Logical Reasoning

If it wasn't for the medicaid issues in this part of the state, we wouldn't be losing the large part of the population that pays for it. It is an entitlement and a very large part of it is used in a manner I and many others would deem as crazy or ridiculous. Double check your definition of oxymoron. Oh sorry . . . play on words and I am the moron. Got ya.

That's what I got. I read through the whole thing and that stuck most in my head. It is my insecurity in this area and the fact that I need to apologize for the idiot politicians and the foolish choices they have made.

"The Bills understand the county's financial position." Are the Bills supposed to feel sorry for us? At what point does the sympathy for being a small market team begin and end? The Bills owe us nothing and as much as I am not a fan of negotiating in a way that gives away everything because we should take advantage of anything that the state can help us with and the NFL. Just don't tell me that we have to worry about our medicaid budget or other things that reinforce crazy entitlements because the Bills weren't thinking about those things when they signed Mario Williams. They were trying to win football games and bring value to an entertaining product that brings revenue to the area instead of suck the area dry and push John Galt away. My advice would be to our county executive would be to keep it simple. The Bills and what they bring and what we can provide back.

There has been an awful lot of discussion this offseason because our defense has supposedly improved. I also think it has but Sparano coming over from the fish is going to have some tricks up his sleeve with two very fast receivers and Tebow. The Jets have three all pro offensive linemen and a solid running game. Their defense is solid and plays tough under Ryan. They have been quiet thus far in the media possibly because they know that chalkboard by every team you play makes the game tougher. Maybe they just want to play football and let their performance speak for itself. I for one would rather have them shooting their mouths off in an unfocused tirade that would allow us to gain that bit of hunger that may have been missing just a bit. The players play but this is going to be ultimately Chan vs. Rex. Two guys that have been around football a long time and know each other pretty well. Although, new faces like their offensive and our defensive coordinators, our Williams and their Tebow, our hopeful top two draft picks that have more questions than answers and their fireman our our Elvis. If they don't want to talk yet (and its still early) and give us any more fuel to excite us or any other team, we as fans need to understand that this excitement doesn't mean squat if it doesn't amount to wins.

??? Hmmm.

I am a diehard Bills fan and appreciate the difficult decision that Mr. Brandon had to make. I am sure it was difficult and will have a great deal of scrutiny with it. True Bills fans will completely understand the rationale, but this really should not have surprised anyone. Our boxes are a tough sell along with our club seats. We need the revenue from the tickets but probably could not afford the financial obligation to the league if we went with the 85%. Before those of you who wish to bash this move do so, try and think outside the box a bit.

If you are a real follower of the Bills, you would truly understand that they did everything they could to keep him and put him on the field. He could not even get on special teams and sat for a bunch of games including the game away in Baltimore which is his home town. With all of that, I can truly wash my hands of this guy. If he gets sacks on us or has a good game, I can live. He is not a member of our team any more.

The overall lack of vision and thought of Mr. Higgin's push for this is beyond foolish. I am aware that it is an overall NFL thing and not just Buffalo, but are there any local fans out there who see this as a problem besides myself? Our lack of corporate sponsorship and local business creates an absolute dependence on the season ticket base and sellouts. More than most areas that have a football team, we need the average fan to buy the average priced ticket and a season one is preferred. If Brandon decides not to abide by this which, from what I understand he can, I would support him.

If player safety is going to be such a huge issue from this point forward, this makes absolute sense. It should be noted that the implication with respect to these things has always been the safety of the person doing the drugs because they could hurt themselves, but it also now includes the safety of the person in the other uniform.

I was under the impression that he could not limit the evidence he had when he met with the players. He had to show everything he had to them to justify his stance and I would truly hope that he would provide it considering the degree of the penalties that were placed especially on Vilma and Williams. If I am wrong and the effected players know there is more out there, they should take their punishment and move on.

I have always been a supporter of the commissioner especially over the last couple of years when he has cracked down on bad drug and alcohol related issues when they have come up. There has not been one individual player that was larger than the image that the NFL wanted to portray and "come hell or high water", poor decisions were to be met with swift and pretty harsh punishments. There have been some on the field stuff too. Rule changes to protect quarterbacks and helmet-to-helmet collisions that are very pro offense were and are implemented to maintain safety, the general offensive integrity of the game, and an image to fans that the words tough and violent can mean two different things. If you consider the media induced push for kids to "move" sixty minutes a day, as a parent I think it is great and my image is heightened even higher. My problem, however, is with the Saints bounty penalties. I really think that the inability to trust the general fan base's understanding of a future lawsuit (or present one) defense is irresponsible. My image is that any one of the plaintiffs will say that the NFL knew how violent the sport was and did nothing to protect the players. Roger Goddell's response will be to say, "Well, in 2012 when we heard what the Saints were doing, we implemented harsh and swift penalties for the players and coaches sending a very swift and direct message that those types of behaviors would not be tolerated". The question then becomes, would Goddell have to be this harsh if the 1800 plaintiffs hadn't sent through the paperwork for the suit. My answer is probably not. If you consider his main responsibility as commissioner is to maintain the present and future NFL, can you blame him especially when it is at the top of sports world. There are some members of the media and players that want the commissioner to start the process over because of a general lack of evidence and there may be some truth to that. If, however, he is preparing himself for that one answer from that question that will come up in court may two or three years down the road, would you blame him if he didn't change anything related to the punishments.

Interesting how on the first interception, Dareus looked like he was waiting for Tebow to run and kind of held off on the rush. Not sure I would agree with that if that was what he was told but they held him from alot of scrambling yards and made him pass the ball.

Not sure about Early.

I give the Bills credit for looking at the Terrell Owens experiment (which worked for the year we had him) and learning from it in that Stevie Johnson was held back. I would like to see what Jones, Easley, and the others can do to step up to the spot. I don't need to lose a draft choices.

He seemed genuine and focussed. Nothing extraordinary. Not sure what you are looking for.

Completely agree. It would have interesting to note if during the last collective bargaining, any discussion of long term disability and/or permanent health insurance were discussed or post-football transition. If it was not brought up, than shame on the NFLPA

I believe there was a genuine lack of awareness of the concussion issues when Joe D was playing. I think the NFL was more in growth/survival mode and they made changes to the Deacon Jones head-slap and some other rules to reduce head injuries so there were efforts to mitigate the damages to players and the costs weren't known.

Football is an incredibly violent sport. A sport that is won through attrition to an extent. Each one of the eleven players has to win an individual battle on every play and collisions are a huge part of it. To blame the NFL the way Joe D does seems wrong and his message, frankly, is becoming boring. As sympathetic as I am to his present-day issues, there is not one commissioner prior to Goodell who understood the damages to the brain that would come. I actually believe that the steps that Goodell has taken with respect to head-shot penalties, less time in the offseason, and continued research on helmets will help. The suit by the 1700 or so players has no merit. Joe D said that he was addicted to the sport that he played and there are many who have been playing since they were very little. I would be in support of some sort of long term care/disability plan via trust that would help players that have such issues as well as a transitional fund to allow help in a movement to another stage of their lives in either an occupational or psychological way. Joe D is an alum of the team I have followed since I was a young boy and I would support him in any way but there are times when you can support someone by showing them the reality of their situation. These realtities aren't always pleasant. Football is a multi-billion dollar industry today and there is a financial debt that todays' players owe to the pioneers like Joe D, but the complaints of those pioneers to the present brain issues have no merit in a courtroom.

I am not sure of my math, but if the Pats didn't have that penalty for unnecessary roughness during the kneel downs, there would have been about 45 seconds left. Not saying the Pats would have done anything with it, but no one has ever really brought that up.

I like Schopp for the most part except there are definitely times when you can tell he becomes bored with the topics and the callers. When you have a call in show, you get idiots that say stupid things but you just have to deal with some of course. John Murphy will add more credibility to the station than is already there.

The first game is not the end all-be all, but I think it is important to the mindset of a team especially if they win. We play the Jets away for our first game and they will be prepared for us as they always will. The pressure on Sanchez to win has always been there but when you consider the contract he just signed and the signing of Tebow, he will have to really have his game together especially against a team like the Bills who Jets fans and the media usually consider a win. I don't think anyone should limit the Tebow skills in some sort of option, wildcat, or short yardage trick play. As much as we made Tebow look foolish last year, I would expect the unexpected. Has anyone noticed on the youtube videos of Glenn that he handles himself fairly well at left tackle? I think he can handle Coples and/or Maybin. A strong running game with Spiller and Jackson will control the clock and the game and make play action passes a bit easier than the game against the Jets at the end of the year last season. Revis is going to do his thing, but Chan is creative and clever and may figure some things out hopefully before the game. Just some thoughts.

Let's face some facts here. There are a bunch of layman fans out there who could have purchased a draft magazine and done a better job than what was done prior to Buddy taking over the reigns completely. There are some head scouts, maybe Modrak, who felt that they had to justify the travel, hotel and ticket expenses that scouts cost and find the guy from the small school no one knows about. That might be reach on my part, but I started off the post talking about 2010. I could have included a bunch more and with this approach, a team will eventually find that Stevie Johnson or Fred Jackson or Jason Peters, but those guys as good as they are will never outdo the more simple approach.

2010 - Clemson, ACC; Central Florida, Conf USA Arkansas St, Southland Conf Conn, Big East James Madison, Atlantic Conf Troy, Southland 2011 - Alabama, SEC Texas, Big 12 LSU, SEC North Carolina, ACC Clemson, ACC 2012 - South Carolina, SEC Georgia, SEC NC State, ACC Fl State, ACC LSU, SEC Oregon, PAC 10 It seems like there was an entire mindshift between 2010 and the latest two drafts. I am not trying to take anything away from Troupe, Carrington, or Moats or the schools and conferences they come from, but when you compare those schools to the ones from 2011 and 2012; the teams and conferences are far superior, the players are better, and the Bills are better. I am assuming that this years draft class won't have the injuries, cuts, or overall disappointing play of the 2010, class but how could you not think that when you look at the level of play of the their teams and conferences over a period of time. I know that Modrak is gone and it looks like that is a good thing, but it seems as though someone came to the conclusion after 2010 that we were working simply too hard and trying to find that diamond in the rough. With the exception of this years third round choice, I have not had that "Who the heck is that guy" feeling the last couple of years the way I did when I heard the Troupe and Carrington selections. CBS has an SEC team on every Saturday and it can sometimes be two games. ESPN will find another at some point during the day too. Major colleges with major programs will create major players in the NFL. I am glad that Buddy and Chan are going in that direction.

If you think about their division which has two domes and Tennessee has fairly nice weather, kickoffs may be pushed out of the league all together, and this player may be one of those guys at his position that is the best and will be the best (Megatron, Munoz, P. Manning); it may not have been that foolish of a choice. Most punters don't get injured so the special teams can be stabilized for years to come. i am not saying the Bills should consider this because our punter is very good, but it is kind of interesting to consider what they were thinking with the present rule changes and potential rule changes.

The interesting thing about lines, either offense or defense, is that when there are more than one potential top fifteen or first round pick, one of the players has to be making up for the other. In 2006, we moved up to the first round to pick McCargo, Manny Lawson was picked two spots ahead by the Niners and Williams was picked first overall. Three players were taken in the first round who were basically defensive linemen. Wouldn't you think that one of them or two were making the other look really good. Being Bills fans like we are, we know McCargo was a bust from day one so he was the guy who was sucking off the athletic teet of the other two but especially Williams. This example is of a defensive threesome but the same thing could be said about offense too. This year we are looking for a starting left tackle and when you look at Iowa, Georgia, Stanford, and Ohio State; the only team that looks like it could have two first round picks is Stanford and when you look at DeCastro who is the best offensive line player in the draft, you can't tell me that the other Stanford linemen didn't benefit from his skills. Same thing could be said for Wisconsin too. Just some thoughts about draft philosophy.