T.O. signing was aimed at making Bills relevant

Bills fans have fallen in love with Terrell Owens because, for the first time since the Music City Miracle, he makes the franchise relevant.

And owner Ralph Wilson essentially has admitted that the decision to sign T.O. ultimately was driven by the relevance factor.

“I said, ‘Sign him,’ ” Wilson told the Associated Press.  “In Buffalo, we
haven’t had a national figure publicity-wise since [Jim] Kelly.”

(Somewhere, Drew Bledsoe is muttering, “What the hell?”)

“So I thought, ‘If this guy’s a bad guy, so what?'” Wilson said.  “If he’s a bad guy
we’ll have to get rid of him.  But if he’s a good guy, hey, we’re ahead
of the game.'”

Of course, the Bills didn’t do anything to protect themselves against the possibility that Owens would be a “bad guy” in 2009, since the team has given him a guaranteed salary of $6.5 million.  That said, his base salary as a practical matter would have been guaranteed as of Week One of the regular season, due to the ability of vested veterans to collect the balance of their base pay if cut thereafter.

For now, though, Owens has been on his best behavior.  Whether he remains a good soldier remains to be seen.

As NBC’s Al Michaels said during the second half of Sunday night’s broadcast, they’ve bestowed upon T.O. the key to the city.  As some point, they might be changing the locks.

13 responses to “T.O. signing was aimed at making Bills relevant

  1. Uh, duh? And becoming nationally relevant is why the Jets traded for Favre. Even if they didn’t expect for him to take them very far (and he didn’t), at least he made the Jets relevant. How much talk would there be about them right now if it wasn’t for Favre? Practically none.

  2. Florio, you keep knocking the contract that the Bills gave T.O., but I think it’s pretty favorable for the Bills. He’s getting paid less per year than L. Coles got from Cincy, and he’s a much better receiver, even at this stage in his career.
    And there is no chance that they will cut him mid-season, so the fact that his entire (one year) contract is guaranteed doesn’t mean anything.

  3. If Buffalo makes the playoffs… and I really hope they do… then TO will have the last laugh. Go Bills. Priceless… LOL

  4. Can we please stop the T.O. hating?
    IMHO, he is a good player and a good teammate.
    Here is the problem: he wants to be the vocal leader of the offense he’s in on and off the field. Most teams want that to be the quaterback.
    But the way football leadership works is, the best player on the field SHOULD be the leader by example/production.
    I think McNabb, Garcia, Romo all thought at some point that they were the best player on the field and T.O. wasn’t worth the trouble. And I think they are all wrong.
    Romo only turned on T.O. when he went hollywood and started dating Jessica Simpson and started buying into his own BS (exactly what Parcells was worried about)
    Trent Edwards might have an OK relationship with T.O. because he’s an up and comer HOPING to be the franchise. And being a smart guy, I don’t think he’ll believe that he needs to be the head/leader over Owens. And I don’t think he’ll be stupid enough to think he’s a better player than Owens.
    Finally, look at Randy Moss. Goes to the Patriots and is able to STFU. Why? Because Tom Brady is the best player on the field, and therefore, the leader.
    T.O. will be aight in Buffalo. And this is comin from a Ravens fan.

  5. she-ho thinks she should call the plays. psycho-broad.
    seen her pull the alligator arm act in the playoffs and give up a pick.
    doesnt catch half the balls tossed her way.

  6. I’m glad the Packers needed to become relevant in 1993 and not 2009. Maybe TO would be a Packer and not Reggie White.

  7. Cleric John Preston says: August 10, 2009 9:12 AM
    “It’s not T.O. that is the problem. It is the other three QB’s that he played with and had major issues with that are the problem.”
    I fixed your post for you bud. I guess that we should believe that T.O.’s inability to co-habitate with any of the QB’s he has played with means that it is a freak coincidence that the three of them are the ones with the problem?
    Do the math man. T.O. is a douche. A great athlete, but a douche nonetheless. Dallas was the best chance he will get and he could not even help from shitting on that. When Buffalo starts to tank he will resort to his old self.

  8. Just a matter of time till he quits dancing & starts dropping passes & antagonizing Edwards!!! GO FINS 2009!!!

  9. Cleric John Preston says:
    August 10, 2009 9:12 AM
    “Can we please stop the T.O. hating? IMHO, he is a good player and a good teammate.”
    Terrell Owens is a lot of things, but a good teammate isn’t one of them. Good teammates don’t bitch and moan endlessly about not getting the football.
    Tony Romo didn’t turn on T.O., T.O. turned on him. At every stop in his pro career, T.O. has stabbed his QB in the back. That’s probably not going to be any different in Buffalo.

  10. Why is it people try to equate every NFL receiver who has an attitude problem to Randy Moss? Comparing Moss and TO is a joke from every perspective, including talent. Moss was in a bad situation in Oakland and wanted out. TO was in good situations in SF, Philly, and Dallas and couldn’t handle any of them. Moss never really took a steaming dump on his teammates while that’s all TO has ever done.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!