uncle flap

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet1h On #Bills & Mark Anderson: I'm told he passed his physical, then was cut. We'll see how it's listed. Knee believed to be good enough to play Yes he did. http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2013/05/15/anderson-glad-to-be-back-practicing/ I agree his cut wasn't motivated by money, but don't discount the fact that they can absorb his dead money this year (instead of prorating it over the next three). Every penny is gonna help next year when they are going to be up against the cap with a TON of contracts expiring.

Byrd still isn't signed. They can still negotiate a long term contract, they just can't sign it yet. They can sign him to the franchise or a one year deal commensurate to what he'd get on his long term contract, then just extend it after the season is over.

You're right, my main point was that this isn't simply a financially motivated cut. The opportunity to massage the cap is a bonus. Recent reports seemed to indicate Pettine was going to use him as a third down pass rusher. They don't need him as a one dimensional player in Pettine's "multiple" defense.

They can (and I fully expect them to) eat all the dead money this year, which frees up space for next year when they'll need it. However, don't think this cut is purely fiscally based. He's simply a guy who doesn't fit and has health questions. They're throwing him a bone by giving him the opportunity to catch on elsewhere.

No surprise, but it's now official, Gronk is on the PUP list to start training camp. http://www.nfl.com/n...triots-pup-list

Aren't my tax dollars already supporting the college football machine? Is there a tax increase that I missed included in this proposal? I don't appreciate the implication that I'm stupid or passive; I'm just pointing out that this Division 4 proposal isn't that radical compared to how the major football programs are currently ran. I don't want to tread into PPP territory. We should be analyzing this change in comparison to how the system currently operates, and not how it should or could be in a perfect world. I'm not saying it's "right" that certain athletes are put on a pedestal at the expense of non-student athletes (and student athletes playing less popular sports), but I think it might be naive to think this proposal has much of an impact on anyone besides the athletes of these particular universities and their athletic departments. If you and others are saying, "I don't want these athletes to benefit at the expense of the other students," I agree. But I'll just say 1.) I don't know that the other students are actually missing out on anything academically and scholarship-wise, and 2.) Major college athletics have been moving in this direction for quite some time, so I don't think the Division 4 proposal is drastically different in the overall scope of major college athletics. Like I said upthread, it seems to me that the proposal offers some transparency. Maybe now those of us who are ignorant or indifferent to the inner workings of major college athletics can now make a better informed decision on how to move forward (or vote on pertinent issues). Better than a weekly scandal or rule violation related to "amateur" athletics which operate on a cut throat professional level.

This should be the new mascot: Born from the ashes of a franchise that's burned itself to the ground, like the phoenix, BUFFALO WILL RISE AGAIN! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/royal-gorge-white-buffalo_n_3460392.html

All I'm saying is you could probably field a Pro Bowl caliber roster full of guys who are hardly literate who went to these schools. The academic aspect already is and has been a farce for quite some time. This new proposition is just simply pulling back the curtain a little bit. Transparency is a good thing, right? Why would someone choose to do that when he could get a scholarship to a high profile university and play on a huge stage, maximizing his exposure and opportunity to strike it rich in the NFL? I'm just failing to see what the major difference(s) is(/are) compared to the system currently in place.

I believe in education, too. I don't get what is so disgusting about this. It seems the big schools are acknowledging that sports have overshadowed academics and are addressing it as such. How does this affect anyone's education besides the athletes? Who by many accounts are already getting by on the work of tutors and/or filling out schedules with Basket Weaving 101. Going to college to play football and to get an education are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but the onus is on the student to get what they want out of it.

This is appealing

I know I'm coming off as a Stevie apologist in this thread, but I thought he actually did have a flat tire or something. Like there were some accusations of him blowing it off, so some guy from the Range Rover service dept came out and vouched for Stevie's story. And I believe he apologized profusely regardless. IIRC, there were pictures of him clubbing later that night, so the narrative was that Stevie blew off fans to party or something like that, as if it is impossible to have car trouble and then go out and have a good time later that evening. Maybe I'm conflating incidents, Maybe I got it all wrong, but that's how I remember that incident. Either way, I do agree with you that this alleged incident would be far worse than simply being a goofball. But like you mentioned, he does so much for the fans and the city, that I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.

You mean the Marvin Harrison accused of shooting the same guy on two separate occasions?

I think they should've kept Reinhardt, but I don't see how Nelson fits in to the new offense (at least how it's been described thus far). I liked Nelson, but anyone can catch a 6 yard curl and be tackled immediately. He wasn't bad, but didn't really excel in anything besides finding a soft spot short of the first down and getting like zero YAC. How exactly did the Bills bungle the Byrd situation? Should they have just rolled over and paid him $10.25 a year with $25 mil guaranteed? They did go after a few name FAs. With the benefit of hindsight, who do you think they should've signed knowing how much it would've cost? Can we stop assuming that the Bills can just write a blank check to everyone? Or that every player will take a discount if the FO just asked a little more nicely?

The photo is owned and was commissioned by the NFL. The photo is from a set of portraits taken on March 6 of this year at the NFL Network studios. Should've went with this one instead, I guess: Video here: http://www.nfl.com/videos/buffalo-bills/0ap2000000147547/Johnson-s-top-five-free-agent-receivers

Look, I understand the process of linking "immaturity" to a lack of football focus, but you're on a very slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? Should NFL players have to be celibate hermits in order to completely devote themselves to the game? I mean, having a wife and kids certainly takes time away from a focus on football. Branch and Lawson missed OTAs because their respective kids were born. How dare they? Are they focused on football or not? Maybe these "high character guys" should stop quoting the Bible and read the playbook instead? These charity football camps for kids obviously get in the way of film study, right? And look at Brady and Manning, all that time filming commercials is surely affecting their play, isn't it? I'm being facetious to point out how easy it is to find perceived distractions or a lack of focus/commitment to football.

Fixed.

Josh McDaniels, for one.

Agreed. Mr. Romes put it perfectly upthread: You make a good point that Fitz doesn't do anyone any favors, but I think it was still pretty apparent that DoJo wasn't capable of bailing him out, like Yeevie and even Chandler and Nelson could. And I don't mean that as a compliment to Chandler and Nelson (who are decidedly average at best), but rather an indictment of DoJo being that limited. Jones is a hell of a run blocker tho, I'll def give him that.

I agree about the cap management in the past, but it's painfully obvious that they were/are prepared to spend some serious bank this year. They let Levitre walk, moved the majority of Fitz's dead money to next year, they looked at Fred Davis, and franchised Byrd. EDIT: And signed a budget QB in Kolb. They signed Branch, Lawson, and Legursky. I think the Hughes trade indicates they were looking to further upgrade at LB, but happened to find a way to do so while getting something for Sheppard. EDIT: They got Dotwin, too. Just because they didn't make that big splash doesn't mean that they weren't trying. All signs point to the Bills being prepared to spend big on Byrd and possibly another contributor (in addition to the signings they've already made). The hiccup in the plan is Byrd not accepting a big contract (yet), but something will get done since the Bills can't afford to waste that surplus. They can't roll the majority of that cap savings over to next year. They put themselves in the position to "use it or lose it," and I fully expect them to do so.

Look for the Byrd to sign a one year deal that is commensurate with what he'd be making the first year of a long term contract. Then, after the season, look for the Bills to extend that contract to what looks like the hefty (yet reasonable) contract that should've been settled before the July 15 deadline. I'm not placing a value judgment here, but Parker started a staring contest to see who would blink first leading up to July 15. Neither side blinked, and now Parker has to do what's best in the interests of his client. I know for a fact the Bills were not and are not going to pony up to Byrd's/Parker's initial demands. Parker knows this too and now has to reevaluate his approach. The Bills have all the leverage. A prolonged holdout (or more accurately, refusing to sign) is not going to get that money from the Bills, and another team is not going to pony up those same demands AND give the BIlls adequate compensation. As good as Byrd is, he is still a safety, and I don't think any team could be that desperate to cough up picks/players AND $10 mil/year. It also is not worth it for the Bills to offer Byrd at a discount to another team just to rid themselves of a "problem." If Byrd doesn't sign and doesn't play for however long, or simply signs his tag with no added conditions, he risks losing out on that big pay day in the case that he has a serious injury, or if his play suffers for whatever reason(s). The ONLY way that the Bills don't wind up signing Byrd long term, is if Parker is more concerned with his image than maximizing Byrd's earnings. IMO, Parker's biggest concern now is getting a deal done while still maintaining his image as the premier agent in the NFL. All that said, I think it's safe to expect what I wrote in the first paragraph; Byrd will be signed and in camp sooner than later, and that signing will be a precursor to a long term deal.

I'd like to join this league this year. (My turn for a humble brag:) I won a different TBD league last year, but it was somewhat watered down since a few of the owners seemingly gave up about halfway thru. I think having an entry fee, albeit a small token one like $20, better ensures that owners are more active in their play. I mean it's nice to know you'll win when an opponent leaves a player on a bye in their lineup or doesn't bench an injured player, etc., but at the same time it cheapens the W. Anyway, please keep me posted as I'd be happy to play against my fellow TBDers.

Except that hockey game would have been sold out anyway, so what does the NHL/Leafs care about the Bills? If anything, Brandon should campaign for Toronto to play the Sabres in Buffalo the Saturday night before a home game.

About 3 weeks ago. You might find this funny: http://www.buzzfeed....red-for-the-nfl EDIT: There's some salty language in that article. Caveat Emptor.

Will EJ at Chef's suffice? Might have to work on his ball security with a grip like that.

I stumbled across this a couple weeks ago. I didn't re-watch it just now, but I recall it was somewhat overly optimistic- and I'm pretty much as optimistic as they come. He predicted the Bills win the AFCE, right? So while I think this guy generally knows his stuff, I would bet that these team previews are purposely heavily slanted toward the positive in order to boost views and traffic to their website. All that said, it's good to hear someone expecting/predicting good things for the Bills among the flood of uninspired regurgitated "analysis." Too many commentators are quick to report things along the lines of, "The names and faces may have changed, but I'll expect the same ol' Bills."