uncle flap

I like them, too. Except TIMMAH has a propensity to go overboard and it seems JW is following suit. I enjoy reading what they write, and I understand how the news game is played, but this article by TG that got picked up by national outlets is the epitome of a manufactured non story. What isn't shown in that cleverly edited video is how many times Marrone has been asked about Mario, nor that both Marrone and JW apologized to each other immediately after Marrone's "outburst."

Hmm... wonder why no local guys broke this? Maybe they could stand to write a couple puff pieces to balance out the scathing critiques littered throughout the local mediascape. So far today we've seen Sully, Sal Maiorana, TIMMAH, JW, and Adam Benigni insinuate that Marrone is a liar. What a bunch of hacks. Isn't it disingenuous to accuse the coach of lying while downplaying the fact that he was badgered? And that he lost his cool when he immediately (IMO, unnecessarily) apologized? Come on, this is practically yellow journalism.

There's some additional audio at the bottom of this article: http://www.wgr550.com/Mario-Williams-absent-from-Bills-camp-once-again/16939557 Marrone and Wawrow cool off and make nice. Much ado about nothing. Move along. I will say that I think JW might've been testy after kinda botching a question to EJ at camp arrival, but he can obviously speak for himself. Don't know that he'll comment on it here tho, as he tweeted that he wasn't interested in having this conversation. (I didn't ask him, he just put that out there on his own.)

Speaking of which, it's nice to keep track of the Nick Barnett supporters.

Not sure how much of this is new knowledge, but it's a well-written article, and plenty of this was new to me: http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9521439/heisman-winner-johnny-manziel-celebrity-derail-texas-aggies-season-espn-magazine

Eh, my advice is to pick something not as dated. You're already going against this: and this (as far as parodies go): And while we're on the topic of Bills/Buffalo songs: The Jambrones have some great tunes: http://www.youtube.com/user/thejambrones?feature=watch And lastly, I know most 'round here don't like rap at all, but if you do, this is pretty good. At least as far as football songs go. I think the players would really take to this: EDIT: Apparently, one cannot post multiple videos in the same post. Sorry bout that.

Par = average. I think everyone would agree that despite being injured for part of the year, Mario was FAR superior to the average DE. Oh, you mean par for Mario? He had 10.5 sacks, his career average is 9.7. He had 46 tackles, his career average is 41. And the list goes on. 17% of your cap for your best veteran player is pretty standard. Just about every team has a DE and/or QB making around that much (each) if they're evenly remotely as good as Mario is compared to his peers at their respective position. Give it a rest, man. It's fine to be jealous of Mario's money but find something to actually criticize. Every player has "low lights," but if you pay attention, Mario is making a positive difference on nearly every play. You might think he sucks, but I guarantee opposing coaches and players don't.

It seems that the NFL and the individual teams want you to buy their own (read: double dip) apps and/or devices. So you can watch Red Zone if you get one of those doohickeys Just Jack has posted about; Or use, what I expect the Bills to have this year (many teams do already), a downloaded app that only works in the stadium that gives you some of the following features: http://min.scout.com/2/1199288.html

Only catch with the NFL Mobile app is that video is disabled during the game and for a period after within a mile of the stadium. I looked it up before, I'll see if I can find the restrictions. Found it: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/158818-one-billion-dollars-deal-for-verizon-mobile-to-stream-games/#entry2823928

Was Lawson not out there today? Or just not doing anything noteworthy?

http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2013/06/07/fan-friday-6-7/

Wow. I'm actually surprised. I totally expected a ton of ire directed at Brad Smith and an equal amount of "Who the %&$# is Aaron Wilson?!?!" Although I don't have a list, Aaron Wilson breaks plenty of stories all around the league. It's not uncommon to see the likes of Schefter and LaCanfora tweet things along the lines of, "As reported by Aaron Wilson..." I'm glad to see Brad Smith seemingly get a vote of confidence and a clean slate. I think he was criminally under/mis utilized by Chan. I won't go into detail here, as I already have in plenty of other topics. No, I don't think he's an All-Pro or MVP candidate, but he's certainly an under-appreciated and valuable asset to the team, IMO. Hopefully Hackett & Co. can maximize his talent rather than squander it by taking reps with the QBs. Smith is dangerous with the ball in his hands and he needs to be running reverses and catching bubble screens - get him the ball in space and let him work. The Packers' use of Randall Cobb is a great blueprint for how I think the Bills should be getting Smith the ball.

Aaron Wilson ‏@RavensInsider15m Bills wide receiver Brad Smith signed a renegotiated contract today. No details available yet I know he's not a big name but this guy is a legit reporter.

3.5

I think the two biggest factors leading the Bills to take risks on these players are: 1.) An overall lack of talent. Yes, they arguably have some marquee players, but not enough to compete for championships, which is the ultimate goal. If you aren't winning, you need to make some proactive and even risky moves. If these guys don't pan out, they aren't in any worse of a position than they were to begin with. If you sacrifice talent for character, you may be less likely to win. And winning is the bottom line. 2.) A no-nonsense climate created by the new coaching staff. By all accounts, Marrone is a strict coach with zero tolerance for BS. I am confident that if these guys present any sort of problem, it will be addressed quickly. The offenders will not be coddled, nor enabled with opportunities to do anything detrimental to the team. In any situation, it's obviously impossible to completely account for an adult making his own decisions, but I have no doubt that the culture will be established that will define a clear set of expectations and consequences. In light of these two factors, I'm hoping for the best, and am comfortable with the Bills taking a risk on these players at this juncture. That said, I do not want them to make a habit of relying on "turning around" players of questionable character. I also don't want Marrone to rise to Belicheat levels of arrogance, and assume that he and his system are strong enough to compensate for numerous players with "red flags." There's a fine line to walk in this regard, and I'd still prefer that the Bills err on the side of caution. However, I still think there is some room to take reasonable risks.

Interesting that you bring that up. Not that I necessarily agree with this viewpoint, but I've often wondered if the Bills think they get more value by drafting DBs and RBs with high draft picks. It is financially cheaper than signing FAs of those positions, or even re-signing your own picks, if they can just draft a comparable player to replace those DBs or RBs when their rookie contract expires. Following a model like this frees up money for premium FAs at premium positions. Of course, it doesn't really matter if you don't have a QB, or if you make poor personnel decisions across the board. While I don't exactly agree with a policy or model of investing picks instead of cash at certain positions, it would obviously be easier to judge if the other aspects of the team were in order. I think theoretically, a model like this could make sense, if you have consistency in other areas, and established cornerstone players. As we all have seen, it doesn't make sense to save money when they ultimately spend that money foolishly.

Very interesting. Thanks for the insight. I was basing that on statements made in December, so I wonder what changed. Was it that the Bills were unwilling to negotiate, or that their offers were far below market value? Again, and I'm not expecting a definitive answer from anyone, when is the appropriate time to get these extensions done? When is too early? When is it too late? Rhetorical ?s of course, but my point is that there seems to be a very small window when a player is going to be looking for that security and when a team is willing to make a substantial offer that doesn't handcuff their options for the future. I would certainly agree that Levitre and Byrd both qualify as good enough players to plan your team's future around (to an extent), but I can only imagine the outrage here if Byrd and Levitre were signed to 6 or 7 Mil/yr contracts. Those figures would've seemed high without context, as now they would seem like a deal.

Both Byrd and Levitre were on record as stating they wanted to test free agency. How early should the Bills be vying to extend them? Injuries, personnel, and coaching changes are a part of the game. Isn't it more prudent to see how things unfold with a player who is already under contract? And what is Byrd or Levitre or any other player's incentive to re-sign early? Especially when one considers the team and coaching staff in many ways have in disarray. It's far better for both sides to keep their respective options open. To some people, (not you, jw), it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. I imagine many of the people claiming Ralph & Co. are cheap would be the same people claiming that the Bills overspent on marginal talent.

I first wanted to use this picture below, but it didn't fit well as an avatar. When I was a kid, Frerotte was far from my favorite player on the stacked SB teams, but his eyeblack/face paint was all sorts of awesome. All in all, he was a cool player, but I chose to use him as an avatar more so because of the particular picture, than any sentimental attachment to Mitch. RIP. http://youtu.be/Y_4fNYY6HSM

No one denies that Overdorf does the contract negotiations, and that he answers to Brandon, not Whaley. Wawrow even mentioned it today. http://www.oleantimesherald.com/sports/article_a7b07e6c-f46b-11e2-a271-001a4bcf887a.html However, I don't think that is that strange from a structure standpoint regarding a typical NFL FO. Overdorf isn't making decisions in a vacuum. While he answers to Brandon, Brandon seeks input from Whaley. Why else would they even have a GM? Sure, Brandon (and by extension Overdorf) can say, "Hey Doug, we respect your opinion, but we aren't gonna pay X for Byrd." But I refuse to believe it's as cut and dry as many here think. There's a cap floor, and the Bills aren't hurting for cash. There has to be a plan. It may not include overspending on Byrd, and it may limit Whaley's input to an extent, but I still think we're conflating making mistakes in FA and coaching choices with being cheap. The cheap factor may lend itself to uninspiring coaching hires, which lead to poor FA pick ups, but Overdorf managing the cap is independent of both.

Even if what you say is true, how do you account for the success of the late 80s and early 90s? Dumb luck? Polian and Levy somehow thrived despite Overdorff & Co's best efforts to stifle them, right? Isn't it then well within the realm of possibility that the bumbling FO could have a good GM, Coach, and QB fall into their lap again? I mean, it's been almost 30 years. Ralph himself said during the SB years that we better enjoy this team because we won't see another like it for 30 years. Hmm. Makes ya think. I will gladly grant that habitually running an organization "on the cheap" will certainly limit the opportunities for success, but at the same time, that model doesn't guarantee failure. That said, I still think you're ignoring a preponderance of evidence that things are changing. A coach has far more to do with the performance of the team than any other single factor. Therefore, even if what you say is true, it is still possible for Marrone to get this team competitive and even win a championship down the line. I'm not predicting that Marrone will win a SB, but I'm not automatically dismissing his chances solely based on some perception that the team's accountant is a tightwad. Practicing skepticism is a virtue, no doubt. And one can certainly look objectively at facts, and then decide to be optimistic or pessimistic. I'm not questioning your (or anyone's) fandom, but it just makes no sense to me to ignore all the seemingly positive developments in the recent past, when I think it's safe to assume we all want the Bills to win. Different strokes, I guess.

Offense: CJ. Can he handle 300 carries or 350+ "touches" whether they be runs or catches? Or maybe a better questions is can he be as effective with an increased workload? I think so, but think the offense goes as CJ goes. Defense: I'm torn between Kiko and Leodis. If Kiko performs as advertised, that will eliminate the gaping hole in the middle to which we've grown accustomed over the past cople years. Leodis represents the CBs in general. Gilmore will be solid, but if they can't get consistently good play from the CB2 and the Nickel spots, whatever pressure Pettine can create will likely be neutralized.

There is no narrative. You asked a snarky question and I answered it with facts. You're welcome. Did you even read what I wrote? Anderson will cost the Bills $4.5 million total in cap space. As it stands today, it's $1.5 M this year and $3 M next year. SInce they have the option to take the full hit this year, I don't see why they wouldn't do so. I'm not interested in discussing the many reasons the Bills have been less than competitive, nor speculate why they might continue to suck. I'd much rather look for reasons to be optimistic. Some say that makes me delusional, but I'd rather hope for the best and be disappointed than expect the worst and feel validated when the sky falls. IMO, what's delusional is falling to see that the tides are indeed turning at OBD. Deny it all you want, but this is not the same ol' Bills. Don't strain yourself.

Here is the list of players currently on the roster whose contracts will expire after the season: Jairus Byrd S Eric Wood C Alan Branch DT Alex Carrington DT Mike Caussin TE Scott Chandler TE Tashard Choice RB Dorin Dickerson FB Hutch Eckerson T Chris Hogan WR Arthur Moats LB Jay Ross DT Bryan Scott LB Chris Scott T Mickey Shuler TE Mana Silva S Frank Summers RB Torell Troup DT UFA Thomas Welch T Sam Young T Zack Chibane G Izaan Cross DE Jordan Dangerfield S Kip Edwards CB UDFA Kendall Gaskins Brandon Kaufman WR Kevin Norrell WR Keith Pough LB Nickell Robey CB Da'Rick Rogers WR Jumal Rolle CB Drew Smith RB Aaron Tipoti DE Jeff Tuel QB Ryan Turnley C Granted, many of these players won't even make the 53 man roster, but I'll leave it up to you to decide who to re-sign after the season. The projected unadjusted cap for next year is $123 million, same as this year's. The Bills rolled over $10 M in unspent cap space from last year, so their adjusted cap figure is $133 M. They have spent $107 M out of $133 M available this year. If they spend the $10 M (which they can't rollover again), they'll be at $117 M out of the unadjusted $123 M. So the most they could possibly rollover is $6 M. Therefore, at most, they'll have $129 M as an adjusted cap figure. They have already spent $112 M of next year's cap, which leaves $17 M to sign draft picks (about 5 or 6 mil). So now they're down to about $11 M left to extend Byrd, Wood, Branch, Carrington, Chandler or whomever you want out of the above list. Or you've got to sign players to replace them. Then there are positions you want to upgrade. Those contracts are gonna cost ya, too. Still following along? Now if they eat Anderson's dead money this year (and I don't see why they wouldn't), that frees up $3 M for next year. Yes, Mario Williams has far and away the highest cap hit, but on nearly every team the DEs and QBs have huge hits in comparison to the other positions. This is actually something the Bills are in line with as far as league-wide trends. Sorry if this pisses in your "the Bills suck" narrative. The Bills might "suck," but not because of whatever it is you're trying to insinuate about the cap and contracts.