[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

Just go back to your Pats* board idiot.

You at the peak of your powers.

 

So sad.

[Will the next CBA make or break the Bills?]

I think people miss the point of the old CBA, the owners voted to accept the CBA knowing it was not good because of the upcoming TV contract. They knew the had an opt out in 2 years. This let them get their finances and TV contracts renewed with the fact that they will get their TV money even if there is a lookout. They also built up a lockout fund which has 300 million for each team set aside to cover the owners cost during a lockout. As soon as this was accomplished they dumped the CBA. The upcoming no cap year has a lot of provisions in it to keep teams from going wild and spending crazy. Plus the 2006 Pats were under the cap and would not of had to cut players, the teams it helped the were the Redskins and Cowboys

many people here are always complaining how the Pats sign players for less than market value. Plus the Pats have let a lot of players leave when their contract demands became too high (ie Samuels, Law, Daniels, Gay and others) If they were as free spending as you say they would of signed all of them to big contracts like the Redskins.

Bob Kraft is an outstanding businessman and has been they driving force behind getting the NFL owners 3 tremendous TV contracts, that has generated millions for RW and the Buffalo Bills. The NFL owners even RW have thanked him for this on many occasions. All owners have different opinions on things. Kraft does not want the luxury box income to be counted until after the stadium is paid for, he also wants team to find ways to get more income like selling naming rights for stadiums. If he has to add the income from boxes to the shared pool then RW has to add the 5 million he gets from Erie county for the stadium. RW does not want to do these things but neither want the Jerry Jones or Snyder going crazy. You might also have to add the NY Jets into the picture when they get their new stadium. This will be a major stumbling block in the future on owners who pay for their stadiums verses owners who get free stadiums and all the concession and parking money. Also remeber that the teams get a split of the gate when the play each other. Where the home team gets 60% to 40% for the visting team. because of the lage difference in ticket prices RW gets nearly 50 % more than the Pats do when they play each other

All good points. All wasted on these clowns.

 

Dogbyte must be a pats* fan.

[Will the next CBA make or break the Bills?]

Snyder has owned the Redskins for 10 years now. Even if you think he's making just $30M a year in pure profit, that's enough to cover the (let's see, carry the one) $300M stadium. And he's seen the value of his team triple. Kraft is in an even better position, having bought his team for $175M, only to see it increase in value over 7 times. And his portion of the stadium was $325M-$150M from the NFL's G-3 fund. Add them to Jones, who is paying for his stadium, and you have 3 owners TOTAL who paid for their own stadiums, as I said.

 

First you say "maybe Snyder hasn't paid off his stadium". Then it's "he's making just $30M a year in pure profit, that's enough to cover the (let's see, carry the one) $300M stadium."

 

A team's value is only relevant when it comes time to sell it. Also, a significant part of the value of the top rated franchises derives from their new stadiums.

 

It is clear that you are not aware that the G-3 is a loan program. It is paid back, in other words--just like all the other loans a team secures in building a new facility. It was available to all teams, including Ralph, since 1999. So, instead of threatening the poor souls who run Erie County with moving his team in the late 90's in order to get them to buff up "his" stadium, Ralph could have had plans for a new stadium in the works. A new stadium could have been built for under $300 mil back then and if Ralph could have gone with a majority private financing plan (he's got tons and can borrow against the value of a debt free team), combined with matching G-3 money, we might have a new stadium. That would have been a huge bonus for the new owner and the fans and would have likely guaranteed that the Bills remain in Buffalo after he boxes.

 

Fair enough. Some of the teams did spend money on their stadiums. But outside of the Jets and Giants (who are in the largest market in the US, received $300M from the NFL and are sharing the cost between them, not to mention the exorbitant prices they're charging), every owner stuck his taxpayers with well over a $200M bill. Moreover, they raised their ticket prices by 50%, and the taxpayers are still responsible for stadium upkeep. And in Adams' case, he MOVED the team. Try proposing those to Erie County, versus what Ralph asked for, and see how far you get.

 

Adams moved the team because Houston wouldn't take his money as part of financing of a new stadium. Nashville took his money. The not so bright folks in Houston then quickly coughed up nearly $200 million for a new stadium for the hapless expansion Texans.

 

Found this on Baseball Prospectus:

 

There is no such thing as a "small market" in football.

One of the vox populi arguments for the NFL is that teams in its smallest cities--Green Bay, Jacksonville, Minneapolis--are competitive. It's a nice thought, but the fact is, where an NFL team plays is essentially irrelevant. With the national-TV contract bringing in so much money, all that's left is to fill a stadium eight days a year. The population base required to sustain an NFL team is probably one-tenth that needed to sustain an MLB franchise, when you consider the limited number of home dates and the greater percentage of seats sold via season tickets.

 

If anything, the NFL's system has led to some real absurdities. One Los Angeles team moved to Oakland, another to St. Louis. The team in Houston moved to Memphis. If "markets" mattered, these things would never happen. Essentially, NFL games are studio events, and where the studios happen to be located isn't important, as long as there are 80,000 interested parties within an hour's drive.

 

As opposed to your cents-less claim that the Bills could just raise prices without any concern? LOL! And you realize that season tickets cost less per game than gameday tickets, and that most years, people can sell even just a couple tickets and payoff most or all of their cost for the seasons, right? Hence the reason you see the stadium filled with Pats fans, or Cowboys fans like in 2007?

 

How much did you spend on Bills tickets this past season? How much more would you be willing to pay per ticket?

 

A senseless claim is that the Bills would have to double their prices to get in line with the league average. They are less than $20 from the average. The Skins are not even in the top 5. All teams did not increase their ticket prices after they opened their new stadiums.

 

More BS.

[Move Back to Buffalo?]

Sorry D&C, but this is just silly and adds to the percieved fobias of WNYer's 'us against the world' menatlity. Virtually all of us here are from the area and we all know sunglasses are a rarely used accessory to our wardrobe. When Spring finally arrives, we all walk around like moles rubbing and sheilding our eyes from that rare, terrible floodlight disturbance in the sky. I'm in daily contact with family & friends there and a quick check of the area's current weather shows it's in the freakin' 40's there every morning! 40's!! In late June! Back in '95, there were 11 straight weekends of rain from late June into August, effectively wiping out the entire year! We moved to Fla the next Spring. We're all from there. We love it there. But the weather SUCKS!

?

 

It's 60 at 7am in Rochester.

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

I can respect fans from other teams that identify themselves as such that come to our board to chat. I have NO RESPECT for a DIPSPIT that comes here trying to pass himself off as one of us when he is OBVIOUSLY a fan of the Pats* It would not surprise me if you were a Bills fan in 1990, most Pats* fans are just like you, BANDWAGON fans.

 

Reread the above, son. You can continue to flail away with the pats fan stuff, too.

 

You , JPFan#1, are a bit of a joke here. Your boy set us back 3 years and yet you STILL pine for him.

 

You take cheap shots at Edwards any chance you can. You're no Bills fan.

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

Going into 2007, lots thought the light had started to go on for Losman, due to his much improved performance in the second half of 2006.

 

Yes, you said this already. Show me "lots". Again, his coaching staff obviously didn't think so. And as even you would have to concede (if you were honest with yourself) that they were right.

 

The Bills did not play to Losman's strengths in 2007. That was a factor in his failures (not the only one).

 

What are his strengths?

 

The pats* cheated, and no, other teams do not cheat like the pats* have for 7-8 years. If they had they'd have been punished. Filming a super bowl walkthrough also qualifies as cheating, no matter how much the commish tries to sweep everything under the rug.

 

I don't know who else, other than JJ (and perhaps those he implicated), did what the Pats did over the past years under BB. Unless you believe that the guilty always get caught (even you can't really go with that one, can you?).... The League did send a memo to all teams in offseason before 2007 season. Why didn't they just pull the Pats aside and warn them? Oh, that's right, your whole theory rests on the premise that the Commish (who wasn't the commish when the Pats won 3 SBs and when rumors of foul play already existed) favors the Pats for reasons that you cannot explain.

 

You say I have a credibility problem, and then you say something like "the Pats filmed the SB walkthrough of the Rams". There was no film. Matt Walsh admitted this. The story in the Herald was retracted by the paper in shame. It never happened and you know this. Yet you still say it anyway. But me pointing this out makes me a "pats fan".

 

Why would you do this to yourself?

 

Or this?:

tom brady likes to sleep with men. Sure i may be a 5 year old for saying it, but the only people who get defensive about it are pats* fans.

 

I don't get defensive about what you say about Brady. What do I care? The guy throws away beautiful women for more beautiful women. And marries a super wealthy super model. It is just a stupid thing to say and I'm curious as to what benefit you get from saying something so idiotic? Does it help you feel better about yourself? I'm fascinated by this.

 

 

i dont care when your first game was. you've been on the board for only a few months and have shown an extreme propensity to defend everything patriots* related. That sends up red flags in anyone's book.

 

I already responded to this in my above post (you ignored it). I know some TSW lifers get uppity about posters who haven't been here too long (is this the kind of informed exchange we've been missing ??). Do you think if I had been here for a few years, I would find your responses any less impressive?

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

Good Christ your little new england*-loving skull is awfully dense.

 

1. Since when does throwing few passing attempts equate to the coaching staff asking him to as little as possible? The Bills had big leads in both those games, so therefore had no need to pass the ball. And if the running game is working, which it was in both of those games, why continue passing? I dont give a crap who your QB is, if you have 3 score lead in the second half, you run the ball. Only your patriots* continually pass when they have a big lead.

 

2. Lets assume for a second that your asinine theory holds water (which in reality it doesn't). How is 200 yards and 3 TDs asking the QB to do as little as possible?

 

3. This discussion is about JP Losman in 2006, and has nothing to do with Trent Edwards. Edwards was still in college.

 

4. The fact remains that JP played well in the second half of 2006 (as evidenced by him being the NFLs 11th or 12th rated passer that season). He didn't follow up in 2007 or 2008 and looked very bad. But that does not take away that after 2006, there was a belief by a sizeable number of people, including many around the NFL, that JP had turned the corner and the light had turned on for him.

 

5. You simply repeating that JP had a bad 2006 doesn't magically make it true. The numbers don't lie. Those who watched the games don't lie either. But keep on thinking that "he finished bad" and that the team surrounding him played no role in going 2-3 over the last 5. (its actually 2-2, because the week 17 finale was a joke of a game after we'd been eliminated) And keep on ignoring that the Bills had gone 5-2 in the 7 games prior to the 2 game skid and pretending that had nothing to do with Losman's improved play (a direct result of the OL reshuffling).

 

6. You have shown an extreme propensity to defend anything and everything pats* related, including tom brady*, rodney harrison*, vince wilfork*, and bill belicheat*. That is what makes you a pats* fan.

 

Many here have clearly stated that if the coaches had only stuck to a plan that played to JPL's "strengths" he would still be around. They clearly meant his strengths as a passer--you know throwing the long ball, big air attack. I disagree that this was his strong suit. It is a myth created by guys here who were burned by this waste of a pick that many accurately recognized as such years ago.

 

Look, all I'm saying is that he didn't play well in December. If you want to ignore the 3 losses or explain them away with such solid, stat-based arguments as "bad calls" and (my favorite--you made a whole game disappear!) "Game 17 was a joke because they were already eliminated", well go rigth ahead. I understand why you need to do this.

 

Can you provide a link to the "many" people around the NFL who thought JP had "turned the corner"? Obviously none of them work at 1 Bills Drive. As soon as he was injured the next year, it was pretty much over, as far as they were concerned.

 

I "defended" Brady? From what? Harrison?? As for Bellichick, I didn't defend his breaking the rule against video taping opposing team's signals. I simply pointed out that stealing signals is cheating and has been done by teams since teams decided to broadcast their signals for all to see. Also, I pointed out that Bellichick didn't invent video taping and that it has been done for decades. I pointed out that the whole Matt Walsh saga was a big bust and that he has faded away after his 15 minutes of fame was up. I also mentioned the obvious--that after they stopped such cheating, they had a record setting year. I also pointed out that there was no cry of outrage by the owners of other teams who were cheated out of SB wins, so one can conclude they weren't that upset about the whole event.

 

You see, I didn't make any of this stuff up. It is all public knowledge. Yet you still can't believe it---and that therefore I must be a Pats fan for even mentioning these things. The world is not flat, Your Holiness. It's been in all the papers.

 

I went to my first Bills game 18 years ago, against the Bears, when I moved back upstate. I try to go when my job (7 days a week) allows. Those were good times as you recall. So the past ten years have been a major disappointment--maybe I was spoiled getting more into it back then. But I'm still here, just like you. But I don't feel the need to defend each questionable decision by the FO or support such moves long after they've proven foolish. I don't feel compelled to defend poor behavior by a Bills player just because he is (now) a Bills player. And I don't think pointing out something which is obvious about another team--even a rival-- makes me a bad Bills fan, nor do I think that calling another team or a player "gay" is really much of an intelligent argument.

 

That's how you and I are different.

[Bigger sack of dung]

Dead on. It's completely missed up, but the only difference between Stallworth, Lynch, & the majority of the board, is Stallworth was very unlucky. I know have been guilty of being really dumb in the past. Luckily, I've never been in Stallworth position because I don't know I'd live with myself. It's also because of stories like Stallworth that people finally get the picture of how dumb drunk driving is.

There is absolutely no evidence that ML was drinking that night. Right?

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

When did i say than < 30 passes a game was playing to JPs strengths? Playing to his strengths means calling the types of plays he was most successful at, not simply called tons of passes. I guess a dimwitted pats* fan like your self cannot comprehend any nuances of the game, huh?

 

2006 pre-bye week (7 games): 6 TDs, 6 INTs, 8 fumbles,

2006 post-bye week (9 games): 13 TDs, 8 INTs, 5 fumbles

 

Even the most ardent JP bashers will tell you that his 2nd half of 2006 was much improved over his first half. He cut down on turnovers, increased TDs and started looking good as a QB. By denying the improvement, you validate by above statement by exposing yourself as someone who simply does not understand the nuances of the game of football. I suppose i should expect no more from someone who probably started following the NFL in 2002 after you got your tommie brady jersey.

No, actually I was the one saying that throwing "< 30 passes a game" was playing to his strength (specifically I said < 20).

 

 

Yes, you're clearly a man who can appreciate "nuances". Endlessly coming back with "well........you're.....you're...you're, like......a Pats fan", is very sophisticated and nuanced.

 

Anyway, if you want to lump a bad finish to '06 with a decent stretch in November (even there, he had one great game)--go to it. If it makes you feel less foolish for sticking with a bust like JPL, I understand.

 

But it doesn't erase the fact that, no matter how you spin it, he played poorly in December---except when they asked him to do as little as possible.

 

JP's gone. Time for you to get behind Edwards, like the rest of us right thinking folks.

[Losman headed to the UFL?]

I've been saying the same thing all offseason. Even back in the day when some folks round these parts were wondering which NFL team would sign JP to compete for the starting job

No no no. He's just waiting until after the draft before he signs with a team. Right?

 

 

There will be no 2nd UFL season.

[Brandon Marshall requests trade]

Cutler is in for a rude awakening in Chicago. His record is 17-20 (should be 16-21, if not for Ed Hochuli's monumental screw-up last season) as a starter, hasn't taken his team to the playoffs, and with Shanahan as his OC and the talent around him last year, he had 27 TD's (2 rushing) but committed 20 turnovers (including 2 lost fumbles). In Chicago, his only decent receiving options will be Greg Olsen and Matt Forte.

Shanahan was fired before last season (it was in all the papers), so it's doubtful he was Cutler's OC.

 

When your defense gives up 4 TDs a game, it's hard to get to the playoffs, chief. Obviously Fingon didn't notice this either. Cutler had to throw a lot. Jim Kelly went to 2 SBs with worse numbers (and he fumbled more), but he had the luxury of a better defense--anybody gonna argue he was "semi-good"?

[Brandon Marshall requests trade]

Not really, the Broncos traded a semi-good QB for a decent QB.

 

 

 

The Broncos got instantly better by trading Cutler away.

Pure gold.

[I would plan on T.O. costing us $9 M + a year next season]

To me the biggest question is when and if he leaves and IMO he'll leave after a year as long as he's productive then who takes a leadership role that he brings when he departs. I hope he stays but if not we need to bring in a player that turns up the volume in practice, meetings, etc much the way Jim Kelly did. It's not all about talent but when you have a talented confident player that makes players around them better then you have a winner.

 

Huh?

[Will the next CBA make or break the Bills?]

The owners opting-out had nothing to do with the economy, although that certainly hasn't helped. They have been looking to opt-out of the CBA from almost the beginning, but they had to wait two years before they could do it.

 

You should have stopped after "nothing to do with the economy". It had a large part in this scenario.

 

 

And a lockout 2 years ago (which probably wouldn't have happened since the players had no incentive to do it)

 

Ah, let me help you a bit on this one: the players don't "lockout", they are locked out. My my my.

 

These guys have been making money hand over fist for over a decade, thanks to TV revenue and unshared revenue like luxury boxes, PSL's, club seats, advertising, naming rights, etc, as well as the highest ticket prices in the NFL. Maybe Snyder hasn't fully paid-off his stadium, but Kraft had such a minimal investment in his, he surely has.

 

Snyder bought the stadium for $200 mil and put another 100 mil into it. Since you are the math wizard (see below), I'll let you tally up his total. Kraft is on the hook for at least 325 mil (is that what passes for a "minimal investment" in your house?)---plus the cost of development of the area around the stadium. Snyder has owned his stadium for 5 years longer than Kraft, so how is is that you think he hasn't paid off and Kraft has (oh, you made that up. I see.)?

 

They have made money, true. Yet Ralph is completely insulated form the economic domwnturn. His fans are, by your estimation, amongst the most destitute in the nation, yet he doesn't have to worry about empty seats, even when he raises ticket prices.

 

I never said the "majority" of owners are old guard. But how much do you think Bud Adams has maximized his profitability? He moved his team and got a new stadium built. Same goes for Art Modell. What about Al Davis? The Browns? Irsays? Hunts? Maras? McCaskeys? Fords? Bidwells? Frontiere? They paid little for their teams and haven't spent a single dime on their stadiums either, many of them getting new stadiums paid-for by taxpayer money, which are used to jack-up prices even further. Yet Ralph "has maximized and continues to maximize his investment more than" any other owner and "[n]o one can dispute this?" From where do you pull such crap?

 

More BS from VOR.

 

Adams offered $85 million towards a new stadium in Houston (he was playing in an "updated" dump--Astrodome). They declined. Tenn accepted the $85 million and a new stadium was built. "The Browns" stadium was 25% privately financed. Irsya's stadium is 15% (100 mil) privately financed (and the Colts actually lost money in '07). Pittsburgh 40% (109 mil). Bears was 34% (200 million). Cardinals 37% (169 mil). Ford Field 49% (211 mil--and the Lions are losing money also). The Giants and the Jets are financing the 1.3 billion for their new stadium. The Hunts will pitch in $125 mil towards the new stadium.

 

That leaves pretty much the Bills, the Rams and Oakland from the group you mentioned. So the "haven't spent a single dime on their stadiums either" is clearly wrong.

 

 

 

A 10% raise (like prior to the 2008 season) is just $5. That's $20 more per a family of 4. Raising them $10 is a $40 increase. Raising them by $30 to even just average league prices is $120. Get the picture? And it still doesn't take into account the lack of luxury box sales.

 

My favorite part. Nice job! Did you have to take off your shoes to help you with all that cipherin'? Anyway, the market clearly shows that the Bills could raise prices. The games are sold out. Season ticket prices are at near record levels.

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

Thank you for verifying that you don't actually watch the games. (But, the Bills are usually on the same time as your pats*, so i can understand why you don't see any). I guess he had trouble playing in the cold when we beat miami in buffalo and the jets in the meadowlands, huh? Both of those wins were in december.

 

Blaming Losman for those 3 losses is the height of stupidity. Some bogus calls cost us the SD game. Robert friggin royal and his out of bounds feet along with jauron's idiocy (deeeerrr, what do you mean its 4th down, i dont have a play call) cost us the tennessee game. And the baltimore game, the bills were i run for the bus mode, kind of like 2007 vs philly.

 

Yes, those two wins were in December, and as I pointed out, they won those games beacausethey changed their gameplan. By limiting his pass attempts, they limited his likelihood of a bonehead play and turnovers. It worked in the Mimai game and the GB game. Therefore, he had less trouble in the cold as long as he didn't try to pass more than 30 times. In fact, they only won 2 of 7 games all season when he was allowed to "play to his strengths" (over 30 attempts).

 

I didn't blame the losses entirely on JP. But you were the one making the obviously wrong claim that he improved after the bye. A few bad calls lost the SD game? Otherwise JP did fine? Look at that 1st half. Starts with an int. 3 consecutive 3 and outs. On 5 drives, he faces 3rd down form the shotgun and cannot convert (he fumbles away on one of those).

 

"your pats*". Really, that's all you've got given the rest of your lame response. Guess you're going with your strong suit, eh?

[Anyone with espninsider know who the bills 'covet?']

Uncle Rico would throw for 4,000 yards and 35 TD's in his first year. I love his lightning fast, sling arm release. I heard he now has the same personal trainer as T.O. It was meant to be!

And it appears that he is already wearing the new uni.

[Will the next CBA make or break the Bills?]

For starters, the owners didn't need to lockout the players prior to the 2006 season. Therefore any talk of losing revenue is just ignorance on your part. The only reason the big market owners passed that POS CBA was because the NFLPA stopped pushing back the start of FA, and if there wasn't an increase in the cap, teams like the Redskins, Cowboys, and Patriots* would have had to cut players left and right to get under it. So instead of doing that and telling the players they weren't going to get more, the most logical thing to do was give the players a huge raise and increase the cap, and subisidize the smaller markets. Brilliant I'm sure you'll claim, again because you "don't care about it."

 

I did not suggest that there would have been a lockout in 2006. Just that if there was no extension of the CBA then, we would have been looking at a lockout by now (i.e., 2 years earlier), instead of 2010. And the economy now is different than 2006, hence the unease of the owners.

 

As for "large debt service," the only owners to whom that would have applied in 2006 were McNair, Lerner, Johnson, and Wilf. That is, owners who recently bought their teams for $800M+. No owner at the time had debt service on his team's stadium because they had them paid for them by the taxpayers (hence the reason none of them own their teams' stadiums), except for Snyder and Kraft. And in their cases, probably not even, since they've charged the fans enough to pay for their stadiums several times over.

 

Don't leave out Jones--he has to come up with over $500 million (nonpublic) to cover the cost of his stadium. Also, just beacuse an owner didn't "recently buy their team for $800M+", doesn't mean they aren't still paying for their purchase. And claiming that Snyder and Kreaft have paid off their stadium debt already--and "several times over"--is more plain dumb from you.

 

 

And basing the cap on total revenue and not shared revenue DOES put the Bills at a competitive disadvantage, among other reasons, and hamstrings the future owner. Assuming the future owner decides it's worth keeping the team in Buffalo like Ralph did.

 

If Ralph truly wanted to maximize the likelihood of keeping the Bills in Buffalo, he would have sold them 10 years ago, when the purchase price and the possibility of a new stadium weren't prohibitive.

 

Don't talk to me about "Ralph's first reaction," pally. The fact that the owners opted-out of the CBA after two years proves that Ralph knew what he was talking about. Any mindless ramblings by you about Ralph's "first reaction" and underlying motives is wasted bandwidth. The CBA was junk. Ralph knew this. The owners realized this later and killed it. There is really nothing more to say, unless you're so thick that you can't get that through your head. Oh, wait...

 

From the NFL:

 

In addition, as we have explained to the union, the clubs must spend significant and growing amounts on stadium construction, operations and improvements to respond to the interests and demands of our fans. The current labor agreement does not adequately recognize the costs of generating the revenues of which the players receive the largest share; nor does the agreement recognize that those costs have increased substantially -- and at an ever increasing rate -- in recent years during a difficult economic climate in our country. As a result, under the terms of the current agreement, the clubs’ incentive to invest in the game is threatened.

 

 

Another simplistic statement. All of the "old guard" owners have maximized their investment on their team, having bought them for (compared to now) peanuts back some 40+ years ago and having had their stadiums built by the taxpayers all along, some even getting state-of-the-art stadiums built which increased their revenue even more. Just because you "don't care to know about it" reveals more about you than anything else.

 

There majority of owners are not "old guard" who bought the team for peanuts 40 years ago.

 

And you're really losing it if you think that making the playoffs will lead people in a horrible economy to begin with (nevermind the global slowdown) to start paying even close to average ticket prices, should the team start making the playoffs again. A $10 price increase wouldn't get them out of the bottom quarter, yet would probably kill most families' chances to see games, and I bet it would do the same in your case, assuming you even go to games. But let me know where this vast, untapped pot of wealth is located in WNY. And we all know the taxpayers can't even approach affording building a new stadium for Ralph, like virtually every other team has had done for them.

 

Another tired statement. Ralph has raised ticket prices, as much as 10%, over the last few years. Stadium sells out. People are going to secondary outlets to pay far over ticket value.

 

You can't even assure me that you can think for yourself. What makes you think that I believe what you can assure me about Ralph thinks?

 

"We were not afraid of an uncapped year," Wilson said in the news conference. "We were not afraid of a strike in 1987."

 

Any other questions?

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

They took them off in the latter half of 2006 and JP showed some flashes that he could be a decent QB.

Really?

 

Check out the month of December. Bills lose 3 of their last 5 games while JP throws a total of 9 TDs, has 6 ints, loses 2 fumbles and is sacked 15 times.

 

That's "taking off"?

 

Looks like someone had a little trouble playing in the cold.

 

Actually, the Bills faired better when they didn't let JP throw the ball. 4 of their 7 wins cam in games where he attempted under 20 passes.

[Will the next CBA make or break the Bills?]

Gee, you think the owners said "we have the best labor situation in sports" and "hallelujah, we have labor peace!" when they voted 32-0 (totally united, not "pretty united") to kill the CBA they signed just 2 years before? And they had an "opt out" clause because they had a feeling it would blow up in their faces, like it did.

 

The owners make no money on games that are not played. I'm guessing that they thought this was not a good time for a lockout. Also, many of the owners have derived most of their wealth outside of football--I would venture that nearly all of Ralph's pile is from the profits he pockets from owning the Bills. Most other owners also have serious debt and likely went into panic mode when the economy started to tank last year. Hence the opt out clause was exercised.

 

Touting "labor peace for 2 years" is probably the dumbest defense of the CBA that's I've heard yet.

 

That may be so, but it is the only rationale I have heard. Again, owners with large debt to service aren't going to dip into their savings to pay their mortgage on the stadium.

 

Look, it's obvious to everyone that the CBA was a POS. Why you can't bring yourself to admit it is anyone's guess, but I have an idea why. And the CBA should mean a lot to Bills fans. Basing the salary cap on total revenue, and not shared revenue, puts the Bills at a competitive disadvantage.

 

I have already told you (you don't pay attention very well)--I don't really care about the specifics of the CBA. Saying that the CBA put the Bills at a competitive disadvantage is just ridiculous. The current salary cap (or the old one for that matter) has done nothing to prevent us from playing in a playoff game for almost 10 years. That "probably is the dumbest" statement you have crapped out all day.

 

Oh, so "Ralph's first objection was only because the cap would immediately go up." Yet he was under "no obligation to pay the increased cap anyway," so why would he be protesting? Makes no sense. What Ralph really protested was revealed by what he said after the infamous "I didn't understand [the CBA]" clip that ESPN embarrassingly ran, which was "I think the players got too much." Obviously his fellow owners figured that out, a couple years late®.

 

Ralph's first reaction was to the increase in the cap. He realized at some point that the new revenue sharing with the players is essentially voluntary--no team HAS to give more money to players (i.e., spend to the cap). But he continued on his "little guys don't stand a chance" stuff. Also, remember that, at the time the CBA was announced, it was understood that the top 15 revenue teams would be required to pay into the increased player revenue-sharing pool. So.....

 

And really, why should you as a fan care if he gets "free money" from the other owners? You should be ecstatic, because it means the ticket prices for "your" team stay the lowest in the NFL. Hmmmmm.

 

Maybe I would be as ecstatic if I was as comfortable as you are with mediocrity and futility, but I'm not. If all the extera money was wisely invested by Ralph into putting a winning team on the field, I would be very happy. And I'm sure that just about any Bills fan would pay more to see a playoff caliber team play at home, so your "you should just be happy you you have the cheapest tickets in the league" song is just another brainless statement.

 

Buffalo is a small market team in a league of owners determined to maximize their investment.

 

No owner in the NFL has maximized and continues to maximize his investment more than Ralph Wilson. No one can dispute this.

 

And I can assure you that Ralph was absolutley NOT worried about an uncapped year OR a lockout--he was not concerned about "damage".

[Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman]

JP is a gunslinger.

Probably the least astute assessment of JP Losman ever.

 

Gunslinger?? Like someone with the savvy, intuition and skill to improvise based on what he sees unfolding before him and able to make successful, split-second decisions?

 

And last season, the guy was a mope. He isolated himself at gametime and when his number was called, he was as unprepared to perform as ever.

 

Yup, great guy. Great teammate.

[Poz]

He's ranked 8th amongst 4-3 middle linbackers?

 

Ahh.....OK.

[Has anyone heard this?]

The camp is not moving anywhere...from the Bills perspective, the regionalization/Rochester tie-in is Brandon's baby, and has worked very well. And from SJF's perspective, it has brought them a ton of good publicity, and the increase in applications improves the student body quality, not to mention the football team (show me another Div. III school with facilities like this!)

 

Not sure who their major sponsor is at the camp.

[Interesting situation in St. Louis with Rams]

There are plenty of wealthy people in St. Louis that could buy the team, but it seems like there are many roadblocks like cross ownership rules pertaining to other sport franchises and so forth. A move back to LA is logical, but they need a stadium. My bet is on LA because they have plenty of people with the money that have been waiting and the city of Industry is waiting to build a stadium- contingent upon a team moving there. The timing might finally be right for LA to get a team again.

 

This was all covered in about 10 different posts weeks ago.

[Will the next CBA make or break the Bills?]

Ralph's biggest complaint about revenue sharing was that the money from boxes and suites is not shared but increases the cap. He wanted that money shared and if not , the cap should not go up based on unshared money.

Teams like the Boys, Pats and Skins use that revenue to cover a huge monthly debt nut which Ralph doesn't have to worry about. These other guys aren't going to simply give away that revenue to a guy who they know is clearing tens of millions most years--no matter how bad his team is.

[5 years 50 Million-are you serious?]

1. Not this year. It's going to be ugly, mark my words.
   
2. I think there needs to be a rookie cap, NOW. I don't think ANY rookie should make more money than a vet at his position. That is, after all, how the real world works.
   
3. Would you prefer a turd salad or a tall glass of diarrhea?
   
4. No. They will finish fourth in the division, and we will beat them twice, as will New England, and they'll drop at least one to Miami.
   

 

 

 

Thank you.

 

It's so easy to say, "they're more talented than us." Demonstrating that point, on the other hand, more or less impossible.

Favre played poorly against the Bills and we still lost both games last year. In fact he lost 4 of his last 5 starts and during that stretch, he threw for 2 TDs, 9 ints and was sacked 9 times.

 

"Demonstrating that point (that, right now, Favre to Snachez is a huge dropoff), on the other hand, more or less impossible."