metzelaars_lives

We're obviously on the same page but almost all the big prospects are already up. As far as guys still in the farm system they actually now have one of the weakest systems in the entire league. But if you count Eichel, Reinhart, Ristolainen, et al as "prospects" then they have one of the strongest. It's a matter of semantics I suppose. Tremendous post.

Exactly. If Bucky Gleason could go back in time, I'm sure he would be whining about the 1987 Bills team that went 7-8 after three straight seasons winning no more than four games even though they had started to put some nice pieces in place and were clearly a team on the rise. I'm sure he would've cherry picked stats to tell everyone to curb their enthusiasm and that they were going nowhere and that they still sucked. Bucky Gleason is even worse than Sullivan because at least Sullivan was the original. Gleason is blatantly trying to rip off Sullivan. It's beyond comical. The guy is a complete jabroni. And I stick up for everybody- even Mike Rodak. I could explain it to you but I don't have the energy. In short, he tried seeing through the current path for a few years, it was going nowhere, so they went for a full-on rebuild. With respect to the Sabres, I literally wouldn't change one move Pegula/TIm Murray have made. Is it guaranteed to work? Of course not. Some things already haven't- Leino, Ehrhoff, etc.- but everything has made sense at the time. It is an extremely effectively run organization. Anyone who follows the Sabres closely is thrilled with their current path. The next ten years are going to be very enjoyable for Sabres fans.

The fact that he asserts that the Sabres "are going nowhere" is utterly beyond comprehension. He was against the tank last season too. It's almost as if the guy doesn't understand what the Sabres are doing whatsoever.

This is almost as ridiculous a take as the OP. What does Drew Brees wear a go pro all game and then let you watch it after?

No. Sabres, no. Canisius basketball? They won a MAAC title when I was a senior in high school, the year before I went there. They are pretty good this year though, watch out. Colorado Rockies, no. I started rooting for Wyoming football a few years back and ever since, they have completely sucked. Denver Nuggets, no. Those are all my teams. Nothing.

I'm top five anyway. And yes, that's fair. I too was guilty of getting snippy at Bill after bad losses last season. Have since reined it in.

As much as I am a pro-Taylor guy, I think he is a little tentative and waits for guys to get wide open, which can make the pass blocking appear worse than it is at times. I think their pass blocking is average/adequate at worst. Their run blocking is as good as just about any team in football. Again, with all the things to worry about going into the offseason, the offensive line isn't even on my radar- assuming they are able to re-sign Glenn and Incognito, which I think they will. They'll find a right tackle. Can they find a run-stuffing linebacker? A pass rush? A safety? A #2 receiver? These are my primary concerns.

I'm one of the best posters on this board and you disagree with me all the time. McKelvin did have a good game but Graham looked a step slower than everyone else on the field (except Rambo) as he has the entire second half of the season. At least to me he did. Then again, these are all depth guys (or at least Graham should be) and are probably fine backups so I'm not really that concerned. We paid for staying healthy all of 2014 this season. Hopefully it swings back our way next year.

You're right, they don't have five all pros on the offensive line. Nobody does. They do however, have two pro bowl alternates and an elite left tackle. Miller/Urbik have been fine and yes, they need a right tackle. As a unit, they have been above average this season. Yet as is always the case, everybody on this website always insists that the Bills' line sucks and has always sucked.

You should be able to comprehend that he is starting due to an illness to the starting RT. How anyone could watch this game- or this team all season for that matter- and complain about the play of the offensive line is beyond me. Especially when there are so many legitimate things to complain about.

I'm not complaining about anything. I am taking issue with the people who are hell bent on keeping the name and think you're a "wuss" if you can even see the other side of the argument. I have already stated on numerous occasions, that I don't care that much about the subject myself. I freely refer to them as the "Redskins" and think nothing of it. I am however, sympathetic to the Native Americans who are offended by the name, which many on here snicker at and THAT offends me. I think you like to argue for the sake of arguing more than I do.

We agree that the United States is, by and large, too PC in 2015. I think most people- even liberals- would agree with this. Comedians- who, outside of the blue collar comedy tour, are pretty much exclusively liberal- pretty much unanimously agree with this. Bill Maher complains about it all the time. Jerry Seinfeld, Louis CK, etc., etc. Would you agree that a line even exists though? For instance, in Moab, UT there is a canyon and a trail both named after "Negro Bill" (see link below). Until not too long ago, both the canyon and the trailhead were named after "Ni**er Bill." You could literally be driving in Utah and see a sign that read: "Ni**er Bull Trailhead Parking." Was the state of Utah being too PC when they changed the name to "Negro Bill?" Were you all grumpy, complaining about how it just aint right and that people were too sensitive and you wished it was still the 1950's when they changed it? Were people lobbying that there was some sort of copyright infringement at the time? I don't know, probably. The point is that the idea of America being too PC and there being certain instances, like this one, where it is appropriate to be a little sensitive are not mutually exclusive concepts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro_Bill_Canyon

Never said I did. To the point a few others have brought up however, what if they were called the Washington Negroes? Would they similarly not be forced to change the name in that instance? I am conceding to not having read up on the whole copyright angle here. I am just thinking that it would probably be in good taste to change the name at some point. And I can assure you that if they were called the Washington Negroes that it would have been changed already (even if the mascot was a proud looking negro). My point, again, is that the American Indian does not have enough of a voice/advocate and instead you have a bunch of white guys on some website telling us the extent to which/whether or not they should be offended. And I am of the mind that America is WAY too PC in many regards. I just don't think this is a good example of that. And lastly, to the whole "they're not offended" or "I know a guy who isn't offended" crowd- I am aware that many of them are not offended. Are you aware that many of them are? It seems not.

Great post. The bolded paragraph trumps anything else that anyone could possibly say on this issue and also made me what some refer to as "lol."

That's a fair stance. I don't sit around thinking about it either. I only questioned the process by which you formulated your opinion on the issue. Personally, it doesn't really bother me either. What bothers me are the people who come on here guns-a-blazin', hell bent on not changing the name, telling us a) that Native Americans are not offended because they know one guy who isn't (of course many of them are- enough of them for this to be an issue) or b) they shouldn't be offended because it used to not be an issue. As another pointed out, "negro" used to be an accepted term. Could you imagine if there was a Triple-A baseball team named the Mississippi Negroes? Do you think people would be talking about it being some sort of trademark/first amendment issue? No, they would just change it. The problem is that Native Americans don't really have much of a voice/advocate here. As evidenced by this thread. Last week when we talked about Crohn's Disease, at least ten people WITH CROHN'S DISEASE chimed in. When it comes to this topic, it's always "a guy I know" or a "girl I dated for two weeks who was half..." Believe me when I tell you that in many circles it IS an offensive term. In some, it's not. But it is in enough of them to just change the damn name already.

So what if you dated one of the millions of Native Americans in this country who is offended by the term? Would you formulate your opinion on the subject because that's what that one person thought? I dated a girl who watched Real Housewives of Orange County. That does not work for me. Look, this thread can go 40 pages (it seems to be a bi-annual event at this point) but I can summarize it very easily and we can just end it here and move onto football as other have suggested: Half the people will say, "hey if it offends (some of) them, who cares, just change it." And then the other half of the people will say, "I knew an Indian guy one time down at the bingo hall and he said he wasn't offended so there you have it" and it will eventually devolve into a conversation about how this is another example of the "wussification of America." Choose to get involved at your own risk.

Emojis are the cartoon figures most commonly used by teenage girls to express emotions in text messages. You used one earlier that seemingly paid reverence to a post, which totally clashes with your typical ideologies- including those you have already made clear in this very thread (using another emoji). Hence, my confusion.

This is the exact opposite of a post you would emoji bow to. Are you sure you read it?

I can't do it again.

You go girl! I am actually cool with all three of these moves. I liked the Manuel pick at the time, Jackson was/is toast and what in the world could anyone's issue with the Watkins pick be at this point? Watkins is a complete beast and if they just force feed him, he'll put up the numbers you are looking for. Yes beckham might be better but I don't blame Whaley for not being a psychic. Watkins was as sure of a thing as there was coming out and it was/is the right move.

Maybe I'll come say hello and meet some of you guys. Can't believe I paid $100 to go this stupid game.

Sammy Watkins, McCoy, Incognito, Glenn, Gilmore and Darby are mediocre? This is a growing narrative on here lately- that bills fans overvalue their own players- but you seem to forget that before the season many national analysts and publications were stating that outside of the qb position, the bills had as good roster as any team in the league. The bills do have a lot of very talented players on their roster, it's not really up for debate.

Derek Carr appears to be a franchise QB. Bortles appears to be a franchise QB. Why anyone is anointing Bridgewater anything is beyond me. I don't think I'd trade Taylor Bridgewater straight up. In fact, I wouldn't.

Ha good call, my bad. Yes I agree with him.

I have Crohn's Disease and can assure you that a) diet is critical to managing Crohn's (although as I stated already, more often than not, if I'm in full on remission, I can eat whatever I want and if I'm mid flare, anything will set it off) and b) everyone's illness is wildly different. Gluten absolutely affects me and makes me bloated. In fact, most people I know with Crohn's are affected by gluten more than anything else. For me, greasy foods are not an issue, for many they are. And as far as calling the dude out and saying it's time for him to play, you do realize he hasn't even returned to Buffalo yet after being hospitalized in Philly, right?