Calgary_JG
-
Posts
109 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Calgary_JG
-
-
Awesome thread! As per the OP the Bills have been bad and deserve a lot of criticism for the past ten years but I get a kick out of "analysts" on the NFL Network(aka NFC East Network), a network devoted solely to covering 32 NFL teams, who can't name 10 players on about half of those teams...and then call themselves "experts"!
I respect the fact that they know a lot about football but anybody on this board could sit down with Jamie Dukes and beat his ass silly in a discussion about the state of the Bills and the direction they're heading. I've boycotted the NFC East network for the simple fact that I'd like to listen to an intelligent conversation about football but all they've got is a rehash of what some other know-nothing moron on another network said the day before.
As the "NFL Network" I've always expected that they should have an hour of coverage per week per game but now I'm convinced that they don't do that because their "analysts" are too dumb to intelligently discuss any teams that don't live in NYC or Dallas.
-
I'm a lawyer in Canada but from what I can understand to be going on...
Player A signs a contract with Team A to play football through the 2013 season. In the absence of a CBA, Team A is bound to the terms of that contract unless Player A is in breach; however, with the presence of the CBA the contract is negotiated under US labour laws which allow Team A to not be bound to the terms of the contract should it be in a legal lockout position (and vice versa for Player A in a legal strike position). The fact that these contracts were negotiated under labour laws means that there is no free market for those players who currently have active contracts, although any player who is not currently under contract, in the absence of any other agreements, are eligible to sign with whichever team they choose.
The issue is that there are other agreements that have taken effect and this is where it gets hazy. The owners agreed to operate under a specific set of rules in the event of an uncapped year with no CBA. I can only assume that this is valid due to the fact that it, again, was entered into under labour laws because otherwise it would be considered to be collusion. It is under this set of agreed upon rules by the owners where we find ourselves today. This agreement obviously contained provisions dealing with the draft and free agency, which is why we're having a draft and which is why no teams are signing free agents.
The fact that the NFLPA is no longer a labour union doesn't mean that all of the agreements entered into through the collective bargaining process are instantly nullified and that it's free reign, there are some residual after effects.
You do raise an interesting point about the draft, and one that I was wondering about too, in that how are they even holding a draft. The short answer is that they can hold it because all of this began under labour laws. The fact that no rookie can be signed until an agreement is in place (or they're forced to hold games) I would assume is also due to this agreement by the owners.
-
Siding with either group is a hard pill to swallow but I can't in any way, shape or form side with the owners. Greedy, selfish and arrogant. I wish the govt would step in and stop allowing the NFL to have special rules for how it deals with players that most other business don't. They get to act like one league but then owners in big markets whine about helping small markets. You can't have it both ways. And save your "draped in the flag" FoxNews rhetoric about how this is American and freedoma and liberty shall prevail and business should have no regulations. That's fine if you believe that but as soon as you take a nickel or taxpayer dollars to help finance anything you should prove the need. Open your books Jerry Jones and show the taxpayers of Dallas why you "needed" $300M in PUBLIC tax dollars to help with your stadium financing? What other bank doesn't require financial statements be provided when seeking loans or breaks? None. So why is the NFl exempt when they're taking our money.... that include RW.
The bottomline is, Jones and the other highly debted teams WANT, not need, WANT, more profit because they're so in debt from stadium financing. Making it worse, they build new stadiums on taxpayer dollars to sell highly priced suites to businesses who right them off as expenses on their taxes and the government loses out there as well.
Any suggestion that the owners are the ones gambling and taking the risk and therefore should be rewarded as such is BS. Risk is spending every last nickel YOU have to build a stadium. Risk is pushing all YOUR chips to the center and building something from scratch. Risk is not using taxpayer dollars to increase your profit because you don't want to spend your own money to support your own business.
What the NFL is engaged in is corporate welfare. It's socialized debt for privatized profit. But its America and private business is allowed to do that in the name of freedom, liberty and the flag but any redistribution of money to individuals is socialism.
What's next, the Republican National Committee charging for the rights to broadcast its presidential nomination debates as a means to get the party out of campaign debt. That would never happen, the RNC is the fiscal powerhouse in this country, they don't run into debt, in fact, they know all the ways to stay out of debt and make profit. And because they're such principled individuals, they'd pay off their own debt, right? And those seeking office would want to get their message out to people by using network television as a means to freely broadcast to the most people possible because it's their obligation to explain to us why they should be elected and the onus and incentive is on them to tell us, not the obligation of us to pay them to tell us though our cable bills.
Stupid. This country is dumber by the day.
The points you make aren't bad but I don't see how they connect to the current issue with the players. Any thought that the owners are trying line their pockets with more of the players' money is ludicrous, all they want is for the players to share in some of the cost of running the league. They aren't doing that by cutting pay to that genius Adrian Peterson (who apparently plays for free with a gun to his head) or anybody else, they're trying to grow the league and are only asking the players to partner with them so everybody can get richer.
I've been involved in a lot of business structuring arrangements in my career and NEVER have I ever seen a partnership where one partner insists on getting his guaranteed cut of the REVENUE before any costs are factored in. These whiner players are basically saying "we don't care about your costs to run this business, we don't care if you all just up and went bankrupt, gimme my money first!" People say the owners are so rich so they can afford to pay some of the costs of the NFL out of their own pockets - this is a stupidly ridiculous argument. I say if you want to bring in the owners' other businesses then every endorsement deal ever signed by a player should be thrown into the pot.
Face it, neither side deserves any sympathy but from a rational perspective the owners are just doing what they can to operate their businesses. Consider this, if a team were at the cap maximum in 2009, the average salary would work out to $2.4 million per player. The salary minimum that year was $111 million (86.4% of the cap) or $2.1 million per player.
In 2005, the average American earned $28,000 per year. In other words, to earn the average NFL salary, assuming no team paid above the minimum, the average American would have to work 75 years. Or put another way, if the average NFL player has a career span of 3 years, he earns the same amount as if he had a career span of 225 years for an average income earner.
The players should stop their whining, shut their mouths, say thank you to the NFL and move on.
-
The problem I can't get around though in the fan argument is that it's not the players that are expendable. You make it sound like you would shell out hundreds of dollars a year to watch some 4th stringers start rather than Brady, Manning, etc. That's simply not true. The owners are the expendable ones...there are plenty of billionaires who have nothing better to do with their money than buy a football team...couple that with the fact that a franchise in the NFL runs successfully as a public stock option and I'd say it's the owners with a bloated sense of their worth in the process.
that's where you're wrong...fans will pay to watch the Buffalo Bills. If Brady or Vick or Brees ain't playin they'll watch QB#12 instead. This idea that the players are the product is ridiculous, football is the product and the NFL owns the best product. If you want to go and watch Brees sling it around in the UFL, go right ahead, I'll be happy to watch the Superbowl
-
I was in Dallas and huge Cowboy fan at the time. I remember Kevin Sweeney to Cornell Burbage or Kelvin Bryant for TDs. Then Tony Dorsett came back as did Randy White and others. Then, the Monday night sell out against the Redskins as the last replacement game. If Drew Brees and Peyton Manning and Tom Brady think they're getting a raw deal, I say go find a better one elsewhere. Bring on the replacement players I say. I'm all for it.
The players should take note of this type of sentiment. I for one agree 100% Let Brady and Manning and Brees et al go ahead and play for Oklahoma of the UFL if they feel they're being cheated by the NFL. I'll gladly watch QB #12 play for the Buffalo Bills. The union was relevant back in the days where owners were making millions and players were making nothing but in this day and age its ridiculous for somebody to be paid the salaries these guys are being paid and have them cry and whine for more.
-
by the way that Buddy has raved about Newton and the fact that Gailey believes that mobile QBs are the future, this dinner with Newton AND his agents should not be taken as insignificant. They are going to take Newton if they get the chance, you may as well start getting used to that.
Most likely the top 5 picks in this draft will be (in no particular order):
1) Newton
2) Peterson
3) Dareus
4) Bowers
5) AJ Green
If you remember last year's draft, everybody raved about Suh and how he was a lock to be the #1 pick until everybody woke up and realized that St. Louis didn't have a QB so they picked the QB and everything else fell into place. The Panthers this year are in a similar situation. IMHO I think the Bills and Panthers actually work a deal for the #1 pick and I think Carolina will move out because if they don't they'll have to pick Newton. Again IMHO I think privately they're prepared to go into next season with Clausen/Moore as the QB depth chart but I don't think they're prepared to defend picking a DL over QB to their fans which they would prefer. Trading out of #1 makes that easier.
Barring a trade I think Newton goes #1 to Carolina and Peterson goes #2 to Denver meaning that everybody here who wants a DL will get their wish. I would bet dollars to donuts that Newton and Peterson are 1 & 2 on the Bills wish list though.
-
the reason we've been so terrible for so long is the fact that we've drafted based on need for many of our past drafts (whitner, losman, maybin, mckelvin) where we should have just drafted the best players. Peterson is widely regarded as being the best player in this draft. If we can draft the best player in the draft at #3, I say git er done Buddy!
the bills have exactly zero players on D that opposing coaches have to game plan for (Merriman maybe if he returns to form) so I say the more talent the better. it's not the end of the world if we draft him, this team needs a lot of talent before we can compete.
-
the curve that Chan's talking about is the fact that the future of NFL offenses are going to encompass an athletic running QB moreso than the pure pocket guy with the big arm. What we should all remember is what he said about how every team should have a "waterbug" type back last year before we drafted Spiller.
I would suggest that we should all start getting used to the idea of a QB at #3...
-
Most of the posts on this board seem to indicate that people think the Bills are one or two players away from being competitive which is just not true. The Bills are broken and they need talent to get fixed. This #3 pick isn't for next year or even for 2012, this pick is about building a competitive team for the future. I tell you, if Peterson's the guy, I'll watch in 3 years with a big smile on my face as he shuts down the pass. If they go DL, I'll watch with a big smile too. Bottom line is we need talent, something we've been sorely lacking for the past 10 years. It doesn't matter the position, they just need to hit on a few of these picks.
-
I didn't read the whole thread so it may have been mentioned but wasn't Chan the OC under Wanny in Miami?? George Edwards was also on that staff...not going to crap all over the idea totally but we would look a lot like the MIA coaching staff from 2003...
Any move to get Edwards out of the DC role is a big +++++++ in my book.
-
actually, taking this point a step further, does anybody think that Edwards could be replaced next year? My first reaction is no but there may be a lot of great D-Coordinators out there, Wade Phillips, John Fox, Singletary, Marvin Lewis may get canned, Leslie Frazier...
Word was that Gailey wanted Ted Nolan last year before Miami snapped him up, perhaps we make a move here.
just a thought
-
Eh, Canadians. What do you expect?
PTR
It's Canadian eh? and as a Canadian I'm ashamed that this idiot is allowed to express his opinion. In Canada though nobody pays attention to TSN outside of the Toronto area. I bet this moron would be able to tell you what Mats Sundin had for breakfast on any specific day but obviously isn't smart enough to know which team Tebow plays for.
Go Bills!
-
As a fan in Canada about 3000 km's away (2000 miles) I call on every bills fan that can go to the game to show up and make this a true home game! We can win this game, NE has one of the worst 3rd down defences and the Bills have one of the best 3rd down offences.
btw, absolutely love the Bills are 5-0 on December 26th stat!
-
Moats knocks Brady out on the first play, the D hangs a shutout on the Pats while scoring thrice on turnovers. Spiller takes two to the house, the O scores three more times, one of them being by Brohm who's in for the 4th quarter mopping up.
Hey, it's Christmas time. A guy can dream about more than sugar plums, can't he?
The Legend Killer strikes again!!!!
-
Cmon guys! I for one have been looking forward to this game since early in the year. The "bad" Bills teams from the last three Pats games have been competitive. I know that everybody here remembers how we almost won at Foxboro last year, and then in December the Pats came in to town and only put up 17 on us...Brady couldn't do anything that game and he had Moss running down the sidelines. This year we had a late lead only to curl up and hand them a W...I'm telling you, Bills win this one 27-24.
-
This takes the cake as easily the laziest reporting ever...the guy obviously couldn't even be bothered to read the injury report!
"Without Evans, Steve Johnson, who leads the team in catches with 66, becomes Ryan Fitzpatrick’s top target and guys like Roscoe Parrish and Shawn Nelson play more prominent roles. Don’t be surprised if Fitzpatrick tries to throw to his backs more as a result."
It intrigues me as to the roles they could play that will impact this game from the IR. Maybe they'll stand on the sideline and form a wall on punts....oh wait....
-
ESPN this morning reported that they were contemplating having the game at University of Minnesota stadium, which is an outdoor stadium, but that the g(ay)-men didn't have their winter gear with them so they needed to find a place to play inside. Is it just me or does this reek of some kind of either a) Favre wouldn't be able to extend his streak outside in 0 degree weather, or b) these teams did not want to play in the cold.
I know that's a bit conspiracy theorist but something's just not right with this.
Being from Canada and actually going to a CFL game in -20 C weather this year, I appreciate how awesome cold weather football is so to hear NFL teams complain about the cold gets me.
-
I prefer J-O-K-ES JOKES! JOKES! JOKES! (I know it doesn't quite fit but you know...it fits!)
btw, jokes fans should take notice that Bills fans are mocking them!
-
I think it's safe to say this has been a frustrating year, but I was discussing our year this morning with a Chiefs fan and we came to the realization that our Ls have been against the following teams:
Miami (6-5)
GB (7-4)
NE (9-2)
NYJ (9-2)
JAX (6-5)
BAL (8-3)
KC (7-4)
CHI (8-3)
PIT (8-3)
Those are 9 of the top 15 teams in the league that we've played through 11 weeks. Note that we beat the two bad teams that we've played.
I know that doesn't mean a lot for a lot of you but consider these points:
- we're not the worst team in the league; and
- for a team that's as competitive as we are we're going to get a high draft pick in April.
Perhaps with these positive tough games that we've played, with one more year together growing in the system, and an infusion of high draft pick talent into the team next year that we may even compete in the division as early as next year.
I'm definitely not happy about the L's...in fact they p@ss me off, but if you look at the fact that we were never going to make the playoffs this year, I don't think you can ask for a better way to do it.
-
The arguments are all valid and everybody can have an opinion on whether we should draft a QB or not, but I think the point that's missed is that we've got the luxury of drafting the BPA this April and we don't have to reach on a QB or any other position.
This team is still a few playmakers away from competing in the playoffs (pending the outcomes of the NE and NYJ games this December I think this team can compete within the division next year) but at least it looks like we've got NFL football players at each position.
We'll have a top 6 pick and that's a position to get a playmaker everytime.
-
Regardless of how they play the next 3 weeks, the last three division games will be fun as hell to watch. I love the fact that the Bills are going to have a say in what happens in the division with the patsies and that crappy green team in the last two weeks.
I'd bet that we end up 5-11...I would also bet that there aren't a lot of teams that would want to play the Bills right now. Go Bills!!
-
Who gives a rat's a** what Glazer thinks. Buddy's job is to improve this team and this move may well do that. If he pans out great. If we resign him, all the better. But to sit on his hands and not take a shot at signing hime is not an option. As PTR said, Glazer also wrote we'd be crackerdogs not to take him. Bottom line is that most of the media are pant-loads who have to either fill copy inches or keep the meters moving to justify their existance. I try to give them as little credence as possible and 90% of the time that attitude gets justified.
This is the most common sense I may have ever read on this board. +10!
The only people who can't understand this move or don't like this move are either:
A: people like glazer, shefter, all of the idiots on the NFLN and the rest of the media who apparently think the Bills should just be pushed into the falls; and
B: people who can't see the big picture and are ASSUMING that he won't re-sign in Buffalo.
Let's look at if Buddy didn't put a claim in. Miami would have got him (not that Buddy would have known that at the time), let's say he plays well with them and then he signs a long term deal. Regardless if its a division opponent or not, Buffalo has exactly a 0% chance of signing him at the end of the year, FA or not, and now we have to look elsewhere to find somebody who can actually play OLB in a 3-4. By claiming him, worst thing happens is he sucks and he leaves, we may or may not get a compensatory draft pick. The chance is still there that he plays well and then leaves, in which case we're almost guaranteed a compensatory pick, but by picking him up, there is the chance that he plays well, that he enjoys himself in the system and playing with the guys around him and that he signs a long term deal. By putting the claim in, we get a 26 year old former pro-bowler who may stay and enjoy a great and productive career in Buffalo.
Don't think for a second that Buddy did this hoping to get a couple of extra wins this year and then say bye bye Shawne...in fact anybody who thinks that definitely fits the idiot category. Buddy did this to get a chance to evaluate the player and see if he can entice him to stay in Buffalo if it works out. It's an 8 game tryout, not an 8 game rental.
The negativity about the Bills in 95% of the media p*sses me off! You get know-nothing d*uches like shefter, glazer and lacanfora who spew this negative crap about Buffalo being the most undesirable place to play in the NFL and that type of stuff spreads into group think with all of the other morons in the media. If they actually bothered to consider the move, it's the most common sense move in the history of waiver wire transactions. Buffalo needs help at OLB, Merriman needs to go to a team that will actually let him play so he can showcase that he's still a good NFL player. Anybody who sees otherwise really just hates on the Bills. Let's not forget that SD CUT HIM!
Anyway, I'm so happy the Bills made this move for no other reason than it looks like 1BD is paying attention. I think this ship is headed in the right direction. We all know it's tough to attract FAs, I applaud the effort.
-
Besides paying him a bit of scratch and taking up a roster spot I don't see the harm in giving him a 9 game tryout. The consensus seems to be that grabbing Merriman is a no brainer and I agree. It's not like Kelsay's a 20 yr old who needs snaps to improve, this is a guy that has the potential to be a long term solution to a problem that we're going to have for a long time.
-
Why are we still talking about this bum? He's a terrible qb, we should all be happy that he's finally gone and that's all that has to be said. Move on...next topic
How about replacement owners?
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
The players don't want to share $1 billion of costs now with competent and successful business owners running the league...the thought of them getting together to share $7 billion in costs is laughable