BillsfaninFl

Does the County really earn a return on the stadium investment? Many years ago when the stadium was built, critics were saying that the Bills will be the only ones making a profit from it. The money was supposedly spent to pacify the team organization because they were threatening to move unless they got a new facility. The final plan was not a dome because the team ownership didn't want part of the money top go for that. (Who cares about fan comfort?) The Bills got such a cherry deal that they even got to decide (and profit) if there were other events held there, like concerts. The only return on the County's investment that I know of is when the stadium naming rights were sold to Rich. Ralph was pissed, stating that "the stadium should not bear the name of a person." Of course, when the Rich contract expired, no further naming rights were sold and the stadium was then named for a person anyway. Funny how that worked. Is it different now?

The amount proposed for the Bills may only amount to one or two player one year incomes. If the money becomes available and if the amount is substancial it may pay for improvements to the stadium. But it's chump change compared to the price that will be paid to buy the Bills, so it will be a small factor in any decision to keep the team in Buffalo. That will happen only if the new ownership wants the Bills to stay put. If so, the state money will be a plus.

Interesting. I used to live for those games against our divisional rivals. But for several years, my mindset has been that I hope we steal one or two of these contests. I know some others feel the same way, judging by their responses after we beat the Patriots early this year. It was as if they proclaimed the year a success no matter what happened afterward. And that uncertainty became fact as even the Dolphins beat us.

I liked Talley as a player. I appreciate what he did for the Bills and wish him all the best. He probably could develop into a good linebacker coach. I assume you are not linking his potential new career with having any positive effect on the current team. If hired in that capacity, he would be an unqualified rookie. It would be no better than hiring a successful and beloved coach as a rookie General Manager, only to have him Levy town with a reduced reputation.

Ahhhh, it's token move time again. The fans are unhappy, so it's time to bring in a couple of players who will get the gullible excited. I ask them... Do you really think that Nix's philosophy has changed? Or could it be that the Bills' nosedive exposed the fact that they only want to continue the illusion of a rebuilding team? The real Bills organizational strategy is to change the G.M. and coaching every few years to reset the fan expectations. The sad thing is that those expectations keep getting lower. Don't you understand that blind acceptance doesn't make you a better fan than someone who demands true progress. It just makes you an enabler who helps the team continue on its bottom-dwelling ways. Conversely, fan discontent forces them to make a few moves. If it was unanimous discontent it would force them to do more. And don't be concerned about the fear of them moving the team. A new owner might, but not the current organization. Doing so is expensive in the short run, but attractive for years to come. This organization is not looking ahead ten years, it is expecting to sell out in a few.

Wrong response. That is what you will post after next season.

Several posts here make excellent points. Yet there are still people who think the future may be bright. I like their "hope springs eternal" attitude in the face of no real evidence of improvement. But the facts are that each year the Bills have as many holes to fill as the year before. To the dreamers who respond with their annual "I've got a feeling we are headed in the right direction," go back and look at the comments each off-season. For every good player added, there is generally a position weakened. Whether you believe the Bills are two, six or twenty players away from being a playoff team, Looking at the big picture shows they are no closer now than they were at the millenium.

Evans is a good guy and doesn't deserve any venom. That said, here is his status. Evans is not a moves guy. His thing was to run all out for the long pass. Having lost a step, he no longer is effective. This season, in 9 games, he caught 4 passes for 74 yards. I hope he invests his pay wisely, because his career is all but over. No venom, just reality.

The odds are better that Snow White will show up at your house.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists is kind of like the Bills. Few people take them seriously. But to anyone who might be worried by their article, the Doomsday Clock only moves when they want to get some publicity. Therefore, it may never get to midnight. Unless of course, if the world ends. Then one of those quacks will move the minute hand with his last breath so that they can claim that they were right. Hmmm... who do they claim that to?

agreed

I'm not here to argue how good or bad TD was. I'm thinking about how many of our GMs and coaches were sent packing because of a rift with Ralph. Polian, Butler, Phillips, Donahoe, etc. Wilson's record indicates he cared more about having loyal/submissive staff members than hiring people who can develop winning teams and letting them do their job without his meddling. I can't accuse him of meddling now, but then the strategy is now static: maximize the team's sale value.

Jerry writes about how successful the ex-Bills coaches are doing in the playoffs. I don't disagree, but there are two additional things to think about. First they are performing as assistant coaches and are therefore in their element. Unfortunately, the Bills hired some of them as Head Coaches with less than stellar results. Secondly, the fact that there are a lot of coaching alumni is influenced by the fact that there has been a revolving door in Buffalo. "You get what you pay for" said a wise man and the Bills refuse to pay for a proven GM or Head Coach. People will keep shuffling in and out of Buffalo as long as this organization is led by the current group.

You win the debate.

Unfortunately, it's really true.

I'm sure his mother doesn't think he is ugly. Who cares? If he can play well enough to win football games, he's handsome.

For me, having fun watching an NFL game is related to how my team plays. Having a guy do some contrived dance just looks stupid. You want humor? They should show more shots of we fans in the stands.

Bills Marketing Strategy 101: After a few games, sign someone playing or coaching well to an extension (Jauron, Fitz, etc.). It generates excitement among the fans and keeps them coming to games for a while. If Tebow was a Bill and had the start he had with Denver this year, he would have been given an extension by mid-season. This organization is pathetic.

Why are you Global Moderators threatening a guy for a post as mild as that?

Let's be logical about this. Every year we hear the same spin from the Bills' GM & Head Coach. Then gullible fans keep repeating it. "We are only a few players away from being a good team." "We have made progress." Then there is the berating of posters who dare to see through the BS, as if they are traitors. Forget what has been said each year. Look at the facts. Look at the actual trends shown by this organization over a period of several years. There is no real evidence that this team is any better now than it has been for several years. You can pick one or two statistics (like the number of sacks given up) and claim that the o-line is better. But once teams could see the Bills' early season offensive pattern, they no longer had to blitz as much to stop the offense. Since the team did not make a lot of changes in play calling all season, they were doomed to be beaten repeatedly. I like the comment that we have no control over what will happen. That is so wrong. I believe that most of the token moves OBD has made in recent years are in response to unhappy fans. If more fans expressed displeasure with the way the franchise is run, there would be more pressure for the team to invest more into winning (if they want to keep the business profitable).

Is that oil or tears dripping from those big red eyes? Some of these guys don't realize how sensitive you are. Hey guys, this man has more than 16,000 posts. Give him some love.

IMO, there is a big difference between being a nonsmoker sitting between two people chainsmoking in a casino, and getting a little smoke mixed in with the fresh air of an open stadium. And while nobody can mount a convincing argument that drunks are not dangerous when driving, prohibition was repealed a long time ago and it is okay for people to drink alcohol. To me, the thing I have difficulty understanding is why would a football organization believe it is in their best interest to alienate a substancial percentage of their paying customers by trying to limit their enjoyment (related to smoking, tailgating, etc.) at a time when their main entertainment product (the football team) has sucked for several years? Do they really believe enough tee-totalers will show up for games that will more than make up for the party types who will quit coming? I got the inside scoop on the conversation that took place in the high level meeting about all this. There was a fly on the wall and these are his notes of what was said: "Look. If we make them park in the order we let them into the lots, then there is less chance that friends will be able to be together. So there will be less partying before and after games. We will save money on cleanup."" "True. And if we frisk them when entering the stadium and confiscate their beer and booze, they'll have to buy more of what we sell." "We could also ban smoking in the stadium, even though the nonsmokers have been coming for half a century knowing that people around them will be smoking. I'll bet a lot more families with young children will buy tickets." "Only if we also ban swearing, prancing around half dressed, painting yourself and a dozen other things that will be frightening to toddlers." "We can't do everything at once, we can think about that stuff next year." "Let's also not let fans leave to have a smoke and return." "Why?" "No reason. I just want to piss them off." "Okay, let's do it. Even if some fans quit coming to games, there are plenty of others on the waiting list, right?" "Actually, there is no waiting list. We just said that to keep season holders from giving up their tickets." "Oh. Well, let's do this anyway. It's not like there's another NFL team nearby that they can switch to."

You are 100% right. But they don't care if you know their tendencies. There are enough people who never begin to get suspicious about their moves and actually think things will be better next year (click) next year (click) next year...

Yeh, but we would have had to give him a raise to keep him. How many stud players do you expect us to keep at those inflated salaries? We don't have any? Oh!

I never considered Nix and Gailey good hires, but really, what's the point in asking for them to be replaced? Ask yourself if you really believe the organization would hire anyone better than them. In my humble opinion, I don't see any improvement in staff until the team has a new owner. Look at who has been in those positions for the Bills during the last dozen years. Is any of those people a G.M. or Head Coach today? Guidelines for hiring Bills staff: 1. Must be someone Ralph knows. 2. Must be someone who is desperate enough to work with severe restraints on their ability to spend money on players or coaches needed. 3. Must be willing to accept a relatively low salary. 4. If they are qualified for 2 and 3, then Ralph doesn't have to know them. 5. Preferred age = beyond normal retirement. The closer to 100, the better. 6. Experience not necessary, but if they have it there is no need for them to have proven themselves successful. 7. Not necessary to be good at calling plays or game clock management. 8. Must agree to be outranked by financial and marketing personnel. 9. Should realize that their tenure will be two or three years. 10. Must be able to use the same old b.s., spin, cliches and excuses without laughing.