Peevo
-
Posts
373 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Peevo
-
-
2 minutes ago, corta765 said:
Literally last year McD on why they like going to camp:
Stop repeating yourself I get it you think the $ should be looked at. The head coach and GM don't care and have their value of being at SJF right now.
Okay? You asked my opinion, I gave it.
I get the coach finds value in it, that's fine. But the value is in the camaradie of going away to summer camp. Not SJF necessarily.
Couldn't you argue the EXACT same experience could be had at any public Rochester college with better infrastructure for fans? Like, I dunno, Brockport or something?
If that's the goal, why not move it where fans can park there? Like, i'm not asking for much. Just better logistics. I feel like I'm crazy right now. This is not a big deal at all.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, corta765 said:
Do you work for the Bills or something to be so considered with margin and expenses lol
The NFL prints money this is a drop in the bucket.
Not really, I'm just looking at the whole picture. It's this really significant undertaking for, in my opinion, little payoff. Training camp used to be "a thing".
It stretched into the 3rd or 4th week of preseason.
This story is dated August 25th (!) 2004. https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/2004/08/25/bills-rookie-qb-losman-breaks-leg/28437218007/
Training camp stretched into LATE AUGUST at one point. It's such a short thing now, what's the point?
That's all I'm saying. The suits at OBD should be asking "is the juice worth the squeeze" for 10 days in Pittsford?
-
1 minute ago, corta765 said:
Bud the GM & Coach only care about what is best for the team. You are only thinking of it from a fan perspective and honestly your perspective is really wrong considering how many fans like how close you can get to the team and the access provided that doesn't exist anymore. Sounds like you have had poor experiences in Pittsford, but for many families and kids especially you are not getting near the same experience in stadium as you do at SJF.
And to repeat again the GM & Coach will do what they believe is in the best interest of the team cost be damned. If they feel this is what is best they will do so and Pegula has smartly let them and stayed the heck out of it.
Yeah, maybe for the kids IN ROCHESTER. Again, it's a small fraction of a fraction.
You can literally offer the exact same experience for more people in Orchard Park. And make more margin, due to far fewer operating expenses.
-
3 minutes ago, The Wiz said:
And Ralph has the Athletic Center and School of Education named after him there as well because of all the money he donated to them.
Sure, that's why they named the buildings after him. That's the trade off. $ = naming rights. It's not that deep.
The "Jacobs School of Management" is named at UB for the Jacobs family. Do the Boston Bruins practice at the Pepsi Center?
-
14 minutes ago, corta765 said:
Again literally the coach and GM have said they find value in this for team which is why it continues. It has zero to do with regionalization, just the fact GM/Coach find it a good thing they like for the team. As long as they see it that way it will not change.
But you're removing the entire fan experience / fan accommodations from the calculus.
The GM & Coach ought not be the only decision makers in this process, given legit business interests involved. Sponsors, advertisers, the campus itself.
SJF has a vested interest (seems obvious) in maintaining this relationship.
However, SJF for 2.5 DECADES doesn't seem to care at all about how the thing runs. Wouldn't it be better for fans if they could simply PARK ON CAMPUS?
That would attract MORE VISITORS. More eyes on your facilities. More potential boosters. Potential students. Potential legacies. More revenues for the school!
A public facility would theoretically welcome any and all comers to experience the space. In my opinion, SJF is "a solution without a problem".
It's a clunky, awful experience for almost any fan outside of Pittsford, NY.
There's no reason to keep it that way when you have a $20 MILLION training facility in the town where all your employees already live.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, The Wiz said:
Just a hunch that Terry doesn't like the idea of paying for the team going to Rochester for a month and a half after they put the final touches on a 2+ billion dollar stadium.
That doesn't mean that they are going to do camp in OP but I'm sure they would like more people around the area to see the new stadium and surroundings.
Training camp these days is like 2 weeks at most. I don't know the numbers, but the margin on SJF has gotta be tight.
Yes, they sell sponsorships (Connors and Ferris), and I'm sure the gift shop does well.
But still, the operating expenses of packing up the entire training department (the Bills training staff literally pack up all their gear in a truck and unpack it every year), for 2 weeks, can't possibly be worth it.
Look at this way. You're a Buffalo/WNY area fan. Under McDermott, the team has retired night practices completely.
You want to go to training camp in Pittsford, NY?
- Take PTO for the morning drive on some random Tuesday morning in August
- Wake up at like 5:30/6 AM
- Drive 90 minutes plus down the highway - depending where you live (Fredonia, NY for example, you're 2hrs or more)
- Park at a random high school parking lot 25 ish minutes away from SJF
- Wait in line to get on a bus / shuttle to campus
- Wait in line through security to enter Training Camp
- Walk the entire campus to finally reach the facilities
- The grandstands are already packed to the gills, and there are 0 spots available to see anything
- You resort to sitting on some grassy knoll across the street from the practice field
- You see literally nothing
- It's 12:30 PM on a Tuesday in Rochester
- You get an underwhelming garbage plate
- It's now 1:40 PM on a Tuesday in Rochester
- What do you do now?
Back when the team actually used Rochester as a marketing vehicle, there were weekend night practices.
You could go out, get a dinner, go see a band at BugJar something. Make a night of it!
Now it's a waste of resources for just about everyone except immediate residents of Pittsford / the surrounding burbs.
The only reason they went to SJF in the first place is because of Russ Brandon's affiliation with the team. He hasn't been employed by the Pegulas in 6 years.
Pittsford training camp has long surpassed its useful life. Maybe it was important to "regionalize" the fanbase in the Drought Era. I get it. But Josh Allen negates all of that.
-
1
-
On 2/1/2024 at 4:16 PM, Patrick Fitzryan said:
The most embarrassing day in Bills history in my lifetime (just turned 40) was the first game played in Toronto. Not only did our crappy, heartless team get rolled by Miami, you could hear audible "Let's Go Dolphins" chants from the crowd.
They took a home game away from Buffalo and put it in a different country, ironically giving the Dolphins a friendlier environment than they get when the Bills play them in Miami. It was such a disgrace.
As we are both Millennial Bills fans, I imagine responses here will cleave along generational lines.
"Embarrassing" can take many forms. Sure, they got killed in the Superbowl. That's a bad game. It happens. Bills aren't the only team to get blown out in the Superbowl.
The Bills CHOSE to remove home games from their fans, and play in Toronto. That's indefensible.
The entire post Mularkey drought deserves consideration for this though. There's so many blunders.
- Trading All-Pro LT Jason Peters in his young prime (probably a Hall of Famer)
- Trading Marshawn Lynch in his young prime for peanuts (none of the return made any impact on Bills)
- Games in Toronto, then extending the Toronto series, then giving yourself credit for ending the extension of the series a year after
- Extending Dick Jauron
- Signing Terrell Owens
- The decision to redesign the jerseys & color scheme when Drew Bledsoe came to Buffalo
-
The coterie of powerful, shadowy, old, male executives at One Bills Drive during the drought who kept getting paychecks yet never took responsibility for any of the team's failures.
- Tom Modrak - what did he do all day? no like seriously what was his job there?
- John Guy - same question as above
- Bud Carpenter - used outdated injury treatments on players, was hesitant to oversight or change. Doug Marrone wanted to fire him, and the head coach DIDN'T HAVE THE POWER TO FIRE HIS TRAINER
-
Scott Berchtold - PR exec that ruled the press box with an iron fist.
- Remember when he denied "knowing anything about" that cancelled halftime celebration on the field for Ralph during the Browns 6-3 game?
- There was controversy with the media when Troy Vincent broke JP Losman's leg at training camp.
- WGR 550's Paul Hamilton reported it very differently than the "company line" and it's caused tension between the two camps for years
- Jeff Littman - mysterious financial advisor who was never available to the media
- Jim Overdorf - still employed? Didn't he cut Troy Vincent without anyone else's knowledge?
-
1
-
6 minutes ago, DrBob806 said:
The NFL scheduling formula is presently brilliant. It was even better when it was just 16 games.
Yes, there are quirks, like some divisions can have "down year(s)," but it's great for the fans, especially the opposing conference match ups by division. Before 1978, AFC/NFC games didn't rotate like they do now. We also have rotating AFC vs AFC, NFC vs NFC by divisions.
You may not be old enough to know, but there was a period where the NFC won 13 SBs is a row, late 80s into the 90s.
A lot of this stuff is by chance/luck. I wouldn't ruin a good thing.
Correct. The Chiefs are dominant because they presently have the best coach & the best QB. The scary thing is their defense has truly improved.
Appreciate your perspective. I appreciate you engaging with my point.
I'm too young to remember the early 90s.
But there seems to be a real hesitance to my generalized "every NFL team should play every NFL team" each season idea.
This is not a crazy idea, in my opinion. It's almost heretical, judged by some of these responses.
NHL teams play a brutal, violent, unhinged, bloodsport 82 times a year. How many concussions per year in the NHL? It's just, if not more violent, than the NFL. Then after all of that, they play another 20 plus brutal, violent, exhausting playoff games to determine a champion.
Daring to suggest professional football players play 31 games in a calendar year is somehow some absurd idea. Increase rosters, bake in some "no more than 20 starts per player" rule and really force teams to have 2 QBs to be competitive. I know, none of this will happen.
But isn't this more fun than "the Bills should draft this player in round 5 I've never heard of from a college i've never watched" conversation?
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, 1ManRaid said:
Complaining about strong opponents is a quintessential "get good" moment. Top teams already get pitted against each other in the current scheduling algorithm, that's about as fair as it can get.
That's only 2 games out of 17 though.
No one can seriously argue the Patriots run from 2001 - 2019 was competitive in the AFC East. No one could argue that. How many times did the Dolphins/Jets/Bills make the playoffs in that stretch?
The Patriots consumed so much advantage from a weak division they cake walked to a home playoff game and a week off almost every single year. You can't tell me that isn't an unfair advantage.
We are all so scared of promotion and relegation, yet the Bills were de facto relegated out of the league due to merely existing the AFC East for 2 decades.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Draconator said:
Peevo = Deebo
Don't you have a game to prepare for?
I'm just some guy that used to work on Buffalo radio stations.
-
Just now, BRH said:
Are you advocating a 31-game schedule?
Yes, in a perfect world. I addressed this in above post.
No playoffs. Who ever is in 1st place at the end wins. Simple. Fair. Again, I know this will never happen. Owners like money too much.
-
Just now, Mr. WEO said:
SO they should all agree to change everything every few years? Mahomes and the Chiefs wouldn't dominate in the NFC....because their QBs aren't as good? This makes no sense at all.
What sports league does this? None, simply because it lacks any logical reason to do so.
Plenty of leagues do. It's called promotion and relegation.
All I'm saying is, this isn't as much a problem in the other big 3 leagues because of the amount of games. Every team plays every other team at least twice. No one care argue competitive imbalance. Everyone gets a fair shake at every team.
Until all the teams play each other, you can't objectively say any NFL team is truly the "best". That's all I'm getting at.
-
1 minute ago, Warcodered said:
Well it's never going to happen, in that there has to be playoffs that's money and the league is not eliminating money no way no how.
Honestly all of this is obviously never going to happen you're never going to get the kind of votes you'd need from ownership.
As a fun exercise the idea of an end of the season reshuffle is kind of interesting putting the bad teams together in divisions and the good teams together as well, really force some balance and coemption. With something like that I guess there's a lot of tiers of things you're competing for each year. Competing to be in the top division, to win the division, win in the playoffs and win the Super Bowl. But it's all a lot of craziness.
Correct. This creates a system more in line with relegation/promotion. Teams have more to play for than just division titles and early playoff exits. It's a more "open" system than the closed system they currently have. That's really all I'm getting at.
-
2 minutes ago, MJS said:
Nobody has a problem with you suggesting a change to how the NFL is structured. They have a problem with your reasons. You don't change something because a team is good and keeps winning.
The reason for change is because one team (Pats and now Chiefs) have monopolized the system to a point where it is non-competitive.
It is a fact monopolies are bad for economies. That is a fact, right? They suppress competition. How can we (the league) create more equitable results? Break up the monopoly. (AT&T in the 80's, Standard Oil). This is not a new idea.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, sullim4 said:
I will say that it is interesting that the longest dynasties have occurred post-2002, when the NFL realigned into the 4-team division setup. With smaller divisions, it is harder to overcome a single, dominant team in a division. It's harder to attract free agents, for instance, if you're playing Brady or Mahomes twice a year versus.
I do think there is a competitive issue when the first place team in the division and the last place team in the division play identical schedules aside from three games (the two cross-division in-conference games, and the 17th cross-conference game). I wouldn't mind seeing them juggle things a bit here.
See, I'm not the only one who thinks the system could be reformed! Thank you @sullim4!
And for the record, I know this stuff will never change. But there really is no good reason besides "we've always done it this way" to the NFL alignment and scheduling system.
It's never made sense. There's conference realignment all the time in college. I don't know why it's such a third rail with the NFL.
-
1 minute ago, WhoTom said:
What solution do you have in mind?
I'm already getting lambasted for this so what the hell.
Eliminate all divisions and conferences.
31 games, everyone plays everybody once. Alternate home and away every other year. Who ever is in 1st place wins the championship. If there's a tie at the end, fine 1 championship game to decide between the 2 top teams.
You want 17 games?
Fine - eliminate the divisions and everyone in the AFC plays each other once. 15 games. 2 games out of conference every year. If they go to 18 games, you can play 3 out of conference games.
If you want to get real nuts have the bottom feeders in each conference forced to realign into the conference. You want 8 divisions? Force the 4th place team to "realign" or "relegate" to the opposite conference or something. You don't want to be in the NFC East? Fine, don't suck.
I don't have every machination of every scenario worked out here. All I'm saying is we accept the current system as is, with all of its various flaws, and "im the worst post ever" candidate for merely suggesting we can change it.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
how long has this been corroding the OP's brain?
In 1967, the NFL decided to align the conferences so that, 50-60 years later, 2 teams would dominate the SB?---and they should simply "mix it up" a bit if one conference dominates the SB?
lol--in the pantheon of bad TBD idea, this may be its apex.
But why is change so bad? I'm genuinely asking.
Until all the teams play each other we will never really achieve competitive balance in the schedule.
-
5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Hang on, what is the argument here? If Mahomes was in the NFC - i.e. the weaker conference for opposing Quarterbacks - then your theory might support moving him to the AFC to face more competition. But how does moving the best Quarterback out of the stronger Quarterback conference and into the weaker one promote competition?
If Mahomes was in the NFC he'd make the Superbowl every year with even less jeopardy.
All i'm saying is after all the games are played, we're stuck with the Chiefs in the AFC title again, what's the point of all of this?
The Bills got their skulls crushed by the Pats for 20 years, and we all just accepted it without complaint. Now the Chiefs have ascended and there's virtually 0 hope for all AFC teams until he's retired.
How is it fair? That's all I'm saying.
-
1
-
-
One of the few malleable things about the league is that we all accept how the schedule isn't the same for every team. Yet it's by CHOICE they do it this way.
League owners and operatives could simply change it.
You can't control player injuries, free agency, draft positioning, salary cap, etc. There's a lot of randomness that affects results. The scheduling system is by design, and I'd argue has a massive impact on what teams make the Superbowl every year.
31 games (every team plays each other once) is never gonna happen. So what are some better options than the current system?
Brady and the Pats went to 8 consecutive AFC Championships (2011 - 2018). Not even counting their pre-2011 runs. The Chiefs have appeared in 6 straight conference championships. 2018 - 2023 & counting.
The AFC domination transferred from Brady to Mahomes in the span of a season. Now the conference is Mahomes' to dominate until he retires.
We just accept this as a reality. The NFL could just change it. Why is it this way? Because they decided to in 1967.
If the conferences are unevenly matched due to the presence of a generational talent, it creates a competitive disadvantage for 15 teams simply because of league logistics. Again, they choose to have it this way.
NFL fans accept the reality that their teams play almost all the same teams every year, and expect DIFFERENT results. I'm burnt out on the same teams every year. And of course I know as I'm writing this that IT WILL NEVER CHANGE. Doesn't mean we can't at least have the conversation, right?
-
1
-
5
-
1
-
1
-
4
-
-
11 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:
Aaron schobel was 10x the player of Kelsey … led afc in sacks twice
monster motor
this team would kill for a schobel opposite von… he was a terror
in your argument Kyle Williams was a good player in terrible teams lol … doesn’t mean he wasn’t a beast
It's more so the calculus that goes into deciding a WOF honor. I know, OJ remains up there. That's such a dark case I don't know if it's fair to even count.
But with Aaron Schobel, I do genuinely wonder if the Bills induct him into the WOF, or retired his number even, would he show up to the ceremony?
-
On 5/19/2023 at 10:29 AM, Call_Of_Ktulu said:
I wish we had a young Schobel with Miller on the other side.
Schobel was a good player on a terrible team for a decade. Arguably his most memorable play came in a famous, hilarious, Shakespearean level loss (Week 1 MNF @ NE 2009).
If off-field is taken into account on WOF, he doesn't deserve it at all. Maybe did 1 interview in 10 seasons. No charity, community building work.
Fred Jackson, Stevie Johnson, Kyle Williams, the list goes on. Lots of Drought Era guys did a LOT in the community, and are still active alumni members (leading the charge, social media, etc).
Schobel sucks. His legacy means nothing to the Bills. What did he do? I'm genuinely asking. 14 sacks in the 2006 season? Awesome, he sacked Tom Brady in all those memorable 30 point losses.
Was never accountable to the media. Nor the fans. Name me 1 interesting story about him as a Bill. An anecdote. ANYTHING. His career is "drafted, played, retired". Like, in the NFL. In the modern media age.
Sure, the boomers on here will be like "he did his job, retired, that's what I want to do". Cool man. That works in a job where you're not beholden to media and community interests. There's at least a half-dozen drought era players that DESERVE recognition way ahead of him, despite his on field "accomplishments".
-
2
-
-
48 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:
You often go back to your old company events?
No, but I wasn't a professional football player at my old job. And the Jim Kelly tournament isn't a TEAM event. It's a Jim Kelly event. But he definitely invites former players to it all the time.
It's just an observation is all. A reliably, proven former veteran just seems like he fell off the face of the earth.Eric Wood does radio/TV. Jim/Andre/Thurman are still around. Freaking JP LOSMAN did John Murphy's radio show within the last 5 years. Ryan Fitzpatrick, an ACTIVE NFL QB attended a Bills playoff game.
Kevin Everett did a long form interview with the Athletic. Torrell Troup did a long form interview with Tim Graham in the last 5 or so years. There's plenty of examples here.
There's no standard of alumni behavior or anything. This thread is going pages deep. Fans still respect/care about the guy. Why isn't that reciprocated in some way?
As a child of the drought/Millennial Bills fan, Schobel was like the 1 really good player you could point to in the lean years. I'd be willing to bet some fans still show up to games in his (terrible looking) jersey.
And for a guy to be so good, and just completely erase that chapter of his life from the fanbase seems strange. That's really all I'm getting at.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, Gugny said:
Schobel belongs on the Wall of Fame. Long overdue, in my opinion.
Nine seasons ... all with the Bills. Played 16 games in 8/9 seasons. Second all-time in sacks. Awesome Buffalo Bill.
Sure, but I don't think the point of my post is sorta gaining traction.
He was a public figure for a decade on an NFL team, and now has 0 public presence. That's certainly his prerogative. But man, you'd think the 2nd all time sack leader would do a radio appearance once in a DECADE.
Has he ever come back to Buffalo for Jim Kelly's golf tournament or something? That's what I'm talking about. Like choosing to engage with the alumni community.
It just doesn't make sense to me at all.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, DrW said:
His family appears to have a restaurant in the Houston area. This guy got cards signed by him in 2020.
Interesting. Even still, this is a pretty deep dive to find any interaction with the man.
I guess my overall point is that, even if Aaron Schobel were to go up on the Wall, would he even show up at the stadium for the unveiling?
He deserves it as a player, but as a Bills alumnus/ambassador? There's gotta be a laundry list of more deserving Drought Era players, right?
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
Network pricing to watch all NFL games in 2025
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Sunday ticket is so expensive, especially now as an out of market Bills fan.
With so many Bills games on SNF, TNF, MNF, etc, you're looking at paying full price for Sunday ticket for about 5-7 games a year.
It's not firm, becuase the back end of the schedule 4:30 games could still air over the air in the local market, and you then don't need Sunday Ticket either.
Comes out to around $80 or more/game.
There was rumblings in the Anti-Trust lawsuit discovery that ESPN was bidding on a "a la carte" or individual team discount option when Sunday Ticket went to bid in 2023. But shocker, the NFL didn't want to "devalue" a "premium streaming product" for "niche football fans" or whatever.
https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/espn-proposed-dropping-sunday-price-to-70-and-offering-single-team-packages-nfl-declined
It's insane that ESPN WANTED TO OFFER A LESS EXPENSIVE PRODUCT to the consumer as a potential loss-leader, and the NFL just was like "lol yeah no thanks".