mjd1001

Watkins is drastically overpaid for the player he is and what he brings...but with that said...the comparison isn't taking all things into account. The issue with RBs is....how much do you pay NOT for what you get, but rather for what you get over the possible/potential replacment. The best 'journeyman' RB is going to be closer in talent and production to a top RB....more so than the best 'journeyman WR' is going to be to a top WR.

I'm not going to say you are wrong...because I am nothing but a casual observe and I certainly can be wrong, but my feeling now is that I DO think he has lost a step. To the naked eye, it is really hard to tell. With his running style, he always looks like he is moving incredibly fast/quick. But, when a back with McCoy's style does lose that half-step/full step...it may not be apparent to the naked eye in terms of what we see in his body movement. Where it WILL be apparent is on the field. That 1/10 of a second slower cut or burst foward may be the difference between his slipping a tackle 2 years ago and going for a 7 yard gain...vs now that tackle he used to slip being something that trips him up for a 2 yard gain instead. I am seeing more of the '2 yard gains' instead of the '7 yard gains'. Plus, he is a year older....into his 30's. In RB years (especially for a style of RB like him), well, hes not going to be quicker/better this year than he was 2 years ago (his last good/great year)

Maybe for what they want in a role...Yeldon is better than McCoy. Meaning..if they decided that Singletary is going to get the bulk of the carries...and Gore is going to be the veteran/pass blocking back/locker room guy.....then the only 'position' left for RB3 is a guy who is a 3rd down back/ride the bench guy. Maybe they feel Yeldon will be better at...or at least fit the role better than McCoy...and a MUCH lower salary.

Actually, i see no idea how I"m proving your point. It isn't a haul at all out there. I lived in that exact area for a while, and my office is still about 10 minutes from the Stadium. There are a LOT more poeple and a lot more money in that area and they have the ability to frequent it more often than anywhere in Buffalo. As I said in my previous post...I admitted that it isn't busy all the time...but the demographics of that area are MUCH better than anywhere in WNY...and that is why it can exist in Boston.

They aren't in the middle of no-where at all. For people in the Metro Boston area who often commute 60+ minutes just to get to work, the trip to Foxboro is really nothing.

Exactly my thoughts. Add to that what they are likely to pay Zeke, and they might have an unreal amount of $$ tied up in a good-but-not-great QB and a RB.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you, but there are a lot of key differences between Foxboro and here (Orchard park or anywhere else) -The pats stadium (And Patriot place) is within 30-40 miles of a couple million people who have pretty easy access to the area. -Whether it was in 'patriot place' or not...that area is a much better area in general to support a bunch of restaurants, a luxury theater, a mini-mall and a Bass pro. Not only because of my point above (population density) but also the wealth in the area. A lot of BIG companies, a lot of TECH companies employ a lot of people and pay high wages right off of Rt. 128 not too far from the Stadium. -Having lived in the area a while back and visiting the area a couple times per year...Patriot place isn't a slam-dunk as it is. Stores come in and close down every year, and when you visit there on a Summer afternoon sometimes..I wonder why even more don't close down because it can be a ghost town in some of those shops. An NFL stadium may help attract commerce to a certain extent, but you aren't going to get even a 'mini Patriot place" unless they area was already 80% of the way there to support that kind of thing before the stadium. I don't think there is a place in WNY where we could have that now...due to population density and wealth.

Thats pretty much what they are doing isn't it? Sorry if this was posted...and I may not be clear on 100% of the details...but I know a few years ago the NFL 'investigated' the Pats about this and let it go. Supposedly one of Bradys businesses in the Boston area has a deal (or deal) with the team. The team uses his business, pretty much overpays compared to other options...so that money goes to Brady 'outside' of the cap. Once again, if someone else knows more of the exact details of it they can correct anything I said above..but I know they are doing something like that. Shouldn't be a surprise though...the Pats deny any cheating when confronted with a direct accusation..but they seem to really REALLY like putting out there how smart they are by 'gaming the system' and breaking rules (as long as they aren't caught.)

Knotted nylons and hissy fits? How about the fact that this is a topic and many of us are simply engaging in the discussion? Your post is a LOT more more knotted nylons and hissy fits than my original post was that you replied to.

Pats and Pitt are too high Colts I think should be high...but #1 is a bit too high until they prove they belong in the top tier of teams. If you are going to put the #1...you can justify Cleveland a bit higher too. I'm not a fan of the Jets, but I think they should be a bit higher. I'd go a bit higher with the Bills, and 49ers could be higher also. I know New England is justified a lot of coverage based on their success....but it we are to believe some of their reporters, they would have been to 15 Superbowls in a Row, winning most of them, with another 3 or 4 more to come.

Thats a tough one. I think the GTA (and northern suburbs) have more Bills fans than any other team...but it certainly isn't a majority.

The players need to only play 16 of the 18 games...I hate that idea. I want an 18 game seasons.....the other ideas I like that have been brought up: Expand the gameday roster and the total roster and go with 2 bye weeks. Only 2 preaseason games..or get rid of the preseason totally.

Give me a roof on any stadium I attend. Then again, I don't go to any games anymore...because I LIKE being at my home (or a friends) for the game on a comfortable couch, with a refrigerator nearby, etc. So I want a roof....but I'm hardly going to go to any games anyway. Throw a roof on it I'll go to 1 or 2 games a year (MAYBE at most). No roof and I"m likely not going...but either way this is something that should be asking ticket holders/buyers and POTENTIAL ticket buyers.

I think Marino should be higher. He wasn't great against the Bills all the time, but it was incredible just how far above the rest of the league he was with his stats, and there were times when the D-unit he was facing would know what was coming and he just moved the ball up and down the field like no-one else did from his era. I actually think Elway is rated a bit too high. I was never overly impressed by him. I think his stock is higher than it should becaau of 'the drive', where he was picked (#1 overall) and his superbowls at the end of his career (that he didn't contribute too much toward). Too many games I watched Elway (and I saw a ton of his games) where he made a dumb play or thew a bad interception that lost the game for the Broncos.

So if you just look at NFL stadiums...it is the second most expensive using their metrics, just a tad bit behind Soldier field.

Went to see Aladin last weekened with my wife. I though it was pretty good. Fun movie...colorful...the setting had kind of the 'wish you could be there' feeling too it. I know it is getting some bad reviews...and it isn't an Oscar winner but I though it above average.

I agree. There have been so many changes with the team this year, at this point I'm good to go into mini-camp and training camp with what they have. A lot of competition and hopefully a lot of improvement already over last year. I want to see how the current roster shakes out.

Actually, I'm good with having a bunch of 2 and 3 receivers (not so much 4). The problem with the Bills the last few years is too many times we convinced ourself we didn't have a #1 but had a bunch of #2's and #3s...when in reality we didn't have a #1 or a #2 and had a bunch of 'maybe #3s' and 4's and 5's.

Reporters are running out of things to post and stories to write...yet they know that everything they put out there on draft week is going to be read and get them hits on social media. If any NFL reporter ever had even the slightest thought or idea...this is the time they put it out there.

Personally, I'd prefer a downtown stadium, and a dome. I stopped going to games years ago though. If they build something downtown, and with a dome, I'll likely go to a game or two per year again, even if the tickets double in price. I just worry about the traffic downtown though...I don't see a way they an easily get 50,000+ people in and out of downtown after a game without it being total chaos. That being said, there really is nothing they can do or build to even get me to buy season tickets again (just too convenient to watch the game at home with family and friends), so if they keep it in the southtowns, not too big of a deal for me.

Tanking is happening in sports, that is obvious. What I don't get is why a team doesn't use it as a 'spring training' so-to-speak. If you are going to lose, why not really use the time. Play mad-scientist with offensive formations. Instead of spending the whole week developing a gameplan to lose by 15 instead of by 25, how about having your staff brainstorm to come up with ideas that 'no-one' has ever tried. A team trying to win isn't going to want to do anything really wacky, but what would be the harm for a 'tanking team' to try to see how to attack an opposing offense (Or defense) in a unique way? Of course, I don't really know what any of that would be...but it seems when teams are tanking...they still try to do whatever they can to keep games close.

I'd still like to see a trade down. Draft picks are lottery tickets. I'd rather have a low(teens or early 20's) first and an extra second than a higher first (8th).

The Browns are a sexy pick because: 1.) They seem to have added talent to a team that last year was on the rise. They might be legit good. 2.) They have added a lot of the 'big name' players. They are putting together the type of team that most causual fantasy football players would want. Once again, it may not work, or it very well may work.

I don't want him at all, don't like the guy, don't want to root for him. Plus, as others have said, I don't want to pay him what he's likely asking for and get stuck with a bad deal 2-3 years down the line when he starts declining. High pick for that? If he was a free agent and didn't require any draft pick compensation at all I don't want him with a high salary.

I agree. I don't have a problem with the show, and I'm fine with Tasker on it. Murphy is better and play-by-play than he is at hosting a show like this. Sometimes when I listen, he give me the vibe of the 'get-off-my-lawn' 'everything was better 30 years ago' guy...but I can deal with it. When I'm driving, I listen occasionally. The reason I don't tune it more often is there just isn't enough content for them to fill 15 hours a week with...they tend to repeat things or talk about stuff I just don't care about.