CodeMonkey

At halftime last night they mentioned that there were other rookies late as well. The Browns said the rookies misread the schedule and as far as they were concerned the case was closed.

I watched the first half of that game last night and I think the Bears are the perfect first opponent for the Bills. They seem to have a pretty good offense and a mediocre defense. The Bills offense should be able to put up some points on that defense. If they cannot, then that is a red flag. Similarly, the Bills defense should get a good test from the Bears offense. If they can stop or at least significantly slow down Cutler and company, that bodes well. Yes it's only one game, and the first game of the season at that. But I see this game as a very good barometer for the rest of the season.

The Bills need him for the nickname alone.

I agree and I have been trying to ignore where his money came from. But what immediately comes to mind whenever I see that "drill another well" statement is he can take that another well and shove it up his ass. Actually it just occurred to me, people have been asking what the trust might not like about Pegula. That is one possibility, where his money came from. Admittedly a long shot, but I'm not sure what else they would not like about him.

Based on consistency of rumors and alleged leaks? Does that make any sense? But I do agree there are probably far fewer in the last 2 categories and precisely for the reason you mentioned. People tend to believe a rumor if they like it ... repeat it enough times and it is fact

So this process has been going on for quite some time now, and as near as I can tell there are people here who: - are 100% convinced the team is in Buffalo for a very long time, if not forever. Generally a foregone conclusion that Pegula is the next owner. - are 100% convinced the team is in Buffalo at least until the lease runs out, then who knows. Next owner unclear. - won't accept any thoughts in their head except the Bills are ... stayin' - don't know if the Bills will be in Buffalo for the near or long term. - are 100% convinced the team is leaving Buffalo as soon as the lease expires, if not sooner. - are 100% convinced the team is moving to Toronto. So basically, the same as the day it all began

Nobody buys a NFL team to get rich. They are rich to begin with. It is not an investment for them. So long as it does not lose money I suspect any owner would be OK with it.

Concrete? They already denied it with a plausible (at least to any non Bills fan ) explanation. Now, after the denial published in JW's article if it was proven that the person did indeed sign the NDA then in my opinion they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

It might be possible for a inquisitive journalist to find out if this Rai guy signed a NDA or not.

From the JW article ... "Rai told The AP on Wednesday he's not involved with the group's ownership bid. He added the references connecting him to the proposed Bills' purchase were "a mistake on my behalf," and the result of a misinterpretation made by a co-worker who wrote the biography." http://www.wgrz.com/story/sports/nfl/future-of-the-bills/2014/08/14/bills-to-toronto-concerns-raised-by-documents/14050399/

There would probably be considerably more late season blackouts if not for these people as well.

I can see the point both you and Dean are making. And I can agree under most circumstances. But I draw the line at extreme weather. In a city with a moderate climate where you might see some rain and some wind fluctuations but not much else, I can agree with an open air stadium. But Buffalo NY, in December or January (or even November sometimes), I cannot. That kind of weather ruins games, not help.

I would agree and wonder how many who bet with their heads would make a bet of 6 or fewer wins as well.

I see some 10-6 or better predictions and I wonder, given the Bills recent history, how many Bills fans betting with their head and not their heart, would make a bet of 10 wins or more this season.

Have to agree(?) with you there

I really didn't watch football much growing up. We were generally outside weekends when I was a kid and didn't live near a NFL city too often. Only started caring about it at all once I moved to Rochester a great many years ago after college (I'm a fossil as well). So the Bills are the only team I have ever followed.

Perhaps. But it also widely accepted that bad conditions tend to level the playing field and gives the worse team a much better chance of winning the game. I would much rather watch higher quality play where the better team wins than a game in bad weather. But that's just me.

I was at a game a few years ago against the Browns on a Monday night during a blizzard. 6-3 final (bad guys), all field goals. The weather sucked, and so did the game.

Well, I suspect most Bills fans would have enjoyed going to the playoffs once in the past 8 years. Or 14 for that matter.

So is most of what is on TV.

They generally have one person that has to drop out for medical reasons. It creates drama which they can drag out on the show and generates good ratings.

I don't immediately see anything wrong with a pay-per-view of blacked out games, which is exactly what I would expect the NFL to do (show me the money). Though I imagine the networks and people who still watch over the air would not be very happy about it.

Hey those little bastards shouldn't be on my lawn!

Regarding Pegula and fracking, it is accurate. And knowing people in PA affected there really is no debate as far as I am concerned. He and others did poison much of that state to make a profit. There are many many people there whose lives were, and still are, ruined by it. Regardless of all the good he has done and will do for the Buffalo area, where the money came from should not be forgotten. That being said, the article was clearly a hatchet job. And as Hopeful implied, pretty clearly motivated by a party that has skin in the game of the Buffalo Bills ownership.

Rumor there is JF is the starter game 1 with Grossman as the backup. Hoyer is trade bait.