The Frankish Reich Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 1 hour ago, FrenchConnection said: Exactly. The average number of wins during the 16 year drought was not 4 or 5, but 7. So, not good enough to win but not bad enough to draft highly and unfortunately our highest draft picks came during years with less than stellar drafts. Jets, Dolphins, Bucs, Titans, Bills ... Jags? NOT the teams that tanked - Browns, Lions (but maybe post-tank/late period Stanford Lions of recent years?) NOT the teams that had sustained success despite never making it over the hump like the Bengals. Mans certainly not the few teams with sustained success (Pats, to a lesser degree Steelers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) ...think we became the prominent urinalsts' whipping boy after Lions got off the oh fer 16 schneid........go back to 2004.....Moo's club sat at 9-6 facing the Steelers 3rd string...win and we're in, ending the schneid.....BOMB.com.......yet the 2005 forecast was Bills were "up and coming and perhaps a SB contender (re-read the articles)".....so we go 5-11 in the dumpster and peed on the urinalists.......the mumblin', stumblin', grumblin' fumblin' "drought era" made Bflo a prime target.....post Polian, "F Troop" ran the show (sorry Sgt O'Rourke) with a cadre of unqualified misfits in charge....we were the tailor made laughing stock target....we're on the right track IMO with the "Mc Trio" ala McBeane, McDermott and McDaboll whether they like it or not..... Edited September 13, 2019 by OldTimeAFLGuy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt328 Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 1 hour ago, Shaw66 said: There is a simple dynamic at work that causes the disconnect between the media coverage generally and fan perception. Actually, two dynamics. One, of course, is the fans are homers and as a general rule think the team is better than it actually is. That's a given, and it's always at work. This can be true to an extent. I think some fans can project their "hopes" into an upcoming season. Some are overly pessimistic, because they fear getting their hopes up. But quite a few are very knowledgeable, and prefer to be realistic about their team's chances. For instance, if you polled the Bills fans on this message board prior to last season, I believe the majority were anticipating us finishing with 5 or 6 wins. Of course, there were some who thought we could go back to the playoffs with Nathan Peterman, and a handful who said the Bills were a 1-15 squad. But the bulk of fans were spot on. This year, most of us are anticipating a 9-10 win season, which is borderline Wild Card. 1 hour ago, Shaw66 said: The other is this: (I know there are journalists who actually form independent judgments and state what they believe, but they're in the minority. I'm not talking about them.) Most journalists are in a business. The business is producing content. They succeed in their job if they produce content that people accept, because that keeps people coming back to hear what that journalist has to say. If you're a journalist and you write or say things that people generally don't believe, then people stop listening to you. The general football public thinks the Bills are a bad team. They think that because the four Super Bowls were followed by what they believe was consistent failure, and it pretty much was. The running jokes about Buffalo and the Bills reinforce that belief. Okay, if I'm a journalist writing for a national audience, and I write the same old crap, and simply update it with Allen is not accurate, there were doubts about him coming out college, Bills were 6-10 last year, etc., my audience generally believes it. It all sounds right to them, so they think I'm a smart guy, and they move on to another article. However, if I write something like I did in May, saying the Bills are the next great franchise in the NFL, people think "WTF is this guy talking about?" They might read what I say, but most people simply aren't going to believe it because, well, it hasn't been true for 20 years, so why would be true now. And they're going to think I'm an idiot. If they think I'm an idiot, they aren't going to listen to me next time. Now, I don't really care what people think, so I write what I want. But if I earn my living writing this stuff, I care A LOT about what people think. Five years from now, when the Bills are the next great franchise, nobody will remember that I said what I said and that others didn't. So there's no upside for journalists to stick their nexks out saying the Bills are going to be great. All that will happen is that fans will think they're stupid. It's especially true for a small market team. There's some upside in predicting the Giants or the Bears or the Rams are going to be good, because there's a big market there that wants to hear that. No national journalist really cares all that much how much of the Buffalo market he's capturing. Maybe this plays a part. But I think it's more related to ignorance. Nobody has the time to cover 32 teams. Even the guys who do this for a living. If you took just 2 hours to study the replay/film from every game during a week, it would have taken you 32 hours. Teams considered irrelevant are simply pushed off the end, until the prove otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 2 hours ago, mjt328 said: This can be true to an extent. I think some fans can project their "hopes" into an upcoming season. Some are overly pessimistic, because they fear getting their hopes up. But quite a few are very knowledgeable, and prefer to be realistic about their team's chances. For instance, if you polled the Bills fans on this message board prior to last season, I believe the majority were anticipating us finishing with 5 or 6 wins. Of course, there were some who thought we could go back to the playoffs with Nathan Peterman, and a handful who said the Bills were a 1-15 squad. But the bulk of fans were spot on. This year, most of us are anticipating a 9-10 win season, which is borderline Wild Card. Maybe this plays a part. But I think it's more related to ignorance. Nobody has the time to cover 32 teams. Even the guys who do this for a living. If you took just 2 hours to study the replay/film from every game during a week, it would have taken you 32 hours. Teams considered irrelevant are simply pushed off the end, until the prove otherwise. I agree, ignorance is an important component. But the reporter's are ignorant because the standard refrain works for their purposes and there's nothing in it for them to dig deeper. They don't want to know a different story than the standard story, because they won't write the different story anyway. It isn't in their personal interest to diverge from the script, at least until the Bills actually start winning. So you get a lot of media people who can see how Allen is playing, who understand who Edmunds is, who have heard from sources that McD knows what he's doing, but they still don't tell a different story. Their view is the Bills are the Bills until they prove they aren't, and there's nothing in it for them to say anything different. The outliers are guys like Chris Simms, who's been quite vocal about Allen being an emerging star. They're in the minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts