Who do you like tomorrow?

**highwater** · 04-29-2008, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

That said, i think it was a business decision to fire Billick($) and think its a business decision to get an early QB.

I think this issue has pretty much been beaten into submission, but I'll throw in my final two cents and call it a day --

1. Regarding the above quote, I don't think anyone would argue that it's obviously the owner's prerogative to make a change at HC. But as has been stated on more than one occasion, it was the manner in which it was handled that many people have a problem with. Bisciotti came across sounding wishy-washy at best, and hypocritical at worst.

2. But in describing it as a "business decision" with a dollar sign attached, I'm not sure what your point is. It's not as if he saved money by firing Billick.

3. Following up on that, I'm not sure why drafting a QB early is a "business decision" either. I'm not sure how much influence Bisciotti had into that, but it's primarily a football decision, not a business decision, IMO.

4. I think PP is right when he states that there seems to be an unusual (even for a message board) backlash when Bisciotti is criticized. PP never said Bisciotti was Danny Snyder or Jerry Jones, he was just questioning some of his moves and the manner in which he made them. I don't see a problem with that. He appears by all accounts to be a great guy, but he's not above a little criticism.

**jonboy79** · 04-29-2008, 11:39 PM

Both decisiocost Stevie B an UNTHINKABLE ammount of money to the rest of us. That's wat I men, besides he fact that both are at least somewhat PR relayed as well. Winning makes him more money as well.

**Losac** · 04-30-2008, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

Holy shit man.

You DO NOT get my point at all.

This is the last time I will say it. SB has repeatedly said he doesn't get involved in football decisions. Having influence on trading up is in fact influence. I didn't say he COERCED anyone.

Good lord.

I wonder what would happen if SB influenced something most of us were against. Then I wonder how everyone would feel.

But since we got what we wanted (I wanted Flacco), everything is fine, right?

The man says he doesn't get involved at all in football decisions. IMO, that's not entirely the case.

And THAT has been my point the entire time.

PP

YES, I DO get your point.

Your point:

SB has repeatedly said he doesn't get involved in football decisions. Having influence on trading up is in fact influence. I didn't say he COERCED anyone.

As I have said a thousand times: no one knows what "influence" he had in trading up. He was quoted as saying he thought we should get a franchise QB and that he was "spooked" when he heard other teams wanted Flacco, who was obviously the guy the FO wanted. Him saying that we need a franchise QB IS NOT GETTING INVOLVED IN FOOTBALL DECISIONS. It is stating the obvious.

And we can argue semantics all you want about "having influence" vs. "coercion".

**purplepoe** · 04-30-2008, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Losac

YES, I DO get your point.

Your point:

As I have said a thousand times: no one knows what "influence" he had in trading up. He was quoted as saying he thought we should get a franchise QB and that he was "spooked" when he heard other teams wanted Flacco, who was obviously the guy the FO wanted. Him saying that we need a franchise QB IS NOT GETTING INVOLVED IN FOOTBALL DECISIONS. It is stating the obvious.

And we can argue semantics all you want about "having influence" vs. "coercion".

Wow.

No point in beating this dead horse.

Points have been made and counterpoints have been made numerous times.

Time to move on.

PP