mjd1001

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.

8 of 14 doesn't matter. I don't feel good going back more than 10 years....and even maybe not even 10. The rules of the league and general point totals have changed so much that the farther back you go, the less the numbers matter. Funny thing is...I think YOU are presenting your 'facts' and miscrediting things on your side of the argument. You cherrypicked the 2013 Broncos as an example.How about the Eagles last year who had the 3rd ranked offense? The pats the year before with Brady near his statistical peak? Or the Pats in 2015 that were also near the top in Offense? The FACT that the majority of recent superbowl winners were led by likely Hall of Fame QBs with Offensive units that were ranked in the top 10 in the league? If you want to break this argument down to is most simple form...7 of the last 10 superbowls were played and won with well above average scoring (compared to the rest of the league) by more teams ranked higher in offense than defense. This year the top 5 defenses in the League were the Bears, Ravens Titans, Texans and Jags. Top offenses were Chiefs, Rams, Saints, Pats, and Colts. Last nights SB was one of the very, VERY few examples of a low scoring game, but certainly the Best D-units in the game don't near get as far as the top offense unites.

6 of the last 10 winning superbowl teams before tonight scored over 30. 6 of the last 11 including tonight. 6 of 11 beats 5 of 10. Someone else did the research on this (read it online, I'll try to find the article to link) but of the recent superbowls...the winning team more often than not had a higher league rank in offense than they did in defense. I'm not sure how far back the study goes, which is why I'll try to find the article.

Not sure about that, but I do know the number of points scored to win the last decade of Superbowls was really high...41, 34, 24 ,28, 43, 34, 21, 31, 31, 27. Of those, 7 of those games had offenses that were lead by likely Hall of fame QBs.

not for me...this is the first time I have felt it or declared it myself.

With a LONG wait until opening day next year. I think the Era of Brady being dominant is just about over. He still may be 'good', but I'm not fearing him much more especially after the last 10 games he played. The Era of Bellichick being great though...that may still be with us.

He coached like a head coach who didn't trust a young QB to make good decisions. The way to play this game would have been too play 3wr and a single back..and spread the entire field sideline to sideline. If the Pats Blitz or run crazy stunts...the QB needs to recognize that QUICKLY. Goff did not.

Defense CAN win championships...but in todays NFL...it usually doesn't. One or two great defensive performance in the last decade do not prove defense wins championships.

I'll agee both that I'd take Smith and that he was the Best Bill ever.

Personally I wouldn't want to take them at all. But for anyone, I think it only makes sense to take them if you think they can help 'put you over the top' to be a legit superbowl contender.

A stadium that seats about 45,000 - 50,000...on a much smaller footprint in downtown is interesting. You can still have a pretty big lot that allows for half the fans (if not more) to tailgate.

I agree almost 100% with you. I'm a fan of the Bills....and I can be just as big of a fan watching on a high-def screen at home or by sitting in the Stadium. I haven't been to a home game in years though. What would get me out there again is a shorter drive (from the northtowns), a roof over my head (climate controlled in the entire stadium) and just a nicer area to hang out in before and after the games. Tailgating is great for some people, but I'd personally rather have a wide variety of restaurants/clubs/bars within walking distance of the game.

I've changed my position on the OL. A decade ago, I still held on to the thought that I wanted the best OL in the league (at least top 5). Now, not so much. A great OL is only important if you don't have a good QB. Of course build the best OL you can, and make sure that it isn't "bad", but OL and RB are two areas I don't want to chase someone and 'overpay' for them.

Ok, you might not be wrong, he might be a mentally weak person....but with the information we know for sure, there is no way to tell that. Truth is, everyone is different. Everyone's mind is different. For some people it is easier to lose weight than others. Some people are artistic, some are analytic. Some people have the mental 'ability' (how their brain is wired) to do some things better than others. It is not a 'choice', I don't know of anyone that chooses to have artistic ability over being good with numbers. The same can be said for how easy it is to quit an addiction. Mentally weak? as I said before, he just might be..and he might be looking for excuses. But there is no way to know that..it is just as likely that how is brain is 'wired' makes him better at some things than you, but makes it harder to quit addictions. People have to learn to step outside of their own experiences and realize that not everyone has the same abilities and everyone's brain doesn't work the same way.

I don't think Gordon is a superstar at this point on the field...but he is a player for sure that is capable of having a big enough game to turn a loss into a win. This has the potential to really hurt the Pats in the playoffs, especially if they don't get the bye and have to play 3 games in the AFC. His 'projected' 16 game stat were for about 60 catches...just over 1000 yards. Only Edleman had more yards-per-game receiving than him...and it was close. With him in there, you might have had to shade a Safety a bit closer to his side of the field...or play your zones just a bit deeper. Without him....you can probably bing the Saftey (or whoever is playing zone) just a tad closer to the line...and make those short throwing lanes Brady loves just a tad bit tighter.

I usually don't call people losers...but It doesn't bother me if someone else does if the person they are talking about has problems like he does....knows he has them...and doesn't want to get any kind of help. If that person at some point recognizes they have an issue and even takes a few steps to try to correct it/get help....that is when I have a problem with the 'loser' label. I want to believe him in his post....and I will for now....but you never know when someone puts something out there that is legit...or whether it is a carefully worded, agent written, after-the-fact suspension issued P.R. move.

I don't consider it really a lost season. The wins this year have been more entertaining to watch for me than the wins last year. Plus this year we got to watch a young QB that looks like the best shot the Bills have had at a potential star player at the position. Lost season? In term of wins and losses only. I have been more entertained this year than watching many games in the past decade.

How about an option for no-one?