Whaley started the internet on fire today

[Scumbag College]

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/bills-gm-doug-whaley-humans-aren-supposed-play-football-article-1.2648308

"A question about Sammy Watkins, who is recovering from a broken foot, made Bills GM Doug Whaley turn philosophical about the sport he's involved in.

"This is the game of football," Whaley told WGR 550 radio on Tuesday. "Injuries are part of it. It's a violent game that I personally don't think humans are supposed to play."

[OpIv37]

He should be fired immediately- not for expressing an opinion but because he's willing to make millions off something he doesn't believe people should be doing. It's a complete lack of ethics.

Oh wait- Russ Brandon's his boss.

[Victor7]

This guy it just too much.

This is like a McDonalds top employee going on national TV and saying "Don't eat the food it ain't healthy!"

What a moron. And this is the guy that runs our teams ladies and gents.

[Mace]

This organization is just getting more bizarre by the day.

[k-oneputt]

This guy is an idiot. I was in his corner but no more.

[k-oneputt]

The pressure is on these idiots. They had better produce this season or they all should be fired. And if Pegula doesn't pull the trigger then he is on the hot seat too.

[OpIv37]

The pressure is on these idiots. They had better produce this season or they all should be fired. And if Pegula doesn't pull the trigger then he is on the hot seat too.

That was the problem with Ralph. The owner can't be on the hot seat.... He learned with the Sabres but it was a slow process. Hopefully he'll come around eventually with the Bills

[Night Train]

THE NATIONAL GUARD HAS BEEN ACTIVATED ! :btm:


A lot of dumb things have been said at OBD today. Captain Obvious says hi.


But the drama queens here are far more entertaining. :clap:

[BillsImpossible]

Humans were not designed to play football.

I totally agree.

Humans weren't designed to go 250 mph, skydive, fly, climb Mount Everest, drink a half bottle of scotch, or eat fast food either but people still do it.

That's why people love football. It's dangerous and fun.

Playing in the NFL is something that ordinary people can't do.

The NFL is full of extraordinary athletes, the best in the world.

I'm glad Whaley lit the internet on fire today, because the news cycle has been quite boring lately and this NFL off season has been nothing much to talk about until now.

[OpIv37]

Humans were not designed to play football.

I totally agree.

Humans weren't designed to go 250 mph, skydive, fly, climb Mount Everest, drink a half bottle of scotch, or eat fast food either but people still do it.

That's why people love football. It's dangerous and fun.

Playing in the NFL is something that ordinary people can't do.

The NFL is full of extraordinary athletes, the best in the world.

I'm glad Whaley lit the internet on fire today, because the news cycle has been quite boring lately and this NFL off season has been nothing much to talk about until now.

Rams moving, Brady suspension, Johnny Football, the concussion stuff, two big pre draft trades... This offseason has been more exciting than most.

And you're right about all those things humans weren't meant to do. What makes Whaley a scumbag is that he makes so much money off it while admitting humans weren't meant to do it. He's ok with people ****ing up their lives for our entertainment as long as he's making a buck off of it.

[Arm of Harm]

Back when I was in college, one of the guys I lived with was a former football player. He couldn't go for runs, because football had done too much harm to his knees. There were some other things he couldn't do either. And that's just the effect on a guy who'd played high school football only. Imagine the effect on guys who go on to play in college, and then in the NFL. You look at the price Johnny Unitas paid in terms of football injuries which never fully healed after retirement.

I'm not saying people shouldn't play football. I love playing football myself! But we have to be realistic about the fact that the human body wasn't designed to withstand the beating football inflicts. And I think that's what Whaley meant when he said that people aren't supposed to play football.

Don't get me wrong--I'm not a Whaley fan. The Bills won't win the Super Bowl until after the they've found a new GM. But in this particular instance, I don't think he deserves to be castigated for having spoken an unpleasant truth.

[Scumbag College]

And you're right about all those things humans weren't meant to do. What makes Whaley a scumbag is that he makes so much money off it while admitting humans weren't meant to do it. He's ok with people ****ing up their lives for our entertainment as long as he's making a buck off of it.

This is what bugged me the most about the comment. Whaley is a pretty bright guy...he gave up a really good job on Wall St. after playing at a pretty big time college football program to join the Stillers staff and has worked his way up to the GM of the Bills. I'm guessing any and all of us would take that job. And he could get back into the financial sector if he is this adverse to the idea of letting people play football.

I'm not a Tea Bagger, Fake Tough Guy, Rush Limbo listener that thinks any safety precaution that the NFL takes to help players is the "sissification of 'Merica." Too many ex-players are seriously ****ed up from the game and if some rule changes are implemented that improves their well being, I'm all for it. Bare knuckle Boxing matches used to go 74 rounds and guys died in the ring. 8oz. gloves and 12 round Championship bouts didn't make Boxing into figure skating, ballroom dancing, or golf.

[OpIv37]

Back when I was in college, one of the guys I lived with was a former football player. He couldn't go for runs, because football had done too much harm to his knees. There were some other things he couldn't do either. And that's just the effect on a guy who'd played high school football only. Imagine the effect on guys who go on to play in college, and then in the NFL. You look at the price Johnny Unitas paid in terms of football injuries which never fully healed after retirement.

I'm not saying people shouldn't play football. I love playing football myself! But we have to be realistic about the fact that the human body wasn't designed to withstand the beating football inflicts. And I think that's what Whaley meant when he said that people aren't supposed to play football.

Don't get me wrong--I'm not a Whaley fan. The Bills won't win the Super Bowl until after the they've found a new GM. But in this particular instance, I don't think he deserves to be castigated for having spoken an unpleasant truth.
the problem isn't that he spoke an unpleasant truth. The problem is that he understands the unpleasant truth but chooses to make money off of it anyway. If he had any moral compass, the unpleasant truth would have compelled him into another line of work.

[stuckincincy]

He should be fired immediately- not for expressing an opinion but because he's willing to make millions off something he doesn't believe people should be doing. It's a complete lack of ethics.

Oh wait- Russ Brandon's his boss.

Er...the team sells out year after year. Let's not feign indignity... :handball:

[feldspar]

the problem isn't that he spoke an unpleasant truth. The problem is that he understands the unpleasant truth but chooses to make money off of it anyway. If he had any moral compass, the unpleasant truth would have compelled him into another line of work.

The only problem is yours, and how you chose to take what he said...and then project all this crap.

He was not wrong.

[OpIv37]

Er...the team sells out year after year. Let's not feign indignity... :handball:

Hence the Brandon comment. He's never had any interest in building a winner. He's only interested in creating the illusion of a winner to play off the passion and loyalty of Bills fans.

[OpIv37]

The only problem is yours, and how you chose to take what he said...and then project all this crap.

He was not wrong.

What he said was not wrong. He makes money off of something that he feels hurts people by his own admission. That has nothing to do with any choice or projection by me- it's the reality and that's what's wrong.

[feldspar]

What he said was not wrong. He makes money off of something that he feels hurts people by his own admission. That has nothing to do with any choice or projection by me- it's the reality and that's what's wrong.

Anybody with two brain cells knows what he said is true. That includes 31 other GMs, whether they say it or not, it's an obvious truth, universally recognized by everyone.

Maybe the problem is with this new-fangled sound-byte society, where everything is hyper-analyzed by people who are too much of a hurry to think things through, and people are expected to talk out of their ass more and more instead of just telling the truth.

So you're saying that you have a problem with him telling the truth? Or is it that he shouldn't TELL the truth? Because, at this point of the conversation, I'm getting the idea that you want NFL GMs to not give a rat's ass about the truth. Should they not care about the players or have a perspective on the beast? What?

[IlluminatusUIUC]

He was defending Watkins by pointing out that football is violent and injuries happen. People are going nuts with the hot takes here.

[OpIv37]

Anybody with two brain cells knows what he said is true. That includes 31 other GMs, whether they say it or not, it's an obvious truth, universally recognized by everyone.

Maybe the problem is with this new-tangled sound-byte society, where everything is hyper-analyzed by people who are too much of a hurry to think things through, and people are expected to talk out of their ass more and more instead of just telling the truth.

So you're saying that you have a problem with him telling the truth? Or is it that he shouldn't TELL the truth? Because, at this point of the conversation, I'm getting the idea that you want. NFL GMs to not give a rat's ass about the truth. Should they not care about the players or have a perspective on the beast? What?

Huh? How can something be "hyper-analyized" by people too busy to think things through? I don't think you know what "hyper" or "analyze" actually mean, because people incapable of thinking things through can't analyze by definition.

Anyone who agrees with Whaley but makes money off of football is admitting to making money off of something that is harmful. Yeah, it's the truth. But it's a truth that makes them despicable human beings. I'm not sure why you think being truthful about being a despicable human being is so much better than lying about being a despicable human being.

[OpIv37]

He was defending Watkins by pointing out that football is violent and injuries happen. People are going nuts with the hot takes here.

Exact Whaley quote: "It's a violent game that I personally don't think humans are supposed to play."

Nothing in that statement has anything to do with defending Watkins. It's a general statement and a very damning one.

[Figster]

What he said was not wrong. He makes money off of something that he feels hurts people by his own admission. That has nothing to do with any choice or projection by me- it's the reality and that's what's wrong.

We live in a world that is entertained by violence and destruction. Athletes are payed to perform these acts of violence to entertain us. Its no secret man is not made to get punched in the face yet millions of dollars is won or lost every day humans inflicting bodily harm on other humans.

Do you realize how many occupations are in one form or another dangerous to somebody's health?

[Generalissimus Gibby]

This organization is just getting more bizarre by the day.

When they hired Rex I knew we were heading towards being a reality show. Now this team is its own version of MTV

[The Jokeman]

Hence the Brandon comment. He's never had any interest in building a winner. He's only interested in creating the illusion of a winner to play off the passion and loyalty of Bills fans.
Brandon is the marketing guy so what you just described of selling this team to fans to buy into this team is his job!

[OpIv37]

Brandon is the marketing guy so what you just described of selling this team to fans to buy into this team is his job!

Yeah but he gets the fans to buy into teams that aren't worth buying into. He's a snake oil salesman: spend as little as possible on the product on the field while convincing fans it's worth buying.

[OpIv37]

We live in a world that is entertained by violence and destruction. Athletes are payed to perform these acts of violence to entertain us. Its no secret man is not made to get punched in the face yet millions of dollars is won or lost every day humans inflicting bodily harm on other humans.

Do you realize how many occupations are in one form or another dangerous to somebody's health?
All of that is true. None of it excuses Whaley for making money off of something he admits is harmful to people.

[Joe Fo Sho]

the problem isn't that he spoke an unpleasant truth. The problem is that he understands the unpleasant truth but chooses to make money off of it anyway. If he had any moral compass, the unpleasant truth would have compelled him into another line of work.

Moral compass? Please.

By this logic the President of GM should also be fired and no one should replace him. The automotive industry should be shut down due to vehicle emissions and risk of injury. Vehicles are responsible for far more injuries/deaths than the NFL. Humans are not meant to drive cars. They're also not meant to fight in the UFC or even eat french fries for that matter. Why does everyone have to be responsible for the actions of others all of the sudden? If you don't want to risk injury, don't play in the NFL. If you are willing to risk physical damage to your body/brain, Doug might be willing to give you a paycheck. Big deal.

To think anything negative about Whaley's comments is just finding another reason to moan and ache about the Bills.

I design industrial machines that are installed in factories all over the world. Many of them are in 3rd world countries obviously, because of the labor costs. I'm not the one who decides where the machines are installed, who we sell them to, and I don't have any control over the factories working conditions. Should I feel responsible for the workers who don't make a livable wage who work 16 hours a day in poor conditions? Should I quit and join the Red Cross?

[trapezeus]

I am not a whaley apologist(he can build a d, but he can't build a team), but his statement out of context is misleading. he was making the point that missing 3 games in 2 seasons isn't a lot. its a brutal game. and he has a point that guys that play 16 full games year in and yr out are minorities.

his phrasing was awful.

[Mahdi]

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/bills-gm-doug-whaley-humans-aren-supposed-play-football-article-1.2648308

"A question about Sammy Watkins, who is recovering from a broken foot, made Bills GM Doug Whaley turn philosophical about the sport he's involved in.

"This is the game of football," Whaley told WGR 550 radio on Tuesday. "Injuries are part of it. It's a violent game that I personally don't think humans are supposed to play."

Whaley's comment is very honest and very fair...

Many people including football players have said similar comments in the past.

What Whaley is getting at here is that football is a game that the human body will always take a beating from because the collisions are violent and our body's are not made of steel. It's a gladiator sport which is what makes it what it is as the most popular sport in America.

Whaley is saying nothing new here....

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Exact Whaley quote: "It's a violent game that I personally don't think humans are supposed to play."

Nothing in that statement has anything to do with defending Watkins. It's a general statement and a very damning one.

Oh come on, Op, you're supposed to better then this. That's not an exact quote, it's one line cropped out of a paragraph answer.

You can listen to the interview yourself here: http://www.wgr550.com/Whaley-Lawson-could-have-played-through-shoulder-i/22753385

The Howard Simon Show: Do you worry about the number of injuries he [Watkins] has had? Is he injury prone?

Whaley: I wouldn't say that. You look at his game log, and he's only missed three games. So is he's injury prone? I wouldn't say that. With a guy like this, we hope it gets limited in the future, but this is the game of football. Injuries are part of it. It's a violent game that personally I don't think humans are supposed to play. And these things are going to come up, but we trust in our medical staff and we trust in each individual athlete to do what they have to do to get back on the field.

[OpIv37]

Moral compass? Please.

By this logic the President of GM should also be fired and no one should replace him. The automotive industry should be shut down due to vehicle emissions and risk of injury. Vehicles are responsible for far more injuries/deaths than the NFL. Humans are not meant to drive cars. They're also not meant to fight in the UFC or even eat french fries for that matter. Why does everyone have to be responsible for the actions of others all of the sudden? If you don't want to risk injury, don't play in the NFL. If you are willing to risk physical damage to your body/brain, Doug might be willing to give you a paycheck. Big deal.

To think anything negative about Whaley's comments is just finding another reason to moan and ache about the Bills.

I design industrial machines that are installed in factories all over the world. Many of them are in 3rd world countries obviously, because of the labor costs. I'm not the one who decides where the machines are installed, who we sell them to, and I don't have any control over the factories working conditions. Should I feel responsible for the workers who don't make a livable wage who work 16 hours a day in poor conditions? Should I quit and join the Red Cross?

That's a bit of a dubious comparison. GM's cars and your machines serve a fundamental purpose. Sure, some people will misuse them, but people misuse everything. It doesnt change their purpose or benefit.

Football is just entertainment. It's completely unnecessary. It has no fundamental purpose other than entertainment, and if Whaleh truly believes humans shouldn't do it, then he should go make his money off of one of the million other forms of entertainment that humans were meant to do.

[OpIv37]

Oh come on, Op, you're supposed to better then this. That's not an exact quote, it's one line cropped out of a paragraph answer.

You can listen to the interview yourself here: http://www.wgr550.com/Whaley-Lawson-could-have-played-through-shoulder-i/22753385

The Howard Simon Show: Do you worry about the number of injuries he [Watkins] has had? Is he injury prone?

Whaley: I wouldn't say that. You look at his game log, and he's only missed three games. So is he's injury prone? I wouldn't say that. With a guy like this, we hope it gets limited in the future, but this is the game of football. Injuries are part of it. It's a violent game that personally I don't think humans are supposed to play. And these things are going to come up, but we trust in our medical staff and we trust in each individual athlete to do what they have to do to get back on the field.

Nothing about that supposed context changes the fundamental nature of what he said.

[Albany,n.y.]

50+ years ago on The Jetsons, the football players of the 2060s were all robots.

[Forward_Lateral]

In 10-20 years there will be no such thing as football. It will either be some version of flag football, or something along those lines.

[Joe Fo Sho]

That's a bit of a dubious comparison. GM's cars and your machines serve a fundamental purpose. Sure, some people will misuse them, but people misuse everything. It doesnt change their purpose or benefit.

Football is just entertainment. It's completely unnecessary. It has no fundamental purpose other than entertainment, and if Whaleh truly believes humans shouldn't do it, then he should go make his money off of one of the million other forms of entertainment that humans were meant to do.

It's not a dubious comparison at all. Football might be entertainment, but it's affect on the human race is minuscule compared to the automotive industry, not to mention it only hurts people who sign up for it. Cars injure far more people and have an incredible affect on our environment, but it's OK because we can get from point A to point B fast. Plus, if you can make billions of dollars on it, it's fine right? Where do you draw the line?

Entertainment that injures hundreds yearly versus fast transportation that kills 1.3 million people per year (3,287 people daily) and injures/disables 35 million more yearly. Those 3,300 people that are killed daily are expendable though because I don't want to have to walk to work?

Don't underestimate the purpose entertainment serves in the daily lives of the people who are fortunate enough to enjoy it.

McDonald's is completely unnecessary and has a worse affect on the human race than the NFL. Should the McDonald's franchise owners close their doors so they can sleep better at night?

Should the clerk at Foot Locker quit because the shoes he/she sells are made using child/slave labor? Do Nike shoes serve a purpose that justifies that?

Where's the line? Doug Whaley deciding which handful of people should make millions of dollars and who shouldn't is nothing comparatively.

[OpIv37]

It's not a dubious comparison at all. Football might be entertainment, but it's affect on the human race is minuscule compared to the automotive industry, not to mention it only hurts people who sign up for it. Cars injure far more people and have an incredible affect on our environment, but it's OK because we can get from point A to point B fast. Plus, if you can make billions of dollars on it, it's fine right? Where do you draw the line?

Entertainment that injures hundreds yearly versus fast transportation that kills 1.3 million people per year (3,287 people daily) and injures/disables 35 million more yearly. Those 3,300 people that are killed daily are expendable though because I don't want to have to walk to work?

Don't underestimate the purpose entertainment serves in the daily lives of the people who are fortunate enough to enjoy it.

McDonald's is completely unnecessary and has a worse affect on the human race than the NFL. Should the McDonald's franchise owners close their doors so they can sleep better at night?

Should the clerk at Foot Locker quit because the shoes he/she sells are made using child/slave labor? Do Nike shoes serve a purpose that justifies that?

Where's the line? Doug Whaley deciding which handful of people should make millions of dollars and who shouldn't is nothing comparatively.

Do you see McD's executives speaking out about the obesity epidemic? Do you see Foot Locker's CEO taking a stand against child labor? Do you see GM officials warning people of the dangers of climate change?

[Bill Cody]

Nothing about that supposed context changes the fundamental nature of what he said.

I think you're being a little harsh. I think what his comments refer to specifically are the recent reports on concussions in the game. It's a picture that wasn't known much about until now and we still don't know enough. A lot of people in the game including players probably have serious concerns about the future of the sport. No doubt many privately agree with Whaley, they just didn't say it out loud. Whether Whaley were to make an ethical stand or not the real mercenaries are the NFL itself. They're like the tobacco industry, they know a lot more then they're saying and they could do a lot more to improve safety but it would shave profits. Like playing with triple lined helmets that wouldn't look nearly as cool on TV.

Maybe by being willing to say out loud that the Emperor has no clothes Whaley will make it safer for others to speak out about a conversation that needs to happen. Because the league doesn't care one whit about the cattle with numbers they profit so handsomely from, the fact that they were just recently accused of trying to influence the concussion research tells you that. It's all about power and profits. Whaley is a tiny tiny cog in the wheel. So let's not single him out for saying out loud what, in my opinion, a lot of football people actually think. With no serious action by the league on safety Whaley's comments will be looked back on as more prophetic than unethical.

[OpIv37]

I think you're being a little harsh. I think what his comments refer to specifically are the recent reports on concussions in the game. It's a picture that wasn't known much about until now and we still don't know enough. A lot of people in the game including players probably have serious concerns about the future of the sport. No doubt many privately agree with Whaley, they just didn't say it out loud. Whether Whaley were to make an ethical stand or not the real mercenaries are the NFL itself. They're like the tobacco industry, they know a lot more then they're saying and they could do a lot more to improve safety but it would shave profits. Like playing with triple lined helmets that wouldn't look nearly as cool on TV.

Maybe by being willing to say out loud that the Emperor has no clothes Whaley will make it safer for others to speak out about a conversation that needs to happen. Because the league doesn't care one whit about the cattle with numbers they profit so handsomely from, the fact that they were just recently accused of trying to influence the concussion research tells you that. It's all about power and profits. Whaley is a tiny tiny cog in the wheel. So let's not single him out for saying out loud what, in my opinion, a lot of football people actually think. With no serious action by the league on safety Whaley's comments will be looked back on as more prophetic than unethical.

Yeah well, if you want to stick to the tobacco industry analogy, Whaley's the guy making huge profits selling cigarettes at his corner store while complaining about the health effects of smoking.

If he cared that much, he'd sell something else.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Nothing about that supposed context changes the fundamental nature of what he said.

That's not "supposed" context Mr. Weasel Words, that's the actual context. He was asked if Watkins was injury prone. He said he disagreed, because football is a violent sport that humans are not built to play, so injuries happen. And despite that, Watkins still has a good injury record, so he thought it wasn't an accurate description.

Claiming he's making some grand pronouncement about the sport and then further claiming that he's somehow unethical for continuing to work in the NFL is just ridiculous hyperbole.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Yeah well, if you want to stick to the tobacco industry analogy, Whaley's the guy making huge profits selling cigarettes at his corner store while complaining about the health effects of smoking.

If he cared that much, he'd sell something else.

When did Whaley complain or even make mention at all that he cared?

[Joe Fo Sho]

Do you see McD's executives speaking out about the obesity epidemic? Do you see Foot Locker's CEO taking a stand against child labor? Do you see GM officials warning people of the dangers of climate change?

Oh, so it's only OK if you turn a blind eye to all of the damage you're doing. That makes sense.

[sahlensguy]

It wouldn't be easy to gain a competitive edge in any line of work, in which your GM just made this comment.

Thanks Whaley.

[OpIv37]

That's not "supposed" context Mr. Weasel Words, that's the actual context. He was asked if Watkins was injury prone. He said he disagreed, because football is a violent sport that humans are not built to play, so injuries happen. And despite that, Watkins still has a good injury record, so he thought it wasn't an accurate description.

Claiming he's making some grand pronouncement about the sport and then further claiming that he's somehow unethical for continuing to work in the NFL is just ridiculous hyperbole.

Claiming his statement doesn't have broader implications because he mentioned Watkins is being intentionally obtuse. Claiming it isn't unethical to profit off something he admits is harmful is just ridiculous.

[Bill Cody]

Yeah well, if you want to stick to the tobacco industry analogy, Whaley's the guy making huge profits selling cigarettes at his corner store while complaining about the health effects of smoking.

If he cared that much, he'd sell something else.

Ok I see your take. The difference to me is if you grow up loving the game, built a career in it and then when you've found success you learn some harsh truths about player safety it's not easy to let go. Could you? Maybe he's still hopeful of some advances in safety, unlike tobacco where there's not much you can do with a cigarette.

[OpIv37]

Oh, so it's only OK if you turn a blind eye to all of the damage you're doing. That makes sense.
I didn't say it makes it OK. Them being wrong too doesn't make Whaley right, and at least they're not being hypocrytes about it

[Joe Fo Sho]

I didn't say it makes it OK. Them being wrong too doesn't make Whaley right, and at least they're not being hypocrytes about it

But they are hypocrites, they're just liars too. You seem to just be upset that Whaley isn't claiming ignorance like the rest of them.

The executives at McDonald's know more about how they're causing obesity than probably anyone in the world, just like oil companies knew about climate change before anyone else did. The NFL probably knew about brain damage well before the general public did, too. They just claim ignorance.


Claiming his statement doesn't have broader implications because he mentioned Watkins is being intentionally obtuse. Claiming it isn't unethical to profit off something he admits is harmful is just ridiculous.

It's only harmful to the people that sign up to be harmed. It's not ridiculous, and you can even argue that it's not unethical.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Claiming his statement doesn't have broader implications because he mentioned Watkins is being intentionally obtuse. Claiming it isn't unethical to profit off something he admits is harmful is just ridiculous.

Is Watkins some kind of slave? No, he's a highly paid professional in a dangerous line of work. The broader implication of his statement is that people get injured while playing football and it's not fair to label them injury prone as a result.

Don't you train at an MMA gym? I thought you said you worked out with semi-pro fighters. Is your coach being unethical for taking money to train guys to hurt each other?

[OpIv37]

Is Watkins some kind of slave? No, he's a highly paid professional in a dangerous line of work. The broader implication of his statement is that people get injured while playing football and it's not fair to label them injury prone as a result.

Don't you train at an MMA gym? I thought you said you worked out with semi-pro fighters. Is your coach being unethical for taking money to train guys to hurt each other?

A risk of getting hurt is different than saying "human beings shouldn't do this" while profiting off it anyway.

[OpIv37]

But they are hypocrites, they're just liars too. You seem to just be upset that Whaley isn't claiming ignorance like the rest of them.

The executives at McDonald's know more about how they're causing obesity than probably anyone in the world, just like oil companies knew about climate change before anyone else did. The NFL probably knew about brain damage well before the general public did, too. They just claim ignorance.



It's only harmful to the people that sign up to be harmed. It's not ridiculous, and you can even argue that it's not unethical.

Whaley said "humans shouldn't do this." He thinks it's so bad that humans shouldn't be involved in it but he profits off it anyway.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

A risk of getting hurt is different than saying "human beings shouldn't do this" while profiting off it anyway.

This is the "You didn't build that" silliness all over again.

[OpIv37]

This is the "You didn't build that" silliness all over again.

Huh?

Those were Whaley's words, not mine

[feldspar]

A risk of getting hurt is different than saying "human beings shouldn't do this" while profiting off it anyway.

Holy ****.

A poor choice of words by Whaley, maybe...but you know damn well what he meant; that is, unless that stick up your ass goes farther up then I'd realized.

Talk about another non-issue.

All you're doing is arguing semantics, and you're going it in one of the most biased and stupid ways imaginable. Funny how you call yourself a fan of the Bills, yet all of your biases seem to actually be AGAINST the team.

[OpIv37]

Holy ****.

A poor choice of words, maybe...but you know damn well what he meant; that is, unless that stick up your ass goes farther up the I'd realized.

Talk about another non-issue.

All you're doing is arguing semantics, and you're going it in one of the most biased and stumped ways imaginable. Funny how you call yourself a fan of the Bills, yet all of your biases seem to actually be AGAINST the team.

I don't know what he meant. I do know what he actually said because it was recorded. Its's a known fact, while you are presuming to know what he meant as if you can read his mind. Then you accuse me of being biased?

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Huh?

You don't remember Obama getting hammered for years over half a sentence taken out of context?


Those were Whaley's words, not mine

Humans aren't supposed to play football. They get injured when they do.

Watkins plays football. He got injured. It is unfair to blame him for getting injured while engaging in a sport that injures people.

If you want even more context, listen to the interview. The Watkins question came after a several minute stretch where the hosts questioned him about Shaq Lawson's injury as well.

[feldspar]

I don't know what he meant.

Then why do you have anything to say about it?

[OpIv37]

Then why do you have anything to say about it?

Oh Jesus.

Poor phrasing. I know what he said- if he intended it to mean something other than what he said, neither you nor I know what it is.

[feldspar]

Oh Jesus.

Poor phrasing. I know what he said- if he intended it to mean something other than what he said, neither you nor I know what it is.

It's obvious what he meant.

Did you listen to the interview?

[Pinkerton Security]

I don't know what he meant. I do know what he actually said because it was recorded. Its's a known fact, while you are presuming to know what he meant as if you can read his mind. Then you accuse me of being biased?

As always, there is more than 1 way to view what he said. And as always, you took it way out of context and as a way to complain about our FO.

Your claim is that Whaley is a bad person for making money off a sport which we can all agree is detrimental to human's health - if you care so much about these poor souls who are paid money to hurt themselves, then why watch it? Where do you draw the line?

[Mahdi]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/25/doug-whaley-saying-humans-shouldnt-play-football-was-a-poor-choice-of-words/

[Joe Fo Sho]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/25/doug-whaley-saying-humans-shouldnt-play-football-was-a-poor-choice-of-words/


I don't know what he meant.


Clearly I used a poor choice of words in my comment yesterday morning,” Whaley said in the statement. “As a former player who has the utmost respect and love for the game, the point that I was trying to make is that football is a physical game and injuries are a part of it. Playing football no doubt is very physically, mentally, and emotionally challenging, and that is all part of what make the game so compelling to play and watch. The game has more protection for players now than ever, thanks largely to the safety advancements and numerous rule changes made by our league and promoted to all levels of football. I believe our game continues to have a bright future and I hope that this statement provides clarity as to the intent of my earlier comment.

There, now you know what he meant and should be able to see how ridiculous you're being.

[sahlensguy]

Quote Originally Posted by Doug Whaley
Clearly I used a poor choice of words in my comment yesterday morning,” Whaley said in the statement. “As a former player who has the utmost respect and love for the game, the point that I was trying to make is that football is a physical game and injuries are a part of it. Playing football no doubt is very physically, mentally, and emotionally challenging, and that is all part of what make the game so compelling to play and watch. The game has more protection for players now than ever, thanks largely to the safety advancements and numerous rule changes made by our league and promoted to all levels of football. I believe our game continues to have a bright future and I hope that this statement provides clarity as to the intent of my earlier comment.



There, now you know what he meant and should be able to see how ridiculous you're being.

And this has anything to do with what he said yesterday how?

[OpIv37]

As always, there is more than 1 way to view what he said. And as always, you took it way out of context and as a way to complain about our FO.

Your claim is that Whaley is a bad person for making money off a sport which we can all agree is detrimental to human's health - if you care so much about these poor souls who are paid money to hurt themselves, then why watch it? Where do you draw the line?

He said humans shouldn't even do it. I draw the line at getting money from things I believe humans shouldn't even do.

- - - Updated - - -


There, now you know what he meant and should be able to see how ridiculous you're being.
If I'm being ridiculous, why does he feel the need to apologia and clarify his statement?

[Joe Fo Sho]

He said humans shouldn't even do it. I draw the line at getting money from things I believe humans shouldn't even do.

I had to stop thinking that way when I got a job at McDonald's in high school because I wanted that sweet sweet minimum wage paycheck. It's pretty easy to get over, especially when you realize that people have control over their own actions and I wasn't forcing them to do anything. Kind of like the situation Whaley is in now, only the people who are choosing that line of work are well compensated.


If I'm being ridiculous, why does he feel the need to apologia and clarify his statement?

I've had to clarify my statements before, mostly to people who didn't comprehend what I meant by the words I said. It was so ridiculous.

[Arm of Harm]

Huh? How can something be "hyper-analyized" by people too busy to think things through? I don't think you know what "hyper" or "analyze" actually mean, because people incapable of thinking things through can't analyze by definition.

Anyone who agrees with Whaley but makes money off of football is admitting to making money off of something that is harmful. Yeah, it's the truth. But it's a truth that makes them despicable human beings. I'm not sure why you think being truthful about being a despicable human being is so much better than lying about being a despicable human being.

Football is harmful. That isn't an opinion, it's a fact. A fact backed up by concussion research, as well as by the unhealed physical damage retired football players endure. In your opinion, Whaley is a despicable human being for making money off something he believes is harmful. If that's how you see things, fine. But what does that say about us as fans? We are also benefiting from this harmful activity. Granted, we're not making money off it. But we still enjoy it and support it. If we didn't, we wouldn't be on this discussion board.

Anyone who claims football isn't harmful is either misinformed or intellectually dishonest. Both the fans and Doug Whaley benefit from this harmful activity. Albeit, our benefit takes the form of enjoyment, whereas his is both enjoyment and monetary. But in a case like this, the degree of benefit is not morally relevant. To use your cigarette analogy, a cigarette company which makes a profit of $1 million is not a thousand times morally cleaner than a cigarette company which makes a $1 billion profit. If Doug Whaley is a "despicable human being" for making money off something harmful, why are the rest of us not also despicable human beings for enjoying football?

[OpIv37]

Football is harmful. That isn't an opinion, it's a fact. A fact backed up by concussion research, as well as by the unhealed physical damage retired football players endure. In your opinion, Whaley is a despicable human being for making money off something he believes is harmful. If that's how you see things, fine. But what does that say about us as fans? We are also benefiting from this harmful activity. Granted, we're not making money off it. But we still enjoy it and support it. If we didn't, we wouldn't be on this discussion board.

Anyone who claims football isn't harmful is either misinformed or intellectually dishonest. Both the fans and Doug Whaley benefit from this harmful activity. Albeit, our benefit takes the form of enjoyment, whereas his is both enjoyment and monetary. But in a case like this, the degree of benefit is not morally relevant. To use your cigarette analogy, a cigarette company which makes a profit of $1 million is not a thousand times morally cleaner than a cigarette company which makes a $1 billion profit. If Doug Whaley is a "despicable human being" for making money off something harmful, why are the rest of us not also despicable human beings for enjoying football?

Eh, I didn't state my opinion particularly well there. We all enjoy and/or profit off of things that are harmful to people.

What makes it different is that he said it's so harmful that people shouldn't do it. When I feel that strongly about something, I can't in good conscience participate in it and I definitely can't profit from it.

[OpIv37]

I had to stop thinking that way when I got a job at McDonald's in high school because I wanted that sweet sweet minimum wage paycheck. It's pretty easy to get over, especially when you realize that people have control over their own actions and I wasn't forcing them to do anything. Kind of like the situation Whaley is in now, only the people who are choosing that line of work are well compensated.



I've had to clarify my statements before, mostly to people who didn't comprehend what I meant by the words I said. It was so ridiculous.
Do you believe that McD's is so bad that no one should eat there ever? That's different than understanding that fast food can be harmful if overconsumed and working there anyway.

And maybe people didn't comprehend what you meant by the words you said because you chose the wrong words and you were the one being ridiculous.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Do you believe that McD's is so bad that no one should eat there ever? That's different than understanding that fast food can be harmful if overconsumed and working there anyway.

"Should" is the operative word here, and it's the same word that Whaley used. People should eat healthy, McDonald's is not healthy, therefore I think people should not eat at McDonald's. I can even say that people should not eat McDonald's ever, because there are better alternatives.

Now "can" people eat at McDonald's? Sure. Can people eat McDonald's and be healthy? Absolutely. Can people play football and not injure themselves? Yup.

I agree with Whaley that people should not play football, but I think they can if they want to. With that thought process, capitalizing on the sport is not unethical.


And maybe people didn't comprehend what you meant by the words you said because you chose the wrong words and you were the one being ridiculous.

Can you clarify this statement?

[Joe Fo Sho]

What makes it different is that he said it's so harmful that people shouldn't do it. When I feel that strongly about something, I can't in good conscience participate in it and I definitely can't profit from it.

Saying someone shouldn't do something in no way indicative of how strongly they feel about it.

[trapezeus]

I usually agree with op, but in this case, I think the context is clear that he was defending Watkins as not injury prone. all the articles that sensationalized picked this one sentence out and used it for the agenda of head injuries. Whaley brings this on himself wording it like this. but his intent was clear to defend Watkins, not to criticize the sport.

[OpIv37]

"Should" is the operative word here, and it's the same word that Whaley used. People should eat healthy, McDonald's is not healthy, therefore I think people should not eat at McDonald's. I can even say that people should not eat McDonald's ever, because there are better alternatives.

Now "can" people eat at McDonald's? Sure. Can people eat McDonald's and be healthy? Absolutely. Can people play football and not injure themselves? Yup.

I agree with Whaley that people should not play football, but I think they can if they want to. With that thought process, capitalizing on the sport is not unethical.



Can you clarify this statement?
You labeled the people who didn't understand you as being "ridiculous" with no consideration of the possibility that you chose your words poorly and did not communicate what you truly meant to say.

[OpIv37]

Saying someone shouldn't do something in no way indicative of how strongly they feel about it.

It is when someone who is supposedly an "expert" at something says people shouldn't do it. This isn't some overprotective mother or chess club nerd who's scared to play. It's someone who should know what they are talking about. If my life and financial well-being depend on an activity, I'm not going to blurt out that people shouldn't participate in it unless I have a damn good reason.

[Joe Fo Sho]

You labeled the people who didn't understand you as being "ridiculous" with no consideration of the possibility that you chose your words poorly and did not communicate what you truly meant to say.

I actually gave strong consideration to that possibility, it just was never the case.

[X-Era]

Frankly I don't care how much Whaley stumbles, mumbles, and misspeaks. He's doing a great job at free agency, drafting, and all the other things under his charge. That's all that really matters as far as I'm concerned.

[OpIv37]

Frankly I don't care how much Whaley stumbles, mumbles, and misspeaks. He's doing a great job at free agency, drafting, and all the other things under his charge. That's all that really matters as far as I'm concerned.
He is? That's why the team is a mere 1 game over .500 during his tenure, we had virtually no cap space this year, and our best draft pick is gonna sit out a good portion of the season, right?

[X-Era]

He is? That's why the team is a mere 1 game over .500 during his tenure, we had virtually no cap space this year, and our best draft pick is gonna sit out a good portion of the season, right?
Yes he is.

Name one single GM who hasn't had a rookie get injured.

Plenty of good GMs have had teams that have under performed. Ryan is to blame for what he did with the groceries.

Tyrod Taylor alone makes the argument. And that doesn't even look at the draft success (when FULLY under his management), resigning our own, and various other roster moves where we got incredible value.

[Cleve]

Well, on a similar note, I personally don't think that Doug Whaley was ever meant to be a football GM. So there's that.

[Buckets]

Rams moving, Brady suspension, Johnny Football, the concussion stuff, two big pre draft trades... This offseason has been more exciting than most.

And you're right about all those things humans weren't meant to do. What makes Whaley a scumbag is that he makes so much money off it while admitting humans weren't meant to do it. He's ok with people ****ing up their lives for our entertainment as long as he's making a buck off of it.

And what does that make us? We support the sport that maims, and sometimes kills human beings. What responsibility do we shoulder? Aren't we like the people who support dog or **** fighting? If we did not continue to shell out the big bucks to support the NFL how long do you think it would last. Just saying, don't get all philosophical on us.

[OpIv37]

Yes he is.

Name one single GM who hasn't had a rookie get injured.

Plenty of good GMs have had teams that have under performed. Ryan is to blame for what he did with the groceries.

Tyrod Taylor alone makes the argument. And that doesn't even look at the draft success (when FULLY under his management), resigning our own, and various other roster moves where we got incredible value.

Yeah we got everything except the one thing that matters: wins.

[X-Era]

Yeah we got everything except the one thing that matters: a head coach that can coach us to wins.Fixed it

[WagonCircler]

Yeah we got everything except the one thing that matters: wins.

Actually, the only thing that matters in Bills World is successfully brainwashing fans into believing the illusion of progress so they hand over their cash like sheep.

X-Era is a perfect example. Giddy as a schoolgirl over a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in 1.5 decades.

Great job, Whaley! Great job Russ! Mission accomplished!

[TacklingDummy]

Quote Originally Posted by Doug Whaley
Clearly I used a poor choice of words in my comment yesterday morning,” Whaley said in the statement. “As a former player who has the utmost respect and love for the game, the point that I was trying to make is that football is a physical game and injuries are a part of it. Playing football no doubt is very physically, mentally, and emotionally challenging, and that is all part of what make the game so compelling to play and watch. The game has more protection for players now than ever, thanks largely to the safety advancements and numerous rule changes made by our league and promoted to all levels of football. I believe our game continues to have a bright future and I hope that this statement provides clarity as to the intent of my earlier comment..

Sounds like someone realized he may be looking for a new job real soon and that he shouldn't be pissing off 31 other owners.

[Arm of Harm]

Frankly I don't care how much Whaley stumbles, mumbles, and misspeaks. He's doing a great job at free agency, drafting, and all the other things under his charge. That's all that really matters as far as I'm concerned.


The most important position in football is QB. Quite frankly, I don't trust Whaley to evaluate talent at the QB position. We tend to overlook how badly he's done there, because Rex Ryan bailed him out by encouraging the Bills to go after Tyrod Taylor. Had it not been for Ryan's influence, the Bills' starting QB for 2015 would have been determined by the competition between E.J. Manuel and Matt Cassel. Absolutely nothing about Whaley's methodology or track record remotely suggests he's qualified to evaluate QB talent.

This isn't to suggest that QB is the only position he's bungled. You look at overpaying for mediocre free agents, over-drafting guys like Kujo, etc., and you can see non-QB-related room for improvement. But he's also had some successes in non-QB areas. At non-QB areas Whaley is hit or miss; at the QB position he's strictly miss.

Look at the franchise QBs that the teams in the AFC East have had:
Dolphins: 2 (Griese, Marino)
Patriots: 1.5 (Tom Brady, and the first half of Bledsoe's career).
Bills: 1 (Kelly)
Jets: 1 (Namath)

Collectively, those 5.5 franchise QBs account for all the AFC East's Super Bowl wins, and all but one of its Super Bowl appearances. A team whose GM can't choose good QB talent is very unlikely to win the Super Bowl.

[TacklingDummy]

Not sure Namath should be on that list.

[YardRat]

The most important position in football is QB. Quite frankly, I don't trust Whaley to evaluate talent at the QB position. We tend to overlook how badly he's done there, because Rex Ryan bailed him out by encouraging the Bills to go after Tyrod Taylor. Had it not been for Ryan's influence, the Bills' starting QB for 2015 would have been determined by the competition between E.J. Manuel and Matt Cassel. Absolutely nothing about Whaley's methodology or track record remotely suggests he's qualified to evaluate QB talent.

This isn't to suggest that QB is the only position he's bungled. You look at overpaying for mediocre free agents, over-drafting guys like Kujo, etc., and you can see non-QB-related room for improvement. But he's also had some successes in non-QB areas. At non-QB areas Whaley is hit or miss; at the QB position he's strictly miss.

Look at the franchise QBs that the teams in the AFC East have had:
Dolphins: 2 (Griese, Marino)
Patriots: 1.5 (Tom Brady, and the first half of Bledsoe's career).
Bills: 1 (Kelly)
Jets: 1 (Namath)

Collectively, those 5.5 franchise QBs account for all the AFC East's Super Bowl wins, and all but one of its Super Bowl appearances. A team whose GM can't choose good QB talent is very unlikely to win the Super Bowl.

I'm assuming you're only looking back as far as the Super Bowl's existence, but the dearth of franchise QB's in one division over a 50 year period should be an example of how difficult it is to get a 'franchise' guy (and it's not limited to the AFC East, the West has two teams --KC and Denver--that have never drafted a franchise QB). Personally, I think the list is even smaller, Griese isn't anywhere near a 'franchise' guy, IMO.

[BillsImpossible]

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

George Orwell

Doug Whaley basically lied about Shaq Lawson needing surgery, and the national media could care less.

Doug Whaley was honest about an orange being orange, and the national media goes nuts.

I think this all boils down to one thing: A very slow and boring news cycle in the NFL.

People that cover the NFL for a living are desperate to sink their teeth in to anything.

People are sick of Bradygate. The media has already milked that cow dry so it's on to a new cow.

Just another day in the NFL barnyard full of media hype and bull ****.

Moo.

[OpIv37]

Fixed it

I guess in your world, the GM has no say over the coach....

[feldspar]

If I'm being ridiculous, why does he feel the need to apologia and clarify his statement?

Because people like you are being ridiculous...that's why he needs to clarify his point. I saw him clarify his point, which was an obvious point in the first place. I didn't see him apologize anywhere, nor see the need for him to. Where the **** did he "apologize?"

I'll ask you again...DID YOU EVEN LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW WHERE HE SAID THIS? I did. Did you?

[OpIv37]

Because people like you are being ridiculous...that's why he needs to clarify his point. I didn't see him apologize anywhere, nor see the need for him to. Where the **** did he "apologize?"

I'll ask you again...DID YOU EVEN LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW WHERE HE SAID THIS? I did. Did you?
Yup.

He still said people shouldn't participate in the activity that makes him millions.

[feldspar]

Yup.

He still said people shouldn't participate in the activity that makes him millions.

Ha, ha.

Now that's just laughable. Completely ignorant take. Congratulations. You've just bested yourself.

Are you just willfully ignorant, or what?

[OpIv37]

Ha, ha.

Now that's just laughable. Completely ignorant take. Congratulations. You've just bested yourself.

Are you just willfully ignorant, or what?
I went by exactly what he said. You are going by some nonsense "benefit of the doubt" interpretation. But somehow I'm the ignorant one? Please.

[Arm of Harm]

I'm assuming you're only looking back as far as the Super Bowl's existence, but the dearth of franchise QB's in one division over a 50 year period should be an example of how difficult it is to get a 'franchise' guy (and it's not limited to the AFC East, the West has two teams --KC and Denver--that have never drafted a franchise QB). Personally, I think the list is even smaller, Griese isn't anywhere near a 'franchise' guy, IMO.

I acknowledge and agree with your point about the difficulty of finding a franchise QB. No argument from me on that one.

However, that does not negate the importance of the GM's ability to evaluate QB talent, or let Whaley off the hook for his inability to do so. A QB's job is very simple: 1) throw the ball 2) to the correctly chosen target. The first item means you want an accurate QB, the second means you want a guy with fast information processing speed. Those are the two most important traits in a QB, and the two things Whaley should value most.

When Whaley raved about how great a player E.J. Manuel was, he talked about Manuel's commanding presence in a room, his physical tools, his work ethic. All that is great stuff to have. But none of that stuff matters if a QB is lacking in the two things I mentioned. (As Manuel is, and as that fourth round bust we just drafted is.) If you're going to take a chance on a college QB, take a chance on a guy who did well in those two areas in college play. Not every guy like that will amount to much in the NFL, but at least you've given yourself a chance of something good.

It's extremely difficult, but not quite impossible, to win a Super Bowl without a franchise QB. The Bills will not draft a franchise QB as long as Whaley is GM. Is Whaley good enough at talent evaluation at other positions to build a team capable of winning a Super Bowl without outstanding QB play? No, he isn't. I'm not saying the man is without successes at the non-QB positions. But neither is he head and shoulders above a typical GM at non-QB positions, either. And he'd need to be head and shoulders above the others at non-QB positions if he's going to win a Super Bowl without a franchise QB.

[X-Era]

I guess in your world, the GM has no say over the coach....
Pegula's.

Some say, sure. Final decision and ownership of that decision? No.

[OpIv37]

Pegula's.

Some say, sure. Final decision and ownership of that decision? No.

Sure but the owner isn't going to go against the wishes of the GM. If Whaley was against hiring Ryan, it instantly creates two strained relationships at the top of the organization. Whaley would feel that Pegula doesn't value his input and wouldn't want to work with the coach he didn't want in the first place.

If Whaley didn't want Ryan here, he wouldn't be here. But in your mind, you need to believe that Whaley is a good GM, because that's the only way we can win without another 3 year rebuild. So, you blame Ryan for the losses and blame Pegula for Ryan being here to get Whaley off the hook.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Sure but the owner isn't going to go against the wishes of the GM. If Whaley was against hiring Ryan, it instantly creates two strained relationships at the top of the organization. Whaley would feel that Pegula doesn't value his input and wouldn't want to work with the coach he didn't want in the first place.

If Whaley didn't want Ryan here, he wouldn't be here. But in your mind, you need to believe that Whaley is a good GM, because that's the only way we can win without another 3 year rebuild. So, you blame Ryan for the losses and blame Pegula for Ryan being here to get Whaley off the hook.

Not necessarily, especially if the coach/GM aren't cry babies like the two they had over in San Fran a couple years ago.

Just because a GM isn't totally against the hiring of a certain coach doesn't mean that the GM didn't have other coaches higher on his wish list than one that was hired. It's not like Whaley told the Pegula's I want X coach and I hate all of the other candidates. Maybe he said, hey I like Rex but I'd rather have this guy, that guy, or promote Schwartz.

Either way, we don't know how integral Whaley was in the hiring of Rex. I've seen people blame Russ for hiring Rex, too. Which one was it? The only one that's to blame for sure are the Pegula's, because it all starts at the top.

[OpIv37]

Not necessarily, especially if the coach/GM aren't cry babies like the two they had over in San Fran a couple years ago.

Just because a GM isn't totally against the hiring of a certain coach doesn't mean that the GM didn't have other coaches higher on his wish list than one that was hired. It's not like Whaley told the Pegula's I want X coach and I hate all of the other candidates. Maybe he said, hey I like Rex but I'd rather have this guy, that guy, or promote Schwartz.

Either way, we don't know how integral Whaley was in the hiring of Rex. I've seen people blame Russ for hiring Rex, too. Which one was it? The only one that's to blame for sure are the Pegula's, because it all starts at the top.

Not the point I was trying to make.

If Whaley had said "I absolutely do not want Rex here," there is no way in hell Rex would be here for the reasons I already stated. Therefore, Whaley is at least partially to blame for Ryan being here. Maybe he did favor someone else, but he could have nixed it and he didn't.

[X-Era]

Sure but the owner isn't going to go against the wishes of the GM. If Whaley was against hiring Ryan, it instantly creates two strained relationships at the top of the organization. Whaley would feel that Pegula doesn't value his input and wouldn't want to work with the coach he didn't want in the first place.

If Whaley didn't want Ryan here, he wouldn't be here. But in your mind, you need to believe that Whaley is a good GM, because that's the only way we can win without another 3 year rebuild. So, you blame Ryan for the losses and blame Pegula for Ryan being here to get Whaley off the hook.
Yeah... see this one is a situation where some want to use the Ryan hiring against Whaley because they aren't Whaley fans. I get it. But to me, Pegula was clear and distinct when he addressed the situation on the HC search. He then has the HC reporting directly to him and not the GM.

This has been gone over ad naseum. No one was privy to the communications between Pegula and Whaley during the search. We simply don't know how much of an influence Whaley had on the hiring.

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/pegulas-get-involved-as-bills-begin-coaching-search-20150102

BB.com details the process. Terry and Kim led the interviews but the hiring was consensus.

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-1/How-the-Bills-decided-on-Rex-Ryan-as-head-coach/aa1cc736-b6c4-4af7-bfe9-4aba573bf0fd

So, this was not a situation where the GM held the interviews and then flew to Detroit to recommend/tell the owner what the choice is. This was the other way around. Led by the owner with GM input.

Whaley liked Ryan but I can't place the ownership for the hiring on Whaley. I place it mostly on the owners and partly on Whaley.

Final decision and ownership over the choice? No.

[OpIv37]

Whaley could have said "I absolutely do not want Rex here" and Rex would not be here. The final decision was Pegula's, but Whaley could have nixed it and he didn't.

He still has some of the blood on his hands even if the final decision wasn't his.

[Buffalogic]

Who cares? A clipped quote in May. Means nothing. It was silly, but harmless.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Whaley could have said "I absolutely do not want Rex here" and Rex would not be here.

Either that or Whaley wouldn't be here. Maybe he didn't want to give an ultimatum to his brand new boss.


He still has some of the blood on his hands even if the final decision wasn't his.

I guess so, although nobody knows how much. I don't think either argument really matters as I'm convinced the two are tied together at this point anyway. If one fails, they will be let go together.

[Dozerdog]

This is just so nonsensical- the fact it's even a news story just goes to show you how lazy reporters are and how watered down news & sports reporting has become.

When there were a lot less news reporters and outlets- people actually had decent stories and/or commentary. Now it's assclowns with a blog competing with idiot ESPN beat writers on who's the first to comment on a tweet, an off the cuff comment, or some other irrelevant item.

It's not just Bills reporting, or Sports- but everything. Jesus- Trump or Elizabeth Warren tweet something and everyone treats it like the Kennedy assassination.

[X-Era]

Either that or Whaley wouldn't be here. Maybe he didn't want to give an ultimatum to his brand new boss.



I guess so, although nobody knows how much. I don't think either argument really matters as I'm convinced the two are tied together at this point anyway. If one fails, they will be let go together.I don't think they necessarily are tied together...

Getting the groceries for the cook doesn't mean the cook cant screw up the dish...

I think the right approach would be to look at who had ownership over what.

Whaley:

Personnel moves
Draft
Free agency adds/losses

Ryan:

On the field performance

If we're not winnng the question is two fold... Do we have adequate talent to win? Is the team being coached well enough, and are the game plans strong enough to win?

In my opinion, Whaley has provided adequate talent for a playoff caliber team. I think we have to have a franchise QB to win a SB but that we could make the playoffs with the talent level that Whaley has assembled.

[Joe Fo Sho]

I don't think they necessarily are tied together...

Getting the groceries for the cook doesn't mean the cook cant screw up the dish...

When it comes to restaurants, I agree. In the NFL, it's been seen countless times when a coach is let go, so is the front office. It doesn't happen every time, but I feel like it happens more often than not. Does anyone know the length of Whaley's extension? I couldn't find it, but I wonder if it ends the year before Rex's or the same year as Rex's.

I don't know if this means anything, but Pegula didn't hire Whaley. If he lets Rex go, he may just want to clean house and start fresh with his own guys. Who knows.


I think the right approach would be to look at who had ownership over what.

Whaley:

Personnel moves
Draft
Free agency adds/losses

Ryan:

On the field performance

If we're not winnng the question is two fold... Do we have adequate talent to win? Is the team being coached well enough, and are the game plans strong enough to win?

That certainly seems like a logical approach. Logic isn't always the motivating factor when NFL teams make decisions, though.


In my opinion, Whaley has provided adequate talent for a playoff caliber team. I think we have to have a franchise QB to win a SB but that we could make the playoffs with the talent level that Whaley has assembled.

I'm a fan of Whaley. I'm not gonna tie his success solely to finding a franchise QB like a lot of people do. I do wish he was as good at evaluating offensive talent as he is defensive, though.

[OpIv37]

Either that or Whaley wouldn't be here. Maybe he didn't want to give an ultimatum to his brand new boss

Yeah, a much better option is to allow his new boss to waste millions on the wrong guy and look like an idiot in front of the entire football world....

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Whaley could have said "I absolutely do not want Rex here" and Rex would not be here. The final decision was Pegula's, but Whaley could have nixed it and he didn't.

I don't know why you assume that, the Pegulas were very publicly playing tonsil hockey with Bill Polian to act as a football czar and oversee Whaley. It's obvious that they were not comfortable giving him full authority.

[OpIv37]

I don't know why you assume that, the Pegulas were very publicly playing tonsil hockey with Bill Polian to act as a football czar and oversee Whaley. It's obvious that they were not comfortable giving him full authority.

Are you people that hell bent on defending Whaley that you can't comprehend this?

I didn't say anything about giving Whaley full authority. What I'm saying is that it would not be in Pegula's interest to force a coach on Whaley and create a strained relationship (actually 2) at the top of the organization. If Whaley really didn't want Rex, Pegula would not have forced the issue.

And honestly, if the Pegula's distrusted Whaley so much, why keep him?

[X-Era]

Are you people that hell bent on defending Whaley that you can't comprehend this?

I didn't say anything about giving Whaley full authority. What I'm saying is that it would not be in Pegula's interest to force a coach on Whaley and create a strained relationship (actually 2) at the top of the organization. If Whaley really didn't want Rex, Pegula would not have forced the issue.

And honestly, if the Pegula's distrusted Whaley so much, why keep him?Let's re[lay the thread here. Whaley was blamed for the Rex hiring which at worst was something he only influenced.

Whaley cannot be blamed for the Rex hiring... he didn't hire him. He simply agreed that he should be the choice. Poor judgement on Whaleys part? Sure. Because he either did actually like him as the best option or didn't want to go against the new owners and brass who did.

[OpIv37]

Let's re[lay the thread here. Whaley was blamed for the Rex hiring which at worst was something he only influenced.

Whaley cannot be blamed for the Rex hiring... he didn't hire him. He simply agreed that he should be the choice. Poor judgement on Whaleys part? Sure. Because he either did actually like him as the best option or didn't want to go against the new owners and brass who did.

Holy logical gymnastics, Batman!

You said he used poor judgment but can't be blamed. He can't be blamed entirely but if he used poor judgment, some blame and criticism is warranted.

This is the problem with too many of my fellow Bills fans. They insist on defending the very people who are responsible for the losing. You admit Whaley used poor judgment that hurt the team, yet you are jumping through hoops to defend him.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Yeah, a much better option is to allow his new boss to waste millions on the wrong guy and look like an idiot in front of the entire football world....

I don't know if you're trying to be funny here, but yes that's a better option for Doug Whaley. It wasn't a certainty (and still isn't) that it would be disastrous and Whaley gets to keep getting paid.

My only point is that you don't know anymore than anyone else here about what happened, no matter how much you want Whaley fired.

[OpIv37]

I don't know if you're trying to be funny here, but yes that's a better option for Doug Whaley. It wasn't a certainty (and still isn't) that it would be disastrous and Whaley gets to keep getting paid.

My only point is that you don't know anymore than anyone else here about what happened, no matter how much you want Whaley fired.

I get it- some of you want to insist that Whaley had no say in the Rex decision and Pegula just went over his head so it doesn't shatter your delusion that Whaley is good at his job. Believe what you want- that's just not how things work in the real world.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised though. The FO has had a culture where accountability is utterly lacking at least since Brandon's arrival. Eventually, the mentality was bound to spill over to the fans. We suck, but it's never anyone's fault.

[swiper]

Blinders are in full bloom on this board. Not only do Rex Ryan, Whaley and Brandon suck. The new owner has been nothing short of horrible.

[BillsImpossible]

Blinders are in full bloom on this board. Not only do Rex Ryan, Whaley and Brandon suck. The new owner has been nothing short of horrible.

Dude, put down the whatever your're drinking or smoking.

The 'new owner,' has a winning record after his first two seasons with the Bills.

'Nothing short of horrible.'

Where would the Bills, Sabres, and downtown Buffalo be today without Terry and Kim Pegula? (and fracking...)

It would be horrible.

They've owned the Bills for less than two seasons.

What do you expect them to do, wave a freaking magic wand and pull a rabbit out of their hats?

[Mace]

What do you expect them to do, wave a freaking magic wand and pull a rabbit out of their hats?

Yes. That would be very awesome, especially if they did it at the Allentown art festival wearing tie dye, or at the Italian Festival dressed like ancient Romans.

[X-Era]

Holy logical gymnastics, Batman!

You said he used poor judgment but can't be blamed. He can't be blamed entirely but if he used poor judgment, some blame and criticism is warranted.

This is the problem with too many of my fellow Bills fans. They insist on defending the very people who are responsible for the losing. You admit Whaley used poor judgment that hurt the team, yet you are jumping through hoops to defend him.I simply won't blame Whaley for hiring Rex Ryan. And if I was rebuilding everything I'd keep Whaley.

He's not the problem. I think he can absolutely be part of the solution.

[swiper]

Dude, put down the whatever your're drinking or smoking.

The 'new owner,' has a winning record after his first two seasons with the Bills.

'Nothing short of horrible.'

Where would the Bills, Sabres, and downtown Buffalo be today without Terry and Kim Pegula? (and fracking...)

It would be horrible.

They've owned the Bills for less than two seasons.

What do you expect them to do, wave a freaking magic wand and pull a rabbit out of their hats?

You're an idiot.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Are you people that hell bent on defending Whaley that you can't comprehend this?

I didn't say anything about giving Whaley full authority. What I'm saying is that it would not be in Pegula's interest to force a coach on Whaley and create a strained relationship (actually 2) at the top of the organization. If Whaley really didn't want Rex, Pegula would not have forced the issue.

And honestly, if the Pegula's distrusted Whaley so much, why keep him?

Again, why are you assuming this? You are acting like an owner meddling in the affairs of the team is an uncommon occurrence. Whaley wasn't Pegula's guy, he was elevated to GM while Ralph was alive. It's not even clear that Pegula liked Whaley when he first took over the team. Pegula secures the team in October 2014, by January 2015 he's openly courting Bill Polian to run the thing.

http://bills.buffalonews.com/2015/12/23/247898/

Last January, Bills owner Terry Pegula pursued Polian to oversee the team’s football operation, serving in the capacity of a “football czar.” At last March’s NFL owners meeting in Arizona, Pegula revealed to The Buffalo News that at one point he was having “two-hour daily” phone conversations with Polian.

“It was like talking with the Pope,” Pegula joked.

...

After failing to land Polian nearly a year ago, the Bills went about the search for a head coach to replace coach Doug Marrone, who exercised an escape clause in his contract that allowed him to depart the club with $4 million, and eventually hired Ryan. General Manager Doug Whaley, whose job was considered in serious jeopardy if Polian were hired, wound up leading the coaching search along with Managing Partner/President Russ Brandon.

And then this, claiming that Pegula is taking direction from another person outside the team
http://bills.buffalonews.com/2015/12/20/pegula-listening-to-outside-advice-on-bills-personnel-matters/

LANDOVER, Md. -- In what might not bode well for Doug Whaley's future as the Buffalo Bills' general manager, team owner Terry Pegula is accepting outside NFL consultation on what to do about some of the problems that have led to the franchise headed to a 16th consecutive season without a playoff appearance, according to a league source.

...

The Bills nearly parted ways with Whaley last offseason when they were in pursuit of Bill Polian to run their football operation. La Canfora reported and the The News can confirm that Pegula is still open to the idea of hiring someone to provide big-picture oversight of the football operation while also finding a new GM.

We'll never know whether Whaley truly wanted Rex, but I am comfortable thinking it wasn't his decision to make. Pegula has been trying to demote him practically since Day 1.

[Mace]

Yes. That would be very awesome, especially if they did it at the Allentown art festival wearing tie dye, or at the Italian Festival dressed like ancient Romans.

I find it hard to believe no one else would think it awesome to see Terry Pegula dressed like a roman centurion with glasses and waving a tinfoil gladius as he produced a rabbit from Kim's um, roman woman hat, to the delight and wonder of the crowd.

[OpIv37]

Again, why are you assuming this? You are acting like an owner meddling in the affairs of the team is an uncommon occurrence. Whaley wasn't Pegula's guy, he was elevated to GM while Ralph was alive. It's not even clear that Pegula liked Whaley when he first took over the team. Pegula secures the team in October 2014, by January 2015 he's openly courting Bill Polian to run the thing.

http://bills.buffalonews.com/2015/12/23/247898/


And then this, claiming that Pegula is taking direction from another person outside the team
http://bills.buffalonews.com/2015/12/20/pegula-listening-to-outside-advice-on-bills-personnel-matters/


We'll never know whether Whaley truly wanted Rex, but I am comfortable thinking it wasn't his decision to make. Pegula has been trying to demote him practically since Day 1.

Nothing you said makes any sense. If Pegula doesn't like Whaley, removing him is Pegula's call alone, especially if Whaley doesn't like his coaching pick.

[YardRat]

I would be willing to bet that 95% of us lowly fans on this (and other) message boards would not have hired Wrecks if one of us were the multi-billionaire that bought the team, and would have replied "What? Are you ****ing stupid?!" if the idea was even floated by Whaley and/or Brandon.

[TacklingDummy]

I would be willing to bet that 95% of us lowly fans on this (and other) message boards would not have hired Wrecks if one of us were the multi-billionaire that bought the team, and would have replied "What? Are you ****ing stupid?!" if the idea was even floated by Whaley and/or Brandon.

I would have be a meddling owner and promoted from within, Schwartz.
I wouldn't have traded for a dime a dozen position like Running Back.
I also wouldn't have given Dareus a boat load of money who has done basically nothing the past 24 games.

[Bill Cody]

I would have be a meddling owner and promoted from within, Schwartz.
I wouldn't have traded for a dime a dozen position like Running Back.
I also wouldn't have given Dareus a boat load of money who has done basically nothing the past 24 games.

I feel like better than half the guys on this board could have done a better job as GM of this team over the past 15 years, not joking. I'd have a $10 draft guide and a beer tap in my office and it would be better than it has been.

[OpIv37]

I would have be a meddling owner and promoted from within, Schwartz.
I wouldn't have traded for a dime a dozen position like Running Back.
I also wouldn't have given Dareus a boat load of money who has done basically nothing the past 24 games.
I agree on the first two. I would have kept Darius. Even when the D was good in '13 and '14, it took a huge step back when he didn't play. DT's aren't necessarily going to put up numbers. He attracts attention and takes up space, which freed up guys like Hughes and Mario to do their thing.

[OpIv37]

I feel like better than half the guys on this board could have done a better job as GM of this team over the past 15 years, not joking. I'd have a $10 draft guide and a beer tap in my office and it would be better than it has been.

Sad but true. I disagreed with TD on Dareus but his plan still likely would have gotten better results than the so-called "experts."

[feldspar]

I would have be a meddling owner and promoted from within, Schwartz.

Jim Schwartz is 29-51 (.363) as a head coach. The year after the Lions fired Schwartz, they went 11-5 and made quite a jump.

The Bills reportedly tried to retain him as DC, where he really belongs IMO.


I wouldn't have traded for a dime a dozen position like Running Back.

Even with the benefit of hindsight, are you REALLY going to suggest that you'd rather have Kiko Alonso on the team instead of LeSean MCoy? The Eagles basically dumped Alonso after one season with that trade to Miami...look what Kiko has done in the meantime. At the time the Bills traded for McCoy, he was 26, and he already was a two-time first-team All Pro running back. Guys like that definitely AREN'T a dime-a-dozen.


I also wouldn't have given Dareus a boat load of money who has done basically nothing the past 24 games.

The Bills gave Dareus what he cost. He'd just turned 25, and was a first-team ALL Pro that year. He basically did nothing in the later half of the 2014 season? What are you smoking? Again, Dareus made first-team All Pro that year.

So, if you were GM we wouldn't have two of our best players by far, and we would have a head coach with a .363 record. Glad you aren't the GM.