Buffalo Bills: 2020-2021

[Eleven]

On 2/12/2020 at 3:24 PM, SDS said:

I would almost say the opposite. So many people know how the nfl works that they misapply strategies used there to the nhl. 

I have no idea how the NFL cap system works.  It seems really complicated.

[Stoner]

10 hours ago, Eleven said:

I have no idea how the NFL cap system works.  It seems really complicated.

Ask anyone on here. They'll explain it to you.

[Taro T]

54 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Ask anyone on here. They'll explain it to you.

How the NFL Cap works?

Pretty sure you're on the wrong board. 

[Stoner]

37 minutes ago, Taro T said:

How the NFL Cap works?

Pretty sure you're on the wrong board. 

Isn't this an NFL thread? Are you telling me if Eleven asked for help understanding the NFL cap he wouldn't have 15 people telling him exactly how it works? And then there'd be a nerd fight about this clause or that?

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

Isn't this an NFL thread? Are you telling me if Eleven asked for help understanding the NFL cap he wouldn't have 15 people telling him exactly how it works? And then there'd be a nerd fight about this clause or that?

Well I’ll ask you, then.  There seems to be a lot of escapes, levels of detail, amd other stuff we don’t see in hockey.  So please explain...

[Stoner]

45 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Well I’ll ask you, then.  There seems to be a lot of escapes, levels of detail, amd other stuff we don’t see in hockey.  So please explain...

You should know by now I'm not one who involves myself in the cap side of things. I enjoy the movie, I don't care how the studio manages expenses on set.

[Cheektorado]

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

Well I’ll ask you, then.  There seems to be a lot of escapes, levels of detail, amd other stuff we don’t see in hockey.  So please explain...

Just about all the reasons the NHL and NFL caps are different to understand is a result of NHL contracts being 100% guaranteed and the NFL contracts are not.  The 2nd biggest difference is the rollover of previous seasons unused cap money in the NFL.  The 3rd difference is that in the NFL a GM can waive a player and eat all the cap hit for that player in 1 to 2 years.  All these differences creates a situation where NFL contracts are written to be generally much shorter in duration and uneven in both yearly cap hits and in guaranteed money (Dead Money) left on the contract.

What I believe is bad about the NHL is the inability of an NHL GM to get out of a bad contract.  It's mind boggling for me to see that the Sabres still have Cody Hodgson on the books and are tied to a Kyle Okposo contract.

[Eleven]

9 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

You should know by now I'm not one who involves myself in the cap side of things. I enjoy the movie, I don't care how the studio manages expenses on set.

Well, you're not one of the fifteen, I guess, smarty.

8 hours ago, Cheektorado said:

Just about all the reasons the NHL and NFL caps are different to understand is a result of NHL contracts being 100% guaranteed and the NFL contracts are not.  The 2nd biggest difference is the rollover of previous seasons unused cap money in the NFL.  The 3rd difference is that in the NFL a GM can waive a player and eat all the cap hit for that player in 1 to 2 years.  All these differences creates a situation where NFL contracts are written to be generally much shorter in duration and uneven in both yearly cap hits and in guaranteed money (Dead Money) left on the contract.

What I believe is bad about the NHL is the inability of an NHL GM to get out of a bad contract.  It's mind boggling for me to see that the Sabres still have Cody Hodgson on the books and are tied to a Kyle Okposo contract.

Ok.  Your first paragraph, which I know was well-meant, leaves me with a thousand more questions than answers.  (Ok, maybe not really a thousand.)  I do thank you for your effort, but I don't think I'm ever going to understand how the NFL works its cap.  And part of that, I will admit, is lack of effort.  I can only put energy into so many things, and the NFL cap may not be one.

Edited February 17, 2020 by Eleven

[Andrew Amerk]

I don’t understand the NFL cap either, but then again, I care far less about the NFL than the NHL. 

On 2/16/2020 at 2:58 PM, Cheektorado said:

 

What I believe is bad about the NHL is the inability of an NHL GM to get out of a bad contract.  It's mind boggling for me to see that the Sabres still have Cody Hodgson on the books and are tied to a Kyle Okposo contract.

So, why can’t this be “fixed?”

[Cheektorado]

14 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

I don’t understand the NFL cap either, but then again, I care far less about the NFL than the NHL. 

So, why can’t this be “fixed?”

Maybe in the next CBA.

[WildCard]

Get ready for a longer season and a revamped playoff format

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28739375/more-playoff-teams-expected-new-nfl-cba-sources-say

[triumph_communes]

glad Buffalo broke the curse before the standards dropped

The new season/playoff format I feel is just better.  Odd-number of games helps break tie breaker BS that's always un-fun.  Less pre-season I think will benefit teams who have less turnover, in a league where turnover is rampant lately.  Only one team getting a bye just jives better too.

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

glad Buffalo broke the curse before the standards dropped

The new season/playoff format I feel is just better.  Odd-number of games helps break tie breaker BS that's always un-fun.  Less pre-season I think will benefit teams who have less turnover, in a league where turnover is rampant lately.  Only one team getting a bye just jives better too.

I don't like one team getting a bye. That bye week is huge, and now only one team gets to benefit from it.

[triumph_communes]

3 minutes ago, WildCard said:

I don't like one team getting a bye. That bye week is huge, and now only one team gets to benefit from it.

A lot of players don't believe the bye is necessarily even a benefit.  They already get one week off before the start of the playoffs and that's enough.  Two weeks?  They come out too rusty.

 

But if believing it is a true benefit, then yes, if only one team gets it rather than 33% of the teams get it, the end-of-season games for those top-teams mean more now.  Longer season is also going to lead to more benching of starters, and this somewhat counteracts that.

Edited February 20, 2020 by triumph_communes

[WildCard]

4 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

A lot of players don't believe the bye is necessarily even a benefit.  They already get one week off before the start of the playoffs and that's enough.  Two weeks?  They come out too rusty.

 

But if believing it is a true benefit, then yes, if only one team gets it rather than 33% of the teams get it, the end-of-season games for those top-teams mean more now.  Longer season is also going to lead to more benching of starters, and this somewhat counteracts that.

I mean tell that to the Saints lol. Rusty or not, you have to play a high caliber NFL team one more time than you'd like, and that team can always knock you out. Teams that avoid that risk benefit a ton

[shrader]

So does everyone get a neutral site game?  I want no part of a short season where one team gets 8 home games and the other gets 9.  I could live with that imbalance if it was baseball with their 2000 game schedule, but not here.

[TrueBlueGED]

31 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

A lot of players don't believe the bye is necessarily even a benefit.  They already get one week off before the start of the playoffs and that's enough.  Two weeks?  They come out too rusty.

 

But if believing it is a true benefit, then yes, if only one team gets it rather than 33% of the teams get it, the end-of-season games for those top-teams mean more now.  Longer season is also going to lead to more benching of starters, and this somewhat counteracts that.

I'll try to find the numbers later, but it's incredibly rare for teams playing Wild Card weekend to get to, let alone win, the Super Bowl. 

[shrader]

1 minute ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I'll try to find the numbers later, but it's incredibly rare for teams playing Wild Card weekend to get to, let alone win, the Super Bowl. 

I don't like the all or nothing approach on this one.  I think getting to the conference  is a pretty significant result.  Those 4 teams have a big impact on the playoffs.  Then again, that could just be years of built up Buffalo bias in me.

[WildCard]

4 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I'll try to find the numbers later, but it's incredibly rare for teams playing Wild Card weekend to get to, let alone win, the Super Bowl. 

Last team to do it that I remember was the 2011 Packers

[Randall Flagg]

37 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

I'll try to find the numbers later, but it's incredibly rare for teams playing Wild Card weekend to get to, let alone win, the Super Bowl. 

Perhaps the point is increasing these odds then 

[WildCard]

31 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

Perhaps the point is increasing these odds then 

I think the point is to make sure week 17 is competitive 

[Randall Flagg]

9 minutes ago, WildCard said:

I think the point is to make sure week 17 is competitive 

I just mean that, maybe they don't like the seeming guarantee that a bye week -> super bowl and would rather "increase parity" by having fewer teams on a bye week or something. I'm just babbling 

[Taro T]

9 hours ago, shrader said:

So does everyone get a neutral site game?  I want no part of a short season where one team gets 8 home games and the other gets 9.  I could live with that imbalance if it was baseball with their 2000 game schedule, but not here.

The way Murphy and Tasker were talking about it, sounds like the "17th" game would be at a neutral step for everybody.  And, to make sure they could have 16 neutral sites lined up each year they might hold off until 2022 to implement it, assuming the CBA gets ratified.

And it seems that the way those will be set up for which teams are the home / road team will be set by either conference or division and will alternate each year.

[shrader]

13 hours ago, Taro T said:

The way Murphy and Tasker were talking about it, sounds like the "17th" game would be at a neutral step for everybody.  And, to make sure they could have 16 neutral sites lined up each year they might hold off until 2022 to implement it, assuming the CBA gets ratified.

And it seems that the way those will be set up for which teams are the home / road team will be set by either conference or division and will alternate each year.

I wonder what that does to Jacksonville.  Will they have their two home games in London and then also have a neutral site.  I'm sure the last thing that owner wants is to be forced to play 8 games in Jacksonville.  And 16 is a lot of neutral site games.  I'll be curious to see how many sites they choose.  They could give London the equivalent of a full season now, but I'm sure they want to spread them around a bit.

And I hadn't thought about the "home team" in a neutral game.  Does that team get anything other than calling the coin toss?  I kind of wish they would just remove that element already and just assign heads to one team and tails the other.  They probably get the better locker room facilities too, but who knows what those options would be at certain sites, if there is a better option.

[Taro T]

9 minutes ago, shrader said:

I wonder what that does to Jacksonville.  Will they have their two home games in London and then also have a neutral site.  I'm sure the last thing that owner wants is to be forced to play 8 games in Jacksonville.  And 16 is a lot of neutral site games.  I'll be curious to see how many sites they choose.  They could give London the equivalent of a full season now, but I'm sure they want to spread them around a bit.

And I hadn't thought about the "home team" in a neutral game.  Does that team get anything other than calling the coin toss?  I kind of wish they would just remove that element already and just assign heads to one team and tails the other.  They probably get the better locker room facilities too, but who knows what those options would be at certain sites, if there is a better option.

Honestly not sure if there is an advantage to being the "home" team.  There probably isn't.  (Had hockey on the brain when posting that.)  There definitely wasn't one for the Bills in TO.  But they MIGHT try to have a bit of a home field advantage  such as the Bills playing San Diego in TO or Cleveland playing Minnesota in Columbus or the Raiders hosting anybody but Dallas in Mexico City.  Or, maybe they'd try to fully neutral site it and have Dallas play Vegas in Mexico City.

The Jags still probably get 2 "home" games in London (anywhere BUT Jacksonville) & then play the 17th game elsewhere - Munich perhaps?

Edited February 21, 2020 by Taro T