HalftimeAdjustment

The NFL does not have parody. It is not tolerated which is why it has become known as the No Fun League. Otherwise, celebrating a touchdown by pretending to film from behind the goalpost while using the ball as a prop would not draw any fines.

Anyone care to rank them against Kay Stephenson and Hank Bullough?

Marrone... barely above Chan. Chan Mularkey Jauron Williams Ryan Rex Ryan, to me, falls to the bottom of the list even though his results were better than Williams. He acted like a buffoon, allegedly did not put in the effort required, and hired his brother who had just run the worst D in the league and promptly ruijned ours. Everyone else on this list gets credit for trying. It is hard to say whether Mularkey was above Chan, it is possible.

Sometimes people gamble that they can break the agreement "a little" because it just wouldn't be worth the former employer's time to enforce. Just speculating here.

That is true and my point was it would be very unusual for a newspaper to require a gag order (as compared to say a sports team or other organization in the public eye).

A standard non-disparagement and non disclosure agreement would cover not denigrating their employer (I don't think that is likely) and not disclosing confidential business information. It wouldn't be likely to be a complete gag order.

If they wanted the contract to work that way, they should have written it that way. And if they aren't allowed to write it that way because of the CBA, then they should have negotiated the CBA better. I don't believe in "implied intent" in contracts. If he is supposed to pay back the money under the contract, then he should. If it is just implied, no.

Over the last 20 years has this occurred to any other NFL team?

He should take whatever he is entitled to in his contract in the event that he suffers a career ending injury playing football and should not give back a single dollar from generosity.

Just because there are many board posters whlith worse attitudes and absolutely terrible ideas, when compared to Sullivan or Gleason, does not mean they were the best choices at TBN. I don't have the level of disdain that some posters do and I wish they would rein it in. Having said that, I also wonder if some of the problem came from the format and need to fill in a certain size of article. I often found Sullivan's columns to start with noting whatever good thing might have happened that week, then spend time returning to the "big picture us bad and they aren't the Patriots" discussion. Perhaps if there was less required content he would have been able to improve on the signal to noise ratio. As it was the team has absolutely been a mess and there was reason to be critical; the problem in my view was endless repetition of the same points (or at least it seemed that way to me). Sullivan wasn't always wrong, I think he was right about Dareus for example and the culture of the team for many years but I got the impression there was nothing they could do to convince him that improvement was possible, at the end. Gleason just had a tendency to sometimes go overboard with lines of attack, really. I didn't make the connection to the same degree as with Jerry but maybe because I follow the Sabres less. Honestly both teams have been a horror show for a long time and did not improve when the Pegulas took over. The Sabres do not even show any real sign of improvement now either. But still I don't see how telling fans "Nice win, but it is false hope, the team still is terrible" after every positive occurrence is a good way to build readership. Once I know what you have to say with certainty before I read your column I guess I get tired of bothering. Maybe others felt the same way.

I don't enjoy the fact that TBN is having financial issues requiring staff cuts. However, I think Sullivan had essentially "jumped the shark" a while ago because his viewpoint was essentially an unchanging drone of negativity by now. I remember his columns as being more worthwhile years ago, and lately I just felt like there was little of substance. Some poster suggested the news should also drop Tim Graham, that is foolishness. He has (IMO) actually produced some interesting, useful reporting - regardless of whether you appreciate his attitude.

I hope he recovers and gets right in the head. Right now he could be another James Hardy. I really hope that is not the case.

Every building has a useful lifetime. The Bills are not playing in their original stadium. The Sabres no longer play in the Aud. At sone point there has to be a decision to fund or not to fund a new facility. Rehab can kick the can fown the road only so far. It is probably true that the stadium does not maximize the revenue of the team even within the market constraints. The problem is, there is still a limited pool of money. If the new stadium would allow the team to make 125% of current stadium related revenue, would it be worth it? What if it is 110% or 150%? We don't know what the Bills' internal estimates are on this. I agree with the commenters who say that there are not a huge number of companies to pay for suites and that $100,000 PSLs are not going to work in Buffalo. But I don't know that we can guess at the numbers. On the surface however I have trouble believing that an investment of over $1B will pay for itself in added revenue. So most likely this statement is intended as a subtle comment to set the stage for more public funding at the end of the current lease. While I suspect the Pegulas might not move the team themselves, they do have a credible option: they can out the team up for sale when the lease is near expiration. Or, when the next extension is near expiration. There is good evidence to suggest that if put on the open market they can make a nice return on their purchase. In the end that is quite a bit of leverage and so it may mot be coincidence this is coming up after the Carolina sale price was reported.

If you eliminate the players from last year's team then I think I would go with Fitz at QB. Fred obviously at RB. But a few spots would be hard to pick...

I think players who were part of the end (Williams, McCoy, Wood, etc) should be eligible if they played at least one year previously. But anyone who played in a pre drought playoff, ineligible. Just my opinion.

Letting Rex Ryan hire his brother.

Allowing Rex Ryan to hire Rob Ryan after he ran the league's worst D Terry Pegula suggesting someone represent the league "because you're black" (allegedly) Incognito taking a pay cut then retiring Eric Wood giving a "press conference' to announce he was ... hanging around but not playing Anquan Boldin signing then quitting Some oddities with various staff getting fired, equipment guys, office staff, the entire scouting dept, etc I bet there are more...

No, I read somewhere she was born in Korea.

So, assuming he is not too seriously injured and recovers, does he have any trade value? Can we package him in with other picks?

Is he convicted of it or just found civilly liable?

I think it was a good "get" and interesting reading. However if they do ever let him come to a game, it will be a circus. That could also happen if the Bills play the Las Vegas Raiders.

They would be fools not to go into 2018 with Tyrod as their starter, no matter who they draft. People need to look at where the Browns are as a team. Taylor was an instant upgrade and difference maker for them. They went 1-31 over the last two years. He makes that better. Even if the rest of the team is a dumpster fire, he will do better. However if a rookie is thrown into the dumpster fire, they may never develop. In fact, I think the only mistake the Browns made here was "overpaying" the Bills, but it may have been what they had to do to get this done. And great job by Beane.

If the Dolphins are cutting him for nothing, why would he be a fit here?

Tyrod: Gone, no takers for trade or at best a 7th or 2019 6th. Because teams know we are not likely to pay him, they might as well wait for a cut. McCoy: Kept unless a team offers great value - at least a 3rd (I would not make that trade but it is possible). Or, more likely than a direct trade, could be traded as part of a move up in the draft. Bottom line, probably stays. Clay, Benjamin: Staying. Matthews: Not re-signed. Glenn: Hard to move with contract and injury. Team will trade if they can as part of a package, but may be impossible. Incognito: Likely to stay one more year. No trade value due to history, hard to see him cut after Pro Bowl selection. Wood: Likely to stay. No real trade value. Hughes: Probably traded for 4th round pick or as part of draft package. Alexander: Cut. Can play, but will move on to another team. I just don't see them needing that much salary cap relief if they get rid of Tyrod and 1-2 other players.

We likely need to get into the 2nd spot. Everyone can talk about how deep the draft is, but last time we took the 4th best QB in the draft, it did not go very well (JP Losman). You need to get near the top. Unfortunately, that could cost a lot - not sure how much but presumably all of our premium picks (1st-3rd) will be on the table.