Drunkard

My mistake. That went right over my head.

Of course it matters. He fits the uniform not unlike some spinster dying to get married that will look past almost anything as long as the guy fits the tux and is willing to walk her down the aisle. They wanted a big guy, with big hands, and a big arm. Being too stupid to go through normal progressions and having happy feet like a nervous squirrel is secondary. Allen is small town and blue collar just like Buffalo pretends to still be with all those non existant steel and factory jobs. Plus he uses blue cheese instead of ranch and he used the word blessed multiple times during his interview at the draft so he checks the most important boxes.

We'll be lucky for Allen to become half as good as Taylor in a few years. Time to hope AJ McCarron has some Casey Mittelstadt level god like qualities because we're stuck with these guys for the forseeable future. Allen probably won't be ready to even start for a year or two so there's no chance we draft another QB high in the draft when he hasn't had his shot.

Pretty sure he was talking about Pegula/Brandon and not some higher power.

I heard blessed a few times too.

I hope the tearing down part is mostly complete. At this point the only guys that are taking up serious cap space that it would benefit us to move out would be Moulson, Pominville (both 1 year remaining), Bogosian (2 years), and Okposo (5 years) although I think we'll keep him until we bribe Seattle to take him in the expansion draft. This team is currently built around Eichel, O'Reilly, Reinhart, Ristolainen, and Scandella. This season Mittelstadt (pbuh) should join the ranks, along with whomever we draft at 1-4. If guys like Nylander, Guhle, and Ullmark prove their worth this season that should go a long way in rounding out the long term roster, then it's a matter of figuring out which JAGs fit best with the existing group and function well in their duties in the Housley system. Hopeful GMJB will find some value aquistions to mix in with the system centered JAGs and they can start to look like a competitive team.

Trading McCoy now wouldn't be the worst idea if the Bills really plan to rebuild. Running backs tend to age like milk (rather than wine) so if they plan to let McCarron take the lumps this season while letting the rookie learn from the sidelines it would be better to get value for McCoy now rather than putting another year of heavy use on his tires where there's a chance he gets hobbled by further injuries or father time gets another crack at catching up to him. I wouldn't necessarily want to trade him and a first for Foles but they could use McCoy to help them trade up for their QB without having to use all thir high picks. He'll be 30 before the season starts and most running backs start seriously declining by age 32.

Hopefully a little time off and a truckload of money changes his mind.

It's possible but unlikely. I certainly hope they aren't pinning their hopes to McCarron because if they are and he stinks they need to be fired. They damn well better draft one of these QBs.

Never knew there was an unofficial term for dudes who can't get laid. Sounds like an argument for legalizing prostitution to me. Who knows how many lives it could save.

Fair enough. I'm going to be highly disappointed if it turns out we dumped Taylor and spend multiple first plus possibly other lower picks on a guy who is barely better than Taylor though. I have no insider information and it's no secret that I don't have a ton of faith in the brass at OBD. That being said I hope that they not only see at least a few of these QB's as significant upgrades over Taylor but that they are reasonably sure they'll be able to secure one of them, otherwise it was stupid to get rid of Taylor. Anything less than an upgrade should cost them both their jobs, unless AJ McCarron turns out to be a stud which is even less likely, imo.

Ok, so how much trade capital are you willing to expend to trade up and grab him? What if it's not enough to get the other team to bite? Do you sweeten the pot further or just grab the best guy available at 12?

So we're supposed to sell the farm for a guy that tops out as good in the NFL and even that is if we're lucky? Can't wait to see Russ sell that to the fanbase.

Well, those bastards at Lionsgate who bought Starz cancelled Ash vs Evil Dead after 3 seasons. I'm hoping Netflix buys the rights for it as well as additional seasons since they already currently have the rights to stream seasons 1 and 2. Netflix typically doesn't release ratings data but from various snippets in articles about the cancellation I've read it's getting plenty of views on the Netflix platform. The series finale airs next Sunday so I'll be cancelling my Starz subscription next Monday. I hope whomever made the decision to cancel it dies in a fire.

https://www.sideclickremotes.com/collections/apple-tv-streaming-accessories According to their website they are compatible with Apple generation 4 remotes. Comes in silver and black.

His contract is completely tradeable. One of the better ones Murray signed because his age when it was signed and how front loaded it is coupled with no trade clauses or restrictions on moving him. It's a $52.5 million contract that has already had $20 million paid out in just 2 years and if we waited for July 2nd to move him another $7.5 million will be paid out. That said I'd prefer to keep him unless we get a younger center in return or a defenseman on par with Scandella or Ristolainen with plenty of term remaining.

I thought Pominville won the Lady Byng back when we were still decent. Maybe he was just a finalist though. After the 7/1/07 disaster but before the tank.

I pay Netflix $14.95 per month to have up to 4 simultaneous streams at a time. That allows other members of my family to avoid a Netflix bill altogether and put that money towards Hulu, HBO, Showtime, Starz, and Amazon Prime so by password sharing we get basically everything and no one person is stuck footing the entire bill. Sure it's technically piracy but it's not like they are losing money because there's no chance I'd pay for each of those services if I wasn't able to share accounts. I would either go without it or pirate it through some country like Tonga that doesn't follow US copyright laws.

It's rules like that which lead to piracy in the first place. The broke college kid isn't going to suddenly spend his beer and pizza money on streaming services. If they figure out how to block it, he'll probably just go without and his parents will just be more likely to cancel since they are paying the same amount while using it less overall.

I have a couple of these things on 2 of my 3 Roku remotes. They are currently $30 on Amazon but depending on when they go on sale I've seen them for $15 or $20 as well. You can program all the buttons on it to do whatever you want (I programmed mine for power, input, volume up/down, channel up/down, mute, etc). It takes less than 5 minutes to program them and eliminates the need to switch remotes constantly (although I wish it had like 2 more buttons). It won't solve the number issue but does make it easier to surf through your options.

Agree to disagree. If you don't think scale matters than I don't know what to tell you. Take this example. You have a 17 year old kid that lives in your house and uses your cable service, Netflix, Hulu, HBO, etc. This kids uses a Roku to stream all the services. Fast forward one year and the kids goes off to college. He takes that Roku with him and continues to utilize all the same programs. Why is it legal while the kid is under your roof and then suddenly illegal when his address changes? When I went to Vegas on vacation last year I took a Roku with me and was able to still stream all the same content I do at home. In that scenario it's perfectly legal even though my address temporarily changed. You are paying for unlimited streaming for most of these services. If your household suddenly goes from 5 people to 4 people (because someone dies or that same kid is now living in a dorm). Do they cut your price 20% because now suddenly you are using their service 20% less? I don't think so. The account holder is paying for that service. If he/she wants to share their passwords with 10 people that's their businesses. It's only going to screw the account holder over if he tries to sign in to watch something and the app boots him out because too many people are already signed in to use the service he is paying for. At that point he can either wait until someone using his information logs off or he can change his password and boot everyone from using his login information.

It's legal enough. At least someone is paying for their service rather than just a couple of seeders broadcasting their streams to the masses for free over the internet. Netflix definitely knows this happens and even encourages it by offering packages that allow 1, 2, or 4 simultaneous streams. The guy running HBO has encouraged it in past interviews that I've read as well and I think they allow 2 or 3 simultaneous streams from a single account. Hulu technically doesn't because to my knowledge they still only allow one stream at a time. If that's how they choose to run their business model, that's fine. I watch Hulu a lot, but I probably wouldn't pay for it if I wasn't able to stream one from my family. I'm not sure about the others but if they really wanted to clamp down on it, they can find a way to tie it to IP addresses the way Time Warner does with their Roku apps. If some of these streaming apps tried to clamp down on account sharing they would probably lose business overall.

That's ok, man. You're still ok in my book .... although I'm filing you under C for chickenshit.

So they're already telling the public to expect a regression from last season? Looks like they won't be getting any of my money this season.

Taylor is better than anything else we've trotted out under center since Flutie. He may not have torched secondaries like Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees, but he didn't turn the ball over and he helped keep the team competitive. Do you remember JP Losman? Trent Edwards? Ryan Fitzpatrick? Brian Bohm? I know you remember EJ Manuel. I'd rather not risk going back to that. Taylor may not have had a super high ceiling, but he had a decently high floor more often than not. We could have kept him until the new guy proved to not only have a higher ceiling, but a comparable floor. If the FNG lights it up we could have moved on from Taylor then. To do it before hand is flat out irresponsible. The Massholes didn't move on from Bledsoe until they had Brady. The Packers didn't move on from Favre until they had Aaron Rodgers.