akm0404

Some of this stuff really makes me wonder what portion of the posters here have never been on other Internet-based message boards. I suspect that John Wawrow posts here to get his name out there more, so that his writings reach a wider audience. Or maybe just for fun, who knows. Most people "bother" continuing to participate here because they enjoy the back and forth that these Internet-based message boards offer. "You are a dummy" has grown to mean "I disagree with the opinion that you expressed in your previous posting" on Internet-based message boards. This may offend your humanistic sensibilities, but it's just the nature of the beast. You can try to keep your corner of the Internet from changing to meet these modern communicative norms, but you'll just end up with smaller debate amongst a hold-out crew of like-minded folks. That is a choice to be made by the owners of this domain, but successful Internet-based message boards and their posters have adapted to this style. And suggesting that, because John isn't a "columnist", his pieces are devoid of opinion rings hollow with me. So, I'll simply say that I disagree with the opinion that you expressed in your previous posting. Every writer injects their own style (which is generally colored by their opinions and life experiences) into their work, and people may or may not enjoy it and may or may not criticize it. I just generally dislike the whole notion of, "I was personally attacked for posting my opinions on an Internet-based message board! It isn't worth it to post here because my feelings were hurt!". Frankly, it isn't "worth" anything to post on a message board such as this. It's just a fun thing that we do to engender debate among a community of individuals sharing a similar interest. If you have any experience on such message boards, you should fully expect that you will catch some heat when you post things that others disagree with. You should expect criticism in the manner that it is generally delivered in this medium - with a bit of bite. You should also expect a bit stronger bite if you separate yourself from the "regular" contributors by positioning yourself as an authority or give yourself a bit of "celebrity". To not expect that to place a target on yourself for extra criticism seems foolish. Just my opinion, hopefully in a style that doesn't violate the Terms of Service I didn't pick John's username, or decide for him that he should post here from a position of notoriety/quasi-celebrity. That was a decision that he made for himself, theoretically understanding fully how that type of persona is received on an Internet-based message board. If I claimed to be a notable, recognizable person, I'd expect that my non-anonymous status would change how my posts are perceived.

Your post lost all credibility when the first thing you cited as a reason not to draft a quarterback #1 is all of the money that you're going to have to pay him. You do realize that you are going to pay the #1 pick in the draft almost exactly the same amount of money, regardless of their position, right? Have you ever seen the NFL Draft and rookie contracts? Not even sure why I felt compelled to rebut this obvious ignorance, but so it goes. Draft a quarterback #1 overall if a franchise QB is available and you want to rebuild for a championship instead of rebuild to 7-9 "through the trenches".

I'm certain this is just a lie. What he probably meant is that he lost a good portion of his poorly allocated retirement investments when the market went south, which correlated closely with the time of his retirement. Bummer, for sure, but let's not let factual information be a burden here.

I have to agree here. Also, where do you expect your safety to make most of his tackles? Behind the line of scrimmage? Come on now. They line up 20 yards deep, and are the literal last line of defense.

Time to do some googling...

If you can't handle criticism, you shouldn't be a writer producing opinion pieces for the public to consume. If you can't handle what happens on an Internet-based message board, you shouldn't post on one. If you think that someone saying that the opinion pieces you write and produce for public consumption are bad and feel that is "attacking" you, you probably aren't cut out for that line of work. Don't put yourself in the public eye if you can't handle people disagreeing with your opinions/style/work product. How this is rocket science is beyond me.

Ask yourself whether, if allowed to enter free agency, Poz would receive numerous contract offers from respected NFL franchises. Do you really think that he won't get a ton of offers? We have players that START on this team that, if cut, would never see an NFL field again. If you have a guy that would start for the majority of teams in the NFL, and you are perhaps the literal worst team in the NFL, you should probably not get rid of him. Just saying.

Ok, so you're projecting your angst at the organizational failure of the Buffalo Bills onto a player who never asked to be selected where he did, and has tried his best to win and perform for the team. That actually very accurately reflects how people feel about Whitner, which I believe isn't fair or particularly well reasoned. Also, suggesting that "The money he shelled out to Donte" was any more or any less that ANY player selected in his draft slot would have earned is silly. Could the Bills have selected a different player? Yes. Would that player have been better? Maybe. Would that player have been worse? Maybe. Would that player have received an identical contract? Absolutely. Again, the round that Donte was selected in is now completely irrelevant. Saying that he would be good enough to play on this team if he were a 7th rounder, but not if he was a 1st rounder is just plain silly. He is good enough to play on this team, and he would see the field for many NFL-caliber franchises. Look to the players that, when cut, would never see the field in the NFL again. Those players are the problem.

People that post on Internet-based message boards and who also have very thin skins make for people that don't have a lot of longevity on Internet-based message boards.

I'm not Poz fanboy, but I do think he is one of the few players on the team that would actually play for other quality NFL teams. He certainly isn't Ray Lewis or anything, but he isn't the problem either. If we are going to commit to the 3-4 defense, we are going to need two competent ILBs. They do not grow on trees - even if we manage to draft a stud, we're going to have another one who will see the field on most downs. If Paul wants to continue his career in Buffalo (why would he, really?) and is willing to sign a contract commensurate with his ability, I think we'd be foolish not to try to retain him. Again, ask yourself how many Buffalo Bills would actually play for other solid NFL franchises. Poz would. You don't need to be a superstar or a Pro Bowler to be on our roster. You do need to be an NFL-caliber player, which I believe he is.

Donte Whitner is so far from being the problem with the Bills that it isn't even funny. Most people have some sort of weird, petty jealousy fetish against him, as if it were his fault that the Bills reached on him and paid him a salary commensurate with the 8th overall pick. The guy actually cares whether the Bills win or lose. Honestly ask yourself how many players on the team actually care, and how many are there because it is their job and really don't give a damn about the outcome of games. He is no Ed Reed. But he is a solid NFL strong safety. On a team with so few NFL-caliber players, it's hilarious how quick we are to crack back on one of our few decent starters. People get mad because he talks some junk and is a part of the NFL's urban culture - one that makes many here uncomfortable. Take a deep breath and look for the real problems, because "Lil' Donte" ain't one of them.

It is really mind blowing that many Bills fans are so afraid of having a good quarterback. Some would rather play with a backup quarterback than take the chance and have the spotlight shine on Buffalo. Very strange. Yes, it is obvious that drafting a quarterback at the top of Round 1 of the NFL Draft gives you the best chance at landing the type of quarterback that makes your franchise relevant in the NFL for a decade. Yes, some quarterbacks selected highly turn out to bust. Yes, some of them turn into Hall of Famers, same way that some offensive tackles taken at the top of Round 1 bust, and some turn into Hall of Famers. It's funny - last year everyone railed against the Bills selecting a quarterback because they still wanted to hope that Trent Edwards would develop into a franchise quarterback. They argued that there were no prospects worthy of selection (people actually campaigned against trading up for Sam Bradford - not that it would have happened, but it illustrates the sickness). They said 'Wait until next year! There are tons of elite quarterbacks coming!'. But now that the #1 pick in the draft (or certainly a very high pick) is a virtual certainty, and the days of Trent Edwards are mercifully behind us, everyone is getting pee shy about stepping up and doing what is necessary to win. Don't be scared. Take a chance on rebuilding for a championship instead of rebuilding for 7-9.

Stick with Fitzpatrick if you are perfectly content having a back-up quality quarterback as the face of your franchise. Stick with Fitzpatrick if you are only interested in rebuilding back to 7-9. Stick with Fitzpatrick if you aren't interested in winning playoff games. Stick with Fitzpatrick if you don't care to be relevant for a decade. LOL city.

I like Donte Whitner. He is so far from being what's wrong with this team that it isn't even funny.

Dummy.

Heresay and speculation only.

Sweet, our quarterback is our best blocker. Lock him up long term, ASAP. Edit: His name is also Fitzpatrick, not Fritzpatrick.

So it really comes down to a debate between whether he can't run routes over the middle, or he won't run routes over the middle. Either way, it doesn't happen, so who cares?

Seriously man, not more of this, "I have insider knowledge and know for a fact that the team has a succession plan in place and will not move but I don't really know anything and I really just heard it from a guy who heard it from another guy who is Ralph's plumber" garbage.

This post shows a great deal of ignorance. Look at Arizona and Kurt Warner via free agency. They were pretty good for a minute (didn't win a Super Bowl), and then because they had an old man QB at the end of his career, he retired and now the franchise is back in the toilet. Sweet! Eli Manning was the #1 pick in the draft. The Giants and Chargers swapped the #1 and #4 picks, and both teams ended up with Franchise Quarterbacks through the draft. What point are you even trying to make? Brees wasn't a trade, he went to the Saints via Free Agency. Pleasing to fact check a bit better if you're going to debate. Brees was one of the very rare exceptions to the "can't get a franchise QB without drafting them early" rule. Jay Culter and Kyle Orton through trade - While these guys show flashes from time to time, it is a very, very, very long stretch to call them elite franchise quarterbacks. I doubt that either of them will win Super Bowls. Certainly not even in the conversation with the league-best quarterbacks. Donovan McNabb via trade - Example of bringing in an aging star in the twilight of his career. This will certainly help make the Redskins a perennial championship contender for a decade! You win consistently with elite-level play from quarterbacks. You most often get elite-level quarterbacks very early in the first round of the NFL draft. Keep trying until you find one, or be doomed to a 7-9 rebuild with a retread. Utter foolishness. Vick, Palmer, Manning, Williams, and Long have been or are Pro-Bowl players in the league. Stafford and Bradford have huge upside and are exciting players poised to be elite performers as their teams build around them. That is a full 50% of your cherry-picked list that are studs. It is convenient when you decided to cut your list off, you missed the players from the previous two years: Peyton Manning - Possibly the greatest QB ever to play the game of football. Orlando Pace - Hall of Fame legend left tackle. It is insane how desperate some Bills "fans" are to have a bad quarterback. It's mind boggling.

The only way you get a Peyton Manning is to draft him yourself. Franchise quarterbacks are selected in the top of the first round, with few exceptions. Sure, you can luck into a Drew Brees once every 20 years, otherwise your free agent options are aging ex-stars in their golden years, or perennial retreads. Again, it all comes down to whether you want to rebuild to 7-9 or rebuild into a team that is capable of competing for championships every single year for a decade. I'm at the point where another 7-9 season is worse than an 0-16 season. At least if you go 0-16, your franchise is almost forced to take a quarterback instead of an endless parade of cornerbacks, running backs, safeties, and Maybins. I feel bad for you guys that are so afraid of busting with a top-of-the-draft pick. That fear is keeping you from objectively evaluating what makes a championship-caliber team good. That fear is keeping you from happily taking the risk of busting on a #1 quarterback, knowing that if you hit you win championships. As has been shown, using the #1 pick in the NFL draft historically gives you a 33% chance of winning a Super Bowl, and >20% chance of winning multiple Super Bowls. Right now, we have a 0% chance. Even though you are still a 2-1 underdog, I'll take that chance every day of the week. And I get it, we draft terribly. That is why we're a bad, bad team. There is no reason to believe that they'll draft the correct quarterback #1. Hell, we probably won't. But you can't get a hit without swinging the bat. Put your fear aside and rebuild for a championship, not a miracle Wild Card season.

This is a great statistic, and is very telling.

I slam the Bills daily because of the terrible product that they have put on the field for the last decade, and the woefully inept mismanagement of a once-proud franchise conducted by our "front office". I am not blindly optimistic, and I predicted that the Bills would be the worst team in the NFL this year. I think Ryan Fitzpatrick is a below average NFL quarterback who will never lead a team to the playoffs. But yet here I am, sticking with them through the bad times. You don't need to be blind to be a fan. I watch their games (three cheers for the Internet saving us from blackouts), and hope for the best. But still, I expect the worst because if you watch enough football, you can recognize futility when you see it. If we are wise enough to correctly draft a franchise quarterback, I will be as happy as anyone when we return to NFL prominence. I'll tell stories about how bad it was to be a Bills fan during the "dark ages". But I guess I'm just a "dooshrat".

Because something happened twice out of 40 or something tries doesn't make it a "proven, winning strategy". In fact, it pretty much proves the opposite. Do you see why?

You would think this is as obvious as the sun rising in the east, but rest assured there will be an influx of posters with limited knowledge of modern NFL football that will assert that the Bills should reach on an offensive/defensive lineman or linebacker instead. These people should scare you. They are the same types of people we've had running our team into the ground for the last decade.