Rochesterfan

This was exactly my thought as well. They will be donating money from the draft to COVID research and first responders/frontline medical staff.

I am thinking 100% the opposite as you. Maybe with a list of 5 FA guys at minimum left - several that will need a physical before we sign - we can wait - draft BPA and if we get a RB great and if not you still have options. Maybe if they get a guy in RD 2 or 3 as BPA - it impacts which FA you want. If you get a power guy like Dillion - maybe you don’t want Hyde or Crowell and Freeman becomes a choice. Maybe you get a speed back or a late 6-7 rd back and therefore you want Hyde. Maybe at each position of the Bills draft the BPA is not a RB and therefore they have to go to FA again. Signing a guy now could actually limit who you draft or keep them from drafting anyone. I think with the number of RBs available in FA still - we are not pigeon holed - it is the exact opposite- they are completely free to draft BPA and then see if a RB is in that group and then if needed pick up a complementary FA RB if needed.

It depends - why is he falling? That is a huge drop - so is he really BPA or just because some pre-draft manuals say he is top 10 talent - maybe the GMs really see him as the 60th best talent. The hardest part about BPA is we do not see how they have things set. If Tua was there at 54 and he was the Bills BPA and they are getting no trade requests - then I would have no issues with the Bills drafting him. More realistically from the QB ranks is the 7th or 8th best QB the BPA as that position is typically over drafted versus the number 7 CB or number 3/4 RB or the #11 WR?

My understanding is that a typical football game production crew is 2-3+ times larger than an NHL crew. Many more camera, sound, and graphics people to get shots and sounds lined up. More people in the truck looking at more feeds and cameras. There is more downtime and more info that has to be constantly updated - down, distance, score, time, quarter, players stats and bios. The amount of info is huge compared to an NHL game. Vince is a smart man and yes the ratings were in line or even above many predictions, but it did not sound like they were high enough that he was going to get a TV deal that paid him money to allow the league to break even or show a profit. He was funding the league at a large expected lost - hoping/planning that the numbers would allow the TV deal to come and cover the costs by year 3. The ratings are why the NHL struggles - the playoffs is where it makes it money. The only reason the NHL has a TV deal to begin with is that allowed the FSN regional channels to have something to broadcast. NBC loses money on the NHL during the regular season. I also expect the XFL to make a comeback - a bit smaller in the future and more likely a few more tweaks because it needs to drive viewers, but I do not think it is going to be a long term viable league unless it gets some support elsewhere with better players.

Yes it was a top ratings gather at a time nothing is on. The issue is production costs versus revenue generated. Does being a top 10 event in February with a 1.1 rating and under a million viewers in the coveted 18-49 demographic equate to the networks being able to cover the cost of a huge crew going to these games to produce the product? My understanding is the revenue generated from those ratings are just in line with covering the production cost and although weeks 4 and 5 had settled to a consistent level - the next week was going to be start of March Madness - which would most likely push them even further down since they were on par with the top weekend college basketball games with little on the line. The money bet on March Madness would drive those numbers up and the XFL would fall a bit more. The XFL needed to do better or it was not going to get a money making deal from the networks. As it was - the XFL got a great deal compared to the AAF because Vince sold the rights to the #2 rated show (WWE) to Fox to hasten the XFL deal. I just do not see where the XFL was going to get a deal that made them money and in that case - the league had a 2 year window based on what Vince pulled out of stock. I enjoyed some games, but most games I would watch a few minutes while doing other things it just did not keep me engaged.

Well a quick search showed that week 7 of last year the late second game of NO/Chi drew 23.1 million viewers for a 13.3 share on Fox. The 2 early Sunday games drew and average of 12 million for a >7.5 share. Heck even college games like LSU/Florida on ESPN on Saturday drew a 6.5 share - so about 10 million viewer - beating things like the MLB post season game 1 of the ALCS on a major network (Fox). So based on my reckoning- a typical Sunday afternoon game draws about 23 times the viewers of the XFL and less important early games draw a minimum of 10X the viewers. The “special” games - Monday, Thursday, and Sunday night all draw similar to the late double header games or slightly less. Hence why the NFL has a huge TV contract and the XFL got nothing from TV. These numbers are why the NFL is king. You see huge numbers of viewers and even competing against MLB playoffs - the NFL blows it out of the water with many Sunday World Series games drawing 2.0 shares versus 13 shares for a regular season Sunday night game.

Agreed - do not want to take away from the other discussion. I will just say in studying the other Coronaviruses - there seem to be a lot of good epitope and target sites, but few that seem to produce strong, long term antibody reactions in humans. The immune response to the various Coronaviruses that cause the cold seems very small, limited, and they don’t last long. Minor mutations allow it to come back year over year and make the same people sick even within the same yearly cycle. This is with lots of live virus invading the body time and time again. I hope they find a vaccine that produces a good, powerful response and provides long lasting immunity - I just think that if the human body has not adapted to this virus to make antibodies in all of the years that the cold has been around and people have been infected and reinfected - the vaccine is going to be limited in its effectiveness also. I think many trials will show some good signs, but like the flu vaccine - it will be very limited in its overall effectiveness and will really be useful to lessen the symptoms and help you feel better sooner - which is not a bad thing, but is not what most people think about with a vaccine. For example in this scenario presented by the OP - my feeling is the vaccine is not going to keep people from getting sick or spreading the virus - it will just make most people recover a bit faster and hopefully prevent what we are seeing in Italy, Spain, and NYC as a high concentration of cases. Therefore, to me the vaccine would have little impact on my decision to attend the game with loads of other people. I also think that a lot more people have been positive than the numbers suggest, but because of a lack of testing early and many more mild forms - they were missed, which is where the Ab testing would be great right about now. Then we can see who has been infected and what kind of levels of ABs people have (which would help greatly with determining the effectiveness of the vaccine) and can tell us whether reinfection is likely and how cyclical this will be. I am so curious from an epidemiological point of view to see this type of info.

The ratings were decent 1 to 1.5 shares - better than most other things on. The problem was always cost associated with producing and filming football games. The articles talking about both the AAF and the XFL talked about needing a minimum of 2.0 shares just to break even. If the XFL was going to get a network contract that paid them money - they needed average network shares of between 2.5 and 3.0. The AAF was even worse because they were covering some of the network costs also. The attendance was good in a few markets (St. Louis and Seattle mainly), but very poor in most other markets and the product suffered from the stadium size and lack of fans. The attendance numbers were not even enough to cover the stadium rental agreements in many cases. Vince supposedly set aside enough money to keep it afloat a minimum of 2 years and maybe a third knowing that he was going to lose huge amounts of money the first 2 years. The hope seemed to be especially after the initial weekend that they could get and maintain enough viewership to renegotiate the deal and make some TV money. The ratings at the end (before March madness took even more viewers) had dropped to levels that were break even for the network - I think Vince knew he was not getting the TV deal anytime soon. Now if they had been smart and opted to have the teams play in towns close together in the Midwest (St. Louis, OKC, Indy, Memphis, Louisville, etc.) - they could of saved on travel, used smaller stadiums, and created more of a college vibe - like you saw in St. Louis, but the TV stations want big markets: LA, NY, Washington and those cities were failures for the most part.

Agreed - the issue then becomes mutations. The Coronavirus is tough to get a good handle on and the shape and nature make it that much harder to produce a vaccine that is both effective and provides longer term benefits.

I agree, but people talk like it will be the MMR vaccine - once immunized you will be safe forever. I think it will be more like the flu where you get benefits from it, but people can still get sick. Coronavirus already causes common repeat infections like the common cold - it will be interesting (and scary) to see where this goes. As I said - it wouldn’t necessarily stop me from going, but I understand why it would stop others. The vaccine is not the thing that would stop me from going or allow me going to a game. The infection rate and where we are nationally would determine my timing to go.

I would attend a game as long as the curve has been flattened enough that we are not going to overwhelm hospital. I am not overly worried as I work Int healthcare and see this and much worse on a daily basis. The fact is the only reason to social distance is just to slow the infection rate and that is working - the problem was always going to be having to many sick at one time. Based on how the common cold hits every year (usually another Coronavirus type) - I do not think a vaccine is going to be as effective as people think - much like how the flu vaccine changes yearly - I think the vaccine will help reduce duration and severity of the illness, but will not be effective at preventing the disease.

The vast majority of these XFL players are worse than UDFAs. You can not even begin to compare the XFL to the USFL or even NFL Europe! The USFL was actual NFL competition- so they signed many star level players - so of course when they folded there were many players that were NFL caliber and ready to start. NFL Europe was designed by the NFL before the PS and it was filled with NFL players that were young or developing - so again it made sense that many more would come out of that. The XFL was filled with guys that were below practice squad level players - it is more comparable to the Old Arena League that would occasionally have a player make it. The only way an off time league is going to be successful (as the AAF figured out) is if they are associated with the NFLPA and can bring in back-up and PS level players to grow and that they are funded by NFL pockets. If not the level of players is just not going to be good enough to make a dent. There was several good things about an innovative 2nd league, but without NFL support it is not going to be a success. I enjoyed a few games and love talking about the players, but many of the stars were guys that could not even stick as PS level NFL players.

How do you figure? Before the shutdown they were losing viewership week over week. The league was never going to survive without getting a paying TV contract and the stations were barely breaking even on the coverage. He realized after part of a season that this was a money losing proposition. Especially if he was going to need to pay more to get any talent back. The only reason it lasted longer than the AAFL was Vince got the big time coverage from FOX at the start for the rights to WWE. The fact that The stations were covering the XFL without charging Vince was a huge advantage the AAFL did not have and even with that advantage the XFL was hemorrhaging money because of travel and cost of venues. Vince said he was prepared to pay up for 2 seasons of loses, but the loses - along with other losses in WWE revenue- was more than he was willing to chance. I am not convinced there would have been a season 2 even if the pandemic had not happened. They had not yet lost viewership to the NCAA March madness or to things like the Masters. Agreed - I feel for the employees and staffers there and across the country. I enjoyed watching a few of the games - wish I could get my time back on a few others. Wish for the best for the employees.

The big reason I would disagree is the money Cooks gets. Now I know that LA paid a bunch, but man this guys is overpayed big time for what he provides. He is going to be a cut candidate shortly to get his salary back in line and now he is your cut candidate. In this draft - I would rather have a cost controlled 2nd round rookie that might need time to develop over a highly paid veteran than has not lived up to his hype in 3 other cities.

Come on @Chandler#81 - you know that Barkley has the strongest arm on the team - you just need to qualify it a bit. Barkley has the strongest arm on the Bills for a guy named Matt, that played at USC and on at least 5 other NFL teams, born on 9/8/90, drafted in the 4th round, and has a career TD to Int ratio of 1:2. Even then he just barely wins, but it proves he has the strongest arm - so we need to cut him some slack. ???

I don’t disagree Doc, but look at JuJu this year as a number 1 similar to what Zay was forced to do. Juju had little offensive help, bad QB play, and his numbers dropped to right Zay Jones 2018 levels. Yes he was injured a couple of games, but his averages per game were only slightly better than Zay’s. I look at JuJu last year and think that is what he would have been for the Bills if drafted instead of Zay. He would not have been the dynamic WR2 we saw in 2017 + 2018. It is harder to say with Kupp and Godwin because both are parts of WR corps that have at other top end WRs and in some cases multiple top options - allowing them to be more free. I tend to believe if like JuJu they were the lone WR threat - always drawing the #1 CB and potential double coverage and the QB was TT level - there numbers would drop just as JuJu’s did and people would look at these same guys differently. For example - let’s say that the Bills drafted JuJu and for the 3 years he put up numbers like last year on the Steelers (pretty reasonable for what he showed as a #1). He averages 40 catches and around 600 yards and 3 TDs. Then you compare that to Kupp and Godwin and everyone is complaining about how we missed on JuJu. In fact there is already discussion in Pittsburgh about trading and/or allowing JuJu to walk after this season because he is not a true number 1 WR. Of course the backside of that is what would Zay Jones have looked like if he had been drafted into any of those other teams. As a number 2 in Pittsburgh or TB with little pressure - could he have been a better player. I think the ultimate fit would have been Zay in LA rather than Kupp. Zay learning under Woods and getting to run routes out of the slot as a #3 option. I think his career would be different - not Kupp good, but better than we saw.

I can and with the bad QB play - lack of offensive talent - and lack of teaching at that position the first year or 2 - I can see us all standing here complaining about them being busts and wishing we had drafted the other guys still. Kupp, JuJu, and even Godwin went to teams where they were expected to be 2s and 3s with established veterans WRs, coaches that were open in the passing game, and QBs to deliver the ball. In Buffalo, they would have been on a team with TT throwing the ball and they would have been the #1 WR. Then a rookie QB drafted with a terrible o-line. They may have been better Zay, but I do not believe any of them are even half as good as they are on their current team. Situation matters and no WR in that draft was coming to Buffalo and succeeding- the offense was still 3 years away from developing.

This exactly - there is no way to compare Diggs versus the field. There may be one or two guys we had no shot at that are better, but there is a real good chance that a couple of hard working 2nd rd picks or later - land in the right spot and have better careers. The issue is finding them and is Buffalo the right spot to develop them into that type of receiver. I am very happy with taking a young known receiver at this point to allow JA to grow and progress over a WR in the draft that might work out, but might not.

Well - it appears he has now been officially charged with assault on the truck driver. So for people wanting to sign him - the assault and battery charge costs him what a minimum of 4-6 games. The sexual assault charges run him what about 8 games on the commissioners list. The threats from a burner phone to another potential sexual assault victim- another potential couple of games. My guess is anyone that signs him (if anyone is dumb enough to sign him)- has a player that is suspended for the entire year. Does anyone take a risk on the potential backlash to get a guy in over a year? Can he keep a lid on the crazy for a year while suspended? I think this is fascinating- I wouldn’t want him, but does someone take a shot?

I just think some of your premise is way off base. The change you are talking about is minor for mid-level starters. Do you actually believe that 2% or about 4 million dollars is the difference for an average QB to suddenly win a SuperBowl? The difference is not a very low end starter at RB, or a #3 WR. The team doesn’t win a Super Bowl because they can afford a low end Guard or a back-up level tackle. The addition of a back-up at DT or DE or maybe a low end starter at LB (think Kiko Alonso) or even a low end #3 CB or safety does not drive the team to a super bowl. The fact that mid level starting QBs saw a 2% increase is not the reason. How much of an increase has mid level OT increased, or DEs, or even CBs. Many positions have seen similar increases compared to the cap for mid level players. Depth across the league is way down because the starter levels get paid many times more than they are worth. For example - Shaq Lawson. Many people wanted to give him the 5th year option at just over 10 million. That is over 2 million more than the Bills valued him at or 1% for a rotational DE. Now let’s say they had used the option - then his starting request after that as a FA is most likely an increase to 12 million - another 1% increase covering the same difference as your mid level QB. Now the difference between a QB on a Rookie Deal and the second deal. Now you are talking some money. The difference for Mahomes is going to be like 30-35 million dollars (15 - 18% of the cap) or essentially 2-3 all pro players at any other position. That is a huge difference. Once you start to lop off top end talent around your roster - the QB better be elite and make others better or you are going to struggle. The Rams tried to keep their elite talent and downgraded a huge percentage of their roster instead - enough that they took a huge step backwards. I think some of it was that teams started to figure McVay out and some was their talent especially on the O-line and LBs took big steps back.

Nope - he has not been good for years. I think even if they sign him at this point he is 4th or 5th on the depth chart. He is not better than Knox, Kroft, or Sweeney. He is on par with Smith (the veteran) and you still have Croom for speed and Becker who both are still around. If this was 2014/15 - then yes, but right now - I want him no where near this roster.

Once again - it was not the NFL doing anything wrong. The NFL did not try to pull a fast one. They were not trying to screw the players. This was all under negotiation and it sounds like the NFLPA came to an agreement and THEY cross referenced it incorrectly in their posted material. The NFL was not involved in the issue at all - it was strictly an issue with the NFLPA. The NFLPA came out and stated it was a cross reference issue - nothing major and because it is very minor they a have corrected this. Nothing to see here and it will not get a re-vote or anything.

As suspected NFLPA calls it a cross reference issue that was corrected. So it was not a nefarious plan by billionaire owners to sneak something by - just as was stated before - the NFL had nothing to do with this. This was an NFLPA issue. I think we need to loosen up a few tin foil hats around here.

Once again - why are you calling it a Shady move by the owners? The NFL and the NFLPA were in negotiations. The suit is against the NFLPA assuming they did not provide the info to the voters. The NFL did nothing wrong at all. Nothing at all suggests the NFL did anything at all. The suit alleges the NFLPA provided incorrect information to the players to vote - not the NFL. It should not invalidate the CBA if the NFL did nothing wrong. They negotiated in good faith and it is up to the NFLPA to provide the information for their members. If anything it should not impact the CBA, but it should create an opportunity for the players to remove the NFLPA executives and get a new negotiation team for 2030. Overall from what I have read - you are talking about a very minor point that impacts offsets against SSDI - this will be handled and if they re-vote - I can see the owners actually working to take back more funds and the players get an even worse deal that they will accept.

If they are having games the border will be open. Canada is on the same timeline as most of the US. It is just like International Games - Europe is weeks ahead of us. Italy and France is what NYC and NO will look like in 2+ weeks with the deaths. If the US has cleared enough to have games and fans - then Canada, and Europe will be cleared also. Now the big question is does this make a fall/winter comeback with reinfection rates like normal corona viruses that cause the cold - that people get every year or is this more of a one time thing. That will be the NFLs full season deciding factor.