Bills(70)

Not true at all. It will cost approx. 1.2 billion for a stadium of this nature in this area. You seem to forget the engineering aspect of a Northern (heavy snow) area. In example: The 2007 proposed cost estimate for the downtown Minneapolis stadium was $953,916,000.[12] The total breaks down to $616,564,000 for the stadium, $200,729,000 for a retractable roof, $58,130,000 for parking, $8,892,000 for adjacent land right-of-way, and $69,601,000 to take into account inflation by 2010.[12] The estimate compares to upcoming stadiums in Indianapolis at $675 million (retractable roof, completed 2008), Dallas at $932 million (retractable roof, completed 2009) and New York at $1.7 billion (open-air, completed in 2010).[12] In addition, according to Wilf, taking into account the costs for the surrounding urban developments put forth in the proposal would bring the estimated total to $2 billion.[8] The estimated costs were based on projected 2008 construction and material costs, so it is possible that the stadium costs could hover near $1 billion if the Minnesota State Legislature does not approve the project in the 2008 session. Referrence link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings_Stadium And there are "always" cost overruns of 10% minimum or more on projects of this nature. The Pro Forma's written for them aren't set in stone. Not one project I've worked on over 22 years now has ever come in on budget and on time. Just an FYI........ And further more, Niagara Falls is not a family friendly environment. You have a Casino, a run down and heavily under and undeveloped downtown, environmental nightmares such as Oxy Chem, Olen Chemical and Dupont Soduim along with a host of other high end polluters immediately adjacent to the area. Then there is the lack of infrastructure in the area, for example the inclompletion of the Lasalle Expressway (an estimated 35 million to complete, just to Buffalo Ave and River Rd. in NT) and the creation of heavy traffic in a known tourist zone (i.e. the Rainbow bridge and the Falls attraction itself, which is sure to see an overwhelming increase in traffic specific to games on Sunday, which the weekends have a higher volume of visition for the Falls itself), actually creating a detractor for visitors specific to the Falls. And the list goes on...... Been down this road with regards to Niagara Falls. It's hard to say this, but trust me on this one, downtown Buffalo is much more suited to a domed stadium. Good idea, wrong area.

Ummm............no, not the Falls. It's the wrong venue for a domed stadium and the amount of property needed, combined with the soil testing results I am sure will come in, could turn a process such as that into a slow, politically corrupted, process. Keep the Bills, or any business you know of, away from Niagara County, specifically crime ridden Niagara Falls. The Lake front, on Fhurman Blvd, where the old Ford production facility is located (some may know it as the old Tops distribution warehouse and Freezer Queen foods production facility, but both of those properties combined were once Ford Motor Company). That is one of a couple of ideal locations, another is on Niagara Street, Near Vulcan Ave./Ontario St. intersection. Then there is the Amherst location. All of which are much better than Niagara Falls.

Where Ralph could save up to 15% by hiring subpar players? I've never called it Ralph Wilson Stadium. Not once. It's always been Rich Stadium to me.

I agree that they do. But this is the problem. The rules are in place for a reason. When the rules are broken, since the NFL is using the NCAA as their farm system, the players that are caught excepting this type of "ILLEGAL" behavior should never be allowed to play football or work in any capacity inside the organizations in the NCAA or NFL again. And the institutions that facilitate this type of "ILLEGAL" activities should immediately be removed from the system and never allowed back in. I'm sure there are other academic institutions that would like to join the NCAA system. Once a policy like this is installed and enforced, this becomes a thing of the past.

I know very little about Ponder, but I have seen game film, highlights on Gabbert. Given the choice of only the 2, I chose Gabbert since I am familiar somewhat with him. Full disclaimer though, I don't want either QB. I just don't see the Bills choosing a QB in the first round. I think people are giving themselves a false sense of urgency on this subject. We have Fitz, and he is more than capable of running the offense while we rebuild the defensive side of the ball. I can see us taking a QB maybe next year or the following, but not now. It just doesn't make any sense given the needs of the team are much more urgent on the defensive side of the ball.

#1- the Bills are Trading out of the #3 pick...but no farther than #10. Very smart move and have backed this idea since we learned of our 3rd overall selection status. Unlike many fans, some of us actually have identified the need to address multiple holes on this teams roster, it is common sense to attempt to use the 3rd overall in an effort to address the most pressing problem with the team currently, the defense. Refreshing that the thought process of the organization is viewing a trade down as the way to go, plus 1 to Nix and the boys. #2- if a Franchise QB is there, they will take him. If they do indeed trade down, this becomes a moot point in my opinion, given the teams that will select infront of them and their needs at the position. On top of that, next years draft class looks to be more promising at the QB position and Fitz has proven he can carry the team through next season on the offensive side. A non-starter of a subject given the needs on defense. #3- i think Von Miller is the most likely pick. Can't speak to who the selection will be in the first, but whoever it is will be an impact player of some type, good enough for me. I would focus on the 2nd round and other draft picks sure to come with any deal to trade down. Paying attention to those picks will allow us to get an analysis of how the team is addressing the depth of the roster, particularly those picks after the second round. #4- Patrick Peterson is viewed as a "nickel" back, so i don't think they take him. Agreed. #5- Gailey said "most" picks will be defensive. As stated in responses to points 1 thru 3 I believe this to be the case and I 100% agree with this strategy.

Bad News for Newton fans in Buffalo. The local sports radio show out of Charlotte, NC is saying inside sources have the Panthers taking Newton number 1 overall. Don't shoot the messenger.

Correct on both counts. And the Pats are stacked enough to get it done. 1st round, 17th overall (From Oakland) 1st round, 28th overall 2nd round, 33rd overall (From Carolina) 3rd round, 74th overall (From Minnesota) or 3rd round, 92nd overall

Cam Newton Sucks Mississippi swamp rat donkey $%^&!!! There, the Newton to Buffalo at #3 pick is settled. I hope Denver or Cinci takes him, I would love to see both of these cold weather teams end up with this egotistical maniac.

That sounds reasonable as well, although with the example I gave on an expanded roster situation, I would think you'd want to keep the preseason games intact to allow the coaching staff to get a handle on the larger roster situation. Merely speculative talk of course, but absorbing 2 preseason games may be the way to go as well.

I can understand when you say you like it the way it is. It's very difficult for sports fans to except change, but over the course of 40+ years as an NFL and NHL fan here in Buffalo, I've learned to get used to it. I would think bringing the roster up to 61 players should be an ample number to suit an 18 game season. Just keep the "inactive quarterback" rule in place and run with it. Why go up from 45/47 to 61? Well, it allows for an additional number of available players in case of injury. The games currently dress 45 (actually, it's 46 due to the "inactive quaterback" rule) and 53 on the roster. If you go to 61 and allow 52 or 53 to dress, you allow the teams more options in case of injury in a longer season with talent ready players that can actually participate with the team and feel more integrated in the system. You go to 18 game seasons, you also should expand the NFL draft to 9 rounds. Make it a 3 day event with round 1 on Friday, rounds 2, 3 and 4 on Saturday and rounds 5 through 9 on Sunday. Going this route puts alot more emphasis and raises the importance of rounds 2, 3 and 4, making the second day of this type of draft just as exciting as the first day for the first round. Then there is the question of what to do with the 2 extra games, are they going to be against inner-conference opponents or opposing conference? I say make them opposing conference, so, in effect, you would have the following layout: 6 games in division (2 per opponent given 4 teams per division, you play 3 teams twice a season) 6 games in conference and 6 games out of conference, this way the teams get to see more opposing conference opponents annually, and if for example, a game let's say between the Bills and the Panthers in the regular season takes place and was close and exciting, and both of those teams were favorites in their respective conferences to make the Super Bowl and they do, it adds an element of pay back or further conference rivalry situation. In short, it widens the seasonal story line and may actually create some mini outer conference rivalry's. I would like to see the season ending in Late Feb., that still gives teams plenty of time for the off season and gives players plenty of time for the off season as well. Just my opinion on it though.

All the more reason to have 2 ready players at the QB position. Sorry, but I'm pro schedule expansion. And with that expansion should also come a roster expansion.

I'm hoping for a fourth. By the way, if there are multiple teams with Compensatory picks in a round, how is it determined who picks first?

Agreed on everything here. Also, if some of the faithful would have noticed (which I know you have Mr. Taro), Brad Boyes comes at 4 mil for next season. A very good price for a sniping right winger. More importantly, due to his off seasons this last year in a half with the St. Louis Blues, he came for only a 2nd round draft pick, that price is very good for a 28 year old right wing sniper who needed a change of scenery. I can see Vanek - Roy - Boyes forming a solid scoring line next season. I already see the chemistry Ennis and Stafford are forming as wingers, just need that stud superstar center to complete them. That leaves Pominville as the odd man out in my opinion. 5.3 mil (I believe?) for Pominville is way to much, although Pommers brings a good 2 way game. Pominville's contract is a bit high, but he has great value to other clubs who lack a 60+ point line 2 right winger who plays the PK and PP. If Regier is going to move someone, I have to imagine it's Pommers given the cap space he frees up combined with the logjam at right wing already here and coming. Current Right Wingers: Brad Boyes (Sniper) Drew Stafford (Sniper) Jason Pominville (Two-way Forward) Mike Grier (Shutdown Forward) Patrick Kaleta (Checking Forward) Mark Mancari (Power Forward) Zach Kassian (Power Forward) Grier won't be back in my opinion. Kassian heads to Portland. Mancari will get re-signed and finally be up with the big club, he's paid his dues and Gerbe and him click, they've both stated such. He's cheap and allows Kassian the time for next season to develop in the AHL. A good call up when Kaleta gets injured. That leaves Pominville at 28 years old as the odd man out to me. Of course, Regier falls in love with his players, so we shall see what happens, but I can't see them moving Boyes or Stafford given their performance this season and Stafford is still only 25 years old. Pominville in a package deal could land a very decent center if the package includes some young stud defensemen, like Butler, Sekera or Weber (although, I highly doubt Weber is going anywhere, just a good solid checking, stay at home type defenseman). I am actually looking forward to the off season for the first time in a long time for the Sabres.

That comment isn't geared toward the 1st pick overall in the draft. In case you hadn't noticed it states the New England Patriots first pick overall in the 1st round. That only ensures that if their pick is the 25th overall for example, but they acquired the 15th pick overall from another team, that Buffalo would get that 15th pick overall. It's just an example, but I hope you understand now. It was worded correctly by the way.

If New England is interested in the 3rd pick overall, they better be prepared to pay the following: 1st round - 17th overall 2011 1st round - 28th overall 2011 2nd round - 33rd overall 2011 and of course, their 1st round pick overall in the 2012 draft. Then I would jump at the offer, otherwise, have a nice day.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Pegula just took over in late Feb. Saying that the Sabres choke is just re-hashing what we've already known for years now. Let the new owner have the time to affect change. He has already started, Brad Boyes as an addition is a very good step forward. It allows the Sabres options in the off season to trade for a very skilled center and Boyes was a steal for a 2nd round draft pick. Pominville or Stafford and Hecht along with 1 or 2 of the young defensemen are sure to be packaged for a deal, maybe at the draft, maybe after July 1st, but it's coming for sure. Enjoy the run to the playoffs this season and look forward to the future. It's shaping up to be a bright future at that.

I am very impressed with this young man. He showed great poise yesterday and is actually mentally focused on the game, not on the fame. Love his comment that indirectly rebutted Newton in The Buffalo News article: Without mentioning Auburn’s Cam Newton, Gabbert alluded to the Heisman Trophy winner’s infamous pre-combine comment about becoming an “icon and entertainer.” For Gabbert — a finance major at Missouri — it’s been strictly business the last two months, concluding with Thursday’s workout. “My sole focus is on football,” Gabbert said. “I’m not here to entertain anybody. I’m here to get the playbook and throw the football.” I wanted defense in the first round, but this kid has gained my attention without question. He appears to be a player, not some cocky personality. I would seriously consider him for the #3 if he is still there.

Von Miller has no case, he has no contract. He is free to go work where ever he'd like. Lawsuits like this are just a joke. Football at College is NOT A JOB. It falls under extra-curricular activities title. What a joke, a college student who happened to play football while at college (where his primary reason for being there is to get a "HIGHER EDUCATION") not only expects, but DEMANDS, demands mind you, to be payed for an "EXTRA-CURRICLUAR" activity. Like I said, what a joke.

Staying Power is the truth, bottom line. There wouldn't be an NFL without the owners, whether people like to admit it or not. The owners give the players a venue to play in. Without them, there is no venue, hence, no NFL. I happen to side with the owners, I own a business that deals with unions and honestly, if the union demanded to see my books I'd tell them to go take a flying leap. I built the company as a product, the union wasn't there when I started, why should they be privy to what the company makes? They shouldn't. And whether or not a profit sharing agreement is in place or not, these players come and go, the owners, for the most part, are around through generations of players. No, I cannot see nor would I, the union's stand on this issue. If they want a system like that, then I recommend the NFLPA go and build their own League that they can operate under the guidelines they want.

Interesting. So, I wonder if the NFL owners plan on putting an entirely new product on the field.

Thanks for taking the time to inform some of the fan base NGU. It's greatly appreciated. We'll wait to see what your skinny is on the draft when it's time. 1 question though. Do you believe Nix and the boy's have entertained trading down to gather more draft picks? Thanks again.

This! And I would like to see Buffalo trade down and still get defensive help. I'm thinking San Francisco. San Fran moves up to the 3 spot to ensure the draft a QB, which according to all of the NFL pundits is the biggest need for them. To San Fransisco (1st round) #3 overall pick 2011 To Buffalo (1st round) #7 overall pick 2011 (3rd round) #76 overall pick 2011 (1st round) San Fransisco's 1st round selection 2012 pick This is reasonable to move up and grab a QB (which ever one SF wants), it also gives Buffalo that second 1st round pick in 2012, if you want Luck in the 2012 draft, Buffalo is going to need two 1st round picks and then some to move up to the first overall selection. I project San Fransisco and Buffalo to both be in the top 15 of the 2012 draft. So you offer those 2 picks and maybe a couple of 3rd rounders or a 2nd rounder and get Luck at first overall. Just my opinion though.

I am happy to see a QB situation discussed that doesn't include the #3 overall pick. Cam Newton would be a HUGE mistake at the 3rd overall. I have no confidence that kid can come in and do anything, this year or any year for that matter. He's just not a franchise QB. I would like the Defense to be addressed, and heavily in the first 2 rounds of the draft, but, if Nix can move up into the 2nd round with a reasonable trade without giving up our original 1st and 2nd rd picks, I'm all for it. I would love Luck next year. Would be the smart move to wait for him as opposed to throwing away an early round pick on someone else.