Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Bills are winning the penalty yards battle, that's a unique thing!!

1970 was actually post merger. So it wasn't the result of Miami operating in the Wild Wild West AFL-NFL wars, they just took one out of the Patriots playbook and thought no one would notice!

Think it made sense for Bon Jovi to want to move the Bills to a larger market like Toronto, but already being in Nashville, doubt he'd want to go to Toronto. I'd imagine he'll just line up someone with deep pockets with ties to Nashville, or someone who could care less where the team is located, and would keep them there. I'd think the league would rather have a team in Nashville than Toronto, but some would also have preferred Toronto to Buffalo. If the league is trying to move two teams to LA how would this help by bringing Toronto into the mix other than maybe use it as leverage to get a better deal from LA??

Did they actually trade two picks or were the Colts awarded the pick afterwards as a result of "tampering" I thought he went to Miami pre AFL-NFL merger and things were running pretty loose with regards to contracts. Things were starting to settle down with respect to contracts, but Miami signed him without an agreement, eventually the NFL ruled and awarded the picks?? Not certain, but thought it was not an agreed upon trade, but it's been a few years.

Agree, some good info. The other side of it too if you do get a Brady, Manning, Rodgers, etc once his rookie contract expires and you have to pay him the the going rate for a franchise QB, it's hard to afford to pay for enough talent to keep around him. If you're a Brady or a Rodgers, your talent can make up for some of that, but if you're Russell Wilson, not so sure. Will be interesting to see where Seattle goes the next couple of years now that they are paying RW all this $$. Will the team stay good, IMO I think they will quickly drop back to a .500 team. So yes that's true, my first question is what did these other QB's do after their first three games, did they also drop off. At this point there is enough film on him to know his strengths and weaknesses and game plan against him. The question is will he also improve? Likely for the remainder of this year, I'll give the edge to defenses. Next year will see what happens. But I do think even without any improvement if you put a strong team around him, which without paying him $20mil you can afford to do, I do think you can be highly competitive and win with him. And to your question of why did Ozzie let him go, what would you have suggested they do? Franchise him for what $15 mil to sit on the bench? Almost every QB out there in a similar situation leaves. Can you give me some names of QB's who at the end of their first signed rookie contract, playing on a team with an established starter at QB, have started say less than a handful of games with their current team, signed a new contract with that same team? Actually there may be some only because they did play a couple of games and maybe they totally sucked, so they didn't get any other offers but if that were the case would also be surprised if the team wanted to re-sign him. Can you explain what you thought Ozzie should have done and why TT would have likely agreed to it?

I'd disagree with #1 as other than the NE the deep ball has been one of his best plays. Maybe that was the strategy Andy Reid tried in the first half and Sammy racked up over 150 yards

Wrong!! Not the college trading deadline. That goes up to spring signing day.

I don't recall the Bills interviewing Hue Jackson??

Not a huge, huge SU football fan , tough to root much for a team that wins 3 or 4 games a year when you're out of the area and you have a 10-1 team down the road, so for all I know they've already hired someone, but wouldn't surprise me to see Etzell at SU

Everything I've read over the years is the refs don't want full time jobs as they all have long term professional careers making big money. If they made them full time supposedly many would quit. The issue I have is the NFL for years cultivated that type of person as the thought was someone making $300 to $500k couldn't be bribed. The problem is in todays would, with as much money being bet, someone could afford $1/2 mil payoff to bribe an official for one game. The other issue I have is in todays world, they guy making those kind of salary's no longer has a 9 to 5 job like Ward Cleaver did, he's at work from 7 till 7 and brings home work on the weekends, so doesn't have enough time to devote to reffing. I'm in favor of full time officials, to get around the problem of too many existing ones quitting because of not wanting to give up careers, I'd phase it in, each year maybe add 2 fulltime positions to crew, so after five years or so, they'd all be full time.

Yeah but the funny part is it seems like Carpenter misses less from long distance. It's the short "extra points" that are killing him.

He also didn't do very well as a HC. Just like Rex, they both were good coordinators who as HC have struggled.

Are you saying it's correct because you've read the rule book or because someone who likely knows about as much as the announcers told them it was correct per the rules. I'll wait until around mid week when the NFL issues there weekly "mistakes report" until we know it truly was the correct call. Everything I've always read the refs don't want to be full time as most don't want to give up their full time jobs. That's the argument the league has made as to why they aren't full time now, if they did that too many of their experienced officials would quit. I'm in favor of full time officials BTW, but this is the argument I've often heard against it. As was pointed out last week the guy who was the official for the Bill's Monday night game Gene Salitare or something like that, was on TV the week prior officiating an NCAA college basketballl game.

If there are dozens as you claim, then explain why there are at least a third of the teams that just never win. Year in and year out they lose, why because they too don't have a good GM. I've said for years the most important hire a team can have is the GM, more than the coach, players, etc. I could give a number of examples of teams that went from years of losing to becoming winners once they got a good GM. Yes Whaley has been here 6 years, but not as GM. The roster does have the most talent it's had in years. Is it turning itn oa playoff team, so far no, but they are better now than when he arrived.

I would be amazed if just about every coach in the league who's been hired as a HC isn't interviewed by the owner. I can't imagine any owner not wanting to talk with the person who like it or not will become the face of their franchise. I'd be equally amazed if both RB and DW weren't also completely on board wit h this hire, in fact more than likely one of not both of them recommended hiring Rex, and TP approved it. It's no different than how most businesses when hiring someone, the interviewee speaks with the hiring manager, the hiring managers boss, and likely someone in HR at a minimum. So to suggest TP shouldn't be interviewing the coach is completely clueless about how these processes typically work. And you know this wasn't what happend? How, can you explain, were you in the room when DW said no t oRex and TP told him, well I don't care I'm the owner and I'm going to hire him anyway!!

Great and how do you propose to do that other than dumb luck? Probably easily 1/3 of the teams in the league can honestly say their QB isn't the long term answer, but they also are smart enough to realize they are still better off than the alternative. Or you can be like Seattle and pay huge $$ for a QB that's maybe a bit better than middle of the road, now don't have the money to pay other players. Will see in the next couple of years how good RW really is when he's asked to carry the team. I agree wit ht he statement "this game was winnable" but finish it with if the defense stepped up and played like they did before Rex was here.

The problem with this whole thread is everyone here is thinking like fans and can't think why a player who plays a position that on Buffalo has the most depth and could go elsewhere to make more money would want to leave Buffalo. And it assumes the Bills really do want him to stick around. Other than he's Sammy's brother what reason is there the Bills would want to keep him other than anyone else on their practice squad. I highly doubt they would offer him more money than any other player on the PS unless they truly think that he was a steal getting him and giving him one year on the PS will turn him into an absolute 53 man roster player for them next season. Yes it was Matt Simms, but thought it was before the season even started. And his reason for turning Buffalo down would be the same reason that JW would leave, Simm's felt he had a better chance of sticking with Atlanta just as I'd think JW would see there's way too much depth in front of him here in Buffalo so he's better off leaving

I'd say Leaf was worse as he was the #2 overall pick, plus back then high draft picks were handed the keys to the bank, so made a fortune doing nothing. JF was the #22 overall pick and not making a ton of money.

THIS!! As long as Felton isn't screaming over lack of playing time, it's good having him on the roster when he's needed. Based on the numbers game of typical roster distribution, likely if Felton were gone, he'd be replaced with another RB anyway who'd hardly play. Wait, that means they could have kept Freddy!!

That's one thing I've noticed, I'm dating myself, but compared to like 40 years ago when QB's all called there own plays. (excluding Tom Landry coached teams) in the last two minutes or so much less plays are ran off compared to then. That's the down side of taking play calling away from the QB's. They have no idea how to do it when they are forced too.

Re #3 Based on the past couple of games, it does appear that the D is starting to "get" Rex's scheme as have seen quite a bit of improvement there. It may be Jason Taylor's comments about Rex having a very difficult D to grasp and takes time, may be what we're seeing here. Would still like to see more sacks, but overall am hopeful there.

Based on the level of his play on Sunday, doubt he'll be a FA. Likely he'll be Denvers starting QB next season. Freeing up $19mil can allow them to pick up some additional depth. Wouldn't it be a kick if Denver won the SB the year after he's gone. What's his averages been the last three games or so? I think many of his high rated states is due to his play the first couple of weeks of the season. I like TT, but think it may be teams have figured him out and he's not nearly as effective any more. Not ready to give up on him, as others have said he doesn't make the big mistake, maybe he can improve I'd give him another year, but think they need to figure out some other options at QB in the off-season.

Is it the same ruling as when there's a whistle on a running play where progress appeared to be stopped, the ref blows the whistle at about the same instant the ball comes loose. Even though the whistle did blow, the ball can still be recovered, but can't be advanced. Seems that's the ruling that they applied here.

Wel lthe other thing it tends to prove wrong is the idea that all the refs are for NE and against everyone else. It just supports the idea that whenever a call goes against you, it's bias towards you.

Sounded to me like the bigger issue was he wasn't very coachable, didn't listen and take instructions well. Those were some of the comments I read about him. I think that would be a bigger reason to dump him than the fumbles. Whether these statistics were completely accurate or not, as was pointed out when Fred was cut, his fumble percentage was about the same as BB. So I think a bigger issue was working with him off the field.