Sierra Foothills

I've said from the beginning that the Bills did some things well and other things not so well. I also said you could probably give them a numerical grade if you wanted to. I have never said the Bills botched this but I have said they've made at least two missteps. Do you think that posters should be giving advice to others about how to communicate their thoughts? Was there a good reason you feel compelled to suggest edits to my posts? Would you like me to proofread your material and make suggestions? Firstly the Watson situation isn't very similar to the Araiza situation and to your comment that the "Bills could've held on to Araiza as long as it took for this situation to be resolved if they really wanted" I'd say that this belief of yours brings your judgement and competency into question. As far as what the Bills should have done, I think they should have placed Araiza on administrative leave/paid suspension on August 1st when they first heard from the plaintiff's lawyer. I think they should have done this and not issued a statement other than saying that it was a private matter. YES, a paid leave/suspension for Araiza would have been the right move if they were really concerned about protecting their culture and their reputation for integrity. Following this move would be a firestorm of discovery by the media outlets as to why Araiza was placed on leave and then possibly hastened statements and actions by the lawyers involved. This move from the Bills on August 1st would have initiated a sequence of actions which would have resulted in a resolution of the situation by around mid-August. The pendulum would have swung to guilt and then maybe back towards innocence and either way the team would be positioned to proceed appropriately. In addition, by placing him on leave/suspension they could have said that they didn't rush to judgement and that they protected the spirit of due process as much as was possible.

Hey Shaw. I always enjoy your posts. To the first bolded, No I was not suggesting it was willful. I was suggesting it was possibly willful but I do believe the Bills were unaware of the situation. They have a great track record. If it were another team I might be more skeptical of what was known. To the second bolded, the Bills could have asked to speak to the victim. They might have been denied access but at least they could have said "we wanted to speak to the victim" which is a whole lot better than not asking to speak to the victim. They could also have asked to speak to any witnesses. Did they ever follow up with law enforcement? To the final bolded I can concede that preserving the culture was aided by cutting Araiza however it wasn't like the team had any choice because they didn't.

To your first point (numbered above), it was reported in the Associated Press that there were teams that were aware of the Araiza situation pre-draft. The AP is a very credible news organization not least of all because they are a not-for-profit. Are you not aware of their reports or do you choose to ignore them? To your second point, I don't believe the Bills knew about the rape story pre-draft but other teams did know, thus the Bills fell short in this regard. It is binary, they either passed or failed. They failed. Is this too difficult to understand? To your third point, Do you believe it's the job of a Bills beat reporter to scour for theoretical news surrounding the San Diego State Football program? If Microsoft hires an executive is it a newspapers job to vet him?

I used to work in news. I was partly inspired by Woodward and Bernstein's Watergate work and I grew up watching Walter Cronkite on the CBS Evening News. I'm the first to criticize the current state of the news media with their shyt disturbing and prioritizing of clicks, traffic, visitors, and ratings above actual journalism. I hate the lack of objectivity by news outlets that began with the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. That said, in reading this topic many of you have a very limited view on the cost/benefit of the news media and also the job that the Bills beat writers are doing with Araiza-gate. A few of you don't understand what the world would be like if the media didn't exist. Having free media (as opposed to state-run media) asking even stupid questions is better than living in a world where an organization get a free pass because there's zero media scrutiny. Even "bad media" keeps people and organizations honest. Others here think the reporting is biased against the team and that the team is being treated too harshly. It seems like most of these "poor Bills" reactions are homerism (and I'm not referring to the works of Homer). As I stated upstream, objectively the Bills have made some missteps during this controversy. MINIMALLY: The Bills either willfully (or not) ignored information that other teams were aware of... that Araiza and the SDSU football team were the subject of a rape investigation. The Bills did not maintain contact with the plaintiff's lawyer who reached out to the team to make them aware of the investigation. Plaintiff's lawyer even followed up with the Bills but the club did not respond. The Bills had zero to gain and much to lose (even from a pure optics standpoint) by not staying engaged with the plaintiffs lawyer. Based on the timing of Araiza's release it's clear the Bills were not standing on principle so much as they were bowing to public pressure. Bills Head Coach Sean McDermott appeared on Barstool Sports on Tuesday 8/23/22 and said what a "great kid" Araiza was. This was 22 days after the plaintiff's attorney spoke to the Bills attorney and 2 days before the Bills said they had conducted a "thorough investigation. How much was McDermott kept in the dark about what was going on? Isn't this a mishandling of the situation? When the Bills released Araiza they were not standing up for him or for due process nor were they supporting their "culture." Releasing Araiza became necessary and unavoidable (except in the opinions of a few delusional posters here). As for the performance of Skurski, Graham, Gaughan and the others who have come under criticism, I haven't listened to the press conferences so I can't speak to the quality of the questions but I have read their pieces and have no problems with what these guys have written and reported. Also it seems like for context, most of you have not read the Araiza articles that have been published in the major newspapers. The local media is doing just fine with their reporting.

Disagree all you want but also mark my words, someone in the Bills organization will lose their job because of Araiza-gate.

This is a great point and I was wondering when it would be made (I haven't bothered going into the 272+ pages in the other topic). Someone is going to take the fall. It will be a test of the Buffalo Bills organization to see what the fallout will be from this situation and how much damage it might cause internally. Good overall take on a fairly complex subject. My thought is that most people here seem to think the Bills either handled this very well or very poorly. But again the truth doesn't always fit into a nice, tidy binary box. The Bills did some things well and other things poorly. You could probably assign them a numerical grade. I dock them points for not doing better on the due diligence/vetting of Araiza. I also dock them points for not continuing the engagement between De'Angelo and Gilleon. They had nothing to lose and possibly something to gain by staying connected in this conversation... even if it's just for good optics. The Bills have not been flawless in this situation but I think overall they responded pretty well.

What is the best-case scenario involving Araiza, the then 17-year old accuser, and the 2 others accused? In other words, what is the "most innocent" thing that could have happened that night? Araiza is guilty of something... minimally very poor judgement and very poor character and possibly a lot worse than that. And there are posters here who actually believe that the Bills should have stood behind this individual of questionable character who represents a swirling cloud of distraction?

IHOH.

The Bills already have a big-bodied receiver with good hands that doesn't separate particularly well... and who has a cap hit of $705,000 for 2022.

Josh is a very interesting person. One paradox is that he's always had to fight to earn respect and he freely admits that he has a chip on his shoulder from past slights. The level of disrespect he has endured is well-documented and he says that it motivates him. And yet Josh doesn't seem to have so much as a single bitter bone in his body and he definitely does not strike me as a grudge holder, like so many people are. Josh seems like too happy a person to harbor negative emotions for very long and so I still haven't figured out what makes him tick.

I'm in that group that believes that Josh needs to be protected from himself via prudent play calling. On critical downs a Josh run should always be on the table to keep the defense honest but I'm really really wishing/hoping that the addition of Aaron Kromer and improvements in our RB room will lead to a team that can run effectively without involving the QB... unlike last year.

People think I'm a sincere and earnest person... but I don't suck at poker. Just saying...

And there are other teams out there (Rams, Bucs, etc) who would be happy to add OBJ for a late season run. Make no mistake... there will be an OBJ sweepstakes. When players with the cache of Von Miller and OBJ entertain thoughts of playing for the Bills it means a few things: They want to win a championship and will be on their best behavior They recognize the Bills as a high-quality organization that they want to associate their brand with I am a Golden State Warriors fan and favor the GS teams that won championships without Kevin Durant over the teams that won with him. That said, the naysayers here shouldn't be looking a gift horse in the mouth. While I'd prefer to win a Super Bowl without OBJ, I'm not gonna grudge him a spot on the bandwagon, especially if he's helping lead the charge.

As I stated in this thread, 2 trade aways are possible and 1 is likely. Update: Aug. 22, 2022 Traded OL Cody Ford to the Arizona Cardinals for a fifth-round pick.

When it comes to football I prefer the description, "has an upright running style."

The reason they changed the roster cut down dates this year is so teams would be able to play all reserves for the final preseason game. Aside from Elam and Benford (one of whom will be starting against the Rams) and the kicker, punter, and long snapper I can't imagine the Bills playing any of their starters.

Theoretically there are at least 3 ways any punter/holder can cost his team a game. 1) Poor hang time/outkicking the coverage resulting in a long punt return leading to a score. Araiza had these issues in college. 2) Taking too long to release the punt causing the punt to get blocked, leading to a score. Has anyone been timing his release? 3) Botching a hold on a FG attempt. This could happen to anyone at anytime. It's probably more likely with an inexperienced holder which Araiza is. None of us have a crystal ball. There's a scenario where one bad play affects the outcome of one game which affects the standings which affects home field seeding. The selection of Araiza as the punter is one of risk/reward. McDermott et al are guessing/predicting/hoping that Araiza will increase the win probabilities of the games and/or that his mistakes won't cost us anything.

Congratulations, good luck, and safe travels Ethan.

“In fairness to Spencer, he hasn't been able to be out there as much as he'd like or we would have liked to this point,” McDermott said. “He's coming off of an injury, so trying to bring him back the right way and building his endurance and getting him more and more comfortable as the days and weeks move forward here.”

@thedean could speak to that. They're big buddies from way back.

Apparently Daboll coached at William and Mary in the late 90s when McDermott was a senior there and they had maintained their friendship since then. The story I heard was that Daboll wanted the Bama job because he thought working with Saban would be better for his aspirations as a head coach. A bit ironic then that he ended up taking the Bills OC job and parlayed that into becoming a head coach.

I had heard that McDermott wanted to hire Daboll in 2017 but Daboll wanted the Alabama job. Regardless, like Hondo says, a first time Head Coach doesn't always have the stability, track record, and credibility to hire their first choices. On balance it seems the Bills have evolved into a pretty solid coaching staff. For one thing it's pretty amazing the Bills have 4 former OCs on their staff under Dorsey. That's a lot of expertise.

Could not agree more. For instance it's a widely-held belief that Rick Dennison was not McDermott's first choice. Dennison was released after one season after McDermott was able to convince Brian Daboll to come to Buffalo.

I don't know if it's intentional or not but you're changing the debate. What has been discussed from the beginning is your assertion that Brees is a system QB. I'm done. The last word is yours.

From The Athletic (Buscaglia) on Spencer Brown: "Between off days, non-padded sessions and preseason games, Brown had only six practices since getting cleared for 11-on-11. On the other hand, Quessenberry hasn’t missed a practice this summer. If anything, they likely view the Broncos game as an important step in Brown’s return. The second-year right tackle played 14 snaps in the second quarter, half of one drive and all of the other, before rookie Luke Tenuta took his place with the rest of the second-team offensive line. As long as Brown continues on this trajectory, it seems like it’s only a matter of time before he ascends to the starting five."