mjd1001

In a way, I'm not all that upset the season is over. That in no way means I didn't want them to win, but this season wasn't really super enjoyable to me. With many 'experts', vegas odds, and most people in the fanbase labeling them the preseason Superbowl favorites....it was like almost any win was just 'expected' and any loss was a huge, big negative deal. I'm hoping next year they are consisdered 'one of the top 4-6 teams' and not the favorite. Like the Sabres in 05-06 finishing with 110 points was a much more enjoyable season for me than the 06-07 team that finished with 113. I dont' watch games in a bubble, for me it is a social experience (message boards, twitter, talk radio, etc) and dealing with angst and consternation after every loss from a team with high expectations is just not fun, at least for me.

The OL has been below average for years. As Great as Allen is, his decision making seemed to get worse as the year went on (taking multiple deep shots when needing 3-6 for a first with an option wide open for 10) I think they are "OK" at RB, Same with TE. I'm not 100% done with Gabe Davis as the #2 guy. BUT, looking not as good now as last year, and Diggs, while still great, is 30 now so you have to look for another young gamebreaking star there. DB's I thought were suspect all year. Tre isn't close to what he was before the injury. Hyde and Poyer, as much as many like them and they ARE good, are a little less than 'athletic' at this point in the career. Wouldn't be a bad thing to make changes at S with a lot more athleticism in the D-backfield. LBs good. DL not awful, but not good. Should be better for the money and the draft picks you put into it. Coaching? its really hard for me to evaluate on any level. I'm OK with it...maybe the Defensive philosophy couuld be due for a bit of a change.

I agree with most of what you said. Poyer and Hyde. They are 'good'. Most people like them. Earlier in the year there was a lot of talk of extensions. However, they are getting older and not as athletic as they used to be. I'd be all for no more years for them, dealing with some mistakes at Safety but going younger and a lot more athletic back there. This team just doesn't seem like there are a lot of great athletes. Diggs is their best non-QB on offense, and he is great but he doesn't strike fear into opponents for his speed or size. This team needs to get more athletic on both sides of the ball. If they don't, and if Tua is back for the Dolphins and IF the jets sign one of the veteran QB's for un upgrade...this Bills team might be in a dogfight that ends with them in 3rd in the division next year.

So Bengals are down 3 OL, and now another gets hurt and is playing hobbling with a brace. Yet the Bills D-line can't get hardly any pressure and are getting gashed by the running game? its beyond belief.

They are getting an open air stadium. I get it, no changing that. But this team, on both sides of the ball, seems to be a lot better team playing in good weather on a clean field. Some excpetions, sure, but overall they are much better in good conditions. I want them to prove me wrong.

The DB's are overrated. Tre White is a shadow of what he was before the injury (hopefully he'll be better next year). As much as we like Hyde and Poyer, they just aren't as athletic and quick as they were a couple years ago. You might need to bite-the-bullet on the experience at Safety and get someone more athletic back there going forward.

Have the Bills been down 14 at any point in any game this year? I don't think so. Baltimore? I don't think they were down 14.

It looks like every bills player is terrified of their footing. Cook wouldn't make any kind of cut. The entire offensive line is not setting. Milano I noticed on some pursuit plays on D was not running full speed. BUT, Cincy doesn't seem to be doing that. Watching their feet the last handful of plays, they seem much more confident in their footing.

I'm not too 'worried' about this game. That doesn't mean I think the bills will win for sure, they may very well lose. But...home game, weather not a huge disadvantage to the Bills....Buffalo is healthier than Cincy. If they DON'T win under those conditions, they simply aren't good enough. If they lose, they need to get better. If they win, on to ATL.

I agree that is the max I want to see. The key to this team going forward is to have players signed to market-value-or-below deals. When you are near the cap and one of the top 10 teams, over-paying a player is poisen to your chances. However, with that said, if you offer 8x$8m and won't go higher....and he says no to that....then what do you do?

His play lately has been puzzling. Before he got hurt in the first few games of the year, I saw him make zero mistakes. He was sound in his own end and was laying out someone every couple of games. Hopefully it was an injury that he is recovering from....because he was playing like a great stay-at-home guy earlier in the year.

I'm wanting to see Comrie play a few games at this point.

Here is something interesting about Eichel...has he worked to get BETTER over the course of his career? Look at the other players drafted at the top of the draft that at the time, were considered generational or near generational. 4 guys came to mind when I thought about guys taken within a year or two of him: Eichel, McDavid, Matthews, and McKinnon. Now, on one hand what I am going to say may be influenced by his injuries...but again, even if you take out the first month or two afte he came back from his injury the numbers wouldn't change much. So, these "close to generational players", how has their production changed from the first 3 seasons they played until the last 3 seasons? McDavid. First 3 seasons: 1.22 PPG, last 3: 1.72ppg McKinnon. First 3: 0.70PPG, last 3: 1.39ppg Matthews. First 3: 0.97ppg, last 3: 1.32ppg Eichel. First 3: 0.85ppg, last 3: 0.88ppg There may be some factors, the injury that impact those numbers, sure. But the one thing it shows is that of those 'big 4', Eichel is the only one that hasn't taken major steps up in production from his first few years to the 'prime' production years. Long term injuries causing wear-and-tear? Or just lack of pushing himself like elite players to get better? I'm guessing its a bit of both.

Off topic, but last night also I decided to kill some time watching both that 90's show and the new remake/relaunch of Night court. Neither are great shows, not even good. I don't know how long they will last, but for an hour or two, I was entertained. Its kinda like the Rob Zombie movie remake of the Munters, it was actuall pretty bad as a movie, yet I was still entertained for some reason.

Exactly, If you don't care about the thread, you are free not to go into it and comment. The "who cares" or "nobody cares" comments are funny to me. Obviously, a lot of people care because they follow and comment on the threads. Just because you don't want to talk about a topic, no need to 'shame' anyone else for doing it. And as others have said, he was a former Sabre, judging the trade kinda REQUIRES following how the player you traded does in comparison to what you got, how he left town..etc. There are a LOT of reasons why people care. As far as Jack himself, I still have the same opinion I have had for the last year or so: -Don't think he is an all-out-to-the-wall effort guy. He MAY show flashes of that, but that simply is not who he is all the time. -In terms of his production, he's simply not a top 10 player in the league. The BEST years he ever had, he was close to 10th in the league in production, his BEST years. Most years, his career, this year, his entire time in vegas....look at it anyway you want and even in terms of production he is a 20th-30th best forward in terms of production. He's not top 5, hes not top 10. So for Jack, you will be fine if you view him like a 1b or a 2a player. Phil Kessel type. View him as the 3rd best player on your team and you will be fine. If you want him to carry your team offensively, or set an example in terms of effort for the rest of your team, than that is your problem as a coach. He has show us for years that isn't who he is.

I know this probably goes against most on this board, but I'm "OK" if the Sabres don't do much at all. Sure, if you can find a team that really, REALLY wants a player that you don't see a big future here, and the return is obviously better than what you have planned for that future for that player than make that deal. Those deals DO happen sometime but not that often. But moving players around because 'it might be time for a change of scenery' and getting another teams 'change of scenery player' back, I don't need that. Also, i'm still not there on trading prospects and/or picks for a veteran guy who isn't good enough to stick round his current team, OR a guy who his current team doesn't want to pay the askig price (you have Dahlin and Cozens big deals coming soon, and you want to have enough money in the next 2-4 years for any other young guys that work out...I do NOT want a guy who might be good but wants top dollar and will squeeze out money for what you need in the near future)

Your above statement resonated with me. I'm not from Canada and this is only indriectly related to the topic, but I think of it alot. A lot of people in our age think 'an hour' away from something is very far, when that isn't the case in many parts of North America. -I spent a lot of time working in New England. I lived on Cape cod but I traved to or through Boston everyday, and on a monthly basis I had stops/meets in Burlington, VT, Bangor Maine, Providence RI and many, many cities in between. One common thing about that area? Distance really didn't matter. Portland Maine is about 2 hours from Boston (more with traffic) and 2 states away (maine-->New Hampshire-->Mass) Yet most of the people I met there identified with Boston. They were just as much Red sox or Bruin fans and people who lived in Metro Boston. Providence RI? Same thing. Where I lived on Cape cod, I was about a 2 hour drive from Boston yet just about EVERYONE near me considered themselves a 'Bostonian', for Theater, sports, many things you just go to and identify with Boston. -My wife grew up in NY city and has many friends on Long island. Same thing for them. She has former co-workers that live 50+ miles from the city (almost 2 hours with traffic) and its nothing to them to support or go to events in NY city. Now yes, I get the fact that in many cases those are the closest teams for them (no other options) but it isn't an issue. Its a bit different in Buffalo. I had friends that lived in Amherst growing up, and would have an opportunity to go to a college basketball game at Niagara, and often no one would go because it was 'too far' away. (the 20 mile, 25 minute drive)

I don't get 'mad' at the Sabres when they play like they have lately, I just stop watching until I see things get better. The issue right now is they are very close (kinda there already) where I'm done watching the team for a while. Sure, i'll follow to see how the are doing, engage in this forum, watch the highlights....but for the time being, i'm done seeing what time the game starts and making sure I watch it. Go on a streak of winning 4 out of 5.....or win 6 out of 9 and I'll be back. But right now, its just not fun anymore.

WAY too early weather forcast for next weekend in Orchard park: Saturday afternoon/evening: cloudy/overcast, small chance of precip, 30-32 degrees, moderate winds Sunday afternoon: pretty much the same as the above forcast for Saturday evening.

For the Bills to advance, it really matters how they play or are they good enough. Who would be tougher, cincy or jax? hard to say, if jax plays good they might be just as good as cincy. But, I might want to play cincy and force jax to play kc. Will jax beat kc? probably not, but i think they have a lot better chance against kc than baltimore would, I think Baltimore gets rolled in kc. so who do we want? Doesn't matter either way, the Bills will win or lose based on their own play, not necessarily 'who' they play.

Football seems just so random at times. The dolphins aren't good enough to advance, but the Bills looked beatable for sure. Now you think the Bills are in huge trouble vs Cincy, but they look 'beatable' too. Even if Baltimore moved on, I don't see them beating anyone else. Depending on what half you took into consideration, Jax or the Chargers could beat anyone or get blown out by anyone. One bad spot by an official. One inch. A ball being 1/4 inch off of the ground vs hitting the ground. So many little things can be the difference between a team making an appearance in the Superbowl or going home 2 rounds early. I guess it is that way with all sports, but it seems like it shouldn't be that way with how long the season is and how much work goes into it.

I don't see how Seattle is doing it. When I look at their roster, I just don't see a top team: -Burakovsky is a career 10-20 goal scorer -Beniers is a great young player, but on 'pace' for 30 goals, not like 50 or 60 -Eberle is getting older and like Burakovsky, for the better part of the last decade he is a 'in the teens' goal scorer -Gourde? see above -Sprong is a journeyman former 2nd round pick who is about a 35 point per year guy -On D-Larsson is a guy that no-one wanted the last couple years -Dunn was a 2nd or 3rd pair guy for St. Louis -Olesiak and Shultz...2 more journeyman that were also not much more than average 2nd or 3rd pair guys Their goaltending is middle-of-the-pack at best. The team Save percentage is about the same as the Sabres this year. Maybe its a case of giving guys a chance they havne't had anywhere else. I just don't see a lot of top talent on this team and their play keeps on surprising me.

What is the rule with restricted free agents vs UFAs? You have to reach a certain age right? IF you are drated, the drafting team could just have exclusive rights to you until you reach one of the ages, UFA or RFA age, and then those rules apply to you. If you really, REALLY don't want to play for that team, you can always go to Europe and play there unless/until you force a trade or get waived.

I agree with you. I know the players don't want this, but from a fans point of view...not much good come of it, and a whole lot of dissapointment/fan stress come whenver you think of a player and not know whether it was a draft pick that your team will never have a shot at.

My company with regard to days off/vacation days. A decade ago, we got 12 paid holidays per year (including 'floating' optional days.) As of this year, we now get a total of 8. Years ago were were told "you earned your vacation, enjoy it". A few years ago it changed to "you earned your vacation, enjoy it BUT you must schedule it very far in advance or we may not approve it" Now as of this year it has turned to " you earned your vacation time, but there are 6! (six) blackout weeks that you can't take it...our customers pay the bills and we have to be available when they want us to be!" There is also something that some are figuring out (doesn't impact me directly but I still think it stinks). New hires at entry level positions making more money, sometimes noticably more than exisiting employees that have been there for a few years. Existing employess CAN get a raise, but they are very small. "Sorry, no money in the budget for that" is the answer. But if there is an open position in a territory that needs to be filled, a brand new hire, wth no experience, no special skills can get paid a good amount more than an existing employee who has been there for a couple years. I get it, they are couning on the exisiting employee not wanting to job jump to get more, maybe not KNOWING the new hire is making more, but it still isn't right. "Job retention" gets a smaller budget than the budget for "filling new positions". The problem is, most exisiting employees DO find out about this...and they they simply care less about their jobs. Instead of giving them the raise to at least 'keep up' with the new hires....what they often get is an employee who becomes 20% or more less productive, who does 'just enough' to keep their job, who doesn't work any extra days...because they were told as an exisiting employee they are 'maxed out' on the pay scale.