JDG

Well, in this day and age in the NFL you need two safeties and three good corners to take to the games on Sunday. I see no reason why the Bills wouldn't want Clements, McGee, and Yobouty - so long as Clements doesn't continue to regress this year. JDG

Yes. Unless, of course, you wish to argue that the jury is still out on the likes of Cade McNown and David Klingler.... JDG

You must not come around here much... ;-) One problem - JP Losman is a second-year QB. In fact, he got more playing time as a rookie as some highly drafted and healthy first-year QBs. The problem of course, is that Kelly Holcomb went onto the field with the same exact players and the same exact coaches and was twice as good as him.... Kelly Holcomb! JDG

While my opinions are admittedly not based upon film review, I thought our defense was cover-your-eyes awful last season. It seemed that if a team decided to pass on us, then we couldn't stop the pass. If a team wanted to run us, well, we couldn't stop the run either. It seemed like the exact opposite of "pick your poison." I think no lead was safe with last year's defensive crew. If a team needed to run out the clock on us, that defense couldn't get off the field. If we need to hold a lead, we rarely could stop them. To me, its no surprise that a defensive-minded coach came in here and immediately used three draft picks on the defensive unit... JDG

Fox Sports mock draft had McCargo going to the Bears at #26.

Because 3rd Rounders automatically start in their second year...

Have a last name of Manning? JDG - Or Detmer.....

But Clayton's was a well-written example of great reporting? Sorry, Kelly, but it *is* possible for good reporting (or in this case, a good opinion column - this wasn't a news article at all) to provide a viewpoint that disagrees with yours. JDG

Its unbelievable that you could like the Clayton article and be mystified by this article..... Look, Gleason concedes that Ralph Wilson is making money - but points out that some owner could make a ton more money in LA. Its not that hard.... JDG

How about Robert Gallery? He seemed awful quiet this year in Oakland...... JDG

Wow guys... way to welcome a new poster to the Board. You guys are the real friendly sort, aren't you? chetsap - welcome aboard, and don't think that the above are typical of the Bills fans here.... JDG

That would be because there is only one owner and GM who completely tips their hand before the NFL Draft - the one with the first pick. If the Titans didn't talk up Young, they'd be practically *begging* someone to trade with New Orleans for Leinart. JDG

This is called smoke-blowing. There's no way the Titans don't take Leinart..... JDG

O.k., you're in California - does CalPers manage 25% return year after year? I'm pretty sure they're at the $100mil level. I mean really, think about it for a moment - do you really believe that all the investors and investment funds in this country with $100 million mentally bank upon 25% average returns over 10 years??? Let alone view 25% average returns as being, quote "less than reasonable"???? In fact, a lot of economic research has been done recently on the fact that it actually gets *harder* to find investment opportunities once you reach a certain size, due to liquidity problems. I forwarded your post (without your name) to a friend of mine who works in investment banking on Wall Street. His reaction was actually somewhat kind.... quote: "Completely untrue." JDG

25% return for 10 years is reasonable? Sorry, but there is huge amounts of risk in private equity, and sustaining 25% return for 10 years is *great* performance, not "reasonable." JDG

O.k., I'm curious, which industries have generally had better investment returns over the past 10 years than the NFL? JDG

I've said Ngata, Young, Justice, and Davis.....

What do you *think* they base them on? Why is the NFC contract worth $100 million more than the AFC contract? If a home NFL game gets @30% share in the home market, do you really think that a 30% share in the LA market isn't "not one cent" more than a 30% or even a 40% share in the Buffalo market? I think you are overly reliant upon anecdotal evidence about the interest in football in LA. People aren't going to spend every day whining about something out of their control - but that hardly means that Angelenos wouldn't follow an LA team, or that LA-area corporations wouldn't all sign lucrative sponsorship deals with an area team. The delay in getting a team in Los Angeles doesn't mean that the NFL isn't interested, so much as it means that there have been real problems in getting a solid stadium proposal put together. There's also the matter of the NFL also having to figure out how to put a franchise in LA once a stadium is ready - there's little appetite for expansion, so that means undertaking the politically risky process of moving a franchise. There certainly isn't anything like the threat of an antitrust lawsuit hanging over the NFL like there was in the Cleveland case. So, the NFL's been moving slowly in order to ensure that there is a good stadium deal in place, and also in order to figure out how to get a franchise there. It seems entirely possible that the opening stages of the second-half of that equation are falling into place. JDG - Who would still love to see an on-the-record quote from the NFL about wanting to keep the Bills in Buffalo.....

;-) Although actually I meant that the linked article itself was perhaps one of the dumbest things ever written.....

I think that the provision about not providing revenue sharing to new owners is aimed squarely at the NFL's oldest owner. Who else is gong to complain? Are there other owners who are likely to sell or die over the next six years as Ralph? I think that the provision about 80% of the NFL's average ticket price is aimed squarely at the NFL franchise with the lowest average ticket price. Based on my back-of-the-envelope calculations, I expect that only Buffalo, New Orleans, and Jacksonville will be under that 80% figure for this year. I think your point about the Bills being the only ones to complain about the qualifyers is actually supporting evidence for my theory. If the suits in the NFL office wanted Buffalo in a far more lucrative market, like Los Angeles, then it would make sense to include provisions that could target the Bills, without raising the ire of the other NFL Owners. The qualifyers that Ralph is talking about appear ominiously well-targeted at the Bills. What other NFL teams are going to get excited about provisions that suck for the Bills, but ultimately don't affect them? A little hyperbole, eh? First off, you're providing a partial sports score. Yes, the Bills are well-represented at many "away" games - but I don't think its because fans "travel extremely well." I think its predominantly first-generation WNY expatriates providing the attendance. Moreover, you aren't comparing it to "away" ticket sales for other NFL teams like the Raiders, Cowboys, Steelers, Jets, Giants, etc. I don't know that the Bills necessarily are a major "road draw" compared to other NFL teams. Indeed, I'd expect that road games for many other NFL teams are far more likely to sell out than Bills games. As for who watches the games, I think that the TV ratings tell the story. Buffalo ended up with 16 1pm games this year - not even a single 4pm contest that would have a shot at being the "national game" for a given week. If the Bills were in Los Angeles, everything else being equal (including LA being in the Eastern time zone), I guarantee you that there would be a 4pm game on the schedule, and in all likelihood a Monday night game as well. QED. Moreover, it is worth noting that Fox pays almost $100 million more per year for NFC games than CBS pays for AFC games. Why? In large part because population *matters* and, the AFC has more small markets (including the two smallest if you properly consider Milwaukee to be Green Bay's market) than the NFC. Don't kid yourself that moving the Bills from the 2nd smallest to the 2nd biggest wouldn't bring the price of the AFC contract a little closer to the NFC contract. You've raised the examples of the Cardinals and the previous LA teams. I think we should see how well the Cardinals do once they have a new stadium, and once they get a couple playoff appearances under the belt. I think the NFL recognizes that a winning tradition and a good stadium count for a lot - there's every reason to believe that the Cardinals could blow the Bills out of the water in terms of revenue once the gap in Stadium and tradition with the Bills is closed a little bit. I think the same thing holds true for Los Angeles. Previously LA had two teams in the same market, two terrible owners, little to no winning tradition in LA, and some of the worst stadium arrangements in the League. I expect that a single team in LA, with a modern stadium, a committed owner, a few years of playoff contention would easily earn 50% more revenue than the Bills. JDG

This has to be one of the dumbest things ever written.....

The Board doesn't flip-flop, you just read different people..... The "new" revenue sharing pool is projected by USA Today to amount to @$10mil per low-revenue team. The gap between high-revenue and low-revenue teams is already around $100million, and could continue to grow. JDG

No it is not. The Buffalo Bills own the naming rights to the Stadium, and they have chosen not to sell them. JDG

Kelly, I am glad that Tagliabue assured Chuck Schumer privately that he wants to keep the Bills in Buffalo. I wish that he would say so publicly (if he has not already said so.) Of course, Tagliabue is a lame duck at this point, so his words only carry so much weight. What has concerned me is that the person the NFL has sent out in public to go on the record on this issue is Greg Aiello, and I have definitely noticed that none of his comments have said anything about wanting to keep the Bills in Buffalo. As for the Canisius professor, I think he is arguing against himself. I haven't seen anyone suggest, not Ralph, not me, not anyone, that the Bills can't compete in 2006. The whole debate here is long term. JDG

Quote?