Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Channel 6 At least for me it is down here in North Carolina!

So sounds like even if the ex coach gets a job in the TV booth or being a motivational speaker, any monies received offset the salary owed by former team. I would have expected it to only include actual NFL team money, but apparently not.

They are of little value without fast arm speed!

Correct he doesn't have a legal say, but it appears it is a rule to allow coaches under contract to move on to HC positions, I always thought it was also allowed for position coaches to move on to coordinators positions without being able to stop them. From what I've read here this week ,teams can block that move. But I think if a team did block that, while Roger may not be able to prevent them, the team would likely be told that the NFL isn't pleased with their actions, and you really don't want to be in the NFL's doghouse not over something like that. And as I also mentioned what goes around comes around so at some point the Bill's may be looking at another teams coach, as professional curiosities, teams don't appear to block these moves. With bringing in a new DC, I think the likelihood of the Bill's blocking any move goes down even more.

What goes around comes around. Do that to the Browns five years down the road their coaches may be coaching on six different teams, Bills are looking to talk with some coach and they make tell their management, screw them the way they screwed us. That's why teams are running by professionals, not vindictive fans

I don't think it has to do with marbles nearly as much as allowing coaches better opportunities and wouldn't want to be viewed as a location that stops coaches from getting better jobs.. If Cleveland wants one of out coaches as DC, would be shocked to see the Bill's stop particularly now that we nave a new DC hired. If Schwatz for some reason doesn't want O'neil makes it easier. I also think if we did not allow someone to leave for a better position, likely we'd be gettign a cal lfrom Roger asking to explain.

Is Pettigrew an upgrade over Chandler?? Obviously he first has to sign here for that to even be up for debate. Looking at his stats, doesn't appear so?? Maybe he's a far superior blocker?? We could upgrade from Chandler, but if Chandler was our biggest need, we'd be in pretty good shape. Wouldn't mind seeing the CB and FS signed.

Before Pettine we also had a banged up Williams brothers, we had a Darius who's brother just died and only had one year under his belt total. We had no LB's worth much of anything, now we had Lawson and Kiko. We didn't have Hughes. Maybe his coaching is what turned around McKelvin and Arron Williams, though you could argue it was Henderson coaching the DB's or could have been the other aforementioned changes changes that made these guys look much better. Was Pettine a step up from prior years, yes but I do question how much truly was him vs using his attacking style and now had injury free, more experienced players to back it up. Not saying I'm at all happy he's gone, but the level of hysteria around here I think is way over the top for a guy who's defense struggled as much at times as they did. Without any statistical data to back this up, but it seems to me that position coaches promoted to coordinator positions, succeed at a much higher rate than coordinators promoted to head coach, so if they promote from within which I expect they will , I'm not all that worreid that we'll see this big drop off assuming evenyone stays as healthy as they did.

The other reason I think it will be Henderson is this, in spite of the vindictive nature of many posters her's who'd name O'Neal (beliee that's the LB coaches name) the DC just to screw Cleaveland, professional teams will look out for the overall development of people. If the Bill's name Henderson and let O'Neal go to Cleveland, two people get promoted to DC. I'm sure if the Bill's feel O'Neal is heads and shoulders the better choice, then probably don't follow my strategy, but if it's close to a coin flip between the two, then Henderson is the next DC. At this point way to late to bring in an outsdie guy, unless he's happy with the entire staff.

Absolutely, just have ot hope the other 31 teams don't bite on Jerry's direction. Kind of interesting when you look at all the teams that are also under the cap. 11 teams further under than we are, but everyone here keeps blasting the Bill's for not spending. Some good teams too on that under side.

I would certainly say the defense was way, way more exiting this year, how much better did it actually play, was it better yes, but not amazing. OK will agree the offense was worse so defense was on the field more, though I'd like to actually see a stat on that to verify we faced more plays, but would also add that Pettine had the best group of players in past few years to work with too.

At this late of a date, would be shocked if it's not an internal name as bringing in someone else they will want to change up scheme assistants ,etc. Plus that's kind of the method that most teams utilize, assistants get promoted to DC and O,once the present ones leave to become a head coach and everyone else moves up one chair.

I think it's cool that went from a baskball star to now a football star. I wonder if he went deaf from listening to Boeheim too much?

Cause people have heard of him! That automatically makes him a great choice. I'd be shocked if they brought Peppers in for anything more than a position coach. Likely he'd want to replace most of defensive staff which agai nto do now would hurt the Bill's much more than promoting one of their existing coaches to DC. The only way they look outside would be if they felt none of the position coaches were qualified at all.

I doubt the Pats were the first team to win who cheated, they were just the first to to win who got caught cheating. I recall a story from back in the late 70's Raiders were playing the Steelers, Madden was still the coach, Raiders finished their practice, ready to hit the showers, Suddenly they are called back out to practice against some other formation, why because spy's had sneaked into stadium and watched Steelers practice. Reported back to Big Al, so now they were working on this. Raiders won game BTW From what I recall Pats were first turned in by their old assistant coach (Mangini was it?) who was now with the Jets' If Pettine goes to Cleveland, I'd bet he has plenty of info he could turn Rex in for doing illegally and likely even Buffalo. But it's kind of an unwritten line that normally isn't crossed, ex-coaches don't tell secrets of old teams. But for some reason the Pat's ex-assistant crossed it. Also kind of interesting that he has not coached since I beleive??

So are you saying Wilson is a franchise QB? If EJ does crack the top 20, from what I've seen he''ll be right about where Wilson is. So Hogan and TJ being on the roster reflects back on Hackett?? Granted I'm sure Hackett had SOME input on who they kept and who they cut, but also certain Marrone and Whaley had alot of input on that too. So if they should have cut them two, who should they have kept instead? Or was it also Hackets job to go out and sign better WR's too? Granted he had some freedom on shaping the roster, but he still needs to go with the best six or seven available and not sure who else would have improved the roster. Rogers, maybe, but he had issues and may also have been over ruled on that one. I would agree that a couple of player changes the Bill's could be getting close, but also assumes that many of the rookies and 2nd year players, like EJ, Kiko, Woods, Grissom, Glenn all improve alot in the off-season, then they re-sign Byrd, and Arron Williams and McKelvin prove not to just have one good year in them. Also need Stevie, Spiller, Eric Woods, to step up a fair amount and the D-line to play as well as this past year. I'd agree with OP in that there are only a few positions where you feel you definitely need to replace the 2013 player, maybe 4 or 5, certainly less than in prior years, BUT also need alot more from the other 16 starters and backup to be equal to Seattle.

I think they should go after that Whitner guy. Anyone know anything about him??

Yes but that will cost you a big signing bonus which then you'd take a hit on the cap if you cut him. If that's really your plan to have a competition and potentially cut him, then wouldn't bother giving him big bucks which likely then would mean he's gone.

Was expecting much more!!

But the title was he didn't resign, then he must still be coaching there! Ah forget it!

Well someone did ask last week, well more like told, (maybe it was you and you're just baiting us) and the answer wasn't very pretty.

I agree it's a great rivalry as they play each other twice a season. Factoring in the first three items you mention you have two very evenly skilled QB's going up against eachother. The more I see of both of them I'd call it the battle of mediocrity Buffalo doesn't have any of those first three items, I think if we had drafted RW, likely this board would be covered with posts talking about what a bust he is and we need to get a new QB this year in the draft. Kind of like this board is now, but times ten!

So if he didn't resign, how can we hire him?? He's under contract!!

No the worst you can do is draft another QB in the 1st round, now both a competing for snaps and neither gets enough to improve. I've heard from multiple outlets once the regular season starts, the back up QB gets around 2 snaps per week with the first team. So how's he going to improve which ever one it it? These days with all the new rules reducing OTA's two-a-days, and other off season work, it also reduces the amount of snaps you get in training camp too. You could use a lower round pick on another QB, but with a rookie, it's unlikely he'd look any better than either Lewis or Tuell. I agree it is a QB driven league and the problem is there aren't enough to go around. Adding up all the teams I count 14 teams that if I were the GM, I'm completely happy with my QB, I count nine teams that are either actively looking for a new QB or have someone they believe is their #1, but is completely unproven like the Bills and Jets. Then there's another seven teams left that have a solid QB, has proven they are somewhat capable, but not enough to move up into the group of 14 teams whom have no plans to upgrade and two years from now these teams could all find themselves in the group of teams looking to make a change. I'd include teams like Miami, Cinnci, and would also include teams like Wash, Balt (a year ago people were claiming Flacco was a bust, then he wins the SB, this year not looking so good again) So the Bill's had Fitz who had games where he looked like he could move up to the "A" league so again don't want to waste a high draft pick to sit the bench when have many other needs. So you keep the guy and try and ride him hoping he plays steady, eventually most of these guys tail off and then you move on to the next choice. The problem too why teams are reluctant to move on to the next guy is look at he high rate of failures of rookies. I've heard this year they expect around five QB's to go in the first round. I'll promise you at least two will be labeled busts in five years, trouble is you don't know which ones and another one or two will become the Fitz of 2018 or so. But given those odds you tend to ride the middle of the road guy a little longer and hope he can move up to the next level or at least close to the next level.

Doesn't matter if he was convicted. Did Barry Bonds ever admit to using steroids, why isn't he in the HOF. This is a popularity contest, and people need to like him to vote for him. What happened is likely enough to turn some off, particually since it's his first year. Not voting for him in year #1 is kind of making a statement that your actions hurt you and this is my way of sticking it to you. Being convicted comes into play say if the league tried to suspend him when it happened, (don't recall what did happen on that end) or other similar things It's very dificult to take any kind of legal actions agaisnt someone without any convictions, but easy to say I'm not voting for you.