BigDingus

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.

Can they revive the Buffalo Braves instead? If Buffalo can support an NFL team, I'm sure they can handle an NBA one. Sure, during the first half of the season there will be less fans in attendance since it overlaps with the NFL, but then again, that applies to the entire NBA. Fans don't care about the early season across the league 😆

Maybe they should. Given how many college players there are, there's no chance these guys can watch tape & give full evaluations on everyone. And even though people would say it doesn't happen, I think some scouts definitely rely on media & "expert" discussions to influence their player grades. I don't think the Bills are like that, though. They take a lot of guys that don't seem to be on people's radar in the later rounds of the draft.

Sure, our offense was improved overall, but that's not going to attract players like it might have in the past. Hopefully our success, team culture & proven QB will help attract the right players, but playing in the windy, cold, no-roof stadium in Western NY with a more conservative offense isn't going to have most WRs lining up to take pay cuts to play here. Not saying people won't play here (we're not in the drought era anymore), but I'd expect we'd have to pay at least Curtis Samuel-level contracts for people in this tier.

SOLD! It's gotta be an upgrade over what we had! Now if only McDermott could let someone else take over defense - COMPLETELY. At this point, I wouldn't care if they scrapped the whole system & started from scratch. The Eagles run a 3-4 / 4-3 hybrid that bounces back & forth, and they got pressure all night without blitzing. McDermott has tried to get that kind of pass rush production the entire time he's been here, but our primarily nickel defense doesn't get it done. It also gives receivers too much space & plays too soft in coverage... the exact opposite of what the Eagles did to suffocate the Chiefs offense. Obviously, we can't base our entire defense off of what one team did in one game, but I don't think McDermott's D could EVER pull off something like that against an elite team & coach like the Chiefs & Reid, even if he had the best pieces imaginable.

"Some of the increase can be attributed to a change in the way viewers are counted. This is the first year Nielsen is measuring out-of-home viewers for all states but Hawaii and Alaska." Interesting. I'd be curious to know viewership by country. I suspect viewership goes up as international viewers are increasing. Perhaps ratings dipped in the US but international viewership offset that, though I don't think the Nielsen Ratings track that (could be wrong).

I think the idea of normalizing just talking about the human body is positive. The fact that it's 2025 & people still clutch their pearls when talking about boobs, even in a breast cancer awareness ad, is absurd. We're cool with all the violence in the world, even in commercials, but seeing a woman in a bra & suddenly men get offended? Yall are cool with looking at them online, yet we still want to make people's bodies taboo... It's not like they were out there getting it on or streaking through the streets. It's like when I see people complain about women breastfeeding & calling it "lewd" or "not modest." C'mon people, this mindset is what keeps things weird & makes other countries laugh at us. Says you! I'm already excited!

That's what we got Kaiir Elam for! Don't worry, I'm sure he'll definitely come around soon!

Maybe that's true, but they definitely didn't steal Mahomes or Worthy from the Bills... We gave them to them 😅

Bingo. And I don't trust Beane & McDermott to identify potential star defensive players in the early rounds of the draft anyway. The best they do is find under-valued players they can coach up in the later rounds. I'd much rather them continue to take shots to get Josh help on offense. They traded to get players like Hyde & Poyer, so if anything, look for young pieces they can get in free agency or trade.

Even at the height of the Pats dominance, regardless of how much I hated playing against him, I always defended how great Brady was as a player. Once he won that 5th Super Bowl, he became the Michael Jordan of the NFL in my eyes. Throughout the NFL's history, no QB had ever won 5 x Super Bowls. The fact he went on to win 7 is absolutely absurd, as he alone has more SB wins than any NFL franchise does in their history. Given how much variability, luck, injuries, roster changes, etc. there is the NFL, being able to make 10 x Super Bowls in 20 years in a level of dominance that can't be overstated. I still see some people say Montana was better because he won 4 of 4 SBs, but how is just not making the SB somehow better than making it & losing? If Mahomes keeps winning, then he may eventually surpass Brady. But a three-peat does not do that, no matter what Nick Wright says.

I wouldn't say he was "pretty good" at all. He had decent stats, but so did Russ his last year in Denver, but he was even more successful than Rodgers. Despite staying healthy, the team got WORSE with Rodger (and later Davante Adams) than they were with Wilson & Co. If he goes to Pittsburgh, expect another average year & WC round loss. The Steelers will be treading water like the Colts were a couple years ago, bouncing from Rivers to Wentz to Ryan (or whatever order they were in).