simpleman

I’m not saying Trent was a future Tom Brady before the hit, but his ceiling still appeared higher than a top 20 QB (which he was). In his almost full year before the injury he had a higher Quarterback rating than Brett Favre, Joe Flacco & Ben Roethlisberger and was only .3 below Tony Romo. Does that sound like someone who didn’t have potential and had an obvious low ceiling? He did not work out, but he had potential and his ceiling did not appear as close as it turned out to be. I brought this up because more than one on this board has slammed Hogan by comparing him to Trent because of his background and how he was described by the scouts. I would not take Hogan as a low round draft choice, and would definitely take Prescott or Hackenburg before Hogan. But as a later round pick I would take a chance on Hogan.

As I mentioned earlier, no stadium is economically viable. Dome, retractable, open. You can add all the extra bells and whistles building it, promote it right, try to bring in every possible event outside of the actual games. Whatever you do with any of the three types, it still will lose money. Choose one of the three types. Just realize, no matter what you do you will lose money. Open, the least potential amount of loss. Covered, greater potential for amount of loss than open. Retractable, the greatest potential loss of money of the three. A chosen few businesses located near any stadium type may profit from it, but in the end the taxpayers in general end up paying much more than any of the chosen few ever make. A smart businessman would never build a stadium as a "money-making" business venture. It is a financial sinkhole. It is a necessary cost of doing business for a sports team. That is why the smart billionaire business-people that own national sports teams get the hapless taxpayers to pay most of the cost. The only real financial choice you have when building a stadium is how much money are you willing to loose. Open air - lowest possible cost. Covered - higher cost. Retractable - highest cost. Why do we have "Taj Mahal" type sporting facilities? Because those that build them are not using their own money to build them. It is easy to waste other peoples money to provide yourself luxury that you don't have to pay for yourself. Taxpayers are famous for not understanding that that luxury ultimately comes out of their pockets. There is no such thing as a free lunch. The decision which type to have basically boils down to how much you are willing to spend of other peoples money to get what you desire. And your ability to convince them to spend it to satisfy your desires. It is never about economic viability. There is no path to economic viability whatever you choose. That is a fairy tale.

I know it is fashionable on this board to slam Edwards. But I believe it was a unforeseeable combination of bad coaching creating a situation where he could never unlearn the overly cautious approach he was trained to have by Bills coaches (Trentative), and his reaction to his Life Threatening hit and concussion in Arizona. Look up "biggest hits in the NFL" to see his name listed tops in the videos. It still is considered so by more than just Bills fans. He never got over the psychological PTSD from the experience and always was "hearing footsteps", which ruined his game. In the beginning I saw he had the brains, the arm, and the skills to be a good NFL QB. (I still think he was the best Bills QB prospect since Bledsoe) He just did not have the mental toughness to take the punishment and overcome his early coaching mistakes and develop the mindset an NFL QB needs to have. Maybe under different circumstances he could have developed. I don't think he was a bad draft selection for a middle round draft pick.

I tend to agree with you on that just based on gut feeling. But I'm not sure the facts/statistics/history would back us up. I would like to see someone calculate the odds of this strategy achieving the type of results our gut feelings tell us it would by comparing the success rate of 2 mid 1st pick vs picks over single top 10 picks similar to how this article rated the success rate for top 5 picks. I wonder about this. In 2013 we basically got EJ, Kiko, Gragg & Goodwin in exchange for a #8 that STL used for Austin. In that case I think trading back was a good move. But that was only a single year trade, not a huge sample and may be cherry picking. And this year I would gladly trade away my first if there was a way to get 3 2nd round picks doing multiple trades. The talent is so good at areas of need in the 2nd round this year. I'd even be glad to trade all this years picks for 3 2nds and a 4th. Beyond the top 7 there does not seem to be a huge drop in talent potential between the later first round and the mid 2nd round. I am not even sure the trade value chart would get you two mid 20s picks for a top 5. Maybe a top 2 pick. I'd think this type of evaluation must be a big part of what the job description is of the new trend in sports of hiring an "analytics" guy. Anyone up for some serious work?

A retractable roof stadium does not make sense if you are paying for it. Best case, it is opened twice a year. The cost vs a fixed roof is enormous. If you are going to spend the money to build a new one, cover it. It is about fan comfort for those attending the game. As far as the positive economic viability of a stadium, even with multi-use beyond the Bills, it is a fantasy that they will even break even. And the economic boost minus the cost to the local economy for building it, the infrastructure and the other issues is a loser all the way around. Only a few close by businesses will benefit from it, while a majority of other taxpayers and the competitors of those businesses will be paying a lot more than the benefits those chosen few derive from it. Check out the economic cost/benefits of every stadium nationwide to see how much of a fantasy it is of an economically viable self supporting stadium. If stadiums could be economically viable, then the rich, smart, NFL business owners would build them all by themselves and get even richer than they are now from those benefits by keeping the profits all to themselves. The reason they have taxpayers fund them is because they simply never make economic sense, they are monster financial sinkholes. Better to get the suckers (er taxpayers) pay to feed the monster and reap just the sweeter side of the profits and rewards of owning an NFL team,

The media in general make such foolish and uneducated interpretations of comments when they share them. In the version in "The Syracuse Journal" the writer used the same quotes from the NFL article but added "Despite all of that, Ryan insists he likes Williams and wanted to have him back. Of course, at Williams' hefty price tag that wasn't exactly plausible for the Bills." right after Ryan's circle comment. Mario publicly stated he would take a pay cut to stay in Buffalo and when released he signed with Miami for about 1 million more than Buffalo will pay for Mario in dead cap. So for 1 million more the Bills could have kept Mario. Rex simply didn't want Mario on his team. It was not about cap or money period. Yet the media added that. Bad journalism is alive and well.

But.. But. 6 receptions, for 61 yards on 16 targets, 0 tds last year. Not good enough to make THE BROWNS team this year. Doesn't that threaten you? LOL.

We created that cap problem and then squandered what we had by creating useless dead cap rather than using it on a quality player. We could have kept Mario for about 1 Million more of cap this year, he offered to take a pay cut to stay and instead when he was released by Buffalo he took that cut when he signed with Miami. Now instead of having his way with the Miami defense like he often did, he will have a chance to stick it to Buffalo at least twice a year. Now we have a huge dead cap hole that can not be spent on a talented player. How many pro bowl players can you have on your team for about a million a year. Waste 7 million on dead cap, or spend 1 million more and have a pro bowler. Easy choice for me. 1 million is barely two lukewarm bodies fresh out of the dumpster at vet minimum. We now have a hole in defense and have to waste a draft pick on a gamble that some rookie will actually play well enough to earn that 1 million. And use up a draft pick that could have been a LB. a WR, a G or a OT at need.

I never stated Bradham's potential was high. In fact, I said the problem was not losing him, but that losing players without a plan to replace them with player who is an improvement over them was the problem. I notice everyone who is criticizing me personally is doing so rather than trying to use facts to pursuade me. Could it be because they are unable to refute me based on their lack of facts? When you lack the facts to back up your faith, your response seems to be to criticize the person questioning your faith. As you and your flockmates have said, the future is rosy and the plan is right on schedule. It's so nice you all have the inside info on the Pegula's plan and the exact time schedule of it. That must be how you all consider it on track, and are so sure it is not a failure. Since you have the plan in hand, exactly when will the Sabres make the playoffs again. I will save this info and remind you if it was a success when it happens. As far as facts : Golden boys mentioned: Jack Eichel 31 ranked forward Sam Reinhart, 157 ranked in points Exactly how many YEARS do we have to wait to not be told we expect instant gratification. 3, 5 .... 10?

Please give me the facts of how the plan has not failed using actual team win/loss records. Giving me your opinions, your hopes, your beliefs for the future are not facts. Facts are what will educate me. Give me actual facts of how last years team, or this years TEAM as a whole is better than the pre-Pegula teams. Pre Pegula teams had numerous players who didn't just have potential, but proved their ability by their play and their player statistics as proof. Drafting a player/players who "has potential" is not a fact until he actually displays that potential. Potential is a belief, not a fact.... ??????

Not at all. I understand it was intentional. But unlike so many Buffalo sports fans, I do not suffer from having such low expectations based on years of suffering and misery for having losing teams for my whole lifetime. Most fans in Buffalo have set the bar so incredibly low, they accept incompetence and losing as a way of life. It is 2016, how many more promises of a 5 year plan for building a competitive team are you willing to accept, only to be handed another 5 year plan when the last one fails? The very fact that it was intentional is why I fault the ownership. They gutted what posters have called a "mediocre" team to build a better one. But after 4 years we now have a bottom dwelling team that is showing no signs of ever climbing out of that cellar. The facts don't lie, you can have "faith" the team is getting better, but the standings show a different story. Show me the proof, don't feed me Koolaide and beliefs. A pattern of failure with the Sabres, and destroying the Bills defense show a repeat of a pattern. Pegula preaches consistency, but has tore down a very good Buffalo defense, brought in Rex who wants to rebuild the team in his image and brought in his brother and his record of failure. The team has made decisions that put the team in "cap hell", to "win now " last year. They "lost now" and failed. Don't feed me platitudes and excuses. Give me a competitive team that shows me it is competitive by the only results that count, actual win/loss figures. Not with opinions and beliefs that things will be better "next year". I am aware the gutting of the Sabres was an intentional plan, and the facts show a failure of that plan over 3 years later. I fear the Bills will backslide this year as the result of management's new intentional plan to gut the defense and rebuild it to fit Rex's desires. I don't see any facts to prove the defense will be better this year than the one they are gutting to build it. Expecting to get more than 1 new above average starter in the defense as a rookie player in their first year in any draft year defies history and is unrealistic. All draft choices have still been shown to be a big gamble, no matter how much research or how good the scouting staff is. All the holes created by the rebuild are not going to be filled this year by the draft. And because of the incompetency in cap management, FA will not be there to help. Letting players like Bradham go is not by itself a bad plan, but doing so without a realistic plan to get a better player to replace them when they are gone is what makes it a bad plan. And this team has created holes to fill everywhere.

Ha HA! Answer: Obviously all the other Bills LBs in 2015. The same 3 all pros were still there in 2015. Kyle was out some games, but in 2014 there were also times when the Dline had players out during course of the season.

Pay attention... to the facts. Mediocrity, huh. A team that the previous two years made the playoffs and was 1st and 3rd. No Pegula team has ever made the playoffs, and have since occupied the cellar as a hot mess. Kind of like what has happened to the Bills defense under Pegula. 2010 1st Northeast Playoffs 2011 3rd Northeast Playoffs Pegula Purchase 2012 3rd Northeast 2013 5th Northeast 2014 8th Atlantic 2015 8th Atlantic

Just goes to show that if an owner really wants to give the fans a "win now" experience, they need to hire a head coach that will develop a scheme that matches the strengths of the existing team, rather than an egomaniac who will waste years rebuilding the team to meet his grand design. And the fans will again be left waiting years for a team that is competitive. Another Epic failure by Pegula with the Bills. Re: what he has already done for the Sabres fans, years of cellar dwelling from a team that used to at least be competitive.

The question to me is, if we are going to give Mills a chance to contribute to this team, why not let him challenge Miller at guard. Does anyone really think he is the best option at Tackle. Wasn't his position at college Guard? He didn't impress me at tackle. Isn't guard considered less challenging than tackle? I'd rather have a player be a decent player at guard than be a marginal tackle. And for those defending Miller, if he is the better player at guard than Mills, then let him prove it during the preseason. It is about putting the best players you have in the best position for the team.

Why not, put him in at guard during the preseason and let him compete with Miller. Let the best man win and have a 2nd option if one falters during the season. Miller has not exactly shined and won the right to be the starter based on his in game performance during the regular season.

I can't believe the Bills think Mills & Hogan are worth 1.7 Million instead of 1/2 Million, yet he isn't/ I don't think any of them have earned 1.7, especially in our cap situation. After losing Carrington as backup and Mario being released on the D-line, the same goes for Bryant. If Mills and Hogan are worth 1.7 (which I question) how are those two not at least as valuable.

A decent job, even the unbiased pros think that the Bills have totally screwed up their cap situation. http://overthecap.com/bills-2016-offseason-preview/

I never thought of Bradham as a marquee player. In fact Walter rates him as the number 17th FA OLB.

I can not believe the logic of everyone saying that all the savings from cutting Mario will be available for new contracts to keep our FAs. You are paying a lot of dead money to release him and not getting anything to help the team this year in return. You have to spend real money to replace him, or suffer the same consequences as we have for 15 years of dumpster diving on still semi lukewarm bodies. And you have to waste valuable early round draft picks on a "could be, maybe" replacement when we already have so many critical needs at LB, OL, WR, S, K, etc. It makes more sense financially and practically to rework his contract with restructuring and a pay cut and give him a chance to shine this year as trade bait, so he can increase his value and hopefully give the Bills a chance to work on a trade to somewhere that benefits both the Bills and Mario, while actually getting something in return from him leaving Buffalo. If you want him gone, do it sensibly, don't just cut off your arm to satisfy your need for a scapegoat for Rex ruined defense. Mario was not the biggest factor in the decline of our defense, just tiny piece of a much larger problem than Mario. (see Rex, and his mega maniac ego). I see this Mario hate as the driving force here, not financial, business logic.

post June 1st cut cap savings is 1.425 mill, dead money 425,000

They have never been in cap jeopardy in recent memory. Again, it is about the cap.

I don't think his fragility hurt him the past two years as a WR. As you said, he just was not that good a WR. That was why multiple coaches never seemed to think he was a viable enough option as a WR. If not for his ST play, he would have been long gone from the NFL. To me it is about trying to find another useful function for him on the team to justify the cap cost for a good ST player only. If you are going to keep him and pay him anyway, why not try to find another way to justify his almost 2 million cap. How is that not worth at least a look?

Thanks for the responses. Yes I was serious. I was asking for informed input, not stating he would make a good backup safety. Seems the consensus is he would not. Looking at the tight cap situation he has a cap number of almost 2 Million. Given the needs on this team, especially if AW retires, it just seemed an option that I would explore if I was a coach. Difficult times require an exploration of all possible solutions if you want to keep valuable pieces of the team intact. 2 million for a strictly special teamer seems like a questionable luxury on a cap limited team. And his backup value to the team as a WR appears negligible. Just trying to think outside the box to find a more efficient use of cap money if the team wants to have him return and find some other value to this team besides a ST only player. Others mentioning why not just get a Backup S in FA are missing the point. If he does come back from the injury in time for the season, we are using up a lot of valuable cap space on a ST player only when this team has some tough decisions to make to stay within the cap. I can see keeping developing rookies, players on the roster for ST to see what their upside is or what they can develop into, but in tough cap times keeping players who have already reached their ceiling and are on the downslope becomes an issue you have to seriously evaluate. (See Dixon, Boobie, similar situation, 1.4 Million for a ST and a questionable value at RB in the Bills situation)