klos63
-
Posts
6,640 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by klos63
-
-
Seems like this could only be positive news. My guess, like others have said , is that a lot had been done behind the scenes for some time now. I think Ralph knew he was nearing the end, how could he have not. If our best hopes are true, even though the success on the field has been limited, Wilson's legacy will be that he kept the team here long after he passed.
-
If we had more talent we would have made the playoffs. Jackson is a wonderful player, but to assume he will be affective for 3 more years is unrealistic. If it happens great, but don't plan on it.If we had more guys with Jackson's heart, we'd have made the playoffs. The guy does enough things like blitz pickup and short yardage where he can be your #3 RB for the next 2-3 years. Referring to Jackson as a misfit toy is beyond stupid.
-
Wasn't he with the team for 3 seasons? Seems like a pretty fair shot to me.I don't think so but PTR would know for sure. Naaman Roosevelt was signed by the Lions this offseason according to this wiki link. I for one rout for the kid, never thought he got a fair shot in buffalo, so congrats to him.
-
What the hell is a blue collar team? Stadium? I know the phrase blue collar, it does not apply to a multi billion dollar sport where it's lowest paid players make close to $1 Million per year. This is a phrase I really can't stand in reference to sports teams, also 'lunch pail' players - who brings a 'lunch pail' to work anymore ? Nobody since Archie Bunker.Just like most powerful and influential enormous corporations, rules can and will be bent and changed for them in the courts. Not to mention that they can tie up opponents in court costing them millions if necessary, which is chump change for the NFL.
I anticipate that this whole notion that the Bills can't leave Buffalo until 2020 will play out quite differently for exactly that reason. Despite the fact that we all want the team to remain here, the fact is that the region simply is no longer capable of sustaining an NFL team, by the NFL's corporate-driven standards along with PSL licensing, whether we are honest enough to admit that to ourselves or not being irrelevant.
Buffalo is a blue collar "lunch pail" kinda town, not one that fits the current NFL model for teams. I personally can't stand where the NFL has taken itself, but unfortunately that doesn't matter either.
It wasn't that long ago that the Bills were competitive, only 20 years or so ago, and during the Kelly/Bruce/Thurman/Reed era, it was still very much a blue-collar kinda gig. For us Buffalonians it still is, but for the NFL it is not.
I see this pushing north of the border and much more quickly than we all assume. $400M is really not all that much, and all it's going to take is a new owner telling the county, behind closed doors of course, that he/she/they will simply let the team "rot" in Buffalo for its last few years, or they can take the grease money and feign something like that the county gets nothing if the team simply leaves and that "this way" the county would at least get a buyout at a fraction of that $400M, which of course they'll sell to the public as a good deal.
Entirely lost will be the irony that having and NFL team is supposed to have a net positive impact on the economy, including getting all those taxpayer dollars back, a false notion, but one that will be stood on its head nonetheless if/when that happens, likely without anyone challenging it like that.
This entire thing, including where the NFL has taken itself, could not be a whole lot more tragic, particularly for WNY-ers.
And frankly, if we cannot have a "blue collar" team/stadium etc., then I'm not sure that I'm all that interested. I've seen what this does, as many of us have, to football in other cities, like D.C. for example.
-
The NFL seems to be doing quite well with their TV contracts, I'm guessing the networks are quite pleased with the 'flawed slate of games' . So you won't watch games that don't involve the AFC or the Bills? How many fans out there want to spend their Thanksgiving or stay up late Monday night watching the Bills? Be serious, the Bills high TV ratings are for local viewership - Buffalo fans watch the Bills games. The rest of the nation probably isn't too hot on them right now. I doubt the networks want a MNF game with Tim Tuel at the helm.I don't see how comparing the number of times the NFC as opposed to the AFC is featured in primetime is meaningless or a waste of time.
There are shows, pod casts, radio programs, articles, and message board posts that analyze the NFL schedule from the perspective of "the common Bills fan": is our schedule front loaded? back loaded? warm teams playing here too early? cold teams playing here too late? how many wins? when do we need 9 wins by? how much rest do our opponents have? how much rest do we have? when's the bye week? and on and on and on. But the key thing about those questions: they don't affect whether or not our eyes will be on the screen watching the games (and more importantly, from the NFL's perspective: the commercials).
But who's playing in primetime is an important question, and it let's me shape my plans for viewership 5-6 months out.
For the first time since the AFL-NFL merger, there won't be an AFC team playing on Thanksgiving. Also, on a somewhat related note, for the first time in my life, I won't be watching a football game on Thanksgiving.
How about opening night? Seahawks/Packers? How does that impact the Bills at all? It doesn't, so I won't be watching. I'll be getting 8 hours of sleep ahead of my work day on friday.
Let's dig deeper:
http://www.bizjourna...tv-ratings.html
8 of the top 11 rated teams (in terms of tv viewership) are American Football Conference teams... including the Buffalo Bills!
If the NFL schedule makers truly followed TV ratings, you would think they would look at the list of teams and their comparative television viewership statistics. Shouldn't the primetime split be 60/40 in favor of the AFC, as opposed to the NFC?
It's not a conspiracy against the Bills, or anything conscious that the schedule makers did. It's just that idiot Goodell giving his stamp of approval to a clearly flawed slate of games that swings way too heavily in favor of one conference (which, coincidently, is the conference with lower tv viewership ratings.)
-
Exactly, this is such a useless discussion. We are now analyzing the percentages of AFC / NFC matchups on primetime. Seriously. I wish my life so free of obilgations that I can worry about things like this. I'm looking forward to the season, I really won't give the schedule a second thought except- who do we play next week?The NFL puts what sells in Prime Time. Face it, ratings speak a lot louder than some disappointed fans on a message board.
It's not really very interesting. Better matchups, more high profile teams for better ratings. It's just like Yankees / Red Sox always on ESPN - it's what the majority of viewers want to watch - viewers = $$$$. It's really quite simple.Interesting stat, I didn't realize it was that skewed for primetime exposure --- Bills right now have a bad combination; small market -- decade+ of losing and no real marquee player (especially at QB) ---
-
you are assuming the weather won't suck in Buffalo when San Diego and Miami vist. That's a big assumption.San Diego and Miami avoid the cold. Green Bay is the only December home opponent, but they're used to the cold. Bills play in Oakland week 16 and then they have to travel across the country to play in New England in Week 17.
-
I don't believe I have contradicted myself, but my personal preference is OT. I think it's a higher priority than any other offensive position.So now you've contradicted yourself. So which way do you draft from those two options?
-
I would hope the new owner has a better understanding of the draft and the importance of the offensive line than you do. I doubt GM's get fired for making 'safe' picks, if that means building a great offensive line. They get fired for making bad picks. Picking a strong OT is never a bad thing to do. You can get all the great WR you can find but if you have a crappy offensive line, kiss the season goodbye. It's that simple.Wow, seriously? Could you not understand the context? That pick COULD ABSOLUTELY BE MISCONSTRUED AS A LUXARY PICK BY A NEW OWNER, not me or us but by a new owner who would wonder why we didn't take a "sure thing" OT. These things happen a lot, basically GMs get fired for this type of thing OFTEN. I could have used a great many different examples and I guess I should have picked something easier to imagine for you. Repeat: I don't think it's a luxury pick. I actually would like the Bills to take Evans. I also think that if they take him with one of the top left tackles available (I don't think it's likely either) they could lose their jobs that much easier when a new owner comes in.
-
I was being sarcastic when I said that you are right in one aspect. It doesn't always come through in the written word. Drafting one of two franchise type WR in the draft would not be considered an unsafe pick. You're really stretching your argument with the reasoning being a round 5 pick from a second rate college will start at tackle - that boarders on ridiculous. You are trying to create a scenario that is so unlikely to occur it needn't be discussed. Basically you are saying, they probably won't do something obviously stupid, else they may make a bad impression on a prospective owner and lose their jobs. Yeah, you are on to something there. (that was sarcasm!).So it makes no sense and then you get it. C'mon. Anyway, to clarify for you... If our biggest need is offensive tackle and everyone knows our biggest need is offensive tackle and Robinson is somehow available, but... So is Sammy Watkins or Mike Evans ( this is to illustrate a point, I don't think that this is necessarily going to happen) and you pick Robinson, that would be "safe". Now if you instead pick one of the two receivers mentioned instead of Robinson because their happens to be some tackle in round five from some second rate college that your scouting department has convinced you can start, that would be a not "safe" move. Is that better? it's hypothetical and all but that's the type of situation I was eluding to.
Do you think Seattle won because of their Wide Receivers? I would think taking a WR who some are projecting at #2 would be an incredibly safe pick at #9(Watkins). Just because we may not be able to name the starting RT of Seattle, it doesn't decrease his value.I think "playing it safe" could lead to Whaley/Marrone's departures, or at the very least accelerate it. If I was the new owner, and had witnessed to Bills FO pass on a playmaker like an Evans or Ebron (if they were on the board) to draft a RT like a Lewan (which would be the personification of the "safe bet" you speak of), I would be quite convinced that they didn't have the ball$ to undertake the measures necessary to field a winning team. A "safe" pick (and RT would be a safe pick) will not improve this team by leaps and bounds. Adding playmakers potentially could do exactly that. For those advocates of "power football" who think that RT is the wise move, based on the notion that the game is moving in that direction (because of the success of Seattle), I ask you one thing: can you name the starting RT for the Seahawks? And when you figure that out, the next question that should be answered is in what round was this RT drafted? Certainly not in the top 10. Who was the Bills' last "great" RT? Probably Howard Ballard- an eleventh round draft choice. Safe pick= Right Tackle. Right Tackle= another 6-10 season. Safe pick= Whaley and Marrone seeking new employment.
I think the term 'safe' is inappropriate here. Is it a good pick or a bad pick, and that will be determined after the player actually plays some games.
-
Really makes no sense at all. What does playing it safe mean? Not making a ridiculous pick? I can't imagine they are thinking of new ownership when deciding which player to pick. If they want to improve their resume, you make good picks and then coach them well. I guess you are right in one aspect, if they picked a player not a value at #9 in a position they don't need - say Center..., yeah then they should worry about their jobs.The more I think about it the more I am convincing myself that we won't see a shocking pick in the first round or two. Purely speculative but I believe Whaley & co. Will play it safe and not make a "spiller" type pick eg: surprise in a position where we are set. To me this means Tackle if Robinson or Matthews is available or Barr if the obvious top two defenders are gone. As much as I would love Evans size, our FO would have to answer to a new owner about making a luxury pick. I think picking Ebron would result in questions about chandlers contract and what they were thinking there.. It's year two for them so the pressure for results is already huge and with looming new ownership it may as well be year three. Thoughts?
-
saying there would be teams lining up to move here may be the most ridiculous statement ever posted here. Really.I'm already sick of talking about who is going to take over ownership of this team.
I've said this once, I've said this twice, I've said this a hundred thousand times over the last 15 years, but here it is again:
If the Bills left Buffalo tomorrow morning, there would be a line of teams 10-15 deep to move to Buffalo tomorrow night.
11th highest tv ratings in the league after 15 years of absolutely mind numbing, pathetic football. Literally running 53 men out onto that field, so long as theyre wearing Bills jerseys, guarantees you will be one of the most popular franchises in the sport.
And you think tarp city (Jacksonville) is going to sit down there with their 15,000 fans, while the Ralph sits empty and millions of (former) Bills fans curse Bon Jovi for moving the team to Toron... god this sentence, this IDEA, is so f*cking ridiculous I'm not even going to finish it im going to get dinner.
-
Do you really think the Bills are bringing in a punter just for kicks(sorry). Moorman is no longer an elite punter, far from it. I was surprised they signed him in the offseason to come back. The Bills will bring in people with the hopes of improving the team, whether a long shot or a solid prospect, they will try to improve. I don't believe this is a situation where we just bring in someone for reps. If we go into the season thinking we are in great shape at punter, that's a bad move.I agree. Moorman's probably chuckling over this; not really viable competition.
I was actually expecting them to bring in some stiffer competition for Moorman.
Also, if you were expecting stiffer competition - who would you bring in instead and why?
-
Agreed, we also need a fall back should Moorman get hurt at any point during the season and then we have a player we have familiarity with. Sometimes I really don't feel that people think before they write.I have no idea if this kid has an NFL leg, but Moorman shouldn't be any sort of a lock. He's at the end of his career, with a diminishing leg and he's already been cut once by the team. I have a soft spot for Brian, but if a kid comes in and can hang with him I wouldn't be surprised if he (pardon the pun) gets the boot.
-
Players are so easy to assess now. Just look at some numbers. No need to watch players or have them come to camp.What's this about? Rated 29 out of 54 punters in 2013. 40.2 yard average? Unless the dude has been on steroids for a year this is stupid.
-
Just curious, how good is our franchise? what will people around the league find out about our team? Have you been to other stadiums and training facilities? I think the national perception of the Bills is probably spot on. Over 50 years, the majority of the time a pretty lousy team playing in an outdated facility.Every team that has been on there has stated they were shocked at how knowledgeable, easy to work with, and professional the Crew was. Fans whine and B word to get more positive exposure, so lets do this! It is seen by many fans, let them in and see how good our guys are, how good the franchise is, how good the stadium and training facilities are, get NFL fans across the spectrum on a bandwagon of sorts for this year. This would be a really good opportunity to shun some pre conceived notions about our Bills on a national level.
-
I'm assuming everyone realizes this, but trading down(or up)requires another team to want to trade with you. I see people all the time suggesting these trades as if it's a simple choice to move up or down. The other team needs a reason to do it too.go for Lewan if available at 9. If not trade down and get one of the next tier OT's and hopefully a second second round choice to fill two other areas of weakness. I'd pick up another offensive lineman in the lower rounds.
-
I think the off the field risks are overblown, however troublesome. It hasn't affected his play on the field and if Tampa wasn't in a position to draft a top WR, they may have kept him. I think they tired of him, but he is still plenty useful. The Bills may tire of him after a couple years too, but this guy gets about 7-8 TD's a year. That's huge.I still think WR is in the mix for the first two picks if the value is right. William is a nice addition to our receivers, but there is still some risk in there beause of his off the field issues. The bills really shouldnt write off the postion just because they aquired him
-
Exactly, with a dominant line, you can dictate the game.Two things . . .
1) O-lineman are the safest bet in round one
2) No team has ever regretted building a strong (elite) offense lineman
I say draft one of the big-three tackles, and 2 or 3 more solid o-lineman in the rest of the draft
-
If we need a tackle, why not draft a great one. It's an important position and we won't have to worry about the huge contract for 4-5 years. Doesn't make sense to wait a few rounds if a stud is there at #9.Yes. The Bills will trade down and either take a legit ROT in the first (Zack Martin ~ #25 or so) or one with their 2nd round pick (A Richardson, or Moses). Also somebody in the 3rd or 4th round. It does not make sense to draft somebody in the first 15 picks who expects to get the big bucks for a LOT and pay him a ROT salary. The highest paid ROT gets paid the same as the 13th LOT. Ignore that and you are building a problem into your team for the intermediate future (rookie contracts are for 5 years) or earlier (al.la. J.Peters or J.Byrd).
-
you have a very bright mother!You sound like my mother now as I've had this same discussion with her, just on a much smaller scale.
And I'll tell you the same thing as I told her, any company would, just not a very good return. You give them $300 million at 3% which insurance companies ten years ago were paying even better rates than that, but even at 3% would be worth $400 million today. Ten years back likely could have got 5% even This technique BTW was explained to me by a financial planner so this is a recommended strategy for situations like this. It was also mentioned in some of the articles this week discussing RW's situation.
That $300 million is now removed from the estate ten years ago as he no longer had that at the time of death. The insurance policy then pays upon his death, but insurance policy payouts are exempt from taxes. You then use that money to pay the estate tax.
-
are we talking a $300 - $400 million dollar policy? What insurance company would insure and 85 year old for that amount?Like has been stated in some columns, and easy way to handle the estate taxes is RW could have taken out an insurance policy to cover that. If he did it say ten years back wouldn't have cost him all that much. It's an easy way to sort of move money from taxable to non taxable, then use that money to pay the taxes. That may have been what Irsay and some of these others like Lamar Hunt, Adams, etc have all done.
-
One point that I have not heard mentioned. Perhaps the buyout was put in to avoid a court hassle and benefit the county. Use the example of Bon Jovi purchasing the team in say 2016 and wanting to move to Toronto. If he waits til the buyout the county gets $28MM. If the county lets him break the lease early, the county gets $400MM. If Bon Jovi buys the team, they are leaving at some point. Is it worth making them play in Buffalo a couple more seasons knowing the inevitable, or getting maximum money out of it?
-
how would that drum up interest?It's possible that this rumor could be floated by the Texans to try to drum up more interest in the #1 pick.
Golisano, Quinn & Brandon enjoy dinner together
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
The Sabres were legitimate Stanley Cup contenders for a couple years under these 2 guys. I'll take that over what we've had recently. And Golisano is worried about the bottom line - can't lose money owning an NFL team, a far cry from NHL.