Yes, there is a lot of talk about how this Sammy Watkins, and the Ronald Darby trade for that matter, help set up the Bills for success in the future. But, what about this year? The now matters in football, especially when there are only 16 games in a year.
Here's an interesting/great question that was brought up in this excellent piece by the Ringer's Chris Ryan? Is it better to suck for a few years so you can really contend for a title, or just be good consistently, but never great. I think in some cities like New York, Los Angeles, Boston, and other large markets where there are other things to do, it might be okay to suck for a few years with the aim of a championship. But in Bill Country, we ain't got much else. I mean, the Bills represent our autumn/winter sports season (unless the Sabres finally turn it around I guess) and forfeiting a whole season with the goal of striking in rich in the draft and being good a few years down the road, I don't think that cuts it with the Bills fan base.
Here's the thing: Sammy Watkins may not have been consistent due to injuries - but he is a stud. I would pay to watch him play. How many other players on the Bills can you say that about? LeSean McCoy? That's about it I think, and he is likely going to miss at least a couple games - based on his injury history.
I just get the feeling the Bills' current management is playing big city ball in a small city town and it's not going to work. Where I live there is a team equidistant called the Browns and I at least have always felt fortunate that I am not one of their fans (most people around here like the Steelers and are lucky for that). But, now I feel like we have adopted the Browns' game plan. Maybe in a couple-three years, it will be the Bills-Browns meeting in the playoffs and I'll be ecstatic and will go back and read this and think about what a dumbass I was. But it seems more than likely, based on Bills history, that we are now guaranteed to suck this year and me be able to rebuild back to mediocrity before it all falls apart again. Do I need to say that Sammy Watkins was stud again? And Darby wasn't bad either. And Jordan Matthews is hurt...
Here's an interesting/great question that was brought up in this excellent piece by the Ringer's Chris Ryan? Is it better to suck for a few years so you can really contend for a title, or just be good consistently, but never great. I think in some cities like New York, Los Angeles, Boston, and other large markets where there are other things to do, it might be okay to suck for a few years with the aim of a championship. But in Bill Country, we ain't got much else. I mean, the Bills represent our autumn/winter sports season (unless the Sabres finally turn it around I guess) and forfeiting a whole season with the goal of striking in rich in the draft and being good a few years down the road, I don't think that cuts it with the Bills fan base.
Here's the thing: Sammy Watkins may not have been consistent due to injuries - but he is a stud. I would pay to watch him play. How many other players on the Bills can you say that about? LeSean McCoy? That's about it I think, and he is likely going to miss at least a couple games - based on his injury history.
I just get the feeling the Bills' current management is playing big city ball in a small city town and it's not going to work. Where I live there is a team equidistant called the Browns and I at least have always felt fortunate that I am not one of their fans (most people around here like the Steelers and are lucky for that). But, now I feel like we have adopted the Browns' game plan. Maybe in a couple-three years, it will be the Bills-Browns meeting in the playoffs and I'll be ecstatic and will go back and read this and think about what a dumbass I was. But it seems more than likely, based on Bills history, that we are now guaranteed to suck this year and me be able to rebuild back to mediocrity before it all falls apart again. Do I need to say that Sammy Watkins was stud again? And Darby wasn't bad either. And Jordan Matthews is hurt...
