uncle flap

I'm not sure about transfer of ownership procedures (as far as "giving" the team to relatives), but for a sale, I understand there is a legal requirement to submit a (publicly available) Notice of Intent. If there was a sale to made before the New Year, I have to believe we would know by now. OTOH, I think we can expect a significant change in the top tiers of team management coming soon. Something like Brandon becoming the de facto owner. Time will tell.

Well, I wasn't "arguing" anything. If you are arguing that The Bills should pay for the (Erie county owned) stadium's upgrades, fine, I agree. But as a practical matter, that's not going to happen. Part of the "cost" of keeping the Bills in town is that public money. If one believes that the Bills would leave town without the support of public tax dollars, then so does that $20-25 mil/year. But then the state would just spend that money on something else, almost certainly not getting that type of return financially. I think we discussed this some time ago when I inaccurately used the phrase "pays for itself." In the literal sense, you are correct, the renovations do not pay for themselves. But if one looks at the situation as "X amount keeps the Bills in Buffalo, and approximately X is generated by the Bills staying Buffalo", then it is indeed a zero sum game.

There isn't a definitive way to measure the TOTAL impact, but there are two main ideas associated with the the economic impact of the Bills. There is $20-25 million generated annually through income tax (on players, coaches, and other NFL employees) and sales tax (on tickets only).* That is not a lot in the grand scheme of things, but more than offsets the state and county's investment in the Bills. The other side of the coin is that the amount of money that fans spend on the Bills (food/beer for tailgating, etc) would be spent on other things if the Bills were not here. For example, If there were no BIlls games to go to, you would spend that money on going out to dinner or the movies or whatever. Im not a big fan of Schopp but he made a good point regarding the NHL lockout: Are you a couple hundred dollars richer right now because you didnt go to a few Sabres game this fall? No, you probably spent that money on something else. What that counterargument doesn't take into consideration is the out of state/county money that is brought in. There are often Canadians and fans from PA and OH at Bills games. Without the Bills, it is far less likely that money comes into WNY. This isn't enough money to make or break the economy here, but I think many would argue every little bit helps. So basically when it comes down to the economic impact- strictly speaking, there is no significant impact locally. On the most micro level, yes there are bars and such that survive almost exclusively on Bills games, but while those fine proprietors would suffer economically w/o the Bills, the county would not, as the people who spent their money there would spend their money elsewhere and thus generate the same amount of tax revenue for the county. On the state level, they basically even out. Purely numbers-wise, there is an argument that giving the Bills money is a good investment because the state would be spending that money on something anyway without nearly as good of a return. None of this is to say I totally agree with public money going to support NFL teams when that money could be better used elsewhere. I'm just pointing out that 1. The economic impact is basically zero either way, and 2. Those that are upset about public money going to the Bills should realize that all things considered, its a GREAT deal for the state. In today's socio-economic climate, it's a given that public money is going to support pro sports. As someone else pointed out, compare our situation to the Vikings and then tell me how you feel about ours. *The $20-25 mil figure is derived from multiple quotes by Gorski, Giambra, Collins, and Poloncarz over the years. As player salaries have gone up, so has this number. 20 years ago it was $10-15 mil and has been steadily rising. I couldn't find a comprehensive break down during a cursory google search, but I've heard/seen this multiple times. As I mentioned before, it is nearly impossible to gauge the economic impact on microlevels because it is seemingly understood the general population is going to spend X percentage of their earnings on something, whether it is Bills related or not.

Some fan you are Enlighten me: how is this idea different than, "I'll only support a team that wins?" Is that not the definition of a fair weather fan? A bandwagon fan? You and others are correct in criticizing an owner who seemingly doesn't do enough to consistently field a competitive team. But to shift the blame to fans who want to have a good time and watch pro football in person? What kind of logic is that? Even if what you say is true- the owner will only spend win fans stop buying tickets- is that a problem with fans? or is it a problem with the owner? Sorry, but it grinds my gears that this sentiment is so prevalent. "It's these drunken idiot fans that enable Wilson to put a shoddy product on the field." Do I think Wilson would be pressured to make changes if significantly less tickets are sold? Yes. But does throwing a ton of money at the problem automatically generate wins? Not so much. I don't like it either that fans are seemingly held hostage in this way, but I wouldn't go so far as to blame the victim. Reading that reminded me of this gem of a quote from our beloved owner, circa 1993, just before Super Bowl 27: "When I used to leave the stadium," said Wilson, recalling the seasons when the Bills won only one or two games, "the fans would throw their programs at me. Now when I leave, they ask me to autograph them." But Wilson is under no illusion that a winning team can simply be purchased, like a successful company. "The fans had better enjoy this team," he said, "because it might be another 30 years before they have another one like this. Teams like this come along once in a generation." http://articles.lati...1_buffalo-bills

CONGRATS TO ME! I'D LIKE TO THANK ME, MYSELF, AND MOST OF ALL, YOURS TRULY!! jk I know most of you gave up after seeing the unstoppable squad I assembled, so no one cares now. GG Awwufelloff, and thanks for running the league! Maybe next year we can play for $ so we don't have deadbeat owners.

The other thing is, it's not a $400 mil fee as in "You have to pay $400 mil if you want to move the Bills." That is what an owner would have to pay if they won a legal decision to break the lease. So, really there would be lengthy court proceedings before that "penalty" comes into effect. The $400 mil is an insurance policy set in place by the State to recoup the $ that they've invested in the Bills over the years. Yes, it's a deterrent. And yes, it is a substantial figure. Some may argue that any case brought against the County and State would be easily won, but it certainly isn't guaranteed. But I think it is important to note that $400 mil isn't simply an associated cost- there are other protections in place before that money even becomes a factor. YEAH

You guys obviously didnt see this: http://deadspin.com/...t-new-team-name[ Oh, and I think the teams named Cardinals are named after teams that referred to the color Cardinal Red. The bird aspect just sort of evolved over time, if I'm not mistaken. From the above article: Pelicans Attack

I mean how can you not love a guy who says stuff like this:

Here's how I see it: Chan is a terrific play designer, but has problems calling plays. I don't think his overall game plans are all that bad either, it's just a matter of him trying to be too cute at times. And although those times aren't even all that often, they are seemingly at the most inopportune times. I mean, I freely admit he's had me scratching my head a more than few times and even screaming for his head. So don't take this as an endorsement of Chan- I think those miscues happen often enough to give him the axe. The bigger problem is that Fitz can't make enough throws consistently. Receivers are open more often than not. For all those that claim Chan is inflexible and doesn't dictate to the opposition what he's going to do, I disagree (For the most part). Again, the problem is Fitz. Chan gets the matchups that he wants, then Fitz can't deliver. Sure, I think CJ should get the ball more, but his YPC isn't totally despite Chan, it has a lot to do with how CJ is used. Granted, I'd take a yard off that average if it meant giving the ball more, but it is a hell of a lot easier to defend a 2-TE run oriented offense than a spread. Especially considering the Bills personell. All that said, if I were the OC, I'd look at the play selection and make some minor adjustments. The first of which is what our boy Yeevie was asking for: let Fitz have more freedom at the line. For all his faults, he seems to be great at making presnap adjustments. Let him call the plays that he is comfortable with. I think that makes him a little looser, and maybe doesn't force the wobbly bullets down the sideline and puts a little air under some of those throws. And I have to believe that FItz won't be so quick to abandon the run. In any case it's most likely too little, too late, so what the hell- let's go with mrags suggestion and just run it every down. But wouldn't they want Brad Smith taking the snaps if there is no chance of passing?

Luckily, they've got a couple more years to figure that out: And per the Buffalo News/Rotoworld: "We're trying to be more balanced down there and not just be pass-happy," Gailey said. The first step should be keeping his best player on the field. The Bills offense predictably stumbled in the red zone two weeks ago when C.J. Spiller was repeatedly removed for third-stringer Tashard Choice. Now, I don't think CJ seems like the type to hold out, but the Bills would be smart to offer a him a raise and extension a lot sooner than later. On the Buddy interview, I don't think there is much to read into. Buddy might not actually be the smartest guy in the room, but he's no dummy. Despite being a small market team, sites that cover the NFL like PFT have an insatiable appetite for content. So, they'll look for anything to run with. I know any press is good press, but the Bills don't want to want to have their GM saying anything that might contradict others in the organization, especially when it can be construed as "I don't have any confidence in our starting QB or head coach when (despite a losing record) there is still a chance for progress and a winning season." I think Russ also may have talked to Buddy and Chan since Buddy has implied that the Bills don't have a QB of the future and intends to get one and Chan follows that up by basically saying Fitz is our guy even if they get that QB of the future. Both of those soundbites have people extrapolating more definitive claims, and you know that Russ doesn't want it to appear that there is some type of disagreement between the two going forward. So, expect any future questions along those lines to be answered in a similar way, albeit maybe more diplomatically.

It's a "candlelight" vigil

He did say it, I heard it on WGR after the game. Unbelievable that a professional coach would say that. Basically any other franchise would be firing him by tomorrow morning. The past few weeks he's been sounding more and more like Jauron. I think after the Pats* game he actually said, "It's tough to win in this league."

This is the worst part of it all.

is that name already taken or something?

Astro, what do you think about Tyler Wilson's apparent propensity to be concussed? Red flag?

This. But, I don't think that this year the Bills should be making that bold move. I'm no expert, but I don't see too much of a difference between the guys that are slated as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounders. So I don't think they should pass up a stud LB, CB, or WR in the first, because they could probably find a QB comprable to what they'd the drafting in the 1st anyway. And if not, so be it. We all know it's basically impossible to make a QB. As much as I want to upgrade the QB position, I'm much more willing to continue building the team by taking a "sure thing" at another position than taking a QB because they "need" one. I'd much rather take a "flyer" on a 2nd or 3rd (or even later) round QB than take a "flyer" on this year's crop of 1st rd QBs. Again, I'm talking about this year. I would certainly feel different if I felt there were more QBs that were more highly touted.

Clippers of the NFL and a few others get the point. Wishing injury is different than playing slightly outside the rules. What I'd call for early is a couple of zero blitzes- sending six, seven, or even eight rushers depending on the Pats personnel. That way, there should be at least one unblocked blitzer bearing down on Brady. If Brady gets rid of the ball in time- hit him anyway. Yes, you might give up a penalty for a late hit, but that is the cost to rattle Brady. As good as Brady is and has been, he has also shown to get rattled in games where he can't keep his jersey clean. That can lead to hurried throws an inaccurate passes throughout the rest of the game. The question we should be asking is do the Bills want to give up 20 yard completions down the seam vs a Cover 3? Or do they want to sell out and at least make Brady uncomfortable? Maybe Gronk catches it and breaks a long gain, even for a TD, if they sell out. Well, the past couple years have shown us that he can do the same even against Cover 3 and drop zone coverage. Notice, I am not calling for a cheap shot per se, I am asking someone to let Brady know if he thinks he can stay in the pocket and pick apart the D, there is a price to pay. There is a definite difference between playing slightly past the whistle and making an otherwise clean hit vs strictly hitting with an intent to injure. What's the worst that could happen? The Bills lose. They have tried the alternative. I'd much rather "Die by the blitz" than sit back and let Brady carve up the secondary. As they say, "If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'" and you already know how Belichick feels about that sentiment.

On offense I want to see both CJ and Fred fed the ball early and often. Especially CJ. I'd also like to see some type of trick play to keep the Texans on their heels. Maybe something as simple as a reverse to TJ Graham. When they do decide to throw, quick/short/high percentage passes to keep the clock moving and give the defense some rest. No need to go for multiple deep strikes. Fitz can't connect and that's an easy way to waste a down. Every possession has to count against an opponent like Houston. On defense, I know we've all been mocking Wanny on this but for the love of Marv, "STAY IN THE DAMN GAPS!" I would be fine with giving Foster 5 yards every carry, as long as they eliminate the very long runs on cutbacks due to defensive players trying to do more than they're asked and getting out of position. Even if the Texans sustain long drives and score, at least it will chew up clock and the game won't get out of hand too quickly. I'd also like to see Sheppard make a play or two. Lastly, on the sidelines, I want to see some freaking emotion!! And not just from the usual suspects. I want to see everyone fired up. Dareus was one of those usual suspects but has been rather pedestrian this year. I'd love to see him leading by example. Like I mentioned in another thread, Mario has every reason to to play like his hair is on fire (EDIT: poor analogy for a bald guy)- Let's see him getting guys charged even if it is for a selfish reason. LET'S GO BUFFALO

You guys don't remember ROBert BROOKS? http://youtu.be/VBAqx94HuGc

You have to arrive before a certain time if you want to stay overnight the night before, I believe it's 10 PM. I think Wooderson is right, at least last time I was there there were all sorts of vehicles accompanying full-fledged RVs, but I'd call or email to double check. Basically, you get a spot which is big enough for an RV and any other vehicle that'd be in tow. I assume you're probably not towing it, but if you arrive together you should be alright. Whether or not you can take your other vehicle out, you won't need to since you can walk to the store he mentioned. However, I'd pick up beer beforehand and not worry about lugging it if you're planning on getting a lot (as you should).

I think the over at 47.5 is a pretty safe bet on this one, safer than Houston covering. I don't bet too often, and never against the Bills, but I'm always really wary of multiple score spreads.

I think it's reasonable to think the fire in Mario's belly burns a little hotter this week, and even if he doesn't show up on the stat sheet, he will create opportunities for the rest of the D. I know that Mario has the talent (or at least did) to be a one man wrecking crew, but I think the D needs more than just Mario to step up his game this week. However, I'm pretty confident Mario will be bringing it and hopefully that attitude is contagious. It could even be the turning point of the season; Seeing the guy play with some passion might inspire some of the other guys who haven't been underperforming. Yeah, it might not be likely, and I can think of 100 reasons why it might not matter anyway. But personally, I have to go into the game with an optimistic outlook, or I can't even watch. Thank god for the bye week, because I was pretty much peeved as ever after that loss to the Titans. I recently posted that due to his attitude/demeanor, I would never like Mario, even if he did start producing. Well, here's to hoping I have to eat crow on that one! If Mario starts playing with some determination, and maybe show some enthusiasm for playing for Buffalo, I could see it happening. I know the guy is naturally aloof, but damn, it's been one thing after another so far that's rubbed me the wrong way. Don't get me wrong, I wanted him to sign and I don't want to cut him or anything like that, but he's certainly been a major letdown.

This is on point. I do think Rob Ryan is a good coach, but the Bills don't need a fundamental shift in philosophy as far as schematics are concerned. Wanny may not be the answer but right now I think the 43 sticks, and let's add not only some fresh thinking to the 43, but some fresh LBs as well.

Not me. But he did cut his hair for Locks of Love a few years ago when he coached for the Raiders. Maybe he'd do it again.

I can't think of anything else it would be besides getting his wrist "scoped." Basically, many types of wrist injuries result in ligament scarring. The getting it "scoped" means the Dr. goes in and removes the scar tissue. The wrist regains mobility and there is less pain. Here's a pretty straightforward and not too technical explanation: http://www.assh.org/Public/HandConditions/Pages/Wristarthroscopy.aspx