediocre type football.  Nah, it's the league "fixing" things.  Still can't understand why conspiracy theories are so popular. 

 

 

They demand equality of outcome. That’s a losing strategy for every area of life.

 

equality of opportunity is all one can honestly hope for, which will not eliminate the reality fact that some people are just plain better than you in areas of life, and you will have to deal with that fact

 

the NFL provides the most equality of opportunity in that the worst teams automatically have first crack at the best talent from college 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BobbyC81]

10 hours ago, H2o said:

If your GM drafts well at key positions then you can spread the wealth around to build a quality roster. Then you can pick and choose who is worth the money after the rookie deal or draft replacements. It all boils down to the QB position. Once you hit on that then everything else becomes a bit easier. 

 

Isn’t always true. Philip Rivers is one of the better QBs but the Chargers don’t make the playoffs every year.

 I think Stafford has been a good franchise QB but his lions rarely make the playoffs.  

[Doc Brown]

Surprised the Bills/Jets game didn't get flexed to Sunday night.

[ProcessTruster]

11 hours ago, ocemur said:

The League decided more passing and scoring would be a better product. They just forgot to check if they had the inventory. Ten years ago or more, a really good defense could negate a really good QB. When they shifted the rules to get more scoring they created a game where only a great QB can beat a great QB. Since there isn't enough great QBs for everyone, some teams are just plain left out.

 

So what do you do? You can't create more great QBs, and they don't want to give up the scoring they believe will make the product more popular. They can either change the rules to encourage QBs to move from team to team, which just means you have the same problem, just on different teams, or you change the rules to make the running game as productive as the passing game. I'm guessing they would need to change rules on holding, maybe pre snap motion or anything else they can do to give the non QB teams a boost. 

 

11 hours ago, ocemur said:

The League decided more passing and scoring would be a better product. They just forgot to check if they had the inventory. Ten years ago or more, a really good defense could negate a really good QB. When they shifted the rules to get more scoring they created a game where only a great QB can beat a great QB. Since there isn't enough great QBs for everyone, some teams are just plain left out.

 

So what do you do? You can't create more great QBs, and they don't want to give up the scoring they believe will make the product more popular. They can either change the rules to encourage QBs to move from team to team, which just means you have the same problem, just on different teams, or you change the rules to make the running game as productive as the passing game. I'm guessing they would need to change rules on holding, maybe pre snap motion or anything else they can do to give the non QB teams a boost. 

I like this post.  If you put defense back in the game, QBs will become RBs from a contract standpoint, teams will be able to spread the cap around to maintain their rosters, and teams can win with defense or offense.   I suppose scoring will decline but only in games the 6 superman QBs are in.   Balance it out.   Maybe the league will wake up if both NYC big market teams suck for a few more years and the stands start emptying out (which I doubt).   NFL game day just shifts to the parking lot for the have nots. 

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

Let teams play defense again. Enough of these 40 point scores 

[Gordio]

I am beaten down by the NFL.  I cancelled my season tickets & this is the first time I have not had Sunday Ticket in years.  I think mostly of the Bills front office making obvious mistake after mistake & being a non factor in the league.  The other thing though is I'm tired of watching Brady/Brees/Big Ben/Rivers dominate the league.  Something does not add up here.  These guys are all 40 or pushing 40.  I was down in Florida for the family vacation the week that the Bills played the pats.  I was at the pool that Monday afternoon drinking a few beers, had a bills shirt on.  A guy walked by and had a Patriots shirt on & asked me what I think is going to happen in the game that night.  He said a few interesting things.  He said "you know my kids our 15 & 17 years old, they have never experienced a losing season with the Patriot."  I said "that is funny, my son is 15 years old & he never experienced a true winning season for the Bills."  We both laughed.   I then said "Brady has got to retire soon."  He said once Brady retires the Patriots will get knocked down a few pegs.  Fans aren't going to like it but it is going to happen soon.  He also said which shocked me "it is common knowledge around the Boston area that Brady has been illegal substances for years to keep his body intact.  Says he does not know how he hasn't gotten caught.  Take it for what it is worth but it makes sense.  Guys in their 40s are not supposed to be playing at their prime.  I

[Wayne Arnold]

13 hours ago, notwoz said:

An interesting story in the Washington Post. It doesn't add a lot by way of analysis (or at least what most fans already recognize), but the fact that the topic is being discussed is significant: 

 

"The deluge of incompetence and/or surrender poses a threat to the product. The league is littered with terrible teams that have either given up hope or dropped the delusion they had any to begin with. Those teams, time and again over the next eight weeks, will pollute the schedule. Ready for Giants-49ers on Monday night?"

 

Has the league killed the goose that laid the golden eggs?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2018/11/06/nfl-gap-between-haves-have-nots-is-growing-wider/?utm_term=.4db00ca19b77

 

BREAKING NEWS: Sports league contains good teams and bad teams. Could it be the end as we know it?!

 

Story at 11.

[All_Pro_Bills]

3 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

They demand equality of outcome. That’s a losing strategy for every area of life.

 

equality of opportunity is all one can honestly hope for, which will not eliminate the reality fact that some people are just plain better than you in areas of life, and you will have to deal with that fact

 

the NFL provides the most equality of opportunity in that the worst teams automatically have first crack at the best talent from college 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From an opportunity perspective the NFL has a lot of rules in place to drive competition, the salary cap, free agency, the draft order, revenue sharing, roster and practice squad limits, etc.  But that can't control the decisions and approaches taken by ownership, front offices, and coaching staffs. 

 

Not to pick on the Bills but look at the series of decisions made by ownership regarding GM and HC decisions and how those management teams made decisions on players drafted, and players signed as free agents.  Then compare that to teams that have been consistently successful at winning on the field.  Why are the Bills near the bottom?  Currently they have almost $59M in dead cap space representing 45 players.  45!  Each one of those represents a 'bad' personnel decision.  The Patriots have $7.3, Steelers $6.3, Saints $19.5, Ravens $13.1.  Looks at the Bills draft history.  Although the last 2 under the current regime look to be breaking the trend the overall performance of the teams scouting and draft process has been awful.  The Bills offense is bad.  Well the three highest paid players Clay, McCoy, and Benjamin and the team neglected to address certain areas of need in the off season. 

 

Bad teams are bad because they consistently make bad decisions and good teams are good because they consistently make good decisions.  You can change as many rules as you like but short of the league regulating and ruling on teams front office and coaching hiring decisions, vetoing trades and free agent signings there's not much they can do to stop teams from making poor decisions and choices. 

 

[Teddy KGB]

52 points ? Will the Bills ever do that under Mcclappy ?