nfreeman

I'm not done with Kane, but it's certainly possible that GMTM is. We'll see. Separately: that wasn't exactly a goaltending showdown last night. Budaj was well out of position on ROR's goal and Eichel's 1st goal was one of the weakest ones of the season. For his part, Lehner was pretty spotty on LA's 1st and 3rd goals, although he did show up during winning time.

Did anyone else notice that Kane exuded zero joy last night after scoring his goal, which was a huge goal? Rayzor mentioned that he had been dropped to the 4th line for most of the 3rd period before getting that shift with Eichel -- maybe he was PO'd.

It's not a straw man, that's for sure. (Now, if I had said "everyone who pushed for the tank said we'd win a cup this year, and we aren't going to, so the tank is a failure" -- that would've been a straw man, because it's an obviously ridiculous standard that no one actually said.) And I'm not gloating. I wish I had been wrong about the tank. And there is still quite a bit of time for that to end up being the case. But at some point (e.g. if the Sabres don't make the playoffs this year or next year), we need to stop kidding ourselves about the efficacy of the tank and recognize that it's chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Correct, although I might add that there are about a million better uses for the $250 Sunday Ticket price tag than the privilege of watching them 16 times.

This post isn't just a straw man. It's a straw army.

After a few years of not buying the NFL Sunday Ticket, I was seduced by Rex's bravado and bought it both last year and, after some hesitation, this year. If Brandon, Whaley and Rex are not gone after this season, I'm out again (still keeping my tickets though).

It shouldn't be seen as incomprehensible, or even odd. Tanking usually fails to produce a winning team, and instead leaves the team in the wilderness for a generation. That is the most likely outcome here as well.

Ugh. If that's true, it makes it very difficult to keep him. Hopefully there will be a new team president and GM in place to make the call.

I don't think it's realistic for the owner not to retain final say in hiring a new president/GM (what if, e.g., Jim Kelly was the new PLF and he started lobbying for his HS coach from East Brady, PA to take over?). The real question is: will the PLF/adviser's recommendations be followed? We can't know for sure, but it seemed like GMTM was PLF's choice -- and if that's true, we probably don't need to be that concerned about TP going off the reservation on the hire. My fear is that TP allows RB and DW to fire Rex without showing them the door as well. I think Tim Graham nails it here: http://buffalonews.com/2016/12/11/blame-runs-deep-bills-failings-fall-feet-rex-ryans/ As for this board running things: I lobbied a number of times for a supervisory board made up of posters here to take over from Darcy during his last misbegotten few years here. I am not done with TT. He looked lousy today but I would like to see him with a good coach, a quality group of receivers and a non-toxic situation. I also believe the Bills have a better chance at making the playoffs next year with TT than with Cardale Jones at QB. Also, and perhaps most importantly, I read today that if the Bills pick up the option on TT for next year, they are only committed to him for $3MM for the following year -- so it's effectively another 1-year option on him. If that is correct, then I don't think there are going to be many QB options for them for next year that are going to be better than TT. If they can get Philip Rivers? Sure, go ahead. But if it's another Fitz or Orton, I'd rather have TT. And what a brutal burn on PA. How can you live with yourself? He must be shattered.

Yes. They all should go, and Jimbo or someone else reputable should advise on hiring the new GM and coach.

Louis CK is great.

Oh, I agree that it's an important issue. I was just trying to drill down on whether uber is actually "illegal" in NYS other than NYC, and if so, why. As for other states -- I'm sure there are many with looser insurance regs -- but at the same time, any insurance company is going to be highly motivated to determine whether its customer is an uber driver -- i.e. I would bet that pretty much every insurance company in every state will ask the customer whether he/she is a driver for hire, and if that driver lied in answering that question, the insurance company would deny a claim.

Well, I got curious, so I looked into it a bit. We're sorta both right. Uber isn't in NYS other than NYC because there is indeed a state law problem with insurance for ride-sharing services. (NB that it's not clear whether insurance companies are prohibited from insuring ride-sharing services, or whether they simply don't want to until the NYS legislature passes minimum coverage requirements, or other -- the news articles I found are pretty imprecise.) The problem was addressed in NYC by requiring Uber drivers to obtain taxi licenses, which in turn enabled them to get insurance through the taxi system. Presumably, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, etc. could do the same thing for their Uber drivers, but the local taxi unions have been influential enough to prevent this from happening. I've been in about a zillion uber cars and a zillion NYC cabs, and I think every one of the uber cars was nicer, newer and cleaner than the best NYC cab I've ever been in. The uber cars are almost always 1- to 3-year-old hybrid Camrys, Highlanders or similar cars (in NYC that is -- in California they're all Priuses), they always have leather seats that are firm and in good condition, and the cars are almost always quite clean. NYC cabs are always dingy, often smelly, and the seats always have permanent butt indentations, some quite large (and deep).

I think it's a city union/corrupt government issue, not a state one -- NYC is crawling with ubers (it's been a huge improvement over yellow cabs and crappy car services, btw).

Speaking of Fasching, do we know when he returns from injury?

Probably true, but that doesn't excuse the Bills' incompetence. And frankly, it's not like they've come close to the playoffs a bunch of times and would've gotten there with 1 more win -- I think the only season where that might be applicable is when they crapped the bed against Pittsburgh (which was resting its starters, having already clinched a playoff spot and with nothing to play for) in the win-and-get-in game.

What a great freaking movie that was.

I've been lobbying for Brandon and Whaley to get canned for a while now. While I would still like to see it happen, and feel that it would be richly justified, I'm not at all sure that this would, by itself, cure what ails the Bills. In particular: I think Rex may have lost his mojo as a defensive coach. It's just undeniable that that the D has stunk for 2 years in a row. TT could certainly have made more plays in the 2nd half vs the Raiders, but the D, with a 15-point 2nd-half lead, could've offered more than zero resistance instead of allowing TD-TD-TD-TD. And is it realistic to think that Rex is going to bring in a new defensive system and/or cede control of the defensive coaching to a new coordinator who isn't his twin brother?

So they will probably finish 9-7 or 8-8. I don't think Rex gets fired at that point. But someone probably will. Who will it be?

That slew-foot should be reviewed by the NHL and get Marchand at least a warning. Will it though?

I agree with the above 2 posts. I thought he looked pretty good -- smooth, good decisions, very good skater. Top-4 potential.

Good opportunity for Zemgus to reassert himself in an upper slot in the forward rotation.

If nothing else, this means that GMTM still sees NHL potential in Guhle.

Oh, no ya don't. You're married to the caviar-at-FNC meme now.

I'm giving Westworld a B for this season.