Rochesterfan

I am not sure I understand this. You are upset because the Bills have clearly set up a process whereby as a club member you are given a chance to get comparable seats (and that is all they are selling at the moment) - You then tell that Rep that is selling specific areas for now that you are not interested. Then you get upset that they move you to a different rep that doesn’t know what you want and you have to explain it again. What exactly are you looking for? Why was this a surprise to you? I am really just trying to understand the expectations that you had in this process. The team has made it pretty clear that they are moving section by section and offering specific packages. You have a choice to look at the various sections they have available or pass and move in later for different sections, but those will be sold later - most likely by a different set of reps. Maybe I am missing something - it sounds like you are not interested in a comparable seat - are you looking for something cheaper or in a different section that is not yet available or where you hoping to get seats in a section being sold for a cheaper price. I just feel like there is a massive part of this story that is missing and it feeds the misunderstanding of the process. Several of us have had a perfectly fine experience going through the process and managing the expectations and several have even stepped back with a no and a request for an upcoming section that may be cheaper and have been accommodated. I just see things posted that I feel have additional information that would make it understandable and maybe we can see your side and the Bills side. I did not have an annoying process other than I wish things would have gone quicker - it met my expectations based upon what I had read here and what I had been told. They did not have nor provide information for areas that are not for sale yet. I would appreciate a better understanding to see why your experience was so different than mine. Thanks in advance.

IDK how overall true it is. The NFL had an agreement in place with the XFL and the Rock to test certain things before coming to the NFL - so I am not sure how that agreement transferred to the UFL and how much the NFL really cares as long as the UFL stays a podunk league with little to no attention - I just don’t think the NFL cares about it and that goes for both players and coaches. I also do not think they see it as a pseudo farm team, but just another minor place to pick up some preseason roster fillers - similar to the arena league in years gone by. As for a college player - if I am on the bench - I am 99 out of a hundred using the transfer window and staying in college over the UFL at this point. The combined spring leagues last year with 2x the players saw several guys get try-out and I think only 2 made active rosters. A few made practice squads, but if you compare that to the college draft and UDFA rate - it is still significantly lower. This year we may see a few additional kickers make NFL rosters - especially as they have experience with the new kick-off rules, but I still think the number of position players that make actual NFL rosters will be very low compared to other avenues. There is also the pay scale - which the UFL actually lowered compared to the XFL with the lack of competition - it was especially noticeable with QBs and the terrible QB play in the UFL. Players actually have a much better chance to make more money with a limited licensing deal in college than the up to $5500 a week in the UFL for 10 games potentially - where you still have to find living accommodations and some meals - with a small stipend. There may be a few guys that get kicked out of college and need a second chance, but until the UFL can expand and actually get some talent - those types of stories will be limited. I honestly think the biggest problem with the UFL is actually the same thing that keeps it afloat. The UFL exists because the TV networks want the product. Fox, NBC, ABC, and ESPN basically fund the league which is the only reason they have survived, but only provide enough to ensure it is able to function. The league itself had less than adequate attendance at games and unless the numbers go up - the networks are not going to have a bidding war over a product they own - so financially they are in a limbo - surviving on what they are given, but unable to financially grow significantly so they will struggle to compete with college ball for players that are in good standing. If the UFL was independent of the networks - they could force a bidding war and maybe make some money to really grow, but they could not afford the production costs as that has doomed other leagues and needed the networks to survive the early years.

It was discussed at the time of the event - everything that happened was occurred before Matt became a part of the league and the NFL was not allowed to punish him for conduct prior to becoming an NFL player. If he was convicted after becoming an NFL player they could enact punishment based on the findings, but the NFL was not able to put him on the restricted list for college issues. This goes back to the Reggie Bush days when the league looked at punishing him and Pete Carroll for transgressions at USC and the NFLPA argued they could not punish them because they were not part of the NFL. Therefore there were no options for the Bills in that regard based upon the reports. Would the contract have been onerous- I don’t know, but as the Bills had no option to place him on any list what do you suggest they do. - should the Bills have kept him on the 53 man roster and not dressed him? That was 1 option and can you imagine the distraction with questions every week that would cause. The other option was to cut him - which based upon allowing him to focus on the trial and not being a distraction was the obvious choice. I just do not understand what you wanted them to do. The Bills were screwed with either choice because they could not trot him out to punt with the allegations hanging over him. Keeping him on the 53 man roster and not playing him for nearly 2 years also was not an option as spots are precious and fans already complain about the fringe guys that the Bills cut (see every WR/RB cut after a decent preseason against 5th stringers). Now imagine you are cutting an additional player to keep a punter that is not going to play - it just is not worth it. Unfortunately based upon the options available the Bills took the one that covered their butt the best, freed Matt to focus on what he needed to, and created the least questions, distractions, and problems for the team.

I think you were roasted because “administrative leave” is not a thing. The Bills could not do what you suggested as it is not an option. The only leave would be if the NFL put him on leave and the NFL was not allowed to do that because the transgression occurred in college not the NFL. Therefore - the Bills had very limited options. Cut him, Keep him on the roster, or work with the player and the NFLPA to get him on a reserved non-football list - which based upon the timing would have blocked him out for the season and would have left the NFL money on the table in the lawsuit. In the end he sat out the 2 years while the various lawsuits fell away and without the NFL contract in place there was not a lot of money for the others lawyer to go after. The understanding at the time was the Bills (Beane) talked with the player and the agent about the options they had - either cutting him or getting the player to step away so they could use the Reserve list and keep him away for the year. The agreement between the sides was for him to go away and handle the lawsuits and keep the other lawyers from using his contract as a bargaining chip. The problem with your suggestion is that there is nothing like what you suggested that the Bills could do. They explored options and talked with the NFL, the player and his agent, and the NFLPA and had limited options of either keeping him on the roster or cutting him. Really a no brainer at that point with that team.

We will see, but I totally disagree with this take. Matt was great at punting the ball in college, but they were low, long, and returnable - especially a potential problem in the NFL. Maybe even more importantly - he struggled mightily with high short punts - for example punting from near Mid-field where good teams like the Bills and Chiefs tend to punt from - lots of touchbacks and he showed little touch. Lastly in no world should a good team like the Bills or Chiefs need/want a weapon at punter. He is on the Chiefs because he is CHEAP - if he is good - that is a bonus, but if they are punting enough that he is a weapon - that is a very bad sign. If he is also punting and getting an average like in college - that is also a bad sign for the Chiefs as it means the offense is not moving the ball. We will see, but my greatest hope is that he has a career year punting for the Chiefs. I hope against all hope he leads the league in number of punts, etc. because if your punter is your best weapon - your offense sucks - so please Matt - punt 150+ times this year and I will be happy.

So - I am going to agree with many others. Based upon your descriptions of the grades - I had to grade him as an A. There is really no other choice as he has easily shown himself to be a top 10 and typically a top 5 GM in this league. Based upon a standard grading curve - I would typically give him an upper B level - somewhere in the mid/upper 80s on a 100 point scale. He checks the right boxes for me - he drafts well (maybe not always what we want and sometimes over values or undervalues positions), he brings in adequate FAs and ensures the Bills consistently have quality depth to cover their issues, he brings in high quality staff to surround himself and seems to let them grow and learn so there is a constant pipeline of talented staff, and most importantly he speaks well and is not afraid to be real - he goes on things like Pat McAfee show and provides excellent talking points and is not afraid to spill a bit of behinds the scene info. Could you have a better GM - yep there are a couple out there - maybe 2 or 3 that are better on both draft and FA combined (some are better at 1 or the other) and even then they all have “wart” picks and get bailed out. To me he is a perfect “Buffalo” man and although you may be able to find better - there is significantly more likelihood that you will do worse - see the majority of teams in the NFL and the Bills for 17 years as they flail time after time.

Yeah - no kidding, but you stated that he had won 2 SB with Ben and that was incorrect. He did not win 2. So the first point was to correct the stuff you got wrong. If you had gotten your facts correct - I wouldn’t have had to even post, but you could not even count to 1 correctly. Of course every Bills fan wants a SB, but what defines a great HC. What makes Tomlin great and McDermott a flop - because as I look at the 2 they are very similar overall. McDermott has won a higher % of regular season games by a small margin 0.644 to 0.633 for their careers. McDermott has won at a better clip in the playoffs for their career - 0.455 to 0.440. Tomlin is praised as a defense coach who has won with both Offense and Defense in an Offensive heavy NFL yet the Bills are consistently top 5 in the NFL in both Offense (points and yards) and Defense (points and yards) - so obviously McDermott is also balanced. The difference is the 1 SB that Tomlin won in 2008 with a team that Bill Cower had won a SB with only a few years before - and that is a huge difference, but it is not like he has repeated that success since. In fact it has been 7 years - this will be year 8 - since he has even won a playoff game. Even legendary coaches like Andy Reid - now considered one of the best of all time - was on par with McDermott in his coaching stint in Philadelphia. McDermott has a better regular season win % than Reid in Philly (0.640 to 0.583). Reid had a slightly better win % in the playoffs (0.526 to 0.455). Neither had won a SB during that stint. Reid then goes to KC and wins at about the same clip as McDermott for his first 5 years and goes 1 - 4 in the playoffs so less of a post season win % than McDermott. Finally in his 7th year in KC and 21st year coaching overall he wins a SB and suddenly that propels them to a couple of more. So yes we want a SB win and yes we want a coach to lead us there, but if it was easy to do - Tomlin in 17 years would have more than 1 and it would not have taken Reid 21 years to figure it out. It takes great coaching, great players, lots of luck, lots of health, lots of depth, and sometimes it takes a bit of fate having someone knock out a team that beats you - like when both KC and Pittsburgh won - neither had to go through NE who had knocked them out during other playoff runs.

1st Tomlin has only 1 SB win not 2. 2nd Tomlin won in a year NE got beat by someone else. It would be no different than if Miami had knocked KC out - it opens up a path that was unavailable prior. 3rd - Yes the Bills are just as good as Pittsburgh - which is why the Bills have 1 of the 2 best records in the entire NFL over the McDermott/Josh time and the best point differential. McDermott is every bit as good as Tomlin over the last little bit. Mike Tomlin is a superb coach that in 17 years has won 1 SB and has an overall 8-10 record in the playoffs. He won the SB in a year the dynasty team was knocked out by another team and they had a bye as a #2 seed to rest - both advantages/luxuries the Bills have not had. Sean McDermott in 7 years has a better career regular season record (.640 to .633) and a better career playoff win % (.455 to .440) and has not benefited from the #2 team getting a bye as Tomlin did and has not had their arch nemesis knocked out early yet. I think Pittsburgh was smart to stick with Tomlin just as the Bills are smart to stick with McDermott. As long as the Josh and the players support McDermott and play and win for him - the Bills are in a great situation.

Did you - really - because I went through the Von Miller signing thread and you were conspicuously absent in your dissent - 63 pages and your name did not show up in review or search. There was a lot of complaints by a couple of known trolls that seem to no longer post. So that brings me to the conclusion of either: 1) You decided to complain elsewhere and did not want to do it on this board (or are hindsight complaining). or 2) You used to post more frequently under a different name/avatar and now are trying to reconcile the change. I am sorry if you can provide some proof, but I did not see it any of the Von threads and it would really track if you had a alternate name that that was complaining.

I think it shows what a Sabres atmosphere could be like if they were good again. It used to rock like that when the Sabres went to the finals - the lack of any kind of winning has killed the vibe. Bandits games are amazing. Being in Rochester - I enjoy the Knighthawks, but love the Bandits. I am so thrilled for Banditland. Congrats Buffalo 🦬!!! That was amazing - I rewound that play like 10 times during the broadcast - just unbelievable.

The KC trade - they got pick 95 for their later 4th round pick.

After the trades - they have 2 2nds, a 3rd, and a 4th - plus a bunch of 5ths - 7ths.

The idea seems fine, but who is SF so enamored with that they have to move up 3 spots and give us another top 100 pick? I would assume based upon the team and the draft that they would be moving up for a WR - so I am not sure that works in our favor. I also am not sure that Atl would really want to drop back 50+ picks for a 3rd next year when they have a veteran QB they acquired and are not in build mode, but in win now mode. My guess is that if we move back from 28 - you are acquiring a 2nd round pick from a team wanting a QB with a 5th year option and that would most likely mean dropping back a bit and watching several teams pick up the higher ranking WRs. We will see - I am not going to hold my breath that the Bills get 4 top 100 picks. I am much more inclined to believe the Bills will move up slightly from 28 to get a WR and move up slightly from 60 to get their player there and then use some additional picks to get a third rounder as their top 3 picks.

And for people complaining about how much NYS covered at 1.4 billion it was 60%, but current costs show it to be running close to 1.7 Billion or a nice 50/50 mix. The final cost is going to end up probably over 2 Billion when done and the Pegula’s covering 60% and over 1 Billion of their own money. The stadium is going to cost them nearly as much as the team did and the PSLs are only covering the initial fraction. This most likely has nothing to do with the PSLs and everything to do with future plans and lack of buyers for other pieces like Sabres, Bandits, Rochester teams and the lack of health of poor Kim - all playing into some decisions that need to be planned for.

And then you have people all worked up over something they don’t know and a certain poster that then makes up things like the PSLs are not selling and spreads the manure across multiple threads with no proof. He is the equivalent of the fake Mahomes interception thread. If you make up something and post it - it must be true. 🤦‍♂️ So no evidence - yet you have stated it as fact in multiple threads.