ropeerasers

Wannstedt's last full year in the league was 2003. That year his Dolphins were the third ranked defense, fifth in stopping the rush and third in points allowed.

Some people here have remarkably short memories. Welker was a Dolphin until he became an RFA. After negotiating a deal with the Pats, he was traded for a second-round pick.

Why does anyone think Pegula has any interest in keeping the Bills in Buffalo? He's from northeast Pennsylvania...

I didn't see anywhere in that PBS link that said the majority or even a sizable number of major football programs -- the ones consistently sending players to the NFL -- are losing money and are requiring significant taxpayer subsidies. But beyond that the premise of your complaint is just so odd. You don't want colleges and universities assuming the cost of training the workforce for the NFL? That's a complaint about the existence of state-funded colleges, not athletics programs. I hate to break this to you, but taxpayers are also chipping in on the educations of engineers, nurses, accountants and hundreds of other professions. On top of that, there is no tv deal, licensed apparel and ticket sales to help cover those costs.

You think major football programs are losing money and that's covered by taxpayers? Really?

To get back to the original point, Cowherd does have a habit of "breaking" dubiously sourced, unreliable "news" then never acknowledging it again after he is proven 100% wrong. After Urban Meyer resigned he went on and on about how he knew from an "inside source" who his replacement would be but couldn't reveal it. The next day and a half was pretty much just him teasing his fans about who it was. He promised that it would be a head coach from a successful college program and not a coordinator with no head coaching experience. Will Muschamp - an assistant from Texas with zero head coaching experience - was hired, and Cowherd never mentioned it again.

Apparently Carrington is active for this one and McCargo isn't despite the Stroud injury.

That's the first thing I thought of, too. Looks like someone originally from Wisconsin or New York is working at a TV station in Northern Cali.

It's a lot easier than expecting a Superbowl then acting like the sky is falling when reality sets in. This place seems to fetishize disappointment.

I don't think what I'm saying is any more delusional than thinking one loss automatically equates to picking first in next years draft. I DO NO think this is a championship or playoff contending team. I'm saying that the phases other than the offense were average to good. Our coaching choice this offseason had an obvious offensive bent, so it's not completely unreasonable to think that that phase will improve with more time in one way or another.

I understand the emotional response, but this team wasn't going to come out for the opener and all of a sudden by the a Superbowl team. Yes, people have hoped for improvements in the past that didn't pan out. Every other team in the league has gone through that at some point. I know it's been a long stretch of inept football, but that's not going to change overnight. True there are plenty of worst to first stories, but those are still the exception not the rule. And I don't think this particular team was/is set up to be one of those teams no matter how much I'd hope for it. So you're left with two possible scenarios: A) You hope for the team to improve this season, draft well next season then seriously compete in a year or two. or B) Give up. Feel free to do the latter, but I'm not to that point yet.

Yeah that's exactly what I said. Great reading comprehension.

Or at least as pleased as I can be with a loss. Honestly, I'm like everyone else and would much rather see a win where the offense dominated and where all the concerns about the QB and O-line were magically wiped away. But the chances of that becoming a reality were always minute given the recent history of this team. What I find reassuring about the game, though, was the fact that both the defense (especially the run defense) and special teams performed far greater than expected based on how they looked during the preseason. Even the optimistic among us, myself included, thought the best case scenario based on preseason was having a competent offense while struggling in other phases because of coaching and scheme changes. I, for one, am glad that didn't ultimately become the reality simply because of the offensive focus of this coaching staff. Rome wasn't built in the night, and years of incompetent offensive coaching won't be erased by week one of the first season under the new regime. In all likelihood, this offense is going to improve as the season progresses. Whether that progress happens with Trent under center is yet to be seen, but the point is we now know that when the offense gets up to speed it will be accompanied by decent defense and special teams. If we can follow this trajectory, we won't be elite in any of the three phases, but we'll be competitive in each. When was the last time you remember that being the case? I know a lot of you probably disagree with the assessment of the defense because of the lack of a pass rush, but I think all the players who switched positions will learn and grow more instinctive in their new roles. And when we get Torbor and Ayodele in the swing of things, the coaching staff will likely feel more comfortable in getting creative with exotic blitzing schemes. I recognize a lot of this sounds like rationalizing, but at the same time I don't think any of it sounds unreasonable.

I don't live in Erie anymore, so I don't know if it has changed. And admittedly, they get bumped less often for the Browns then the Steelers, but it still happens with regularity. And it always seemed like the city was going to implode on weekend the Browns and Steelers played but the Bills were away, playing at the same time.

The Erie stations are only obligated to play the away games. Because of that they barely ever play home games if there's a conflict with either the Steelers or the Browns.