Rochesterfan

Sal talked about this with Beane and I think you are going to disappointed. The Bills need to bring 90 guys to camp - they are mid 60’s right now - 8 picks get you to low 70’s. What Beane talked with Sal last year was how important the late round picks are right now and why he traded back to get more. With the Bills roster - you are not going to get many high level UDFAs (they have choices where to go) and so if there are guys you want - you need to draft them - even if it means risking losing a guy or 2. My guess is you see more picks rather than fewer. The anticipation should be to get about 6 - 8 UDFAs at most - so that means you should have around 80 after the draft. We are 6-8 players short of that and I expect they will have a few UFAs that they will look at after the draft, but it would not surprise me at all to see him want to make a few moves backwards to get extra picks this year to help the numbers. What I do not see is them getting rid of late round picks for more high picks early. They need players at this point to fill out the training camp roster and they want young PS talented players to help them grow.

How many guys do you think the Bills have set and advanced scouting reports on for Pick 25? Since their overall board is around 100 players - they have maybe 10-15 and we know 5 of them are in your Top 10 and at least 1 of the QBs - so maybe 8 or 9 guys. We needed no more than 10 guys there because all that is happening at this point is lower and lower level WRs and CBs are getting chosen. We have the supposed top 10 and 2 QBs that will be picked - in addition several of the DEs and DTs and even the OL are better prospects, but will not get picked because they are not needs here. We are reaching for prospects that are not going to be picked by the Bills in round 1 that fit more into our needs. It is part of the reason you had to adjust the numbers needed - it has gone 4-5 picks to far. We are no longer making a “big board” it is basically looking at a ranking on 2 positions - which would be interesting enough, but it is your time.

First - I will assume you mean Hill. Second - The KC offense was Hill stretch the field and Kelce as the 2nd option - nothing at all from the RB. The Bills already put up more rushing yards than KC and more Points per game. KC doesn’t have a weapon at RB - why would a weapon at RB improve the offense. The Bills already had a way to beat cover 2 defenses - shorter passes to better players were available all last year when the QB wanted to take them. A RB changes nothing - unless you are going to use him a lot- in which case you are taking the ball out of the best players hands and giving it to a lesser player. If you want more carrying of the ball they had a guy that averaged 4.7 YPC and could of used him more - that actually hurts the offense versus yards per pass attempt.. The KC offense drafted a RB in round 1 that has been less effective than UDFAs they picked up. CEH has not helped their offense up to this point. I will be very interested to see what they do this year - without Hill - I think Reid is forced to go to a more traditional running attack and Mahomes and that offense drops to middle of the pack - maybe 10-15 range.

Exactly - they wasted a pick on RB and have gotten better production from UDFAs since drafting CEH. No one is scared of KC running the ball, but Mahomes and that passing attack was deadly.

Nope - that is about o-line. Singletary currently averages just short 4.8 YPC for his career. Other recent 1st round picks like Najee Harris and CEH are both well below that average. Nothing that I have seen from Walker or Hall suggests they will be better. Jonathan Taylor and Derrick Henry are excellent, but both benefit from superior run blocking o-lines - as shown when Henry missed time and the running game handled by low level back-ups was just as good. You want to control the clock and burn time - then you want o-line in the first not RB. That helps you more on many levels in my opinion.

I think we have totally lost the point of the original. Of the guys left - including some of the guys already picked - none should be in play at 25. You have got the 10 guys that might get picked, but picks 11 and 12 and the remaining picks are what is left - the Bills need to be moving out. Because you eliminated the top 10 and are missing the QBs - we are dropping into guys that are not worthy - hence having to drop you requirements - these are not guys we are really considering.

Much like teams playing the Chiefs - if I am playing the Bills and they are running the ball even 40% of the time - I consider it a win because the running game doesn’t really scare me much at all - even from the best teams in the league. Breece Hall or Walker bring nothing that frightens me as a DC and running them takes the ball out of the best players hands. If I am playing them - give me that all day. We will see where it goes, but similar to the way many of the top rushing teams ( only 1 of the top 4 and 5 of the top 10) made the playoffs - rushing offense is vastly overrated by some. Compare that to 8 of the top 10 passing offenses making the playoffs including the Super Bowl champs. In addition 2 of the top rushing teams - were also in the top passing teams (Buffalo and Dallas) and both are more known for passing.

It says right there that they are investigating Brian Flores claim in Miami. I am no sure what to expect, but of course both stem from the lawsuit and my guess is similar to the Pats - there will be fines and draft picks lost over this. The NFL will understand what was done - it will help lessen any blowback from the lawsuits and they can push it under the rug. Protect your business investment first and foremost.

The issue is the size of the football teams versus the size of an NBA team. The cost to run an NFL team, pay the players, feed the players, have the staff needed to attend to these players, equipment, insurance, televise the product, have referees to police the product, maintain the stadium, etc - is astronomical versus like the NBA. Having viewership at NBA levels will not bring in enough money to break even - it has been shown over and over. The NFL is successful because their viewership is 7-10 times the viewership of everything else. Therefore - the NFL gets huge money from sponsors and TV deals. The USFL is basically getting free TV - which will be ok on plain Fox, but their ratings on things like FS1 are going to be a fraction of the original. The are playing without home fans - so they are not getting any crowd money and it plays terrible on TV. They rushed everything to beat the XFL, but the quality of play and players shows the rush job. I think the XFL does have issues with funding, but I also think they are smarter to wait and put together a plan. This version of USFL with old coaches and inadequate players - all being played in Alabama is set-up to fail. The play is bad, the video is bad and the games being played on many channels is bad. It is filler TV with to many players to make money.

That is the issue in the eye of the law. Fox specifically chose to draw from the nostalgia - using a similar Logo, team names, etc - so they were not beginning at zero, but in doing that - they still needed permission. The owners gave up the main trademark, but are still making money off nostalgic gear and after the 30 for 30 had a bit of a revival. It will most likely cost Fox quite a bit of money to keep the Logo or they are going to be forced to rebrand everything - costing them time and money. It was a calculated risk, but considering exactly how hard it is to start these - this is going to hurt and could have been avoided - since you are not playing in the home stadiums - by simply changing up the names of the teams and making the USFL Logo different.

The expectations from the guys covering the Bills and talking to the training staff is that he will most likely be ready for game 1 - assuming not setbacks. The Bills would most likely ease him back in with little to no usage in TC or Pre season. Give him some level of limited snaps and reps in the games to work back the endurance with time off for swelling. They have also said he could miss week 1 and maybe week 2, but most likely wouldn’t start on PUP or IR because he would not miss extended time into the season. We will see, but as the season starts at 8 and 1/2 months from the surgery - the biggest expected issue is him moving around and getting used to and confident playing on it.

The biggest point was in Fox’s original tweet and ads for the league that paid homage to the original USFL and then they tried to say they were not trying to cash in on the original. They had to go back and reissue the preliminary announcement for the new USFL and remove discussion of the original. They could of kept the name USFL - renamed the teams and rebranded and been fine - especially since as you stated they are playing the game in Alabama. It was arrogant and I just hope Fox gets slammed and has to pay a bunch of damages - it would crack me up. The leagues attendance is going to be terrible and that makes for a less than adequate tv experience. At least the XFL and the AAFL had some attendance and crowd spark for the home team.

We will see - opening arguments are expected today in the original USFL suit - with preliminary findings pointing to the original USFL having a case against Fox and either the league needing to change its name and the teams names and logo’s or pay fees to the original league for use of the names. By 7pm tonight it could be the 2 unnamed teams versus each other in bland uniforms for the new Fox Sport league. I will laugh so hard if the Fox loses and the USFL gets a significantly bigger settlement from this than the anti-trust lawsuit they won against the NFL. It was incredibly stupid of Fox to reuse the names and team names from the USFL and with limited fan support already, below average play, and crappy weather - this looks to be a potential washout. They rushed a product to try and beat the XFL and similar to other rushed endeavors - a poor ending is likely.

I am not going to invest my time with this. When I think ok - maybe they can develop players - I quickly think about the top 2 guys from the XFL - PJ Walker and Cam Phillips Cam Phillips still has only played 2 NFL games - both with Buffalo pre XFL. PJ Walker has at least started in the NFL since the XFL, but has 2 TDs and 8 Ints in 2 starts and some mop up detail. These 2 were elite in the XFL against similar quality opponents and couldn’t transition to NFL skills. There are very few guys that exited other leagues like the XFL and have done anything in the NFL - so I just do not see it as a legitimate growth level league - College Ball is a more talented pool. I have tried in the past and after a few weeks these leagues drop off and die - so I am not going to invest in this - especially with the lawsuit hanging over it - I wonder if they will have to do some rebranding and if that impacts the recognition.

Holy god dude - you are the worst. This PFF article is from the end of February. Guess what happened a week later. Yeah the Bills works out a extension with Mitch Morse adding years to his contract. You are literally trying to support you case with an old out of date PFF article. The Bills have literally (and I mean literally) put your entire argument to rest by restructuring his contract and extending him. Therefore - no matter how stupid of an argument you want to make - the Bills have already played a card and showed part of their hand that Morse is their starter his year and next. Now could the Bills draft IOL - yes they could - they have Saffold on a 1 year deal and Bates has multispot flexibility and could move anyplace along the line. It just is not a very high priority compared to say CB or WR. TE is a sneaky need - they have 4 guys on the roster and a flex FB/TE, but I believe all of them are FAs after this year. If they think they can resign Knox and keep the UFA in Morris - I expect them to go late round TE - 3rd - 5th. RB is much less of a need and as Sal/Joe pointed out - they reached out and signed a specific type of back at a specific monetary range - they believe that shows his desire for RB - expect a later round pick here in that mold. Do not expect a high pick unless someone falls to them. 2nd and 3rd round seem primed for some LB action. DE is not a Ned because hey are covered with what they have. Therefore - you are looking at CB/WR as the primary focus in RD 1 with maybe the other falling to RD 2. My guess is Booth, Hall, or Olave in Round 1.

Nope - if you look at second contracts for starting level players there are a few positions that first round picks do not work out for. Many starting level guards make 3-4 million - a 5th year option on a guard is 10+ million. Unless he is an All Pro you are overpaying. RB falls into the same category - you can get mid to high end starters for 4-5 million, but the 5th year option pushes 8+ million again elite level RB. Very rarely - especially late are you picking up the option. QB, CB, WR, DE, OLB, OT - the mid range starter and 5th year option are close enough that you can pick it up and have a year to negotiate if needed. The pay rate is not so far out of line that you put yourself in a pickle. It is easy if they are an All Pro or they bust out, but the majority of players are starter level, but not elite and in those cases that extra year can be helpful, but you can’t use it for every position. The price point should be a huge consideration in what you are drafting. It is part of the reason Linderbaum is dropping - with his size and position.

Then you pass on him. RB is a very low need - despite what you think. TE in the third or later. CB/WR in first and maybe the second. TE, RB, IOL - mid rounds. Don’t waste high picks on low value positions.

Hall in the first would be terrible and there should be no way the Bills waste draft capital that way. If you want hall - trade back 20 spots and have it - do not waste a 5th year option position by drafting a RB. 🤢

It doesn’t matter - you should almost never draft a RB in the first round. The cost of a 5th year option and a second contract make it not worth it. You overpay even if he is good - the cost versus return on 1st round backs is terrible.

I think Sal was discussing this - I believe the conclusion was that they expect the Bills to draft a RB, but not very early. He heard the Travis talk last year was not a ton by the FO and that he would not have been the pick unless several other players were gone. The RBs they actually have signed are all low end RBs. He said reading the tea leaves - he expects RB 3rd round or later and more of a receiver. We will see, but unless Hall falls a long way and other guys are picked - I think this is not a match.

Should be easy enough to do - every city that lost a team has built a brand new stadium - usually 100% public money to bring in a new team. So every city and state that has lost a team - must have determined having the team was a much bigger benefit than not having the team.

So you are thinking the state would spend the 850 million and get a better return than covering the cost in 20+ years. 😂😂😂😂 It surely could of been used to make more jobs maybe, but the Bills employee a huge number including game day people and all of that generates tax revenue. The size of the salaries alone make it hard for a regular set of jobs to match - including the fees on parking, tickets etc - that go right back. Finally - the state, the county, and the Pegula’s have been in discussion for years on this. You know as well as everyone else - the ideal spot would have been to build the stadium downtown where the Pegula’s have their other buildings, but they worked out a basic agreement years ago to rebuild on-site as the cheapest alternative. The ideal solution would have been about 850 million for the stadium downtown and about 2 billion in infrastructure- you know similar to what gets spent in NYC publicly, but they came to an agreement to use similar money in OP. It is a pretty solid assumption that the Bills badly needed a new stadium and that the Pegula’s and the NFL were going to pick up a portion of it and the State and the County were going to pick up the rest. They had a framework on the money before Hochul took over and it was always going to get pushed through. The stupid thing is thinking that the state should of played hardball and risk losing a huge money generator over a couple of hundred million dollars. For all of the crap we read from economists about the cost - the facts are EVERY city that has lost a team (Baltimore, Cleveland, St. Louis, Houston, LA, and Oakland) has found a way to build a new stadium for a team after losing the team - usually at a significantly worse deal than was offered before. The difference is the size of the Buffalo market - means we never get a team again - so you lose the revenue and Buffalo loses its identity. Lose/Lose

And once again without a deal - all that profit goes away to another place. If out of NYS - that is lost revenue that equates to the cost of the stadium.

Terrible Point. They can and do give money - local, county and even state levels give all kinds of money to local businesses. They give tax breaks, loan assistance, and sometime 0% loans depending on the business and the expected revenue and job creation. They even do it to home owners with things like a Star Rebate for elderly people to reduce Residential Tax rate. When my business wanted to add a third floor onto our building - we had to get approval as the area was zoned for 2 story buildings. When we got that approval - we also were given a 10 million dollar - 0% loan from the county because we employed more than 500 employees total and we wanted to increase it by 10%. We also we’re given tax breaks to remodel and add parking to the current space. There are all kinds of funding available that has different levels of payback. The stadium is no different - they are using 850 million to build it, but as the leaser - the Pegulas will be paying some of it back - along with fees on tickets, parking, food, etc to recoup the money.

The taxpayers are contributing 850 million with the expectations being that the State is going to collect enough money via fees associated with parking, tickets, food, and the lease to the Bills to play in the stadium to pay back the 850 million loan in 24 years. The Pegula’s are not paying upfront, but over time with the lease. The Pegula’s are doing the same thing - they are asking the users to help pay for the stadium that you are using. The Pegula’s are leasing the stadium - just as most businesses lease their buildings - they then have to recoup that cost. The PSLs are a way to recoup some of the cost that stay in Buffalo. The difference is if the Pegulas do not charge a PSL - then they have to hike the cost of a seat significantly to cover the cost of the lease and actually have to increase it higher because the seating is not given to the home team it is split revenue with the visiting team. Therefore with the PSLs - the Pegulas can actually allow the ticket prices to be lower than needed to recoup because the PSLs go directly to them unshared. No matter how you want to do it - you going to the game will be covering the cost. The PSLs keep more money with the local owner - higher ticket prices gives more revenue elsewhere. It is a fee - they charge it outside of the ticket price so the money is not part of the shared revenue. Either way by definition it is a PSL - a set amount charged to season ticket holders in addition to the cost of the seat for the right to purchase that seat. I believe the current phrasing is club seat license and fans have talked about it for years. The concept is not new to Buffalo - the process of an essentially 30 year ownership of the seat is a new concept.