Zerovoltz

Sure..you need all the talent you can get across the roster. If you have an elite QB, who doesn't need a security blanket...then the best way to build a roster is probably not spending high on a WR who demands targets and is a locker room cancer.

Now that Diggs has been traded and it's come to light there has been ongoing problems in the Diggs/Allen relationship.....I STAND BY THIS. Allen is going to have a great year, and the Bills are going to be FINE. Allen is now free to run the offense without having in the back of his mind that he has to get one of the guys a number of targets. The ball can and will go to the optimal reciever on a given play.

....The vote was to extend the already in place 3/8 cent sales tax that runs through 2030. Funds were to go to the Chiefs for renovatoins at Arrowhead...and to the Royals who were proposing a new downtown stadium. This is a COUNTY tax. The same country in which Kansas City Missouri, the actual city, is in. So not only did KC city voters get to participate in this, so did residents of the other towns in Jackson County. First...some clarification about Kansas City itself. AS many of you point out and are aware, Kansas City, MO is where the actual downtown is at. There is also a Kansas City, Kansas, on the other side of the Missouri/Kansas Border that is it's own city. The actual residents inside of the Kansas City, city limits, like most major cities, the residents aren't rich, but are heavily taxed. Within KC city limits itself, there was a pretty strong push for NO on this. Certain, the NO vote people were well organized. Second. As some here have noted, this whole thing was the Royals and Chiefs tied together. The combined efforts of the two teams to put out any sort of plan or vision was AWFUL. Especially on the Royals side, but let me talk about the Chiefs first. The Chiefs wanted 800 million in public funds for renovations. They put out some drawings of what they wanted to do...and it was UNDERWHELMING. bigger video boards...(the ones they have are fine) complete the concorse all the way around the upperdeck. something called an "activation zone" in the area where Royals staidum currently stands...looks like a big open field where you might also put a stage and host a few things maybe. And the list gets more and more underwhelming as you go. Certainly looks like very very little bang for the bucks, based on what was presented. The Royals, couldn't decide which site they wanted, flip flopped on that a few times, couldn't come an agreement on community benefits with any of these neighborhood associations etc. And couldn't seem to get numbers or plans or a message straight....up to and including completing a benefits agreement wiht one of these groups with just 2 hours left before the poles closed. It was the most half assed, confused effort. I believe the NO vote didn't win based on their whining and complaining about the tax that has already been in effect for decades. They won because the teams weren't on point, couldn't present a cohesive plan and what they did produce, was underwhelming. The teams message has been "we don't know what we'll do going forward, including moving." ....which national media takes to mean...moving to a completely new locale...not KC metro. The Chiefs aren't going anywhere. They will get a separate deal with the county and do whatever upgrades at Arrowhead or failing that, KANSAS can and will roll out the read carpet for them. The Royals path forward isn't as clear. Both Arrowhead and Kaufman stadiums have held up extremely well over time. Alot of people wonder outload why the Royals need a new stadium downtown (where GASPPP!!!! there isn't that much parking!!!) Technically, they don't need a new stadium to actually play ball in and have parking and access. The stadium remains a perfectly fine venue in that regard. The owners want what they have in Colorado. A downtown stadium, with alot of foot traffic around a bunch of bars and other entertainment, with access to the streetcar, etc. They want something that generates more attendence in the park and more money outside the park. The Rockies are terrible and still sell a ton of tickets and generate a ton of money outside the stadium. The Royals will try again with hopefully a much better proposal and plan...but if they can't get something done in the next few years, I'd think they'd be ripe to leave for someplace that will build exactly that sort of revenu generating setup. Nashville, Charlotte, Salt Lake....they'd make it happen if the Royals shake loose. The Chiefs plans were so horribly mediocre that I can't help but wonder if they sabotaged their side of htis on purpose so they could have an excuse to negotiate and all new stadium with Kansas. I'm not a conspiracy theory person, but their handling was THAT bad....that you have to consider it. Anyhow...the Chiefs aren't going anywhere. Last point. I think there were large numbers of people who aren't in the mood to give public funding to very rich owners to do this or that. I think people are legitamately asking why billionaires can't foot more or all of the bill for enterprises that are enormousely profitable (the answer is ...BECAUSe THEY CAN) ...but the trend is people dont' have much appetite to support this stuff these days.

Signed to participate in the NFL's new kickoff rules environment.

1. As mentioned earlier (but not read by just about everyone posting here) If they "leave" it's for other locations in the KC metro. This is a non story. 2. You can argue that tax funds invested into sports stadiums isn't all that great a deal for the taxpayer if you are wanting to drill down and find out how much revenue is generated VS what is invested. FINE...that isn't really what this is about (even thought the owners and politicians will claim what an economic boon it is!) ...the game is ......do you want to invest public funds in partnership with billionaires who own the teams, so that the stadium/arena and stuff is satisfactory and the team stays in your community? yes or no? because if you don't want to pony up, there is a line around the block of other communities who will. Greed? Coldhearted business.. playing at the heartstrings of fans OF COURSE.... I'd argue the value of of the investment is to HAVE the team..which in our day and age when there is so little that bonds us together as poeple...one of the few things that does...is a pro sports team.

Be careful what you wish for. The last time the Chiefs got punished for tampering in 2016, the NFL made KC forfiet their 3rd round pick right before the 2016 NFL draft. This single event propelled KC into a dynasty by protecting KC from itself. KC wanted Paxton Lynch and couldn't beat Denvers offer to trade up from 31 to 26 becasue KC didn't have a 3rd round pick to trade. If they had it, KC would have been able to offer 28 and 91 for 26 and draft Lynch. Instead Seattle took Denvers offer of 31 and 94. KC was missing pick 91. KC traded back to 36 after it couldn't trade up for Lynch and instead they drafted Chris Jones. The following season, they were still looking to draft a young future QB and traded up to 10 for Pat Mahomes. If KC didn't tamper with Jeremy Maclin, none of that happens. KC takes Lynch, doesn't draft Jones, and only 1 year into Lynch, isn't about to draft another QB in round 1.

It's amazing that this topic comes up over and over again. The Bills did not trade Mahomes to the Chiefs. The Bills traded the 10th overall pick in the 2017 Draft to KC. KC had been talking to the McDermott pretty much since the day he got hired, about moving up IF the board fell in ways that both teams were compelled to move up for KC, and down for Buffalo. KC was trying to move up to pick 5 once the festivities started. When pick 10 arrived, KC wanted to come up because Mahomes was still on the board. I can't stress enough, the McDermott had only been at the job 1 month. He is a D minded coach and did not consider himself qualified to be making a choice about a QB. Watson and Mahomes both were on the board when pick 10 came up. He decided it would be best to gather AMMO for next year, when they'd have a GM in place and they could evaluate and be on the same page about a QB in what was billed as a GREAT QB draft year in 2018. (2017 was not considered a good QB year) McDermott having traded away pick 10, (NOT MAHOMES) did about as well in 2018 as you possibly could! Josh Allen. For all McD knew, KC had moved up for Watson. He didn't know who they'd take at 10 out of Watson or Mahomes. It's quite likely the biggest Win/Win trades in NFL history how it's turned out and yet so many here think it's the Bills/McD fault KC got Mahomes. Is it the 49ers fault the Bears Got Trubisky? Afterall, the Bears traded up to two and made that choice. No one in Chicago blames San Francisco for "giving" Trubisky to the Bears.

One more thought on Ariaza from a KC perspective (IMO) I've seen some posts here knocking Araiza's lack of skill at directional punting/pinning teams in deep. I would ask, If you are punting from your own 50 and you fail to pin it in, and it's a touchback...how many yards did you lose by failing to pin it deep? The touchback puts it at the 25. A returner may have fair caught it at the 10...maybe even the 15 if he doesn't see a return available..but lets say he fair catches at the 10 as most are taught to let anything inside the 10, just bounce. That's 15 yards it's costing by having the punter fail to pin it deep. Now ask if you are the same team punting from your own 25 and your punter blasts a 60 yard punt with hangtime. Let's assume that the hangtime is good enough to compell a fair catch. That's going to be around the opponents own 15-20 yard line...completey and utterly flip the field. In both cases the other team is looking at a 75-80 yard drive. I'll take the guy who can make the other team have to go 80 yards after I've had to punt from my own 25 yard line.

Townsend is UFA. He's an excellent putner and he's gong to get paid. I am very happy for him and happy for his time in KC. The Chiefs aren't opposed to paying good money for a good kicker. Butker is one of the highest paid kickers in the NFL. He's worth every last penny....dude is NAILS in the post season. There is no justification for paying a punter top of market when you are KC. Either you believe Mahomes is going to make up for some of what you'd need a punter for, or your defense will. Araiza is a great low key signing for KC. When KC needs to punt....he will punt. In some circumstances...he will punt very far....and relatively inexpensively. For this not to be an OVERALL (including financials) Araiza will have to be pretty bad. I don't think so. KC probably going to get alot of bang for the buck on this one.

Speaking for myself...I've totally thought the Bills have been good enough and are good enough to win a championship for a while now. Unfortunately, the Chiefs are also good enough...and the Bengals have been right there...and this season, Baltimore was good enough to get it done also. The AFC is a guantlet. I remain convinced the Bills, with Allen are always a threat. (next year, with the Bills cap situation, it will be harder, but sometimes you win in the years you don't have the best version of your team.)

This could be made so much simpler if in the playoffs, you just eliminate the coin toss and home gets ball/choice. Sudden death. Make the regular season matter. Super bowl would need to be a little different because of the home team thing...just make that first team to score 6 points (one TD or 2FG) wins the game after a coin toss to decide who gets ball.

....Beane has been a very good GM.... Beane drafted ALLEN. I also don't think you all appreciate enough, how bad the roster was when he took over. The entire O line from Allens rookie year was OUT OF FOOTBALL within a year of Beane arriving. Most of the rest of the offense was too with very few exceptions. He had to churn the hell out of the roster AND develop a very raw QB at the same time. no small feat. I read the posts around here. Beane makes mistakes on draft day. ALL GMs do. he's had some great picks too. He's made some good trades. You can do alot worse...and you guys should know how bad it COULD be better than anyone. That doesn't mean Beane isn't deserving of criticism nor does it mean he shouldn't be questioned for not winning a SB thus far with the QB he has..that's all valid, but damn..to read some of the posts around here you'd think the guy was Dave Gettleman! Veach has had his share of errors. Veach's 1st draft as "the man" was a disaster. Treaded up for Breeland Speaks who was a complete bust. Only Derrick Nhadi in round 3 has had any impact at all and he is JAG at best and mostly below average. Veach gave MLB Anthony Hitchins a RIDICULOUS contract...he was terrible. The contract was so bad KC couldn't cut him. Overpaid for Sammy Watkins...who at least had some decent post season games but a huge overpay. You could certainly make the case that KC signing Jawan Taylor for top OL money was a mistake/overpay. I won't try too hard to fight that one...he's not bad when he's not getting called for false starts..but that happens way too much and he has a rep so gets plenty of holding calls too! Veach has learned from his mistakes and he's hit on key players in the past few drafts and made trades essential to KC sustaining success. Perhaps the least talked about, but most important accomplishment was after KC lost the 2020 Super Bowl where they lost both starting OT to more or less career ending injuries, had the worst starting center in the leauge and JAG at OG at best....he completely rebuilt the O LINE in an offeseason by trading for Orlando Brown (who was pretty good but not a great pass blocker) drafting Creed Humphrey and Smith who both started as rookies and played well..and signed ALL PRO LG Thuney. They played Wylie at RT...and he wasn't great, but he was competent enough to make that work. That was a miracle. And while Veach hasn't hit on O side skill players well.... Clyde Edwards Hellaire...BUTS. Sky Moore. BUST... Mecole Hardman has done quite well considering where he was drafted....he gets crapped on because KC passed on DK Metcalf. And KC hit on Rice this year...and Pacheco in round 7 last year. Veach nails DB's. KC has a type they look for and Veach finds them in every round. I think though, it should be said that Veach understands what the coaches want and he finds guys they can use. Veach therefore get a TON of help by having hte same coaching staff in place year after year...he gets their type and the coaches develop the players....makes Veach success rate look even better. EVEN after all this....it's still a QB leauge. You really gotta have one. Without Mahomes...all the above isn't near good enough.

Maybe I misunderstood the post about KC winning 13 games in a row with a negative turnover ratio...but if that is what the poster said and intended...that is wrong. KC wins a nuber of games with negative ratios (so do the Bills) but being on the wrong side of TO ratio is hard and even great teams lose more than win whenever the TO ratio isn't in their favor. Bad teams can NOT overcome it all. The broncos for example..haven't won a negative TO ratio game in nearly 2 years.

The Bills are already 4th best odds to win SB next year. I think when you are close and you havn't made it yet, there is a tendency to overanalyze everything. You have Josh Allen and a talented roster. I'd compare the current Bills team VS the Chiefs similar to the 70's Steelers and Raiders. The Raiders were close...and the imaculate reception got them ...kind of similar to 13 seconds. Finally the Raiders broke through in the middle of Pittsburgs run whe the Steelers made it to the AFCCG with both their 1 and 2 RB's injured and unable to play. The Raiders won and went on to win the super bowl. The Steelers would go on to win 2 more in that decade and then Raiders would win a couple in the early 80's. I don't think every little thing about what the Raiders were doing needed to come into question and be nit picked to death. They were on the right track to building a team capable of winning a title, but so were the Steelers. Winning titles is hard and often you have to play against and overcome another really good team......even as your roster is good, your team is good, your coaching is good. I think the Bills are right there, they just simply haven't gotten over the hump...no amount of analysis etc is going to solve a problem you really don't have. When the time comes around again, the Bills will have to beat some good teams to win a title, even as the Bills ARE a good team that other teams have to overcome to win.

I stand by it! .....but I'll concede that some angles look better than others.