Cynical

Looks like they have been sold. Moving to Winnipeg. My link Hockey in Atlanta is like the NFL in LA. Just give it up already.

This ... ... is contradicted by this ... I wish when I went and bought a car, my invoice bill would say 0 (zero). Or that I could take a 3 day test drive ... out of state.

And one hell of a cast.

The University of Central Florida (UCF) plays in Conference USA. The University of South Florida (USF) plays in the Big East.

Robert Palmer's "Addicted to Love" If it wasn't for the video, this tune would have been just another flavor of the month pop song that came and went.

Fixed it. New team will be the Toronto Bison. Doubt it? Is this fate tipping its hand? Bison Steve Christie signed by a Toronto team

I distinctly remember a thread started by a "TSW expert" last year who was pissed off by the "media experts" predicting the Bills would be terrible. The thread was their way of holding those "media experts" accountable for how wrong they were going to be. I am going to assume to you know who was right and who was wrong when the season ended.

Agreed. IMHO, any deal that would move the Bills (or any NFL team for that matter) to Toronto would include a clause for a new stadium. The Rogers Centre is just too small for the NFL in both overall seating capacity and the number of luxury boxes. It's also over 20 years old. As for the guy who said they would support the team if it was "theirs": the Argos are averaging less than 30K per game. If that's what the NFL can expect, I do not see the NFL being in a big hurry to put a team there. The LA market can put more people in the seats.

Big whoop. I love how hockey fans spout this fact as some sort of real accomplishment. The NHL has 15 teams in each conference. 8 of those teams make the playoffs every year. That's more than 50%. Over half of the league makes the playoffs. The NHL plays 82 games a year, and its not uncommon to see teams with 40 and below in the win column make the playoffs. Just last year, both Montreal and Boston made the playoffs winning only 39 games. And Dick Jauron was a well respected coach in the NFL. How many NFL experts/broadcasters thought Ralph was senile when spoke out against the last CBA? Again, let me know when they get there. To steal a Nix comment, don't tell me about the labor, show me the baby.

What hostility and bitterness? Are you referring to the Bandits comments? If so, let's think about this. The Bandits have reached the championship game 8 times, winning it 4. Care to refresh my memory on how the Sabres fared? The Sabres have a new owner, and in his quest to win even a single Stanley Cup, may divert resources from the Bandits and start treating a winning team like an after thought. I stand by my statements until proven otherwise.

Let me know when they get there. I got a feeling its going to be a long trip, possibly one with no end. I feel sorry for you that you feel so passionate about hockey. The best thing about the Sabres organization is the Bandits. Of course, the worst thing about the Bandits is that they are owned by the Sabres organization.

!@#$ing "John Deere Green" and pretty much any Country & Western song. I would rather listen to techno/house.

http://youtu.be/s57FtD2HKLw

Can't say for sure, but I am willing to bet this has something to do with it: Just a hunch.

Not exactly a comparable situation. Nate was a 2 time pro bowler when he left, and was considered one of the top cover CB in the league. Bate fell into "obscurity" because he blew his knee out. Twice. He wasn't the same player after that.

ROLL TIDE ROLL!!!! Right into Buffalo!!

Please, for all that is right, please, please take Newton.

Uh oh. My link

No, your advice is still not "generally correct now". You are over simplifying what was a complex problem. Wolford was only 1 piece of the problem at the time. Would be a nice recollection except the Bills signed Glenn Parker (the starting RG at the time) to an extension which made him the highest paid OL during the same off season (and prior to Wolford leaving for Indy). Seems kind of dubious to say the were playing hard ball with Wolford because they were afraid of escalating salaries along the OL, when in reality they were willing to (and did) make their RG the teams highest paid OL. I hate to disagree with you, but if anybody is looking at the Wolford situation with a limited view, it's you. Your hindsight "analysis" of the situation is it at best questionable and at worst, comical. Your "analysis" ignores the reality and circumstances surrounding the team at that time. 1993 was the first year of free agency as we know it today. - The Bills had 11 players qualifying for free agency including Wolford, Jeff Wright, and Shane Conlan. - The transition tag not only allowed the Bills to match any offer, it also meant the Bills had to offer and pay Wolford 120% of his old contract or the average of the 10 highest paid players at that position (which ever was highest). 1993 was also the first year of the salary cap (34 million if IIRC). - Kelly was being paid 3+ million a year alone. (stop and think about that. 1 player is eating up 10% of the available cap) - Thurman, Bruce, and Bennett were also receiving very sizable salaries during this time period. - Penalties for surpassing the salary cap included fines, suspension of players, loss of players, and/or loss of draft picks (but the decision making was all about business, right?) Glenn Parker was made the teams highest paid OL John Butler was the GM (if Butler was known for anything, he wasn't shy about spending money on players) The reason the Bills were contesting the Colts offer was due to the "poison pill". If it wasn't for that clause, the Bills would have matched the Colts offer. FYI: Because of Wolford's contract, the following year, the NFL banned those types of contracts (the overall financial payout had to be the same for both teams)

They did. His name was John Fina. Hindsight tells us Fina was no where near as good as Wolford, but that's why its called hindsight. In 1993, such hindsight was not available to the Bills. And after every draft, I hear a similar argument from the people who say the Bills should have traded down. It's just that simple and easy, right? About the only thing we agree on. I take it you are making assumptions these guys will be good. I wonder how these guys will be viewed with hindsight 10 to 15 years from now.

Linky Gee, you think?!

Sorry, but that is complete BS. The Bills slapped Wolford with the transition tag, meaning the Bills could match any offer Wolford accepted. The Colts offered Wolford a contract that contained a "poison pill", making it virtually impossible for the Bills to match the offer. When the Bills lost in arbitration (yes, they even tried to get the Colts offer declared illegal), they had no choice but to let Wolford go. My link

Numerous draft "gurus" in here would disagree.

He wasn't the first off the board last year. What makes you think he would be first this year? Quite frankly, if I had to choose between Newton or Tebow, I would probably take a gamble on Newton.

This belongs in the "All Newton all the time" thread pinned at the top. Try reading and searching before posting.