Why is this board so negative?

[Buffalo Boy]

13 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

People literally believe they can read a few page article and be at the Doctoral or Scholarly level.

They were able to get the same amount of information in a 15 minute read as a Doctor who spent 10 years in college.  There are people who literally believe this.

That hits home!!!

[Gman10]

Here is my take on the negativity....We didn't lose anyone that crazy (aside from Poyer) losing Milano (injury) hurts...but we also didn't bring in any huge names....we also still have unreliable Bass.

 

The Bills are right there, but can't seem to put it together when it really counts (playoffs) we are literally doing the same thing every season but expecting different results.

 

Lastly, if the Jets/Fins come in healthy it could be a very rough division...remember we barely made the playoffs last season

Edited August 22 by Gman10

[Chaos]

11 hours ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Meh. It’s a game day thread … filled with instant reactions and hot takes. I find them disturbingly entertaining 

the use of the phrase Match Day in the quote you responded to is comical irony

[ProcessTruster]

because most feel the team is very competitive and will play well and win a pile of games, but will only get so far this year.. 

[mjt328]

23 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

Yeah. Whereas other teams never have any problems or setbacks.

 

More, what you've got there is a severe pessimist's view of the Bills history.

 

Just as reasonable to say that we've been one of the absolute best teams in football the past four years or so, who if not for the Chiefs would probably have a Lombardi or two over the stretch.

 

Every season there is only one NFL team (and fanbase) that will go home happy.

Either it ends without qualifying for the playoffs, or by getting eliminated short of the ultimate goal.  I would even argue the closer a team gets, the more painful it actually is.  Anyone who lived through the 90s can tell you this.

 

The problem is... the Bills have NEVER been that one team.

 

[corta765]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is because they are well led. Whatever people think of McDermott as an in-game strategist and tactician his abilities as a leader and culture builder should be undisputed. If the Bills fired him which franchise without a Head Coach needing a re-set would be chomping at the bit to hire him. 

 

Agreed. BB really altered peoples minds on success for coaches. Most good coaches have well prepared teams and good culture, but they have their follies from time to time. Tomlin has a ring and two appearances yet some of his decisions and running of the ship have been questionable at points, Pete Carroll did a tremendous job in Seattle but has a huge blemish from the SB, Mike Shanahan did great in DEN and has been lukewarm since, etc.. The greats are the greats and their is a reason you get maybe one per decade. Andy Reid until KC won a SB was forever laughed at for his time mgmt skills in PHI and inability to breakthrough and now is probably a top 5 coach ever. I do have a time coming where soon if McD doesn't break through they need to replace him and give Josh a different guy in his prime, but it isn't there yet. ALSO everyone who mentions replacing Sean I always ask who is your replacement and are they an actual upgrade? That usually doesn't go as swimmingly in response haha.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, corta765 said:

 

Agreed. BB really altered peoples minds on success for coaches. Most good coaches have well prepared teams and good culture, but they have their follies from time to time. Tomlin has a ring and two appearances yet some of his decisions and running of the ship have been questionable at points, Pete Carroll did a tremendous job in Seattle but has a huge blemish from the SB, Mike Shanahan did great in DEN and has been lukewarm since, etc.. The greats are the greats and their is a reason you get maybe one per decade. Andy Reid until KC won a SB was forever laughed at for his time mgmt skills in PHI and inability to breakthrough and now is probably a top 5 coach ever. I do have a time coming where soon if McD doesn't break through they need to replace him and give Josh a different guy in his prime, but it isn't there yet. ALSO everyone who mentions replacing Sean I always ask who is your replacement and are they an actual upgrade? That usually doesn't go as swimmingly in response haha.

 

Bills fans have a warped perception of what success feels like in the modern NFL because there have been two dynasties in the last 30 years and we have had a front row seat for both of them. The Patriots juggernaut in our own division when we were irrelevant that we couldn't ignore because they beat our asses twice a year and the Chiefs bandwagon that has been the primary obstacle to us winning championships when we have been contenders. The reality is most teams who have a 5-10 year run of relevance win one superbowl in that period. If the Bills fail to do that, it will be failure. But that is the standard to judge against. 

[oldmanfan]

31 minutes ago, mjt328 said:

 

Every season there is only one NFL team (and fanbase) that will go home happy.

Either it ends without qualifying for the playoffs, or by getting eliminated short of the ultimate goal.  I would even argue the closer a team gets, the more painful it actually is.  Anyone who lived through the 90s can tell you this.

 

The problem is... the Bills have NEVER been that one team.

 

Those of us who were fans in the 60's would argue otherwise.

[buffaloboyinATL]

Is it? I haven't noticed...

[corta765]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Bills fans have a warped perception of what success feels like in the modern NFL because there have been two dynasties in the last 30 years and we have had a front row seat for both of them. The Patriots juggernaut in our own division when we were irrelevant that we couldn't ignore because they beat our asses twice a year and the Chiefs bandwagon that has been the primary obstacle to us winning championships when we have been contenders. The reality is most teams who have a 5-10 year run of relevance win one superbowl in that period. If the Bills fail to do that, it will be failure. But that is the standard to judge against. 

 100%.

 

The other one I always laugh at is fanbases expectations when they draft a QB 1st overall. Every fanbase thinks they are getting Manning 2.0, but realistically the bench mark should be Drew Bledsoe. 4x Pro Bowler, led Pats to a SB as the starter, made the playoffs 4 times as the starter (didn't play in 98' injury), won the division, won playoff games etc.. like realistically in 8 years as the dude that is standard that any fanbase would love. Expectations are just so skewed for team success or QB play that the actual benchmarks for what really good is never are considered.

Edited August 22 by corta765

[dave mcbride]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Bills fans have a warped perception of what success feels like in the modern NFL because there have been two dynasties in the last 30 years and we have had a front row seat for both of them. The Patriots juggernaut in our own division when we were irrelevant that we couldn't ignore because they beat our asses twice a year and the Chiefs bandwagon that has been the primary obstacle to us winning championships when we have been contenders. The reality is most teams who have a 5-10 year run of relevance win one superbowl in that period. If the Bills fail to do that, it will be failure. But that is the standard to judge against. 

Correction: they had the frontiest of front row seats to one other dynasty in the past 30 or so years: the 1990s Dallas Cowboys. 

[QCity]

On 8/20/2024 at 8:49 PM, BufBills83 said:

Asking for a friend.

 

The negativity is imaginary, just like like your "friend"

[GunnerBill]

19 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Correction: they had the frontiest of front row seats to one other dynasty in the past 30 or so years: the 1990s Dallas Cowboys. 

 

They are just beyond my 30 year timeframe..... but yes, we have not been lucky in terms of running into dynasties 

[RunTheBall]

I think there are a number of loud voices on here that skew the narrative a bit. If you only read this board you’d get the impression that unless we win the Super Bowl in a season then there is no fun/joy to be had during it. I feel really sorry for those types of fans. You’ve gotta be able to enjoy the ride knowing it’s probably going to end up in disappointment and the reason it hurts is because we care so much. So yeah, we didn’t get to the SB last year and there are plenty of reasons for it, but man did I LOVE taking the Division from the Fins after they had a 3 GAME LEAD! Enjoy the emotional rollercoaster and at least we have a team with a chance to get to and win the SB. I know that’s not enough for a lot of posters here where it’s all or nothing but that’s their problem.

[Gregg]

2 hours ago, corta765 said:

 

Agreed. BB really altered peoples minds on success for coaches. Most good coaches have well prepared teams and good culture, but they have their follies from time to time. Tomlin has a ring and two appearances yet some of his decisions and running of the ship have been questionable at points, Pete Carroll did a tremendous job in Seattle but has a huge blemish from the SB, Mike Shanahan did great in DEN and has been lukewarm since, etc.. The greats are the greats and their is a reason you get maybe one per decade. Andy Reid until KC won a SB was forever laughed at for his time mgmt skills in PHI and inability to breakthrough and now is probably a top 5 coach ever. I do have a time coming where soon if McD doesn't break through they need to replace him and give Josh a different guy in his prime, but it isn't there yet. ALSO everyone who mentions replacing Sean I always ask who is your replacement and are they an actual upgrade? That usually doesn't go as swimmingly in response haha.

 

 

[dave mcbride]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

They are just beyond my 30 year timeframe..... but yes, we have not been lucky in terms of running into dynasties 

I personally had a metaphorical front-row seat to the 52-17 Super Bowl. Through luck and living in the right place at the right time, I had a seat 20 rows in at the 40 yard line, right behind Ted Danson and Whoopi Goldberg. I distinctly recall the choreographed rushing to the stage of 30 or so  small children during Michael Jackson's halftime set. Good times.  

Edited August 22 by dave mcbride

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Bills fans have a warped perception of what success feels like in the modern NFL because there have been two dynasties in the last 30 years and we have had a front row seat for both of them. The Patriots juggernaut in our own division when we were irrelevant that we couldn't ignore because they beat our asses twice a year and the Chiefs bandwagon that has been the primary obstacle to us winning championships when we have been contenders. The reality is most teams who have a 5-10 year run of relevance win one superbowl in that period. If the Bills fail to do that, it will be failure. But that is the standard to judge against. 

Win one? I think the vast majority of fans would settle for just getting to a Super Bowl right now. 

[amprov56]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

Those of us who were fans in the 60's would argue otherwise.

The 1960's brought the "Great, the Good, and the Ugly."

 

The 1964 Buffalo Bills won the AFL Title and would have beat any team from the NFL. The 1965 Bills won the AFL Title despite massive injuries, not sure how they would fare against the NFL, the great and the good. Ironic in that both teams won through a strong running game - ball control offense and dominant defense - would not go over with those on TBD who want a long bomb TD on everyplay in the 21st century. These teams were loved by the fans who truly identified with players and were happy with the win - defense, offense, or ST led!

 

In 1968 we got the "Ugly," 1 - 13," nothing comparable to what fans complain about today, even through the drought years. Why we have drastically differing view points and react differently in 2024 to the many diverse views on TBD. 

[MikeSpeed]

There is a difference between being negative and being critical. I do not consider opinions that are not positive as ONLY negative if the argument they present is sound. From what I have read here most posters are being critical not negative. I think where the divide between glass half full and half empty comes is that some posters need to be shown that everything is good where others just except it until proven they are not. To me both types of posters have merit.

[amprov56]

30 minutes ago, Gregg said:

 

 

Wonderful idea, in his 70's, he will tear apart the organization in his quest - maybe two good years and just because he is BB does not guarantee a SB then we go into total rebuild mold for who knows how long. The fast food generation at work!!!