Casey D

Training Camp. He played Dallas to release him by faking retirement. By signing w/ Bills, he skipped TC and gets to keep his Dallas bonus too. If he retired, he'd have to give some of bonus back. He signed a 3 year $10.5 M deal in 2012... smart guy. He kind of Byrded the Cowboys

Under recent rule changes, an NFL owner can own another sports team if the sports team is in the same market or is in a market without an NFL team. Thus Paul Allen can own the Seahawks and the Trailblazers. So Pegula can own both the Bills and the Sabres because they are in the same market. Can own the Leafs and Bills too.

There is nothing wrong about how you feel about things, but markets are made objectively not subjectively. Taking your position to an extreme, we could forfeit all our picks for the next 3 years in return for 5 first round picks in 2017. That might get us closer to a Super bowl someday, but the team will suck for several years, with no guarantee of anything down the line. I mean what is 1st round pick in 2025 worth? Objectively, nothing, even though in 2025 it will be worth something I suppose, and you might value it as a long term benefit as it might one day get the Bills to win a SB. Money that is owed to you beyond 7 years from now has basically no present value, but in 10 years I guess it will be worth something. Deferring things is fine, but too far and it's essentially worthless. No one knows whether Watkins will prove more valuable in terms of winning a Super Bowl, as opposed to having say Ebron and two guys from next year. If you knew not taking Watkins will get you to the promised land sooner as you opine, you would not take Watkins-- it's a no-brainer. But no one knows that. I generally share your view that getting as many picks as possible is a better long term strategy, but for every rule there is an exception. If you think Watkins really will get you over the hump, you do it. That's a judgment call, no right or wrong to it... CD Watkins was the highest rated player on the Bills'-- and apparently several other team's-- board. Getting the best player in the draft is bold-- they were not going to trade up to get anyone other than Watkins and Clowney. Makes perfect sense.

So would you give up the 2nd round pick today for say Detroit's 1st round pick in 2017? Why not? Because you get the player this year for 3 years before you even get the 2017 pick? There is plainly a time value here. Why did Buffalo say no to throwing in the 4th round pick this year, and Cleveland reject the Bills' 4th round pick in 2016 to make this deal? They settle on 2015. Again, there is a time value here, which does not apply only to money. Not really hard to understand.

It really depends on how good Whaley and company are at player evaluation. Without breaking the bank on one guy--and even then it usually does not work well-- free agency is not the process to get elite, team-changing players. That only comes through the draft. Plainly what Buffalo is trying to do, however, is find solid players who will be an upgrade at reasonable prices at positions of need. I think that is the only intelligent way to approach free agency as it typically is a waste of money to try and get elite talent in FA. So the approach here seems solid and intelligent, which is all you can ask. If I knew--as many here seem to-- that Williams and Rivers suck, then I guess this is a failure. But if these guys can be solid contributors in little ways for reasonable money, this will all be very good. So I like the intelligence in Whaley's approach, and if he and Marrone know what they are doing-- and I think they do-- things will get better soon.

Nice post.

He's no John Skelton, that's for sure.

Actually if you look at the internal numbers from Innovative Stats where these rankings come from, the Bills were actually better in terms of kickoff coverage than in 2012-- of course that includes touchbacks which Carpenter likely improved upon over Lindell. As to punting, we were bad both years, but just slightly worse in 2013 than in 2012. Where the big changes occurred were in punt and kickoff returns. The Bills were number 1 for both in 2012 and just about last for 2013. McKelvin dropping lots of punts did not help, and we had an inordinate amount of touchbacks. But the drop from 9 to 30 is almost exclusively caused by the difference in return yardage between 2012 and 2013. Outside of last year, the Bills ST were decidedly mediocre, ranging from 17 to 24 over the past few years. Again the improvement last year was due to return yardage exclusively.

There you have it. I think we largely agree. I should have gone back and reread what you wrote earlier-- my bad.

Lots of things. Many of your facts are incorrect IMO. First Marrone's players seem to like and respect him, never the case with GW. The press largely likes him and his candor-- he generally gets very good press. He admits mistakes all the time vis challenges and using timeouts and the formation when TL did the QB sneak in NE. He seems to have a philosophy and vision where he wants to go with the team. His success at Syracuse. He is an emotional and candid guy. All sorts of differences. I'll agree he is not the most articulate guy like GW, but he is not full of false bravado in my judgment like GW. I think they are very different people Time will tell, you could be right, but I think superficial stuff is clouding your view IMO.

You cherry picked that one statement after a longer exchange. I'm not going to repeat everything I wrote earlier, but if Marrone is either too stupid or too loyal not to see Crossman totally sucks--which you suggest is obvious-- then we have a much bigger problem here than Danny Crossman-- we have an utterly incompetent head coach who does not know where his own economic interests lie. I can't reach that conclusion about Marrone, at least not yet. Apparently you already have, so that explains our different views. It has little to do with Crossman, and everything to do with Marrone and his judgment.

Pretty fatal flaw if you are correct. I think Marrone is quite different from Gregg Williams, but only time will tell.

So what? If anything, it only shows the risk Marrone is taking by sticking with Crossman. if he's right, everyone here will have been a Crossman backer all along. If ST brings this team sown in 2014, Marrone will pay the price.

The lynch mob moves to Priefer--- now that's funny. Let's bring the internal Vikings investigation with him. As to Crossman, you know the world is not as simple as who is the absolute best at something-- you build teams and find chemistry. Marrone obviously thinks Crossman can do a good job. If his assessment is blinded by personal loyalty, Marrone will likely pay a high price for that loyalty if it is misguided. I don't know that Marrone is right, but I am confident the fire Crossman herd view is based on anger and not on better information than Marrone has. No, your view is colored by your opinion that Marrone is an incompetent blowhard like Greggo. Either you are right or wrong. If right, then Danny Crossman is the least of our worries, and Crossman's retention should have you doing cartwheels because it will accelerate Marrone's demise which you say is inevitable anyway. I get it.

Of course his being a friend had a lot to do with him getting the job-- that happens all the time in all walks of life. But that does not mean that because you know someone you hire or retain them even if incompetent. I assume Marrone thinks Crossman is a quality ST coach or he would not have hired him in the first place. He may be wrong, but if he is Marrone is possibly betting his HC career on it. And I believe Marrone likes his job-- and what it brings to him and his family in terms of financial security-- more than Danny Crossman. Hmm... do I do this for Danny or my kids? Easy call, don't you think? I believe Marrone would fire Crossman in a heartbeat if he felt it would bring the Bills closer to the playoffs. Why would you think otherwise? Yes, until you show me you are incompetent. I have not reached the conclusion that Marrone is incompetent. And as a manager, you need to give situations time to play out and not change course as soon as things get rough. It's called leadership.

I tell you what-- why don't you see if you can get an HC job and then you can hire whoever you want.

Lynch mobs rarely think much before taking action. Believe me, I understand.

I don't believe people who watch games on TV know the intricacies of what they see on the field. Even Belichick said last year you have no idea who screwed up on a play until you know the details of who was supposed to do what. But look, you want the guy fired, I understand. And you may be right. But for know I'll trust Marrone more than you-- no offense.

Of course, no one knows the future "for sure." But Marrone can evaluate what he saw and determine if Crossman is teaching the fundamentals correctly and had bad execution or he was coaching like Mo of the Three Stooges. That information Marrone does have much more than anyone on this board. Based on that, he can make a prediction on what he thinks might happen in the future. If he keeps Crossman, I assume I know what Marrone thinks he is seeing from 2013. Again I have more faith in that than angry people spewing ST rankings. I mean duh. I mean Belichick was a bad coach for years at Cleveland. Just sayin'.

Not stupid for discussing it-- the discussion is stupid. There is a big difference. You can write anything you like, but it does not mean it makes sense. And your Greggo thing is getting old, and was not clever in the first place.

Marrone said he and Hilliard had philosophical differences-- I guess he saw that after a year. So Marrone can make that kind of decision but has not made it for Crossman. What's so hard to understand? As to the ten year thing, that information was processed-- as you suggest--when he got the job. To use that same information to fire him after one year makes no sense. In any event, Marrone will be held accountable for Crossman. I put more faith in that than in the rantings of people on this board who just quote ST rankings.

This is a stupid discussion. Marrone needs to succeed in roughly three years if he wants to have a head coaching career in the NFL. Yet he hired--and apparently will not fire-- a special teams coach after one year who apparently will doom the team and, a fortiori, Marrone's coaching career. Is it not possible that Marrone thinks Crossman is a good coach and did not have enough tools to work with yet so he deserves the time to develop the ST into a solid unit? Is the point here that there was ample talent to field a good special team unit, but Crossman messed it up? How does anyone here know that. What proof do you have other than your own opinion? I think Marrone believes continuity is important is developing a team-- including special teams. Seems sound to me. The fact that Crossman was not fired after one year does not mean he is not being held accountable, it means Marrone feels he has not had enough time yet to develop a quality ST unit. Simple. And don't point out Crossman's history at Detroit or Carolina. Maybe you all feel he should not have been hired in the first place, but Marrone disagreed and one year is typically not enough time to quit on someone trying to build something. If Marrone thought Crossman was a fail, he'd fire him now to save himself, not keep him around and have his "old friend" screw up his career-- that don't make walkin' around sense. Marrone might be wrong, but people have no quality information to judge the situation, and Marrone does. The Danny Snyder quick fix mentality on this board is amazing. People always want heads to roll to make themselves feel better.

Why, the defense was putrid today. Can't make a stop when you need one. I mean the defense is more fun to watch, but it is not good. I'm OK with Pettine, but no one is going to make him a head coach based on what he is doing with this defense.

But that is who they are. Einstein's definition of insanity--- doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. Seems to me that is the definition of a Bills fan.

Indeed. Wait until next year.