JohnC

He will be coming into camp in shape and ready to play. The rules don't compel him to be there so what is the big deal. If he were a younger player who needed to acclimate to the pro game then I can understand the concern. But he is a veteran who simply is preparing for the season in his own way. When the Browns traded for him they knew that he had a diva attitude. So they shouldn't be surprised with his individualistic approach to the team and game. If he plays up to his talents the organization will gladly tolerate his aberrant behavior. If he underperforms then his self-centered behavior will become an issue. Or another way of saying this is you get what you get.

He is not going to be a pocket passer who goes through progressions. That is not to say he can't make initial reads but there is a limitation to his ability to play in a conventional offense. His style of play is going to be different from the standard style of qb play in the NFL. Will it work? I'm not sure. The point of my prior post is that when you have a Lamar Jackson type of qb you can't run a Flacco type offense. You have to adjust the offense to suit the unconventional player. Will Jackson's limitations eventually be exposed and catch up with him? Probably so. But when the Ravens (Ozzie) drafted him they were well aware of what he could do and not do. Apparently there were willing to work with his limitations and strengths.

What's the option? If you are not going to pay the market rate then get out of the business. This offseason a number of teams are going to have trouble squeezing in all the players they want to keep. It's a touch situation for a lot of teams. We are in a good financial (cap) situation to secure him. It needs to get done, and it will.

Go with the Corolla. Maybe doesn't have the pep but better value.

We are not in accord. That's okay.

When the Ravens drafted Lamar Jackson and especially after dealing Flacco the staff understood that he wasn't a conventional qb. That being so the metrics to judge him and his progress understandably would not be the standard evaluation that you would use on most qbs. I may be wrong and presumptuous but I doubt that he will ever be a pocket qb who goes through progressions. But that doesn't mean that he and the team can't be successful in their own unconventional way. I respectfully disagree with you that the Ravens aren't viewed by most people as a more successful/solid franchise than the Bills have been over the past decade or so. Hopefully, that perception and reality will soon change. But under Ozzie (now departed) and with Harbaugh as the coach this franchise has consistently been good and recognized for its competency.

Let's put aside the 0-16 or 2-14 type of seasons for this discussion because it is so improbable. Even with a disastrous season and resulting bad record I do not envisage the owners getting so frustrated that they would fire the coach. I just believe that the owners are so bought in with the coach they hired and committed to that they are going to allow this regime the space to work things out. Let's not forget that they have already observed this muscled wrestling coach take a stripped down team in his first year and got his team into the playoffs for the first time in a generation. So they have already experienced some success under this coach in very challenging circumstances. I'm very confident that these owners are going to give this regime the time and space to overcome any temporary setbacks, at least for the short term.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that there were a variety of pathways to success. And I will add that there isn't a particular pathway that is the best way. The key is in the execution of the designated plan. Also, good managers are not ideologues. They are the ones who retain the flexibility to adjust to the changing circumstances. Another key, regardless of the approach, is having all the staff on board to the same plan. Inconsistency and mishmash in messaging and execution leads to confusion and failure.

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your judgment that Pegulas would not be afraid to resort to using the much calloused trigger finger if this season turns out to be disappointing. I think that he has learned his lesson that churning coaches and staff is an act of futility. My impression is that with both franchises there was a learning curve for the new owners. And they learned that injudiciously spending money was not a solution to injudicious hiring. I think with both franchises they put more thought into the hiring of staff and allowing them the time and space to do their jobs.

I have argued that one of the primary reasons why the Pegulas hired McDermott is based on the plan that he presented to them to major rebuild the team and organization. He convinced them that his plan was the best pathway to success . His approach was the antithesis of the Whaley approach that was seen as an incremental approach that led to being average.. McDermott wanted to not only redo the roster but also restructure the cap. And that's exactly what he has done so far. I'm not questioning his blueprint to managing the team. He seems to be smartly implementing his plan. The only question I have is under his blueprint would it been more advisable to draft Mahomes or Watson in his first year? I'm more than happy with Josh Allen as our franchise qb. But would it have been simpler to acquire the franchise qb the year before? And would that have accelerated the process of rebuilding because picks wouldn't have had to be dealt in order to draft a qb a year later? Don't get me wrong. I'm a McBeane fan. Under this regime this franchise is being run in a much more analytical and modern fashion. There is a coherency and rationality to how this franchise is currently being run compared to how the prior regimes operated.

If I am a Gilette razor guy instead of a Occam razor guy does that mean I just can't cut it?

If Skinner would not have had his mini-slump at the end of the season where he repeatedly missed an open net he would have scored 50 goals. If he would have capitalized on those additional scoring chances his salary demand would have been even higher, around 9.5 plus. The one appealing aspect of Skinner's game is that his style of play on offense never varied even when he wasn't scoring. And another consideration when considering his value is that when playing with Jack and Reinhart he better than any of the players on the team and in the league is capable of converting those passes from his linemates. The point being that those talents of the other first line players are translated into production. Most of the reporting on the contract talks is positive. So I'm not really worried about a deal getting done. The bigger issue is what other players are going to be brought in to upgrade the talent level. If the GM can add three good (not elite) players to the mix and with internal improvement from the young guys then this team with better coaching should be much more competitive.

I added the same clip to the music thread not knowing that you already cited it. The performance and the response was unbelievable.

Disabilities and genius. https://www.cnn.com/videos/entertainment/2019/05/29/kodi-lee-americas-got-talent-orig-vstop-bdk.cnn

It's out there. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=navy+pilot+aircraft+pilots+in+california+spot+ufo's&view=detail&mid=BB74FC1089424228E525BB74FC1089424228E525&FORM=VIRE https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=navy+pilot+aircraft+pilots+in+california+spot+ufo's&view=detail&mid=5472612B630BE39D82085472612B630BE39D8208&FORM=VIRE https://abcnews.go.com/US/navy-pilot-recalls-encounter-ufo-unlike/story?id=51856514

The owners made a mistake when they hired Rex. The owners made a good decision when they fired the huckster. And then the owners made a terrific decision when they hired the wrestling coach. The owners are learning, growing and evolving as owners. The same cycle of learning and evolving with their ownership of the hockey team is occurring . They deserve credit.

The combine interviewing for the draft has started this week. This is a WGR Paul Hamilton link. I would prefer to keep the high first round pick and then trade off the second lower first round pick in a deal to add more immediate help. https://wgr550.radio.com/articles/news/nhl-scouting-combine-full-swing-0

John W., I still don't understand the organization's frugality with Incognito. His contract wasn't exorbitant and he played up to it. Was he declining? Probably so, but it wasn't significant enough to alter his status as probably the best blocker on the line. He was at a sun setting stage in his career so an extended contract was not probable. The team was in a good enough cap shape so signing him at his current contract level instead of at a diminished level didn't make sense to me, especially for one of our best blockers on a mediocre line. Last year, our OL was one of the worst lines in the league. His subtraction contributed to the plummeting performance of the unit. What I am basically asking is why did McBeane play contract hardball with RI when they didn't need to? Were there other issues going on with this player who had a history of problems?

The reporter/s did get the story right with respect to ROR. He wanted out and expressed his disgruntlement with the team and organization. The front office, like every organization, conducted exit interviews. One of the primary players on the team wanted out. The player had no hidden agenda because it was a public agenda. It was apparent to everyone covering the team, on the team and in the organization that he wanted to be moved. The story about ROR was not a hidden backroom story because he made his feelings publicly known. That's the story! And it is not a unique story that only happens in Buffalo. You are trying to manufacture a side story about his minor league brother that had little bearing on a storyline that exists for all teams in all pro sports i.e. that a player, sometimes a prominent player and sometimes a marginal player, wants out. So a deal was made to accommodate the player and the interest of the team.

The Cal situation has been speculated on but has not been confirmed. So it would not have been appropriate for the reporter from a standard standpoint to report it. Did the Cal situation have a bearing on the ROR departure? Who knows? What is known about ROR is that he made it clear to the organization and publicly that he wanted out.

One way or another in the upcoming season he is going to be exposed either in a good way or bad way.

There is an obvious reason why the ROR is a topic of discussion in the local, national and Canadian hockey media: He is a traded player that contributed to a team that is now playing in the cup finals. He without question played an important role on that team. So what's so surprising about there being judgments about the trade coming up again? I have not criticized the deal for a variety of reasons. But it is not unfair for critics to at least at this point conclude that this was a very uneven deal. My position is that there is still time to make associated deals from the original deal that will make this deal look less imbalanced. As far as the Pegulas as owners being treated unfairly I don't see it. This team under their stewardship has by any measure lagged and been a disappointment. If they want more glowing reporting on themselves and their team then the organization has to be run more smartly and improve its play on the ice.

You intentionally or not bring up an interesting/intriguing issue. Sometimes reporting on the same team (good or bad) for too long can unintentionally make you a lazy and stale reporter. As with any endeavor sometimes backing off and taking a hiatus from your task you can gain not necessarily a better perspective but at least a different perspective. In addition, sometimes when there is a close association there is a (human) tendency to allow your relationships (good or bad) with the players, coaches and organization to influence your views. The Buffalo sports scene isn't wide in scope and the Buffalo News isn't a large newspaper with a lot of reporters to give you the flexibility to rotate those covering the sports. It's in fact fairly small with a limited workforce. But it might be a good idea to rotate assignments in different sports including the college ranks to make sure that there is a freshness in perspective to those covering the different sports.

There's another way of looking at Harrington and his coverage: Improve the product and the coverage will have a more positive tinge to it. It's got to be dispiriting to cover Buffalo's two lackluster pro franchises that have not been competitive for a decade and more. You don't think that it isn't tiresome for Harrington and Paul Hamilton to go into the Sabres's dreary locker room after an all too often spiritless game and ask the same questions about the play only to get the same non-informing droning responses? The Bills seem to be on an upward trajectory. The coverage in the local and outside media seem (to me) to be more positive. Last year, during the hockey team's winning streak the coverage was overflowingly positive. That streak proved to be an illusionary reflection of the real status of the team. It's not surprising that the media coverage then turned even more negative. And it should have. I'm more upbeat about the near future prospects for the Sabres than most are. The coverage will become more positive when the play on the ice and front office decisions warrant it. The hiring of Krueger was a good decision. The media response from the local and out of town coverage was overwhelmingly positive.

I'm rooting for the Bruins. If ROR wanted out from Buffalo then so be it. I'm not arguing to retain a player that doesn't want to be here. But it would irk me to see him win a Cup in his first year after inducing the trade. I'm not wasting my energy rooting against this gap toothed player but I'm certainly not rooting for him to have his name sketched into the cup. Let's go Bruins!