A Few Thoughts About The Game

[Doc]

The issue isn't whether Fitzpatrick has improved, it's about selling tickets, and with several thousand empty seats, it's clear the Bills aren't placing their current starting QB at the center of any marketing campaign. They need a drawing card and Fitz isn't it. After all, we still have the same owner who demanded Lynch in the wake of McGahee's comments and lo and behold it happened.

 

This team is not similar to the 86 team. They have no Kelly, Smith, Reed, Talley, Wolford, et al. Not to mention it was a completely different era where a few teams had more of the talent than today's era where talent is spread more equally. Who do they have now? Fitz, Williams, Jackson, St. Johnson? Not even close.

 

There was supposedly a light at the end of the tunnel in 06-09, but more failure ensued. With RW/Littman/Overdorf running the show, I don't see how things have really changed.

So...where's the link where Ralph said he wants a QB? Much less to sell tickets? And where did you get that Lynch stuff?

[JohnC]

So...where's the link where Ralph said he wants a QB? Much less to sell tickets? And where did you get that Lynch stuff?

 

http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2010/10/11/1745463/buffalo-bills-owner-wants-a-qb-in-nfl-draft

[Doc]

http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2010/10/11/1745463/buffalo-bills-owner-wants-a-qb-in-nfl-draft

Fair enough. But he's likely changed his mind since then. And nowhere does it imply that drafting a QB is about selling tickets.

[JohnC]

Fair enough. But he's likely changed his mind since then. And nowhere does it imply that drafting a QB is about selling tickets.

 

I never said it was about selling tickets. Someone else made that claim. With respect to that issue I have no problem with getting a player who will primarily help the team and also sell tickets. It's part of the business. Nothing wrong with that.

[BillsVet]

So...where's the link where Ralph said he wants a QB? Much less to sell tickets? And where did you get that Lynch stuff?

 

Jerry Sullivan has repeatedly said this in his columns and on GR. Someone admitted to JS that in the wake of McGahee's comments that RW wanted a RB change. Now go discredit Sullivan and call him negative.

 

Fair enough. But he's likely changed his mind since then. And nowhere does it imply that drafting a QB is about selling tickets.

 

Quibbling with others and then going passive aggressive isn't enough. RW loud and clear told John Wawrow that he wanted a QB, and then you come back with this. I'll even provide your counter argument after my post: Fitzpatrick is better now than he was when RW made that point and things have further changed. Right. You don't think RW is aware the stands aren't as packed? He and his handlers/advisers know it'll take a huge drawing card (who won't come via UFA) so that leaves one opportunity: the draft. It would not surprise me if a QB is ordered upon the GM.

 

When 51k pay for a game in the NFL leaving no less than 22k empty seats, that's a serious issue. It is not a stretch to say they've gotta figure out a way to market the team, and this time around they can't trot out a HC or GM who gives nice sound bites. Of course, they could say fan support is waning and try guilting people into it.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Jerry Sullivan has repeatedly said this in his columns and on GR. Someone admitted to JS that in the wake of McGahee's comments that RW wanted a RB change. Now go discredit Sullivan and call him negative.

 

 

 

Quibbling with others and then going passive aggressive isn't enough. RW loud and clear told John Wawrow that he wanted a QB, and then you come back with this. I'll even provide your counter argument after my post: Fitzpatrick is better now than he was when RW made that point and things have further changed. Right. You don't think RW is aware the stands aren't as packed? He and his handlers/advisers know it'll take a huge drawing card (who won't come via UFA) so that leaves one opportunity: the draft. It would not surprise me if a QB is ordered upon the GM.

 

When 51k pay for a game in the NFL leaving no less than 22k empty seats, that's a serious issue. It is not a stretch to say they've gotta figure out a way to market the team, and this time around they can't trot out a HC or GM who gives nice sound bites. Of course, they could say fan support is waning and try guilting people into it.

RW and his handlers also realize that Buffalo fans come out to support a winning and/or competitive team. Having a big draw like TO doesn't hurt, but most of the downturn in ticket sales (IMO) is due to a poor product on the field and in some part, the economy. If Nix and Gailey continue to improve the team's performance, the fans will sell out RWS, with or without a star skill player. Nobody outside OBD, the Ralph C. Wilson Agency, Inc., or his family know how he still feels about the QB situation given how this season has played out.

 

Also, this business of Littman and Overdorf making all the decisions is old news and there's literally no proof that Nix and his staff (Whaley, Gailey, etc.) aren't in the driver's seat. Of course RW has his hands in it and that will never change.

 

Complain about the drafting, coaching staff, FA acquisitions, and other tangible issues all you want, but you should really turn the Littman and Overdorf Are Running The Show record over.

Edited December 15, 2010 by In-A-Gadda-Levitre

[Dan]

Jerry Sullivan has repeatedly said this in his columns and on GR. Someone admitted to JS that in the wake of McGahee's comments that RW wanted a RB change. Now go discredit Sullivan and call him negative.

 

 

 

Quibbling with others and then going passive aggressive isn't enough. RW loud and clear told John Wawrow that he wanted a QB, and then you come back with this. I'll even provide your counter argument after my post: Fitzpatrick is better now than he was when RW made that point and things have further changed. Right. You don't think RW is aware the stands aren't as packed? He and his handlers/advisers know it'll take a huge drawing card (who won't come via UFA) so that leaves one opportunity: the draft. It would not surprise me if a QB is ordered upon the GM.

 

When 51k pay for a game in the NFL leaving no less than 22k empty seats, that's a serious issue. It is not a stretch to say they've gotta figure out a way to market the team, and this time around they can't trot out a HC or GM who gives nice sound bites. Of course, they could say fan support is waning and try guilting people into it.

Ya know... it really is nonsense to thinK that the majority of moves made by the Bills are done so at the direction of Ralph to make money. While, yes, I'll agree that making money is an important factor in many decisions; but you could say that about every franchise in the league. Do you honestly think there's an owner out there that says, profits be damned just do whatever you guys want?

 

To think bringing in a new QB is a marketing ploy is right up there with thinking that TO was only brought in as a marketing ploy last year. It ignores the facts. And the facts are that last year the Bills tried numerous times to upgrade the WR position and were rejected each time by the FAs. It wasn't until TO was released and had no where to go that he was brought in. Of course, they marketed him; but if that's the only reason they brought TO in was to sell tickets; then why did they try several times before that to bring in WRs?

 

Now, the facts are we've had horrible QBs for years... years. Yeah, Fitz has begun to play well; but at the time of Ralph's comments we were a long way from thinking Fitz could be a good starter. Yet, when they talk about bringing in a new QB, it's suddenly a marketing move? I suppose if the Bills stay with Brohm and Levi, then Ralph's being cheap? Let me ask... is there anything the FO can do that's right? Because it sure doesn't seem that way.

[Orton's Arm]

I agree with all of the above, unless the highest rated player is a RB or a DB. I wouldn't care if the highest rated DB is thought to be better than Mel Blount or Ronnie Lott. The Bills need to get bigger and stronger up front. Period.

 

The only exception I can see is if they think a particular QB will be great. At that point it wouldn't be wise to pass on him.

I agree with you and JohnC on this. They should either take the best player available or trade down. Although--if the best player available is a 93 and is at a position of non-need; and the next-best is rated 91 and fills a need, I'd have no objection to their taking the 91.

 

As for RB: their careers are generally short. Also, unless you have an elite RB like Barry Sanders or Jim Brown, the quality of your run blocking and offensive line will have a much stronger impact on the success of your running game than will the quality of your RBs. Not only that, but the New York Times did a regression analysis which showed that improving your passing game by one standard deviation was four times more helpful than was improving your running game by one standard deviation.

 

As for DBs: the Bills have a very bad habit of letting their young, talented DBs escape in free agency. During the last decade alone, there have been three times when the Bills' DB with the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment left in free agency with no compensation. It doesn't make sense to use early picks on CBs until or unless that problem gets fixed. Even if that problem were to be fixed, there are other holes I'd like to see filled before the defensive secondary gets addressed yet again.

Edited December 15, 2010 by Edwards' Arm

[Ramius]

Ya know... it really is nonsense to thinK that the majority of moves made by the Bills are done so at the direction of Ralph to make money. While, yes, I'll agree that making money is an important factor in many decisions; but you could say that about every franchise in the league. Do you honestly think there's an owner out there that says, profits be damned just do whatever you guys want?

 

To think bringing in a new QB is a marketing ploy is right up there with thinking that TO was only brought in as a marketing ploy last year. It ignores the facts. And the facts are that last year the Bills tried numerous times to upgrade the WR position and were rejected each time by the FAs. It wasn't until TO was released and had no where to go that he was brought in. Of course, they marketed him; but if that's the only reason they brought TO in was to sell tickets; then why did they try several times before that to bring in WRs?

 

Now, the facts are we've had horrible QBs for years... years. Yeah, Fitz has begun to play well; but at the time of Ralph's comments we were a long way from thinking Fitz could be a good starter. Yet, when they talk about bringing in a new QB, it's suddenly a marketing move? I suppose if the Bills stay with Brohm and Levi, then Ralph's being cheap? Let me ask... is there anything the FO can do that's right? Because it sure doesn't seem that way.

 

You're asking for a logical coherent answer from Billsvet?

 

Some 4,000 posts on here and every single one is either the bills suck or ralph sucks or "smithers" sucks.

Edited December 15, 2010 by Ramius

[3rdand12]

I need to reiterate, that i billeive we want a franchise qb and still do. Now we are fortunate to wait and pick one without the pressure we had in the beginning of the season, Pre Fitz. And i would be delighted if Fitz just gets better with age and a surrounding cast.

Chan seems now like he wants some tight ends to work with. Maybe FA and draft. I think he would be playing offense a bit differently if he felt he had more strength there. But maybe what we have need more development. eh:( maybe.

I still think we should pick an early round defensive end (pass rusher) a real one this time! and another ilb and or olb.

More quality depth on the D line in the later rounds.

It will also be interesting to see what we have now that Lee Evans is out at receiver.(no Lee bashing please i still love him ).

By the way how long before we look at the every down RB of the future? FJ is my hero but he is no young buck anymore in running back years.

 

Yes we are a little odd with our Db's. what's up with that?

[Bill from NYC]

Also, unless you have an elite RB like Barry Sanders or Jim Brown, the quality of your run blocking and offensive line will have a much stronger impact on the success of your running game than will the quality of your RBs.

 

This is completely true. Now, toss in the factor of where the Bills play. I don't know where you live, but I just came inside. It is freezing and the wind is high. Unless you have a Ryan Mallett/Drew Bledsoe arm, passing is less of an option late in the year in Buffalo.

 

I doubt that that the Times article you spoke of takes this into account. The Bills play in an environment where they need to run and stop the run more than most other teams.

 

Imo, they need to make a huge move for Kevin Boss, who is scheduled to be a ufa. He was made to play in WNY. He is a TE who blocks like an OT and is a huge target with good hands. He would help the passing and running game. Seriously, they should offer him a 5 year deal for much more than his market value if that is what it would take to bring him in.

[JohnC]

 

 

As for RB: their careers are generally short. Also, unless you have an elite RB like Barry Sanders or Jim Brown, the quality of your run blocking and offensive line will have a much stronger impact on the success of your running game than will the quality of your RBs. Not only that, but the New York Times did a regression analysis which showed that improving your passing game by one standard deviation was four times more helpful than was improving your running game by one standard deviation.

 

 

Your response was very thoughtful and illuminating. One of the better cogent responses I have read in a long time.

 

In general, I prefer a balanced run/pass offense. But your citing of a NY Times analysis favoring a good passing game is best embodied by the Pats' reliance on the passing game at the expense of the running game. They have mastered the art of the short passing game and spreadining the ball to a variety of receivers and locations on the field. It certainly helps having a HOF qb in Brady to execute the game plan.

Edited December 15, 2010 by JohnC

[JohnC]

You're asking for a logical coherent answer from Billsvet?

 

Some 4,000 posts on here and every single one is either the bills suck or ralph sucks or "smithers" sucks.

 

BillsVet is one of the best posters on this board. He is never going to be a compliant clone like so many others are. Some people are comfortable with being mediocre while others find that condition to be intolerable.

 

If you disagree with him that is fine. He can handle disagreements. However, there is no need to slight him.

 

In my view he is in front of the class. The other kids in the back of the class need to wake up pay better attention to what is going on.

[Dan]

BillsVet is one of the best posters on this board. He is never going to be a compliant clone like so many others are. Some people are comfortable with being mediocre while others find that condition to be intolerable.

 

If you disagree with him that is fine. He can handle disagreements. However, there is no need to slight him.

 

In my view he is in front of the class. The other kids in the back of the class need to wake up pay better attention to what is going on.

The point I made had nothing to do with compliance or mediocrity. I was simply asking for rational, factual thought. To suggest that drafting a QB with our first draft pick would be done with the primary motivation of marketing is disingenuous in the least. We've needed a franchise QB for quite some time. We all know that. Now when the owner finally agrees and says we'll draft one; it gets spun into a marketing ploy? Come on.

 

You can't have it both ways. Is Ralph cheap for not bringing in a franchise QB or is he only thinking about making money when he drafts one?

 

It's quite analogous to the TO situation last year. It's been widely touted as a marketing move. Yet, everyone saying that ignores the fact that the FO brought in every decent FA WR prior to TO being cut. So, how do you reconcile that? They were clearly looking for a WR, then TO got cut; then they signed TO; then they were accused of making a move just to sell tickets. It doesn't add up.

 

It's been said Ralph went cheap with the hiring of Gailey. But, did he not try desperately to hire Shanny, even reportedly offering him a share of the team? In the end, perhaps he cheaped out; but maybe because it was his only real option when every top flight coach on the list turned them down.

 

I ask, again, what moves could be made that are actually considered good for the team and do not carry some ulterior motives to either make money or save money?

[Bill from NYC]

BillsVet is one of the best posters on this board. He is never going to be a compliant clone like so many others are. Some people are comfortable with being mediocre while others find that condition to be intolerable.

 

If you disagree with him that is fine. He can handle disagreements. However, there is no need to slight him.

 

In my view he is in front of the class. The other kids in the back of the class need to wake up pay better attention to what is going on.

 

I couldn't agree more!!!

[3rdand12]

The Bills play in an environment where they need to run and stop the run more than most other teams.

 

Imo, they need to make a huge move for Kevin Boss, who is scheduled to be a ufa. He was made to play in WNY. He is a TE who blocks like an OT and is a huge target with good hands. He would help the passing and running game. Seriously, they should offer him a 5 year deal for much more than his market value if that is what it would take to bring him in.

Huge move? Have you spoken with Chan on this?

ps you might be onto something though.

[JohnC]

The point I made had nothing to do with compliance or mediocrity. I was simply asking for rational, factual thought. To suggest that drafting a QB with our first draft pick would be done with the primary motivation of marketing is disingenuous in the least. We've needed a franchise QB for quite some time. We all know that. Now when the owner finally agrees and says we'll draft one; it gets spun into a marketing ploy? Come on.

 

You can't have it both ways. Is Ralph cheap for not bringing in a franchise QB or is he only thinking about making money when he drafts one?

 

It's quite analogous to the TO situation last year. It's been widely touted as a marketing move. Yet, everyone saying that ignores the fact that the FO brought in every decent FA WR prior to TO being cut. So, how do you reconcile that? They were clearly looking for a WR, then TO got cut; then they signed TO; then they were accused of making a move just to sell tickets. It doesn't add up.

 

It's been said Ralph went cheap with the hiring of Gailey. But, did he not try desperately to hire Shanny, even reportedly offering him a share of the team? In the end, perhaps he cheaped out; but maybe because it was his only real option when every top flight coach on the list turned them down.

 

I ask, again, what moves could be made that are actually considered good for the team and do not carry some ulterior motives to either make money or save money?

 

My response was directed to Ramius and his #49 posting. It was nothing but pure drivel.

 

Imo, they need to make a huge move for Kevin Boss, who is scheduled to be a ufa. He was made to play in WNY. He is a TE who blocks like an OT and is a huge target with good hands. He would help the passing and running game. Seriously, they should offer him a 5 year deal for much more than his market value if that is what it would take to bring him in.

 

He would be a magnificent pickup. Without a doubt he would give our offense an added dimension. The shame of the CBA negotiation is that again it might have an affect on the potential offseason transactions because of the contract uncertainties and time constraints.

[Doc]

Jerry Sullivan has repeatedly said this in his columns and on GR. Someone admitted to JS that in the wake of McGahee's comments that RW wanted a RB change. Now go discredit Sullivan and call him negative.

Jerry Sullivan? The guy who claimed the Bills would be sold to the highest bidder upon Ralph's death?

 

Quibbling with others and then going passive aggressive isn't enough. RW loud and clear told John Wawrow that he wanted a QB, and then you come back with this. I'll even provide your counter argument after my post: Fitzpatrick is better now than he was when RW made that point and things have further changed. Right. You don't think RW is aware the stands aren't as packed? He and his handlers/advisers know it'll take a huge drawing card (who won't come via UFA) so that leaves one opportunity: the draft. It would not surprise me if a QB is ordered upon the GM.

 

When 51k pay for a game in the NFL leaving no less than 22k empty seats, that's a serious issue. It is not a stretch to say they've gotta figure out a way to market the team, and this time around they can't trot out a HC or GM who gives nice sound bites. Of course, they could say fan support is waning and try guilting people into it.

Wait, Fitz hasn't been playing better since RW made those comments? The team hasn't won 3 games and almost won another 3? Gailey didn't say he couldn't see another QB starting for the Bills in 2011 besides Fitz?

 

And the lack of people in the stands isn't because of the QB. It's a bad economy, the team has a bad record, and several teams are bad draws (Jags, Browns, Lions). But the majority of money is made through shared revenue like TV and merchandise.

[BillsVet]

Wait, Fitz hasn't been playing better since RW made those comments? The team hasn't won 3 games and almost won another 3? Gailey didn't say he couldn't see another QB starting for the Bills in 2011 besides Fitz?

 

And the lack of people in the stands isn't because of the QB. It's a bad economy, the team has a bad record, and several teams are bad draws (Jags, Browns, Lions). But the majority of money is made through shared revenue like TV and merchandise.

 

Most definitely Fitz has played better. Heck, this team hasn't had a 20TD season out of QB since Kelly. But I also trust Gailey to answer in politically correct speech as the HC of the Bills, although his post game PC's have been enlightening at times.

 

The reason people aren't in the stands is there's less reason to attend than ever. We're back to being a bad to mediocre team with no shot at the post-season and no drawing card players lining up. The economy has a little to do with it, but not as much because fans find money to attend sporting events. But to compare the Buffalo football market to Jacksonville is a poor attempt at rationalizing a declining attendance. I would agree that TV is a huge revenue stream, but it's not encouraging to see a game where less than 51k tickets are sold and submit that the improvements and relative affordability of HDTV's is driving a part of the downturn in attendance, both here and nationally.

 

The Bills need something to get fans excited again and will need to craft a new message in 2011 should the season happen.

[JohnC]

Jerry Sullivan? The guy who claimed the Bills would be sold to the highest bidder upon Ralph's death?

 

How do you know what arrangements the owner has made for the franchise upon his death? So far he has steadfastly refused to publicly state his estate plans with respect to the franchise. If you have a link on that topic I would appreciate it. If it is a figment of your vivid imagination then that is okay also. Conjecturing is allowed on bulletin boards as long as they are labeled as such.

[Orton's Arm]

Your response was very thoughtful and illuminating. One of the better cogent responses I have read in a long time.

 

In general, I prefer a balanced run/pass offense. But your citing of a NY Times analysis favoring a good passing game is best embodied by the Pats' reliance on the passing game at the expense of the running game. They have mastered the art of the short passing game and spreadining the ball to a variety of receivers and locations on the field. It certainly helps having a HOF qb in Brady to execute the game plan.

I agree with the above. Passing has become progressively more important, especially in key situations. A good passing game allows an offense to bail itself out if first or second down failed to generate as many yards as planned. You can't really rely on your running game to bail you out of third-and-ten situations, at least not with any degree of consistency.

 

Since you're going to face a number of third-and-long situations over the course of the game, you need a good passing attack to deal with them. Once you have that attack, there's no sense in using it only on third down. You may as well use it all the time, just as the Patriots do. You can even use short passes to partially take the place of running plays, just as the 49ers did back in the '80s and the Patriots do today. But you'll almost never be able to use running plays to take the place of 10+ yard passing plays.

 

This is completely true. Now, toss in the factor of where the Bills play. I don't know where you live, but I just came inside. It is freezing and the wind is high. Unless you have a Ryan Mallett/Drew Bledsoe arm, passing is less of an option late in the year in Buffalo.

 

I doubt that that the Times article you spoke of takes this into account. The Bills play in an environment where they need to run and stop the run more than most other teams.

 

Imo, they need to make a huge move for Kevin Boss, who is scheduled to be a ufa. He was made to play in WNY. He is a TE who blocks like an OT and is a huge target with good hands. He would help the passing and running game. Seriously, they should offer him a 5 year deal for much more than his market value if that is what it would take to bring him in.

Good points.

 

A QB needs a certain minimum level of arm strength to succeed in the NFL. Having more strength than just the minimum is nice, but not nearly as important as accuracy or mental acuity. That said, I agree that the minimum level of arm strength required is higher in Buffalo than in a warm-weather city or a domed stadium.

 

I also agree that when the weather is terrible the running game becomes more important. I like your idea of getting Boss to upgrade the offense.

 

Weather-related game planning adjustments are also key. A year or two ago, the Bills played Cleveland (I think), in a game late in the year. There was considerable snow on the ground and guys kept slipping. The Bills' offensive coordinator called a lot of timing routes, and the snow interfered with the receivers' timing. Conversely, the Cleveland OC called plays in which the receivers were supposed to stop and catch the ball. The weather didn't affect those routes nearly as much. Fortunately, I have every confidence in the current Bills' coaching staff's ability to adjust its offensive playcalling to the weather!

[Doc]

How do you know what arrangements the owner has made for the franchise upon his death? So far he has steadfastly refused to publicly state his estate plans with respect to the franchise. If you have a link on that topic I would appreciate it. If it is a figment of your vivid imagination then that is okay also. Conjecturing is allowed on bulletin boards as long as they are labeled as such.

We've been over this John. I don't know Ralph's exact succession plans. The thing is, neither does Sullivan. The difference is, he's passing-off his conjecture as fact. It's not as simple as "the team will be sold to the highest bidder."

[JohnC]

Mr. Edwards'Arm, I commented that your comments were thoughtful and illuminating. Your response was highlighed below. Tell me you're not one of those self-inflated, self-important irritating egotists? I would be so disappointed. LOL

 

 

I agree with the above.

[Orton's Arm]

Mr. Edwards'Arm, I commented that your comments were thoughtful and illuminating. Your response was highlighed below. Tell me you're not one of those self-inflated, self-important irritating egotists? I would be so disappointed. LOL

Our conversation went something like this:

 

Edwards'_Arm: [various football-related observations]

 

JohnC: "your comments are thoughtful and illuminating," + various football-related observations.

 

Edwards'_Arm: "I agree with the above."

 

Obviously--obviously--my "I agree with the above" comment was directed at your football-related observations, not your statement that my comments were thoughtful and illuminating. I didn't need to agree with your "thoughtful and illuminating" comment, because it was self-evident!