folz

I agree with you that other coaches are doing it as well, he's not the only good coach out there who knows how to build a good culture. And no question that the Bills PR department is always trying to pump us up and give us a positive outlook on the team. And I think McDermott does want the fans to buy in too...he won't alter his course based on our opinions, but if you have the fans behind you, that is a tremendous help. I'm just saying that with McDermott, the words don't seem like empty and baseless PR or just coach speak. I think he really believes the things he says and tries to enact them.

I agree MGK, Josh is not great yet. I guess I only meant it in regards to his humbleness. He is a great athlete, was the big man on campus at Wyoming, and a first round draft choice, but it hasn't gone to his head. But, yes, he still has a ways to go before being considered great by NFL QB standards. But, I too think and hope he can get there.

Actually there are a lot of similarities between Josh and Tre: Great players, but they are both so humble. No diva in them. Great personalities (everyone likes them). Very smart. Family guys. Jokesters. Always having fun. Physical players. A massive drive to compete and win every single play (never taking a play off). And maybe most important, wanting to be great! Some guys' goals are just to play in the NFL, make a squad, make the money, get famous, win games, win a Super Bowl. Those are all valid reasons (especially winning a Super Bowl), but the great players come in to the league wanting to be considered one of the best of all time when they're done and then work their butts off for that goal. In one version of that interview, Tre says exactly that...I want to be one of the best, one of the greats. And Tre backs that up with his talent and hard work. Love this kid and I have no doubt that the team is going to pay him to keep him. He is everything that Beane and McDermott preach about in regards to the type of DNA they want their players to have.

I don't know. I think like someone else said, catch phrases are just a lot of talk, until you back them up. McDermott doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk. We have all been on teams or in jobs where a boss/coach/company uses cliches or slogans, but then they don't seem to live what they preach and you end up with a lot of disgruntled people. Listening to both the Quinton Jefferson and Mario Addison interviews, both who came from good/winning cultures in Seattle and Carolina respectively, both said the Bills culture is different. It is family, it is fun, coach lets you be yourself, etc. They were careful not to put their old teams down in any way, but you could genuinely see that they meant it. They like the culture in Buffalo better. And it never seems to me that McDermott is saying things for "the masses." It is always about the players and the organization. Sean doesn't pander to the press and public like a Rex Ryan. And yes, all coaches try to build a culture, come in with slogans, etc. But how many of them can back it up, make them stick? Get everyone to buy into them? How many coaches have we seen come through Buffalo and tell us they are going to change the culture and somehow the team never fully bought in? It has a lot to do with a coach's personality and people skills (some just don't have them). It is about his words meaning something and pertaining to everyone, even himself. He and his coaches, and the FO are not above the law. They practice it too. How many times have you heard Sean talk about the "growth mindset" also being for himself. To learn to be a better coach, a better man everyday. That is living accountability, not just preaching it. Everything about McDermott is genuine. And I don't know this from anything that he says to the press, but by how the people he is leading talk, act, and perform.

I don't think Ed should have been arrested and I'm glad the charges were dropped. I think it was wrong of the NFL to force him into a program before the results of the legal proceedings were in. And this kid definitely does not need any type of babysitter, ridiculous to even suggest it. But, this does not appear to be racially motivated at all. He wasn't pulled over because he was black, he was pulled over because someone told the cops that he was driving erratically (swerving) and maybe the cops witnessed it themselves as well. And I can understand the cops being cautious of putting a possibly intoxicated driver back on the road. Maybe the breathalyzer wan't working, maybe he's on drugs, not alcohol, they could have thought. So, a major inconvenience for Ed, but not a complete miscarriage of justice. So, I don't blame the cops too much. What if he had been drunk or on drugs and went on to crash his car, injuring someone? Then people would say to the cops, you pulled him over and then let him back on the road? But, big props to Ed for handling the situation so maturely. The bone I have to pick, once again, is with the media. I watched the full interview with Ed. He spoke very openly and maturely about the situation, with really good perspective (and some good advice from Mom). Made me respect the kid even more. But here are the headlines from just the main page of TBD (so this is just the sports reporters, not even the more politically-minded news outlets): Bills' Ed Oliver says he felt 'violated' and 'guilty until proven innocent' after arrest (Buff news) When Bills’ Ed Oliver watched George Floyd’s death he thought: ‘That could have been me’ (Syracuse Post) Bills DT Ed Oliver says felt “violated” by his arrest in Houston (WIBV-TV) Bills Ed Oliver on arrest: ‘I felt I was guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty’ (WGRZ-TV) Ed Oliver: George Floyd could have been me (WROC-TV) Ed Oliver: 'I felt like I was guilty and had to prove my innocence' (WHAM-TV) Bills' Ed Oliver says he feels violated by unwarranted arrest (ESPN) See how they pepper the headlines with "George Floyd" "Violated" "Guilty until proven innocent," making this once again a story about race (with no evidence that it had anything to do with race). Now, at least the headlines above used real quotes from Ed, even though the reporters are the ones who asked him all of the questions regarding race, to get those answers. But then there is this headline from the D&C, which is a complete and utter twisting of a quote to fit an agenda: Ed Oliver says being a Black man very well could have been why he was arrested (Roch D&C) What did Ed actually say when asked if his arrest had anything to do with him being black: “Well, I’m not sure, but to be honest in Montgomery County, they have a no-refusal law so you can’t tell them, ‘No I don’t want to go to jail,’” he said. “That’s how it was explained to me so I don’t know. Maybe so, but the law in Montgomery County, I would hope to believe that whatever color you are, you’re going to jail." How does "I'm not sure" "I don't know" "Maybe, but I would hope to believe that whatever color you are, you're going to jail" turn into "Being a Black man very well could have been why he was arrested"? Quick shout out: Cheers to writers Matt Bove and Carly Mascitti for not race baiting with their headlines! The only two on the front page of TBD. Bills DT Ed Oliver shares perspective gained following dropped DWI charges (WKBW-TV) Bills defensive tackle Ed Oliver on dropped DWI charges (WHEC-TV) Folks, we need to stop being triggered by the media and social media, stop fighting each other. It's time to sit down and talk, work together, not assume that half the country is ignorant and racist. Is there still racism today? Yes, there is. Do we need to continue calling out true racism whenever it rears its ugly head? Absolutely. But there is no systemic racism. That is a made up term that means absolutely nothing. Every time you use it, you are just saying "Everyone is a racist." Which is the furtherest thing from the truth. Think about and look into where all these current catch phrases come from. Did any of you think these up on your own, "systemic racism" "toxic masculinity" "social distancing" "the patriarchy" "the new normal" etc., etc. Take some time to think about where your words and ideas are coming from. These phrases don't just spring up from the grassroots.

I know most of this has basically already been said, but I just wanted to expand on it from my perspective: I gave up religion more than 30 years ago, but I still try to live my life by the scripture that Fromm quoted (paraphrased), "Love God with all of your heart, and treat your neighbor as yourself." If the whole world tried to do that, this would be a much better place. So, how could it be a wrong answer? He's basically saying with that, I am trying to follow that principle, which would mean I am going to try and not repeat any past bad behavior. I am going to try and love and be compassionate and sensitive to all others in the future ("try" being the key word for all of us, of course). And in fact, it is not just a Christian/Jesus thing. Not only was it the number one advice by Jesus, but it is also the golden rule for almost every culture and religion in the world. It is the one rule to rule them all: “Do not do to others what angers you if done to you by others.” ― Socrates “Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.” ― Confucius "One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self. This, in brief, is the rule of dharma. Other behavior is due to selfish desires." --- Mahabharata, Anushasana Parva 113:8 from the Vedic tradition of India circa 3000 BC "That character is best that doesn't do to another what isn't good for itself" and "Don't do to others what isn't good for you." --- Zoroaster, Persia (c. 500 BC), Iː36 "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation. Go and study it." --- Hillel the Elder, as quoted in the Talmud (c. 200 CE), Shabbat 31a "None of you is a true believer unless he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." --- Muhammad, Hadith (Bukhari 1:2:12, Muslim 1:72f, and An-Nawawi 13) "Each one should do unto others as he would have others do unto him." --- Manco Cápac, Inca leader in Peru c. 1200 (Wattles 1996: 192) If Marcel was acting from a place of love and compassion (like the golden rule says to) and not from a selfish need to either get a story or to push his own ideas or beliefs onto someone else, he would have understood that this kid is probably terrified of giving an answer that sounds bad or could be misconstrued, after having had to take the heat for his previous racially-charged comments. He's young and still dealing with the fallout of his previous statements, what did MLJ expect? If Jake started talking up BLM or whatever, then people would say he's just doing it because he's trying to prove/pretend he's not a racist. Seriously, what answer would have been acceptable? Did he just want to see the kid prostrate himself? Is that what the interview was really about? Then that is totally a bad move on Marcel's side, not Jake's. Besides, actions speak louder than words...but actions take time. Anyone can say I'm sorry, I learned my lesson. We've seen hundreds of people do that and we either knew they didn't mean it at the time or their subsequent actions proved that it was just a lie said to get through a difficult moment. Let the kid learn and grow from this in his own time. I like MLJ a lot as a reporter, but I find it extremely arrogant to say that you want another person to respond a certain way or that Jake should be completely on the other side of this already and be able to respond with deep and thoughtful remarks, when he has had, what, 3 months to process it all? I hate to see people I respect, like MLJ, fall into the traps of the misguided righteousness that is so rampant these days.

Is it just me or does Tre look like he seriously bulked up this offseason (see 0:33 in the video)? I think he is about to demand the respect he deserves this year. Beast!

I was at the Cleveland game last year and one of the Browns' fans got mad at me. All I was doing was calling out guys' names who made plays. "Nice Tre," "C'mon Josh," "Yes Tremaine," etc. That kind of stuff. The guy next to me went off on me when it looked like the Bills might win the game..."I'm so sick of hearing you call out players' names!" and then he did a very agitated and bad impersonation of me. No doubt, I do see how it could be a bit annoying to hear a visiting fan constantly doing that right next to you. So, I sympathized and didn't get upset. But then his buddy, two seats over, leaned in and calmly asked me, "How the hell do you know all of their names anyhow?" I always figured that most fans (who are more than just the casual observers) knew the majority of the players on their team, but apparently not. I guess it's just another sign of Bills fans being truly die-hard. I bet if they shot that Jets video in Buffalo at any time during the drought, the vast majority of Bills fans could have named way more than 5 players.

Whose reality though? The one that the television creates?

Totally agree. But, if he didn't play conservatively in 2017, they wouldn't have even had those 9 wins for that miracle to even be a possibility. I'm just saying maybe he still wasn't completely confident in the offense last year in every situation, despite them being a far superior offense to the 2017 and 2018 versions. But, then again, maybe because of how he had to play (conservatively) with the lack of talent on the 2017 and 2018 teams, he was still a little gun shy (or in a bit of a rut) last year, and like most of you have said, he now needs to learn to loosen those reigns a bit because his players can handle it. And maybe that will partly come from him being more confident in his offense this year as well.

Yes, that was kind of my original point, not that Murphy was better than Shaq, but just that he was a lot better than people think he was or give him credit for in the second half of last year. But you bring up a good point, I did not equate snap count into the numbers I provided (though it's a bit closer than twice the amount as you guessed). Over each of their last six games (I include Denver for Shaq, but not for Murphy, since Shaq didn't play in the finale against the Jets), Murphy received 66.55% of the snaps to Shaq's 59.56% of the snaps---so Murphy got 6.5 snaps more than Shaq per each game on average, or 39 more snaps total than Shaq over their last six games. If I pro rate Shaq's stats to include 39 more snaps, then that adds to his totals as follows: .52 sacks .08 FF 2.6 tackles 1.45 QB hits Which would mean the comparison (taking an even snap count into the picture---as best I can) would be: Murphy Shaq 6 sacks 4.02 21 tackles 15 8 QB hits 11.45 2 FF 1.08 1 FR 0 So, pretty even in the pass rushing department (overall), with Murphy having an edge in tackles, and a slight edge in turnovers. But the point being that I think a lot of people seem to think that Shaq was the far superior player (and Murphy sucks), but the team got pretty much the same production out of each guy. There was not a drop-off when Murphy was in the game down the stretch.

I will agree that there were some moments that I wish they had gone for the jugular last year. But, you also have to take into account the offense itself and McD's confidence in them connecting on certain plays or down and distance. For instance, in 2017, we would have never made the playoffs if he let that offense wing it. Relying on his defense and playing conservatively on offense is actually what got that team to the post season. And even last year, we were much better, but the offense still struggled mightily in some games. It is kind of like having a kicker that you know is money from inside 45, but struggles over that. Well, if it's fourth down and a FG try would be from 51, you probably go for it on fourth rather than try the FG because you are not confident in your kicker. Hopefully this year the offense will take off and McD will have the confidence in them to sling it around, go for it, and not play too conservatively. But outside of maybe one or two games, I think he has managed games pretty well in that regard thus far.

I think most people would agree that Shaq has outplayed Murphy over the last two years overall. But, if we are talking unpopular takes, I think the following is more unpopular: I wonder if maybe it took until midseason of last year for Murphy to get fully healthy. Yes, I know that's 2 full years, and some guys can get back from an ACL in like 8 months. But, Murphy not only had a Grade 3 ACL tear (where it tore completely in half), but he also tore his MCL at the same time. His game really started to pickup around week 6 last year. And in his last six games of the season (including the playoff game), Murphy had 6 sacks, 21 tackles, 8 QB hits, 2 forced fumbles, 1 fumble recovery. For comparison, Shaq had 3.5 sacks, 12 tackles, 10 QB hits, 1 forced fumble, over the same six games. Edge to Murphy over that most recent span. Murphy was actually a beast in the Dallas game, the Pittsburgh game, and the Houston playoff game. Go back and watch the highlights. It was only the last 4 games he did not have a sack (not 8). And yes, 3 of his sacks came against Arizona and 1.5 against Washington. But look at any pass rusher. First, sacks usually come in bunches, and secondly, every great pass rusher feasts on weaker competition (Bruce did it all the time...4-6 sacks per season came in the two games against the lowly Jets). Another for instance, T.J. Watt had 6.5 of his sacks against Cinncinati, Miami, and Cleveland last year. Shaquil Barrett, the sack leader last year got 4 of his sacks against the Giants, 3 against Carolina, 2 against JAX (plus 1 each against Arizona and Detroit). That's 11 of his sacks against "weaker" competition. You could pretty much make that claim about almost any pass rusher. It is kind of par for the course. Now, if Addison wasn't feasting on weaker competition, then I'd be worried.

Also, I wouldn't underestimate what he meant from a leadership standpoint in the TE room last year for the young guys (kind of like Gore in the RB room). His contributions off the field may have been more important that his contributions on the field (though as you said, he is still a solid player/blocker, if he could just cut back on the penalties). But maybe the young guys are ready to step up and the leadership aspect of Smith's value won't be as high this year.

Unless there is a significant drop-off, which I don't think there will be this year at least, or he is not getting the same number of snaps as he did in Carolina, then I expect him to do what he has done for the last 4 years (averaged below). He has been amazingly consistent over that span: 9.75 sacks 35 tackles 14 Qb hits 2 forced fumbles

Honestly, I wouldn't trade Josh for any QB in the league right now. I'm not positive he will be a superstar yet, but I feel good enough about him that I want to see it play out. Josh is the perfect QB for Buffalo and this team. I'd rather see our guy blossom, than trade the farm for a different QB. I realize that some of you don't agree with that because you don't think Josh will ever blossom. And while I can understand people not being 100% sold yet, and wanting to see more first, those who are so positive that Josh sucks and always will, well I think you are delusional, and I really wonder what games you were watching last season. And not wanting to trade Josh is not a knock on Mahomes or Watson or Murray or Jackson or anyone else. You can like many QBs and think some or all will be good. Just because you think one will be good doesn't mean another won't be. It's an exciting time for the league with a lot of young QBs who look like they are going to develop into either solid or even franchise QBs (Mahomes already has, obviously). But, whenever these discussions come up, I feel like many (on both sides) are just arguing in a vacuum. To really compare two QBs, like Dak and Josh, you can't just look at win/loss record or a handful of stats. You also have to look at the context. How good an offensive line do they have? How much does the defense help out? Who was more polished/experienced coming into the league? Who's coaching them? What kind of weapons do they have? How good was the overall team that the QB is stepping in to? Who's on your schedule (how many good or bad defenses)? etc., etc. For instance, to compare Dak and Josh's 2018 season, you can't just say Dallas had more wins and Dak had better stats, so he is obviously the better QB. Well, Dak was in his third year, with two full seasons of NFL experience behind him. Josh was a rookie. Dak had one of the best Olines in the league, where Josh's Oline was so pathetic that it had to be completely rebuilt the next year. Dallas was a more veteran team, the Bills were young and had UDFAs starting because of a lack of salary cap. Dak's top two targets were Amari Cooper and Cole Beasley. Josh's top targets were Zay Jones and Robert Foster. Defense was about even (Yards given up: Bills 2nd , Dallas 6th; points allowed Dallas 6th, Bills 18th; Turnovers: Bills 9th, Dallas 19th). Context matters. Having said that, I'm not so sure that Dak is definitely better than Josh right now. But even if he is, Josh has way more upside and is cheap for the next 3 years, so why in God's name would anyone suggest giving up draft picks and paying a monster contract to a guy who at best is a little better than your current QB, but with a lower ceiling? Idiotic (and I assume click bait) post by the "reporter" who put it out there.

As an out-of-towner, I actually listen to the show quite a bit, to feel connected and to hear discussion of our Bills. To be honest, yes, Murph and Tasker are not the greatest talk show hosts. Task often changes his opinions in mid-ramble and Murph often doesn't understand caller's points and isn't always polite to guests. But, I will miss Murphy's knowledge of team history, going back to the old Rock pile/AFL days, and not only do I like when Tasker talks about the 90s teams and his career, but I have a feeling that he (along with money from PSE) really helped to bring on some of the higher profile guests over the last couple of years (with his respect as a former player and his connections from all the years at CBS). Plus, what Bills fan doesn't just love Tasker regardless? So, it will be sad to see them go for those reasons. And even if they weren't the best, they are part of the family. They did bring something to the table, even if they weren't the most entertaining or knowledgeable hosts. I still enjoyed listening to them. As to Brown and Glab, I think some of you are being much too harsh. Yes, Brown works for the team, so he will never be overly negative about the organization. But, first of all, there are plenty of other places to get negative news about the team. And secondly, Brown's position, basically being embedded with the team for the last decade plus, often gives him a much deeper perspective about the team than a regular reporter from the outside can give. Brown knows this team inside and out and he knows football. On his appearances on the show, he would get into much more depth about play calling, personnel, etc. than Murphy or Tasker ever would. I don't always agree with every take he has about particular players or whatever, but the guy knows his stuff. And he has strong, sometimes negative opinions that he shares on players or coaching or whatever, he just won't be the one to say break a Bills scandal or talk about that in a negative light maybe. Also, don't listen to a show paid for by the team if you don't want a generally positive outlook on the team. And I'm wondering how many of you have actually listened to one of the shows where Maddy filled in as host (rather than just hearing one of the more fluff pieces that they would bring her in for). She may not have a full grasp of Buffalo Bills history yet (as some derailed her for), but she is only 27 and probably never gave the Bills a second thought before she was hired like a year ago. So, give her some time to get up to speed. She is learning. But, she is actually very knowledgeable about football. She's not just "a pretty face" as they say. She worked as a reporter and video producer for the University of Missouri, Stanford, and the University of Tennessee football, was an athlete herself (softball), and was an SEC reporter before coming to Buffalo. And on the One Bills Live shows that she has hosted, she actually impressed guys like Greg Cosell with her football knowledge/questions. Yes, her voice takes some getting used to, no doubt. But just because she is a young woman, don't automatically assume that she doesn't know what she is talking about when it comes to football or the current players on the team or in the league. I'm not saying I wouldn't have been down if they had hired from outside the organization, but I just don't think Brown or Glab are as bad as you guys are making them out to be. And before you ask, no, I do not work for the Bills or PSE, and I am not related to anyone discussed above. ?

Great post...and I think this is exactly what the 2017-2019 Bills have been. But, like BillsVet says, now it's time for the Bills to play with the big boys. In the playoffs, the best teams have depth too, so if the weak links are even, the team with the best talent will win. However, I'm with billsfan89. I think the talent is there on the Bills roster, it's just not known nation-wide yet or hasn't fully blossomed. First, we now have Diggs, who is a top-end/superstar player. Jerry Hughes is a pretty top end talent (if he comes back well from the injuries). Poyer and Hyde, as a tandem, are one of the best safety duos in the league. Mario Addison has been averaging 9 sacks a year for four years straight. Tre is already one of the best in the league. John Brown and Cole Beasley as your #2 and #3 WRs is pretty high-end. So, we have some top-end talent. And, we may even have some more superstar players (beyond Diggs and White) on the team, it's just we didn't buy them---they're home grown---so it's taken some time for them to grow into it. But, I really think that Josh, Tremaine, Singletary, Knox, Moss, Oliver, and possibly AJ, all have the potential to bust out into household names, sooner rather than later. So, not surprising that the Bills weren't well-represented on that list as of now. But, I have a feeling that is about to change, starting with this season.

I agree with your love for Fitz Gungy, but disagree with the career backup label. (And by all means I don't mean this to sound like I'm going off on you...this is just a discussion that I used to have with some posters back at the end of Fitz's time in Buffalo, when some of them would say that he's not a starter, or even a backup, but third-string level.) Fitz has started 139 of the 156 games he has been dressed for. That equates to almost 9 full 16-game seasons as a starter in the league (probably almost 10 full seasons by the end of this year). Or another way to look at it, across his 15-year career, he has been a starter for 58% of his career (and that includes his slow career start, where he dressed for only 6 of 48 games in his first three years; injury time out; etc.). So, he is starting more often than he is not. And when he has started across his career, he has always been a middle-of-the-pack QB stats-wise (like 16th to 20th), rather than a bottom third quarterback. So, for the majority of his career, he has been one of the, say, 20 best QBs in the league at any given moment/season. Since there are 32 spots, that makes him a starter. Also, he's 39th place in career passing yards all time and 38th in career passing TDs all time. That's a lot of starts in order to get that high on the all-time NFL lists. So, rather than a career backup, I would say that he is a journeyman starting QB (someone who is going to play a lot---always find a home, often as a bridge player---but who you are always hoping to upgrade from when you have him starting). But he is definitely a starting-caliber QB (one of the 32 best QBs at any given moment over most of his career), he's just not a franchise QB, or a QB you are going to build your team around.

Loved when he said, "If you want to tackle me, it's going to have to be a business decision."? ??

I was in high school at the start of the Super Bowl years. In the offseason, some of the Bills players would travel around to high schools to play basketball against the faculty of the school for charity. I can't remember every player that came, but it was definitely Andre, Tasker (I remember being shocked that he could dunk), Cornelius, maybe Thurman, and a few others. My buddy and I got to be the announcers for the game and at one point Cornelius scored a layup and I shouted into my mic, "Biscuit for two!" And as that rang out across the PA system in the gym, Cornelius, who was running back up court, looked up at me sternly and shook his head and wagged his finger at me (as if to say, "Don't call me Biscuit"). Not sure why (thought it was his nickname), but I have never referred to him as Biscuit since. ? But, Bennett is definitely Wall of Fame worthy in my opinion. He really was the final piece that put that team over the top into championship-caliber level. I guess it just depends on if the club is ok having his name up there with that past incident. I realize that it's a tough call in these times, but I would be ok with him going up on the "Wall" at this point. To err is human, to forgive, divine.

Good post. I was going to post something similar. Not everything Sammy talks about is crazy or out of the realm of possibility, but he seems to be facing so many demons/past trauma that I don't think he understands any of it as much as he thinks he does right now. He's kind of all over the place with it. As Confucius is quoted: “Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." But good on him for at least looking for truth/answers/a better way. It's a long and hard road to go down with a lot of wrong turns and dead ends, and he seems like he has a lot of things to get over and work through personally first, but maybe it will eventually lead him to a better place. However, I think that the article (and Sammy's own words) unequivocally show that it was the right decision for the Bills to move on from Sammy when they did. What would the Bills have gotten out of him in that last year with both his mindset and his actions (not taking care of his body, not getting enough sleep, not being a part of the team, etc.). And the following year, are you going to pay a guy that you aren't sure you can count on $10+ million dollars a year for multiple years? Plus, how does McDermott build his new culture when the highest paid player doesn't buy in, gets bad vibes from the coach, doesn't talk to or hang out with his teammates? Sammy was just not mentally able to help the team at that time, no matter how physically gifted he was/is. With the Chiefs, he was walking into a veteran team, with an established culture, and where he didn't have to be the savior, but just a small piece of the puzzle. So, it's not surprising that he has had some successful moments there. But on a Bills team that was building from scratch, where he was in an even worse mental state, heavy drinking and drugs, bad stuff going on in his life (with family and friends), with all of the expectations, with a coach trying to establish a new way of doing things, a new mindset...it was just never going to work.

I live in NYC and have been going to the Bills/Jets games in the Meadowlands almost every year since the 90s. I'll agree with you that the average Jets fan isn't as knowledgeable as the average Bills fan (about their team---as we are about ours, or football in general), and there is obviously no fan base that compares to Buffalo's in my opinion. But you say... "fans are aggressive and mouthy until the wheels come off" First of all, that sounds like most fans. Also, New Yorkers just have a very direct (sometimes loud) way of interacting that some may feel aggressive and off putting at first, if you're not used to it, but it's just how people have learned to interact in the City. They are not as obnoxious as they may first appear to someone from the outside. They're good folks. "That's when they switch over to blaming the refs and making other excuses." I don't know, that sounds like you're talking about Bills fans (myself included), or fans of any team that has been bad for a while, or doesn't get the love from the league/media/refs (like the Bills and Jets). We're actually not that unalike in what we have suffered through. I have actually bonded with tons of Jets fans over our mutual hatred of the Patriots. Plus, the Jets fans are as loyal to their team through all of the hard times as Bills fans have been, probably due to the Jets being the more blue-collar, younger brother to the Giants. It's like a badge of honor/pride for them. Most of the Giants fans come from New Jersey, Long Island, upstate New York, Connecticut, and even Pennsylvania. Jets fans mostly come from New York City. The Jets are not a regional team like the Patriots and Giants, they are the New York City team. Their fans understand hard work, they understand disappointment, they understand being overlooked (not unlike our fanbase---they maybe just express it a bit differently?). But, honestly, I have never had a bad experience with Jets fans in almost 25 years...and believe me, I go to the games in full Bills regalia and cheer loudly. There is always a lot of good-natured taunting and ribbing (you just have to give it back to them without any anger or aggressiveness behind it); and even when the Jets lose, I've never had an issue with any of them. It's always kind of, "we're still better even though we didn't win this one," "good game...we'll get you next time," or "Bills suck." And you just laugh it off. And speaking of leaving in the 4th quarter...you think getting out of the parking lots at New Era field is bad? Try taking public transportation in the largest city in the country to and from the game with 70,000 other people at the exact same time. I do it every time I go and I'm telling you, it's not pretty, and it's a long time before you are getting home. Longer than getting out of the New Era parking lots and driving back to Rochester. I still don't leave in the 4th quarter, but I can understand why people do if they think the outcome is decided. Maybe your experience was different and you had some jerks ruin it for you (every fanbase has some of those), but I definitely wouldn't paint all Jets fans in a bad light. Sure it is a different experience than a lot of other venues, because New York City is a very different place than a lot of other NFL cities. But Jets fans have always been cool with me.

Is there even a need to watch the debates this year? I think the majority of people are already decided one way or the other and no debate is going to change their minds. It's a mere formality. So no need to sit in front of the TV and get frustrated and angry every time the guy you don't like speaks. There is Bills primetime football to watch instead! I am stunned by this schedule. It feels so strange (because it's been so long) to have the NFL and media showing the Bills respect. I know some people felt like the rebuild was moving too slow, especially after the 2018 season. But as Sean and Brandon have been saying, they didn't want to just buy a quick turnaround and then fall off again, they were going to build a team that could have sustained success. And while that build to a good team may have been a bit slow for some, the ascension to (at least) AFC Championship Game contention came more quickly that I thought it could. Of course, they still have to prove it on the field first, but I really think they are going to do exactly that this year. A storm is coming NFL. A lake-effect squall fueled by a lifetime of disappointments, and it goes by the name of the Buffalo Bills/#BillsMafia.

No...that's definitely Foxboro. ? Which I guess would make this Gase in Jersey. ?