BigDingus

Neat. The one WR we get in FA every year who we all hope breaks out. Maybe this time it'll actually happen.

Tisk, tisk... He should've played out his contract to give us more time to see what he can do! What if he ends up a bust like Elam? Bad move by Bills brass.

I'd rather they extend Cook over most of those guys, especially given he's been more productive & would cost less money than someone like Rousseau.

I doubt that. I know a lot of people think "tariffs will only add 10% to the cost of the end product!" or "if supplies aren't coming from tariffed countries, no issues!" but that's not what happens (not saying YOU specifically). Add 10%+ to every bit of manufacturing & distribution up & down the supply chain, plus whatever price increases these guys will add to keep their expected margins, keep up with expected inflation, or simply take advantage of the opportunity to raise costs. Then you factor in if these companies use labor, shipping or whatever from affected countries at any point in the chain. A company may be importing materials from a country outside of tariffs, but that doesn't mean who they're importing from doesn't have their own costs tied in with another tariffed country. And given how interconnected so many of these companies/countries are, always looking for the cheapest route possible while increasing their own margins, prices go up across the board & leak into other markets.

And that's what happens when you drag your feet doing something we all knew was going to happen eventually. Imagine paying nearly $1 billion more than the Cowboys did for AT&T stadium (or $300 million accounting for inflation) and getting significantly less for the investment. Then again, looks like we're on our way to a recession at this point, with prices skyrocketing for everything & wages falling even further behind. Guess I can't be too hard on them. We're all feeling it.

Huge waste imo. I'm in the minority, but we were already paying Rousseau almost as much as Cook wants, yet Cook has a much bigger impact than Groot. But people are still of the mindset RBs are a dime a dozen, despite the fact we struggled to find a RB for years (and despite the SB champs proving how valuable a good run game is). This year was our most productive offense ever, but since it wasn't all high-flying passing through Josh, people dismiss it. Meanwhile, our middling defense who gives up historically high numbers in their playoff losses, is getting rewarded with extensions at various positions. If there's one thing I've learned it's that you could remove the weakest link on D & replace him with a great player, yet come playoff time, the D performs the same. That's because unlike our offense, the D is consistently stuck with McD. The offense gets retooled & new coordinators can come in, but D stays the same. I put this in another thread, but tell me which group has had DEFINITIVELY a bigger impact: A) Edmunds, Oliver, Groot, Basham, Elam, Epenesa, B) Milano, Bernard, Benford, Hamlin, T. Johnson, D. Williams I'd say it's pretty even. But people want us to use more early picks on D and extend these guys, then just hope McD & Beane finally land a star.

Sounds (and looks like) a Mormon dude I know. And given that he's from Utah, I think I'm not too far off...

But even when we had prime Poyer, Hyde & White (along with Milano & Edmunds), our D still looked the same in the playoffs. The best game they ever had against a good QB was against the Ravens in the Divisional round. The 4 losses to the Chiefs & 1 to the Bengals looked the same regardless of who we had out there, all because McDermott.

So when they inevitably do not reach their goal, what then? Do they have to lower prices or do they just wait it out? They better hope the team stays a competitor & Josh stays healthy for as long as possible (well, we all hope that), because good luck selling those PSLs if we ever hit another drought.

It does not matter. There's a reason you don't pull your season-long starter QB & replace him with the backup come playoff time. No other team is dumb enough to do that.

Eh, I disagree. No matter what kind of players we have on D, it's still coached by McD & still fails to show up in the playoffs. Would anyone say our safeties are better than prime Hyde & Poyer? Definitely not, yet they performed pretty much the same come playoff time. I'm not saying it's hopeless, but our defense has been historically bad in these last 5 losses. Whether McDermott goes heavy D in the 1st or 2nd, the end result ends up the same because he still coaches the same & goes after the same types of players. Did Ed, Groot, Basham & Elam have more impact than Hamlin, Bernard, Benford & Williams? Maybe slightly, but those 1st & 2nd round picks haven't really been much more impactful come playoff time than the picks we took later in the draft. In my opinion, might as well keep taking shots at giving Josh the best weapons possible. The offense is the only thing that really has a chance to change & improve year over year, and it's lead by our best player. In a perfect world, Josh would've been paired with a great offensive coach, then if the D isn't carrying its weight, we could replace the coordinator & start over. But we're stuck with McDermott's D no matter what. We've seen 6 years of McDermott's D suck in the playoffs, while Josh shows up. Spent a 1st round pick on Edmunds & he's just solid. Spent a 5th on Milano & he became a stud. You just never know, but I've yet to see McDermott find a huge impact player in the 1st round outside of Josh, but we've seen him do so in the later rounds.

1. Allen 2. Kelly 3. Bledsoe 4. Kemp 5. Ferguson 6. Flutie 7. Fitz 8. Tyrod 9. Reich 10. Alex Van Pelt

How does an onside kick mean a team is "getting beat the whole game?" The exact opposite could happen, and the team going for the onside kick could've been in the lead most of the game, only for the other team to go on a tear at the end. Or it could be a back & forth game, only for a team to commit a turnover & get another score behind. Maybe it's just a team wanting to surprise someone with their pants down & kick an onside kick to start the 3rd quarter. Unfortunately, you can't do that anymore under the current rules. Onside kicks have been part of the game for ages, only now they've been neutered to the point that they're practically useless.

Exactly. It doesn't really change much. Here's this from ESPN - Among other changes, the NFL plans to use its virtual measuring system to determine first downs in 2025. This wouldn't eliminate the officials who manually spot the ball and use chains to mark the line to gain. The optimal tracking system notifies officiating instantly if a first down was gained after the ball is spotted by hand. "We used this in the background last season," said Kimberly Fields, the NFL's senior vice president of football operations. "The goal for 2025 is to continue to train our techs, who are the ones who will be utilizing the technology, finalizing all of our officiating processes and procedures around virtual measurements and testing the graphics for the broadcast and in-stadium, so fans in the stadium and fans watching on television can see what we're doing. The chain crew will still be there as backup." So yeah, apparently this was already in use last year. Not sure why they insist on keeping the chain gang or all the other nonsense. Just use the concrete tracking data & stop dicking around already.

Out of all those, I do not think Rousseau is worth $23 million a year. He's good enough, sometimes, but he disappears in too many games. He's not a real force that demands constant attention. It's like Ed. Sometimes good, seems good in advanced stats, but then you don't see him do much in a lot of games.

He definitely will be a HOFer. I wouldn't be surprised if he was 1st Ballot, even if it's uncommon for OL to get that honor. He was 1st or 2nd team All-Pro 6 times and a 9 x Pro Bowler. Dude had insane longevity too. Playing OL at age 43? That's crazy.

Tee Higgins - 4 out of 5 seasons with 900+ yards, though he missed 5 games each of the last 2 years. Peerless Price - 2 out of 4 seasons with 800+ yards, though he did have that one 1,200 yard season. But to put things in perspective, Price only had 5,281 receiving yards in his 9 year career. Higgins is already at 4,595 yards in his 5 year career. I know people might think his numbers are good because he plays opposite of Chase, but he had 900+ yards his rookie year prior to Chase's arrival. Imagine if the Vikings somehow drafted Jefferson while keeping Diggs (yes, I know they used the extra pick in the Diggs trade but just hypothetically). Jefferson still would've blown up & become the WR1, but Diggs still would've been capable of being a WR1 on another team. I think this is more along those lines. Higgins isn't AS good as Chase, but he still has the talent & skillset to become a true WR1 on another team.

Exactly. This isn't about trying to give the offense more of an advantage or increase scoring, this is definitely to encourage teams actually kick the ball in play & increase returns.

I've been throwing out the idea that Micah Parsons would be a good option. He's young, not really injury-prone (though he missed a few games this past year), and has a nose for the QB. He's definitely a little over-hyped, but he would easily give us 12 - 15 sacks a season without issue.

I feel like all this points to why it actually does make sense to pay Cook. The WR rate is increasing while the passing game is decreasing. Meanwhile, teams that have started running the ball more & good RBs have been seeing success. The Eagles won a SB after trading for Barkley, Henry nearly ran for 2,000 yards despite people thinking he'd be slowing down at this point, and James Cook was scoring TDs like crazy & our best weapon on offense. His role should probably increase even more, and he's still a lot cheaper than a top WR.

I can't remember every practice squad or 3rd stringer that ever played for the team, so I'm just going off biggest disappointments in terms of draft selection. 1. Aaron Maybin 2. Kaiir Elam 3. Mike Williams 4. Erik Flowers 5. Perry Tuttle Honorable mentions to Vontae Davis for making it half a game before retiring at halftime, and Nate Peterman for just being Nate Peterman. Edit: Oh, and Rob Johnson. What a waste of time, money & effort. He was never any good, and all hopes of him being good ruined actual good teams by forcing him upon us. Nah, I'd put him right up there with the worst of the worst. But I've always thought Elam was bad & never had any faith in him. The fact he was a 1st round pick & stayed on the roster this long just reaffirms my feelings.

Which is why they're searching for an upgrade at QB. The team continues to find ways to win & get into the playoffs, despite having crappy QB production & while playing in one of the toughest divisions. An actual good QB could definitely change things for them.

Understandable, but back then the NBA in general was struggling & only popular in specific markets. It wasn't until Magic & Bird pretty much "saved" the NBA & helped turn things around. In the decades since then, basketball has become a global sport & is has huge interest in many countries. TV deals, superstar international players, and a salary cap has helped allow teams in all market sizes to compete. Whether it's Oklahoma City or Milwaukee, NBA teams can succeed in smaller markets just fine. And if Buffalo could sell out an NHL arena, they could do the same with an NBA one (given that they often share the same arena)

I swear, any time a player wants to get paid it exposes the true colors of so many fans. "We support our guys! Unless they advocate for themselves... then screw that, trade them away!" He's not even trying to leave or suggesting he wants to play elsewhere. He's not starting drama with our QB & the players love him. Josh has few weapons as it is, and Cook was the best of the bunch. "RBs are a dime a dozen!" - Right, that's why we tried & tried & tried some more, yet never could get consistent production from the run game. We wasted draft picks on Singletary & Moss, had years where we rotated 3 guys, had aging veterans, etc. but never had someone as reliable or productive as Cook (both in the run game & pass game). And people are saying this AFTER they saw what happened in KC? After we all saw how dumb it was not to give Cook the ball in that last drive? After we all saw how successful he was, how he was our best weapon, and how KC didn't have an answer for him? He says he wants $15 million a year, which is a lot for a RB but not nearly that much in the grand scheme of things. Top WRs cost double that, and Cook has been more important to this team's success than any of our WRs. We're paying Groot $13.5 million in 2025, but he doesn't have the impact Cook has had. And just because he's putting out there $15 million, doesn't mean that's the only number he'd accept. It's a starting point, and they have a number of options including signing bonuses or stat bonuses that he could take. A lot of players just want teams to show them they're valued & to not low-ball them, so you never know what he'd really take. We have Ed Oliver taking up $20 million a next year, Curtis Samuel $9 million, a rotational DE in Epenesa makes $7.5 million, our 2nd TE Dawson Knox makes $14.5 million. $12 - $15 million is not too much for a player that's been as good as Cook, the problem is the other places we've been spending so much money. Cook & the offense carried this team. Those players deserve to be paid. But so much money is invested in this defense that can't do squat in the playoffs. $20+ million a year for Von, $20 million for Ed, $9.5 million for Jones, $16 million for Milano, $13.5 million for Groot... Hell, even the $4+ million for Elam's rookie contract is a waste given what he's done. But whether we can afford to keep Cook or not, stop getting all mad when players want to be rewarded for their efforts. RBs get treated like crap compared to other positions, and I've seen so many people suggest "run him till the tires come off & let him walk." That's part of the problem. RBs are a unique position that don't often get rewarded with their first big, post-rookie contract. Cook is healthy, he's only 25 years old, and he was our best offensive weapon when we used him. Stop getting all mad that he wants to get paid. If you don't want to pay him, there's no problem with that. I just don't like how so many fans have suddenly turned on him & painted him a villain for doing something completely normal.

Why can't you have both? Sure, you're starting from scratch, but excitement to support the new home team would be high. It'd be a source of regional pride. Of course, this won't happen, but just like with other pro sports franchises, I've always believed establishing a loyal fanbase in a smaller market with less to do is the better course than being the 21st option in a large market. Look at attendance of some MLB teams... You can't convince me Buffalo wouldn't have done better than these other places that got expansion teams. Given how inept they've been, I'd rather get rid of the Sabres & start over with an NBA team. Again, I know this would never happen.