Long Suffering Fan

When a 4 year college basketball starter marries someone who has all of the track records....your offspring should have a good chance of being athletic. 😀

I hate to say this, but one of the reasons why you want this depth is because of injury. It is probably a 50/50 chance that one of these receivers will get dinged up in TC or pre-season. For that reason, the Bills will not move quickly on the decision unless something becomes glaringly obvious at this stage.

It is really just a flip of the coin....sigh...

Yep. I was downright depressed the day the Bills hired him. Even older, that was what Greggo did. We had the number 1 defense and the number 3 defense in successive years (by the yards metric which is far from perfect, but still). He came in the following year and completely scrapped our scheme for his and none of our players were suited for it. When asked about it, he pointed to the fact his defense was number 1 the previous year so it was a better scheme than our number 3 defense. I knew in that moment that he would fail.

Good to hear. I'm not sure it is super deep, but this is still more than what I would normally even expect from one of these interviews which are normally coach speak. Tailoring the scheme for your players is a good thing to hear from him.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner. I mean, you have to evolve and change at times, sure - definitely a grain of truth - but that is a separate thing from making stuff up and getting fired.

Kevin Hart has this schtick that he does...and my brain cells don't completely like it and kind of think it is a little obvious and childish at times....but he does it so well, that I can't help but smile or chuckle. His comedic timing and nuance are amazing.

First, props for calling it. Many of us maybe thought or hoped those things, but you put it out there for all to see. Since it could have been thrown in your face if you were wrong, it is only right that we give you a victory lap. As someone who sometimes forgets what happened earlier in the day, I appreciate you posting this. I've enjoyed your reviews quite a bit and this gives me another opportunity to say, great job. Second, I had to smile at the above line...because I think it is funny and pretty accurate....and a good analogy. People who have argued against character or the process mattering sometimes say things like - well, all professional athletes are great, they all try, etc. I know I have heard Schopp say things like that. That is the same thing as could have been said about the Athenians or the Corinthians, but the Spartans were set apart because among all the great fighters, they had developed a culture which demanded disciples, as you put it. Those that were willing to do anything to be the best. (side note - the Spartans really did do crazy, crazy, sometimes evil things that should never be replicated). Closely tied to that is their philosophy of a leader in every room. Why keep Lee Smith as long as we did? Because he would not allow the other TEs to slack. I can't prove it, but I'm sure he helped shape Knox. Why Frank Gore? Because he demanded a level of commitment from the young pups in the RB room. The real positive sign is that - once you have this started, it is easier to keep going. It is also possible now to take in some people that are NOT perfect for the process. They can be neutral to start because the strong leaders will drag them along until they get it.

Am I the only one that was a little surprised that Von looked small compared to the rest of the dline? In all the videos I have seen of him in free agency, etc. the guy looks huge. Put him next to the rest of our dline and suddenly he looks on the smaller side. I get that at edge you often play at a lower weight, but it still took me off guard. Don't take this the wrong way. I am super stoked that he is on the team and excited to have him. The guy is a hall of famer. I guess this just meant that he plays way above his size or that the rest of our dline is abnormally large.

It's vestigial. They used to be a good way to promote the leagues that had them because they showcased the stars. The NHL even had a rule that there had to be at least one player from each team in the game so that the entire fanbase would care. Before the era of big money, the extra paycheck for winning the game was a big deal. I still remember when the NHL all star game was held in Buffalo way back in the 70s. Prince of Wales Conference won 3-2. In OT, if you can believe it! Martin scored near the end of the third to force the OT and Perrault scored the game winner in OT. I loved that it was such a good game and that Buffalo's stars won it in Buffalo. Exactly right. Back in the day, when the players sometimes worked off season jobs, the little bit of extra money from the game was a big motivator. Now, almost all the players that go are at the top end of the payscale or would be.

Remember it is rest differential - playing on the first Thursday is part of that because we get three extra days. It is not four extra days because the Titans (our week 2 opponent) also get one extra day of rest to Monday (because they played on Sunday week 1). If the Titans played on Monday in week 1, then it would be four. We immediately lose one of those days in week 3 because we are playing on Monday in week 2 and Sunday in week 3 against the fish who played on Sunday the week before. So, by week 3, we are at a rest differential of +2. Thanksgiving helps also. It is short prep for that game, but the Lions face the same thing. The next week we play on Thurs again, but it is no advantage because the Patriots also play on Thanksgiving (not that would have been epic if the Pats played on Sunday of Thanksgiving week). Where we gain is the following week against the Jets. In general, Thursday games help our rest differential because the teams playing both have less time to prepare for that game but extra rest to go against a team that normally played on Sunday that week and Monday games hurt our rest differential because the extra rest day is shared by the two teams that play on Monday. Of course, bye weeks have the biggest impacts.

Let's add to this list Levi Wallace, who only got $4M/year (?). Maybe this says a little about where they are in their careers, but it may say more about us (the fans) perhaps overvaluing them a little. Obviously, Beane did not think they were worth a big contract and the fact that they did not get scooped up confirms that he is right. Hopefully, this means that there will be noticeable improvements this year in the positions where they have been replaced.

Come on, Mickey. With a wave of the hand are you going to just dismiss all of my experiences over the last several decades? I get that these are my experiences and not yours and, since you don't know me, you should not necessarily take my word as gospel, but that also means you should not dismiss them out of hand. I also realize that I have an unusual amount of experience in this area (although it is not much of stretch - all you have to do is know a couple of people with bad divorces and know someone starting a company). That is one of the reasons why I commented. I am not a prolific commenter. Far from it, but I have lived this. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are in earnest. I will give you one example. Someone I know is part of a start up company and I am a little more than tangentially involved. We have a product that is significantly better than our competitors and one of them filed a spurious lawsuit against us. It is ridiculous and unfounded. Interestingly they did not sue us in our state, but in the same state as one of their locations. We find out that, essentially, there is a friendly relationship between the judge and the execs of that company. We file to change the venue. Their CEO has a home address in a different state and so they argue that it is already on neutral ground. We finally win and get the venue moved. The process starts again there. Our competitor then withdraws the lawsuit before any judgment could be made against them. A month later they refile the lawsuit in federal court and the process starts up again. We are deep in the process there and we file for a dismissal. Despite all the evidence we present, the judge does not dismiss. The burden of proof is on us for a dismissal and that is hard to do because the competitor is purposely playing their cards close to the vest. It should have been dismissed, but wasn't. Well, you should counter sue. Yeah, maybe, but then the burden of proof that this was a malicious lawsuit once again falls on us and that is very hard to prove. Attempting it opens up an entirely different case and doubles your legal fees. In this case, through some of my bad experiences and through some of the contacts we have made we have developed some trustworthy contacts. We got what I believe is a really good business trial lawyer. Still, we have already had to pay out $75K and we haven't gone to trial yet. The process has dragged out over years and, as a start up, we don't have that money, but we have to find it somehow. They are trying to bleed us out. This is just one example I can give you about how our system is broken. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Again, I am going to assume that you are in earnest and that you have just never been exposed to the dark side of our legal system. I know there are good lawyers. I wish I lived in a world where I could trust the authority structures above me. I wish I could trust judges and lawyers and politicians, but our legal system has serious flaws. Exactly. It is a pay to play system. If you have lots of cash, it seriously works to your advantage....and delay is a go to tactic that money can pay for.

What are you guys all married to lawyers? People who defend lawyers tend to have very limited experience with bad ones. Without going into details, I or (mostly) my friends have had bad encounters with them in civil, criminal, custody, and divorce cases. They love to extend because they make more money. In some cases it is also beneficial to their client, but the motivation is always there. Oh, the billable hour argument...yes, they spend that time...well, maybe. They say they spent that amount of time, but you have no way to prove they did or didn't. I know of one case where someone I knew was being just ripped off. When he asked for a list of billable hours to prove, they sent back a list that included ridiculous things. There is no way to prove that they didn't work that time on your case...or someone else's. Well, they should just get another lawyer - yeah, you are 25 grand into a lawyer that wants 5K more to finish your case and if you move now, you have to start over. I have had lawyers tell me even worse stories. I have had lawyers tell me to avoid certain other lawyers because they will milk you for all your worth. Oh, and the people pay for that work because they are worth it line....ugh. It would be more accurate to say that they pay for that work because they have no freaking choice. Someone facing a problem that needs a lawyer - their life, or their kids, or their bank account is on the line. Listen, I know that there are good lawyers. I just hope that you don't find out the hard way that there are bad ones. This. Our legal system is messed up on many levels and having speedy trials would solve at least some of the problems.

It's ridiculous because there is no reason that it should take 18 months to get something like this to trial. A speedy trial should be the norm. - Delays are bad for a defendant if they happen to be innocent because it drags out the time that the sword of Damocles is hanging over their head. - It is bad for a plaintiff it they happen to be right because it drags it out and does not give them closure. But it all racks up billable hours for lawyers, so I guess it is good for them. Grrrrr....