BillsfaninFl

One decent drive and the curtain closed on a second game this season where the Bills can't even generate 200 yards of total offense. More to come, folks, more to come.

Hmmmmmm... I wish there was something important to discuss these days. Regarding this thread, who cares? 1. These female sports reporters would go into the showers with these guys if it wouldn't short out their electronic equipment. 2. They do not do it to be sexually aroused. They do it for money. 3. The football players are not there because they are shy. They are there for the money. 4. America is still a country of puritans. In most European countries no one would think it was a big deal. So give it a rest. It's no big thing.

This just came in. The head coaches of Kansas City, Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland all said that it may be a long season, but at least they know they can count on getting a win against Buffalo.

Ah.... I was beginning to worry, because there didn't seem to be any delusional types saying that it wasn't that bad of a game. Thanks! Now I know I'm still in the world of Bills Fans. I am sincere when I say that we need the great diversity we have on the Stadium Wall. People who believe lightning could strike and the team could go all the way, those who keep following the team even though they keep chanting that it sucks, and everyone in between. I consider it free entertainment, a little therapy and even psychology 101. I can't wait until the team wins one game they shouldn't have, so the fanatical supporters can crow that we are "improving" and Chan's system is starting to work. Pay no attention to those who comment that we must "love 'em or leave 'em," and likewise forget about those who announce that they are quitting this forum. These people are missing the point of having a chat room. p.s. - I hope you are right.

Yes, we know you are an Edwards hater. But if you saw how inaccurate Derek Anderson was for Arizona, maybe you wouldn't be so critical. I'm not a Trent lover, but not a hater, either. What I saw today was a QB without much blocking or time, running for his life. Put Tom Brady or Peyton Manning on this team and they would look like bums. On the other hand, it was nice to see Parrish back out of the dog house. He made a couple nice returns and caught a couple of nice pass catches. My MVP (if there could be one) is Moorman, who outdueled the opposing punter with ease. Too early to stick a fork in the Bills, but so far, it is what I expected. I agree that some coaching calls were questionable, but I have to give credit to Chan for taking the safety in the hope of getting a chance to score a late touchdown. (At least I think they did it on purpose.) Jauron would have punted in that situation.

Recently there was a marathon discussion on this forum where people argued about whether Ralph is spending enough money to field a winner. Yesterday's article by Mark Gaughan adds a little reality to the assumptions some people made. He indicated "In terms of cap spending, the Bills ranked 32nd in the NFL last year, at $120.8 million, according to NFL Players Association figures." For those of you who like to dispute sources, you can't get a better one than the Players' Association. They don't spin the numbers in favor of team owners. Gaughan also stated that "Up until this season, there also was a cap minimum that teams must spend. Last year it was $108 million." Now factor in the salaries the Bills were forced to pay last year because of a record number of injuries (an amount they didn't expect to be that high) and they had to be close to the minimum the league forces them to spend. If we were the lowest in the league in player salaries and hired discount management, can anyone make a credible case for Ralph not being cheap... and wanting to field a winner? Of course, we may never know if he was serious about paying 10 million for an elite coach, but the weight of evidence is strongly in favor of that being just the usual "spin."

Mt crystall ball predicts 6 - 10. The other one just hurts.

Yeh, the "straight shooter" will announce that Spiller is the number three running back until he comes in and beats the other guys out. In essence, no announcement at all. If Spiller doesn't sign immediately, Nix will change his tune. A trend is building.

While I don't think the Bills had any choice about Schobel, the brass definitely is showing they are liars. Your example is a good one and there are others. I'm still ticked that Chan said he would not draft a "one year wonder", then went out and did it at WR. It's one thing to spin the upcoming season's potential (because they must), but it is another to throw out statements and contradict them a few days later. The delusionals keep saying give them a chance, but the evidence keeps mounting on the negative side of the scale.

Just think: if the Bills would have acquired Vick, as some of our posters recommended, there would be national articles about the Bills again. So the guys who are frustrated about no national attention would be happy. But I have an uneasy feeling that the article would cite T.O.'s year of probation here and then Vick's, and conclude that Buffalo is where they send the Lindsay Lohans of the league. Meanwhile, T.O. is pissed that his year of "no trash talk" didn't fool anyone and he may now be forced to do it again in Cincinnati. There truly is "no rest for the wicked."

Sorry, I couldn't resist. I sincerely hope you are right, but how can they succeed? The owner thinks like a 90 year old, spends like a 90 year old and meddles with decisions even though he admits he's not a football insider. i.e. - his admission that he doesn't know many people in the league. He also stated that getting top personnel is based on luck and has shown (via his decisions) that he does not understand that elite staff and players are needed to enhance your chances of winning a Super Bowl. Based on his philosophies, if he owned the team for another hundred years, he would eventually get "lucky" again and get a Polian/Levy level staff, with players like Bruce Smith, Jim Kelly, etc. Sooner or later, a Super Bowl would be won. Unfortunately, this will not happen in our lifetime... or Ralph's. So our one hope is for the right kind of owner to take over. Then the team will have a chance to win it all.

I've got some prime swampland for sale for you, down here in Florida.

Interesting responses to this post. Last year I was finally running out of steam as a Bills fan. I had supported them for their entire existence, but was finally getting fed up with the Ralph show. I dropped Sunday Ticket and watched whatever games were telvised locally. It was like "something was missing." So I paid the bucks and will watch them again, but I reserve the right to be a disgruntal fan until they actually do something.

Have we reached the end of this silliness? Let's get back to talking about football.

Do you have links to articles for these delusions of yours? Or does the phrase "everyone who was paying attention" attempt to make your comments credible? Nice try, but you fall way short.

Checked my crystal ball. No, we would not have won it all that year. But a rip in the spacetime continuum would have occured and "wide right" never would have happened. Instead, we would have won four straight Super Bowls and Buffalo would now be a city of 3 million people. Wait! That's not a smoky vision in the crystal ball. There's a smudge there. Never mind.

Born in Buffalo left in '85 (job promotion) Pa then Fl Bills fan from their beginning, and didn't sour on them until last year. i.e., not too bright. Would love to see them return to respectability and be fun to watch again.

You talk about honesty while telling us what people were thinking. Hmmm... Are you a psychic? A fly on the wall? Physician, heal thyself.

Good post, if you wanted to get the two camps arguing. Bad post, because it is meaningless. The point is... many of the fans are fed up with 50 years of local product which hasn't been very entertaining for most of that time: especially the last decade. We can argue until we are blue in the face about which of Ralph's issues are at fault, but the only important fact is that he has been a poor owner of a pro football team. His track record appears to show that he never realized that to be successful in this league, you pay the "best football people" what they are worth, then stay out of their way and count the profits. He had superior football people on his staff and dumped them for crossing swords with him (Polian, Butler, Phillips, etc.). Perhaps his "cheapness" was focused on management and elite players, because he didn't understand their worth in helping a team become/keep being a winner. The average player salary and profit does not address that. But in any case, he has not been fair to the people who have given him all that money and now many of them have had enough. If it makes you feel better, change "cheap" to "inept."

The states west of the great lakes are generally colder than western New York, because the artic air comes down from the northwest. When the winds cross the lakes, the water (or even ice) tends to warm them a little if they are below freezing. So we are warmer but get more precipitation. More snow to shovel, but at least you don't need a heater on your engine block.

Come on. Free agents and rookies say essentially the same things over and over. When you are signed (or drafted) by a team, you are obligated to say the same tired old cliches: a great organization, great fans, etc., etc., etc. You say that because they are about to pay you as much money as the average fan makes in his lifetime, if they keep you. So you don't want to rock the boat. Also, free agents want to make it appear that they had lots of choices and took the best one.

None of the above. Moorman will be forced to run with it after a bad pass from center on a punt. He will go 99 yards for the score and spend the rest of the season at a wide receiver spot.

Someone should step on HIS face.

So a few words from Lynch and suddenly he is excited to be here and now he is going to be all about football. You believe that crap that everyone says, instead of the fact that he didn't come in until he had to?

That may be true, but the gap in quality of play would only be temporary. During the strike, years ago; the replacement players sucked. But they were mostly rookies thrust into a short training period and season all at once. If they continued to play the next year, they would have been much improved, and so forth. In a few years, most of the current elite players will no longer be playing at that level and will be replaced by new stars anyway. Remember, each year the league drafts about 220 players and many make their team. Others are signed undrafted and a few get to stick around. If there is a lockout and the union decertifies, there will be an ugly court battle and congress will be pressured to make changes in the special treatment of the NFL. But the owners will ultimately be hurt less, because they are financially set (as individuals) no matter what happens. If the owners have to start over with new players, they may be smart enough to learn lessons from their past greed and establish pay scales that are more reasonable. We fans pay both parties, and can reasonably expect to pay far less for tickets in a corrected pay structure. Not to sound uncaring, but even with the physical risks it is crazy to give a guy millions of dollars per year. There are lots of jobs where people are in danger of being injured or killed (police, fireman, mine workers, etc.) but the employees don't earn enough in a few years to make them set for life (if they are smart about their finances). I wish we could cut back on what the owners make, but they make the product we love, so they are going to pick our pockets. But if the top players (and especially draftees) make less, we should not stand for paying the same prices for the entertainment.