BillsFan4
-
Posts
9,907 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BillsFan4
-
-
2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
that's your takeaway from his behavior for the past year?
That's one way to look at it, I guess.
No, I thought he looked disinterested last season. I meant he seemed motivated for this season based on what he said on his appearance on the pat mcafee show today.
-
1
-
-
Rodgers seems motivated. He could have a good season there. But he turns 40 this season. It’s an all-in move for the Jets. Are they ready for that? We will see.
For the Bills, it is what it is. Hopefully it motivates them to get better. But they already have a damn good team so I’m not worried.
We play the Jets 2 times next year. It’s not like this massively impacts the Bills here. No reason to freak out. We went 1-1 against them last year and still finished with 13 wins.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Logic said:
I, like 97% of Western New York, am blocked by Rachel on Twitter.
I honestly have no idea why. I never engaged with her directly.
There's thin-skinned, and then there's....whatever Rachel Bush is.Same here. I think she blocked me because I commented on a Twitter post she made about how we should be able to have open discussions 😂
-
1
-
-
Packers have all the leverage. What are the jets going to do? Refuse to pay two 1sts now that Rodgers went public with his desire to play in NY?
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:
Not that easy for the Packers tho either. If the trade falls through then they are stuck with a $50M cap hit for a guy who doesnt want to play there, and they dont want playing. They can't cut him, they can't start him, they can't even have him around the facility at this point.
I’m sure Green Bay wants to move on but Mark Murphy already said publicly they would be ok having Rodgers back.
I don’t see the jets backing out. And I still think Green Bay has the leverage.
Green Bay’s fallback option is to have a hall of fame QB still on their roster. What’s the jets fallback option?
My guess is that it will be a 1st this year with another conditional 1st next year if Rodgers doesn’t retire.
-
1
-
-
It would be weird if this had anything to do with the trade. I wouldn’t think Waller would want to leave Las Vegas since his new wife plays there too.
and if McDaniels decided to trade Waller because McDaniels himself slipped up and told the press about waller’s wedding, I’m not even sure what to make of that. It would be a very odd reason, and would make me think McDaniels is about as thin skinned as you can be…
-
-
"Per a league source, the Packers are willing to wait until the draft to trade Rodgers, if that’s what it takes to get what they want."
🤣
Why wouldn't they wait and leverage the Jets? They know the jets are all-in on rodgers at this point with little to no good fallback options. The jets are even signing free agents rodgers wants. What other choice do the jets have but to pay up? especially if rodgers indeed wants to go to NY. Packers would be dumb to settle for less. I hope they start asking for more assets! lol
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:
More proof Diggs isn't going anywhere
That's exactly what i was thinking. Seeing this actually made me feel better.
-
2 hours ago, Gregg said:
Adam Schefter on Twitter: "With the Jets closing in on a deal for WR Allen Lazard, another WR expected to be on their radar in the coming days of free agency is Packers’ veteran Randall Cobb, per league sources." / Twitter
This makes me feel like Rodgers going to NY is just a matter of time. Reportedly, one of the things he asked for was to sign some of his WR buddies from Green Bay.
edit - it’s kind of funny. NY has built a pretty damn good young roster. Now they’re bringing in Rodgers, who is kind of notorious for disliking young, inexperienced players. So he wants to bring a bunch of his half washed vet buddies that will take snaps from those good young players.
It’ll be interesting to see how that dynamic works. I’m sure it’ll be all good to start, just due to the respect the young guys probably have for Rodgers name. But we will see how long that lasts…
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Beck Water said:
I didn't think the Jets were engaging in widely publicized tampering, but......
It's just weird. He's literally $40M of dead cap to them this year, when they only have something like $19M. They need to come up with an extra $9M of dead cap just to trade the guy.
I hope the Packers hold the Jets up for some good comp
Sean Payton checking Russell Wilson into hospital for treatment of his shoulder or elbow and coming to visit him like he did with Brees.
Reports are that the packers want a 1st round pick and an additional pick if Rodgers plays again the following season.
-
14 minutes ago, Beck Water said:
I know I'm late to the fair here, but as this report pointed out:
Why would the Packers give Rodgers permission to seek a trade, when trading him is gonna cost them a small fortune in dead cap?
Packers team president confirmed in a recent interview they gave the jets permission to talk to Rodgers directly, and he made it sound like they are ready to move on from Rodgers.
-
18 minutes ago, Dablitzkrieg said:
$$$$$$$$$$$
No thanks for that price!
-
2 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:
Seems like that would be a good fit for him too.
-
I like this signing. Seems like he’s an upgrade over what we had and still has upside left.
-
2
-
-
One step forward… (Tuch)
two steps back (Dahlin and Samuelsson)
-
Devon Levi watch officially starts!
Northeastern’s season is over with the loss to Providence yesterday. Let’s hope he decides to turn pro this year. I’m hopeful he will!
-
Sucks they basically pissed away any chance at the playoffs in just 3 games.
I wish Adams would’ve brought in some real help at the deadline. But maybe patience was best. They certainly don’t look ready to push for a playoff spot right now.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, SinceThe70s said:
Agreed - some folks were referring to the kicking motion - pretty sure that's a different rule, no?
The rule you referenced calls out a deliberate attempt. As an Islander fan I could argue he was trying to stop/settle the puck and score. As a Sabre fan you're unlikely to ever see it that way. Refs called it no goal in real time - it should've stayed that way. IMO replay sucks more than it doesn't. Crappy way to win/lose a game.
Yes, that’s a different rule.
Rules 37.4 and 49.2 address kicking a puck in with your skate, or using your skate to kick another piece of equipment (like a stick, glove, or anything laying on the ice) to put the puck in the net.Different from rule 78.5, which was the rule in question on this play.
Don’t get me wrong here. I’m not saying the Isles deserved to lose. They played a good game and made a strong push during the 2nd that the sabres had trouble handling. You could see they were the more experienced team. I thought Buffalo played kind of timid/nervous at times. But I still hate that they won on that 3rd goal.-
1
-
-
Just now, zow2 said:
Not even getting a losers point from these last two hard fought games will likely be the end for Buffalo. Just too hard to leap frog these other teams that seemingly earn points every game.
Yep. They went from controlling their own destiny to now needing other teams to lose to get it. Doesn’t matter though if they don’t start winning games or at least picking up points. Regulation losses are killer this time of year. Tonight especially so. It was basically a 4 point game.
My hopes for a Sabres playoff appearance this season are pretty low now.
I’m bummed. 😢 and frustrated with the inconsistent nature of NFL rules and officiating. They may as well flip a damn coin as to how they choose to apply the rules on a given night.
-
3 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:
Well he didn't actually kick it did he? Hit off his knee so kicking motion doesn't apply?
@BillsFan4 pointed out rule about deliberately redirecting - which looks more appropriate.
As an Islander fan I could argue (and replay officlals agreed) that he didn't deliberately re-direct - but if the call on ice was no goal, it should have stood as no goal. Crappy way to win/lose a game. Instant replay reviews suck.
it doesn’t have to go off his skate. The rule applies to using any part of your body besides your stick. -
Rule 78.5(I) When the puck has been directed, batted or thrown into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick. When this occurs, if it is deemed to be done deliberately, then the decision shall be NO GOAL. A goal cannot be scored when the puck has been deliberately batted with any part of the attacking player’s body into the net.
Fasching very clearly deliberately directed that puck. That was not a stopping motion. You can see his leg turn and move forward.
With that regulation loss and the penguins win in OT, our playoff hopes just took a HUGE hit. They don’t really control their own destiny anymore.
Sucks that it happened on such a BS call. Par for the course for Buffalo sports I guess.
-
1
-
1
-
-
This goal was immediately called off. What could they have possibly seen to overturn the call on the ice? Looks like a distinct kicking motion to me 🤷♂️
What makes it clear - the puck wouldn’t have gone in the net had he not kicked his leg out. The puck may not have even hit his leg without the kicking motion. It doesn’t have to go off his skate for it to be a kicking motion.
such a BS way to lose this game.
-
1
-
-
What total BS. If that wasn’t a distinct kicking motion, then what is? These ESPN announcers are nuts, and showing heavy bias.
-
2
-
Poyer is back! Resigning with Bills
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Very happy to have him back!