True or false: The Buffalo Bills payroll was always one of the highest throughout their entire history.?

Question

I could only find data from 2000-2005 from USA Today:

2005...17 th in league
2004...19 th
2003...25 th
2002...22nd
2001...29th
2000...16th

I contend that the Bills were certainly big spenders in the late ‘80’s and early ‘90’s, but other than that, the purse strings have been a bit tight. How else can you explain the twenty years of mediocrity from ’67 to ’87? It can’t all be coaching.

If anyone knows where I can find data, let me know.

Freestyle: Look in my question where I state that the late '80's and early '90's are not a contention. It's the rest of the years.

Furthermore, the Bills DO NOT have Eric Moulds. He went to Houston. The Bills didn't think he was worth the dough.

Answer 1

well for the 2005 season salaries go to

1) msn.com
2) click on sports (near top of page)
3) click on NFL
4) click on teams
5) find Buffalo Bills
6) right next to where it says buffalo bills click on anyone of the stats(team front OR stats OR roster OR schedule)
7)when the page has loaded, look for "salaries" to be the very last tab on the right

as you can see the bills in 2005 were the lowest payed football team in the NFL.

hope this helps

Answer 2

altogether yes cause the jim kelly andre reed thurman thomas era lasted long, and how much money u think u would spend on them, now its not that bad cuz dey got eric moulds willis mcgahee j.p. losman. they will be a great team in the future and will spend alot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ but until then, THE era stands out big time.

Answer 3

I'd say no. They had good players but only were able to keep a small few through their glory years. Most of the players went to worse teams that had more money.

Answer 4

Interesting information. I hope that Marv Levy changes that next year since he is now in the front office.

Answer 5

17
19
25 one of the lowest.