thurst44

They really are not at all. There's a lot of room for cuts which put them in a not great, but not impossible, situation (Mario cut/restructure, Clay restructure, bump in salary cap alone would likely put them 20-30m under). They are in almost exactly the same situation the Dolphins were last year when they went and signed Suh. Salary cap hell is when a team enters free agency 10-60m over and has to cut players they don't want to lose. Bills are clearly not in that situation. They are also not in the situation where they can be players. They will likely not be major players in free agency, as Whaley has openly said. They will likely try to re-sign Glenn, Incognito...others like Bradham, if their price tags are not overinflated, a few Ryan-friendly bargain guys (of the DeMario Davis variety), and I wouldn't be surprised if we signed one major defensive free agent, despite Doug's comment about not doing anything the first week, as he also said (if i am not mistaken, correct me if i'm wrong) one top-level defensive signing but no more is possible. But, yes, as others have said, they will probably mostly pick up role players after the market calms down, when you can get better value deals, and I'm sure there will be 2 or 3 major underachievers as that's clearly Whaley's stock-in-trade (check out the rivals top 100 recruit lists from 2003-12 and see how many current bills were on there). Vernon Davis would be unlikely too...terrible value at this point in his career and as one poster pointed out, he's not necessarily that connected to Roman.

The schedule is nowhere near as brutal as people here are making it out to be. We tend to look tend to look at the next year's schedule with the best possible versions of our opponents. Hence, no good team is going to tank, the Raiders, Jags, and Rams are "definitively on the upswing," yet the Ravens were somehow an aberration. You never know what your schedule is going to entail until it happens, until you know which teams catch the injury bug. Even now, I don't quite get the horror...yes, we play the Cardinals and Seahawks, but we also play the Browns and 49ers, who look like absolute train wrecks at this point in time. Steelers and Bengals were great this year, but the Ravens were terrible, and the Rams were falling apart by year's end (and who knows how they react to the hubbub of L.A.). The Raiders and Jags have a lot of hope, but it's the same sort of hope that an outsider might see in the Bills -- a lot of young talent, which doesn't always come together. It may turn out to be a nightmare schedule -- or it could be a cake schedule. We shouldn't pretend to know.

Unless you mean pains we don't see, Kyle only missed one game in the prior three seasons. In ten seasons in the NFL, he's played all games in six seasons, and played in 14 or more games in eight seasons.

You might feel differently if you lived in NYC, surrounded by obnoxious Jets fans (in fairness, they were friendly when i went to the game this year)

They also had a decisive win against last year's second best AFC team. Every game is different. And what they've shown that makes one believe they can beat a good team (maybe well-coached, definitely not complete), is their defense is tireless, and only getting better. Yesterday, they were on the field for something like 75% of the first half, yet only allowed one short-field TD. They were missing their top 2 rbs and top wr, and will likely have two of them back. Also, it's telling they cut down on the penalties, particularly the stupid, unsportsmanlike penalties.

Yes, agreed, but I have watched your comments, you're cool to judge Bills based on this many games in a year.

Dallas was the team in immediate need of a QB and they didn't have a 2016 5th round to give. They traded it for Brice Butler.

Tyrod hands off to LeSean up the middle for 9 yards. 23 first downs

Maybe we should be a bit hasty about announcing the end of the career of a defensive tackle who's still playing at the top of his game (2014 pro bowler, 1st team all-pro) b/c he's 32, and perhaps flashback a decade to the 2005 off-season and check the conversations here re: a certain other DT who went on to play six more solid years, the first three going to the pro bowl. We have one of the all-time defensive lines -- let's not be so swift to architect its break-up. If the Dolphins can be flush against the cap and figure out a way to sign Suh, I'm pretty sure the Bills can find a way to keep KW in the fold.

Remember early last year when David Yankey and Cyril Richardson were thought to be likely two top guards off the draft board, then they dropped to the 5th round...and within a year, both released around the same time (next to each other in that link). What a diff'rence...

They're still there as of now, so...

Baby steps: having 6 solid o-linemen is way better than what was expected going into the pre-season

Am I missing another Henderson, b/c I doubt that the confirmed starting Right Tackle is about to be released. Did you mean Carrington?

You missed quite a few: John Miller is the likely starter at RG If Cujo is not the starter at RT, it's because Seantrel Henderson is starting Preston Brown will again be a starting LB Duke Williams could still start at safety (although probably not) Ok, so you do mention the other rounds, but what does it matter where in the draft they get them...

That actually compliments everyone involved...Gilmore had him covered well, EJ stuck it in the spot where Woods could make the play.

I mentioned Stills (ok, should have said he had one promising season, but is not a star by any means, nor is he decidedly better than either of the two WRs they let go), forgot Jennings admittedly, but maybe b/c he hasn't had an 1000 yard season since 2010. I'm not saying the Dophins didn't have a good offseason, just that: (1) their hype in the national press is exaggerated to the point of being ridiculous, (2) I don't see how it was considerably better than what the Bills did, if at all. The Bills traded a guy who didn't play last year for one of the top 3-5 RBs of the past few years, picked up a promising TE, and an explosive WR, and gave up a whole lot less (A potentially great LB, but one who didn't play last year, and a decent starting safety). And I don't agree that the Dolphins have "undoubtedly" upgraded their WRs -- maybe they have, but also Jennings could be washed up and Stills hasn't proven he's a star yet. I do agree that Jarvis Landry could have a breakout season, but on that note, Watkins is likely to have an even bigger breakout season (and let's not forget Woods), so by that logic, the Bills, with Harvin and losing zero WRs have even more "undoubtedly" upgraded their WRs.

Yes, where there are ALSO very few franchise QBs available. Seriously, outside of Wilson and Luck and maybe Newton (the latter two were never options for the Bills to begin with) how many QBs did the Bills exactly "miss out on" in the draft in the last few years? Maybe Tannehill is a real-deal solid QB, but if he is not anything more than middle-of-the-road, he's about to take up an inordinate amount of the Dolphins' cap space in relation to his skill -- and I'm glad we didn't trade up in order to get him (particularly considering we'd probably have benched him after his first four starts this year anyway -- he was as bad, if not worse than EJ) instead of a (hopefully -- ok, he's still got a lot to prove) shutdown CB, something which might be even more important to surviving in a QB-driven league. People tend to act like the league is full of team-transforming QBs and the Bills are negligent for missing out on them, when the actual number is really in the single digits. Yes, they should have drafted Wilson instead of TJ Graham -- but so should have every other team who is still in QB hell. Jacksonville took a punter instead of Wilson that year fercrissake.

The additions aren't even that impressive outside of Suh. Cameron has more concussions than full seasons and Britt is a not-all-that-inspiring WR with one half of a good season (and not necessarily better than either Wallace or Hartline). But then, the pundits always seem to get the Fins wrong. It happened a couple years ago when they signed all those "great" players (you know, the ones they mostly released this year) and went 8-8, or in 2008 when they were supposed to be a doormat for the second year in a row, then made the playoffs at 11-5.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/cap-hit/tight-end/ He's also 15th for cap hit among tight ends on otc: http://overthecap.com/position/tight-end/2015/ He's 4th on overall contract, and why in the world should we care? I understand why we, as fans, should care about the cap, as it affects how we get other players. However, what does it matter to us, when and how he gets his money -- Pegula is the 4th richest owner in the league. Enjoy it. For the record, otc & sportrac now both have Clay listed as the #1 hit in 2016 (it was listed around 15 before), but I've heard there were plans to renegotiate in any case. If not, ok, that's too much, but chances are -- like Suh's hasty 28m hit for the Fins in '16, it will likely indeed be renegotiated.

Sportstrac has all the contract details. Clay's contract makes him about the 15th or 16th highest paid TE in 2015 & 2016 against the cap, which sounds about right to me. McCoy's ranked 7th & 6th for the next two years -- and you could make an argument he's the best RB in the game (definitely top 5), and going into the year that is traditionally a RBs most productive year (that oft-cited study can be read two ways and age 27 is the peak). Sooo, if McCoy gets 2000 yards and Clay is a great outlet for Manuel or Cassel (or Taylor), it's still a bad bet. I semi-respectfully disagree. Sorry, I'm just sick of this misconception that they grossly overpaid for Clay & McCoy, or that it would mean them not re-signing Dareus, Glenn, Gilmore, and/or Bradham. It just doesn't hold up to the facts or math or anything. Besides, what we really should be complaining about is Garrison Sanborn's contract. Over a million dollars for a long snapper?!?!?!? It's the 30th largest cap hit of 2015. Outrage! Doooooooomed! Etc.!

Actually, both the players he mentioned are going to command roughly twice what McCoy will be making, so by basic math, if we cut these guys it's not going to be because of Shady. Plus, we would not likely be starting the season w/ Freddie or Bryce as the starting RB, so, it's not like we're spending the whole 5.5 mil more anyway, b/c we'd have to be paying someone a few million. You can use statistics to prove anything...forfty percent of all people know that!

My vote is a bit misleading -- I'm in NYC, and despise the Jets, but for various reasons (some fantasy, some friend fans), the Giants have become a goto 2nd team (but light years behind my Bills fandom).

That completely ignores any economics. Just plain bizarre.

While I agree with your basic premise to some degree (well, Sully), to be fair, this article drew a sharply different conclusion than the Syracuse article. The BN feature is actually contesting the notion with some solid points (the Syracuse article was agreeing with the opinion). That list was ridiculous as McCown is older and has 2 fewer above average seasons than Cassel (and Manziel cannot be considered anything but a trainwreck at this point until he proves otherwise). And the Jags and Jets not in the bottom 5 (Bortles has shown nothing and Smith has about as many good games as Manuel and waaaaay more atrocious games)? It was just someone running with a groupthink opinion that wasn't well thought out -- that the Bills have a bad QB situation and that's that. It's true, but there are too many total disasters out there to peg the Bills as the worst. The headline is just an obvious one, as is the poll -- uninventive, but certainly not at the level to call for someone's livelihood .

Have you ever tried to watch anything on Yahoo! Screen? If so, I hope you've had better luck than I have -- it tends to buffer and freeze a lot; it's hard to pair with any casting device. I love "Community," and feel this has been a great season, but am now episodes behind, b/c it's just near-impossible to try to watch. Hopefully they will grow by leaps and bounds by then, but it's definitely valid and not overly petty to protest a "free" thing if it's something that is time-sensitive, for which you are currently paying, and which now you may not be able to get. If you cannot watch the game, are you not going to be upset? The Bills Bars in NYC go crazy when the satellites go down. This seems the most basic of fan desires, the ability to actually watch the game.