smokinandjokin

Goddam tater I hope you're right about this. 40 goals? Check All Star? I suppose we can say Check- he played in the Young Stars game Conn Smythe- Well that would more than likely mean good things for the Sabres...

"Um, yeah...Thanks for coming, but this is San Diego. The Charger Girls. Why don't you go try out for the Buffalo Jills or something." -ChargerGirls coach, to this chick

There are 11 teams in the Big Ten, and you're worried about semantics?

The entertainment comes not from crayonz, but from the stooges who get all worked up over his antics. In fact, I may go and read crayonz's "NFC is clearly better than the AFC" thread right now....That is when he's on point. The long, drawn out retarded stories involving tennis players with testicles and hamsters are boring after the first sentence.

I'd probably bet on Drury as well. More versitile, and harder to replace on AND off the ice. Briere scores huge goals, though, and that will be tough to lose. Guys like Roy and Stafford will have to step up... Darcy can take solace in the fact that Buffalo sports fans are a logical bunch, and if the Sabres happen to win the Cup this year, I'm sure the fans will grant the franchise a nice grace period to organize their roster with cap-friendly deals.

The Pens have an exciting young squad, and I realize that the last time they played each other on VS, Lemiuex had just signed a long-term deal with the city....But the Penguin-felatio by the announcers in that game was brutal. Bordering on Patrick/Maguire/Theisman choking on Patriot rooster on ESPN. I don't think it's a "no respect" thing...Generally, the VS guys are pretty upbeat about the Sabres and their style...It's just that Buffalo doesn't have that one star that transcends the game....Even when the Sabres were slapping around Philly last year, the announcers would sweat Forsberg bad....

Hahahahaha....Eric Davis was horrified!

My preference on which to keep (knowing full-well that both could be gone) seems to change from game-to-game. Both are incredibly important, both play different styles very well, and they complement each other nicely. Drury is the all-situations gamer and locker room leader, while Briere is more of your traditional high-scoring superstar. Drury seems to be the pulse of the team...Remember when this board was questioning the Sabres' toughness because of a lack of retaliation when some of our offensive players were targeted with cheap shots? I know Gaustad went after Ovechkin when AO decked Briere, but that Ottawa rumble proved that Drury is the one guy on this team you do not mess with. He is revered in that locker room. Briere is the gutsy, rags-to-riches star who has made himself an offensive force in the league. It's like the NHL watched film of Danny during the lockout and decided that he was the type of player they wanted to see excel under the enforced rules (notice I didn't call them "new" rules.) A supremely skilled playmaker and scorer, Briere also has a way of coming away from a scrum on the boards with more 50/50 pucks than anyone on the team. Buffalo will do well to keep one of them, probably in the $6-$7M per year range. I'm not sure if you can make the wrong choice....The variable will be Connolly....If it looks like he can be healthy and revert to the form that had him as the most dangerous offensive player in the league for stretches last season, it might make it easier to let Briere walk and hope TC can fill those shoes...

Thanks Rico. Not much there we didn't already know, I suppose. I have heard LA as a potential destination for Drury, and I hear Montreal and Philly are going to be the two heavy hitters in the Briere bidding.

From ESPN's NHL page- the article is linked under the topic "Rumors: Drury or no Drury" Thank you! http://sports-ak.espn.go.com/nhl/index

Yes! Wayne Campbell: So, do you come to Milwaukee often? Alice Cooper: Well, I'm a regular visitor here, but Milwaukee has certainly had its share of visitors. The French missionaries and explorers began visiting here in the late 16th century. Pete: Hey, isn't "Milwaukee" an Indian name? Alice Cooper: Yes, Pete, it is. In fact , it's pronounced "mill-e-wah-que" which is Algonquin for "the good land." Wayne Campbell: I was not aware of that. I've only spent one night in Milwaukee, and I wasn't overly impressed. However, I was with another non-local so we didn't have any advice on the hotspots. I hear it's a pretty good town. Worst case scenario, if your friend doesn't like Milwaukee, Madsion is very close (which is a GREAT city) and Chicago is only about 1:15 down the shores of Lake Michigan. I toured the Miller brewery in Milwaukee which was absolutely awesome.

I would take it too, definitely. In fact, it's what we had with Henry. And it's what we had with McGahee. And we kicked them both to the curb. Take your 1200 yards and hit the road. So I'm simply surmising that we will find another solid back who, while not top-5 caliber, is certainly better than half of the RB's in the league, and for one reason or another, the fans and franchise will run him out of town. See, this IS fun!

Understood. I realize this is a fun little speculation exercise. Therefore, I will also speculate that the Bills do in fact trade for Turner, and he plays three very productive but unspectacular seasons for the Bills, averaging about 1100 yards and 7 TD's per season. Bills fans are fed up because Turner does not like chicken wings, and when he mentions that he would love to play for the Bears since he is from Chicago, that is the last straw. The Bills trade him to Cleveland for a 4th rounder in 2010 and a 7th rounder in 2011.

So Willis, who was a 1st round pick and proven NFL starter, is traded away to Baltimore for two 3rd's and a 7th...And the Bills go ahead and trade two 3rd's and a 6th for an unproven backup RB who was a 5th round pick?

Yeah, they are definitely under the radar. The Mountain West is not exactly the hotbed. But they do a pretty good job of attracting some of the mid-level talent in Texas, and those players seem to play with a bit of a chip on their shoulder after being overlooked by the big shots like UT and A&M in the Big 12.

I read yah, I shouldn't have called his retarded post retarded. I apologize. I don't typically nitpick around here, because I understand it's a message board and each has his own opinion. But you cannot say, "Trust me, that offense wouldn't miss a beat if LT went down" and not get called on it. How could that be? I didn't need him to tell me Turner is not as good as LT, we know that. Have we seen Philip Rivers yet without the best player on the planet 6 yards behind him? Can Antonio Gates get open when teams are not focusing 2 LB's and a safety on LT? Will that mashing offensive line look as powerful when it's somebody other than LT slashing through the holes (or finding his own holes)? Would Turner be able to excel as an outlet or screen option for Rivers, with his 7 career catches??? It was a rediculous statement to make, and while it was an attempt to be complimentary to Turner, it was disrespectful to LT and all that he brings to the table. Michael Turner is a backup RB at this point, no more and no less. He did not compete against the best in college, and he has never been asked to carry the load in the NFL. But the Chargers would be fine if LT falls off his roof tomorrow?

2006- you mentioned 2005- went undefeated through the regular season and only lost their bowl game...They finished AP #11. 2003- finished 11-2 and AP #25 2002- AP #23 2000- AP #20 Five times since the year 2000 finishing in the AP top-25? I'd say they're consistently a pretty good team. They began their turnaround in 1998 when they finished 6-5 in the regular season and beat Southern Cal in the Sun Bowl. Final AP rankings- all years

LT went to TCU and they are consistently a top-20 program. And he was a no-brainer top-5 pick. Did you read the guy's post??? I quote, "Trust me that team wouldn't miss a beat if LT went down at RB." And you're criticizing me? Of course players fall through the cracks and are missed by the major schools, and yet end up being successful professionals. But how many? It just doesn't happen that often. It's hilarious the way this board has granted "God's gift" status to a backup player on one of the best teams in the league. Maybe he could come to Buffalo, rush for 1150 yards and 7 TDs for three years, and then we can all decide he sucks and run him out of town. I'm sure RB's across the NFL and NCAA are clammoring to be the guy following Travis and Willis into this gauntlet...

Yes, he was. And the reason was his 2.68 yards per carry in the preseason last year.

Trust you? What do you know? All Hail Michael Turner! The guy who wasn't good enough to play in a premium NCAA conference, the guy who was the 5th round pick, the guy who has proven thus far to be nothing more than an adequate backup on a team that hasn't really needed him yet. The Chargers wouldn't miss a beat??? Without the best player in the league??? Turner has 7 career catches!!! Even for this board, this post is retarded.

Definitely not! That is news. Song still sucks, though...

This is BY FAR the worst song I have ever heard: "Bicycle Race" by Queen. The lyrics are bad enough, but there is also a solo featuring a handlebar bike bell. Absolutely terrible song.

Are you putting out an All Points Bulletin in an attempt to recover the five penis pumps that were stolen from your car? The press conference is a good idea. Just like when a child is abducted, you have to stay in the news and keep the story on people's minds. Good thinking.

I understand the general theme of your post, but comparing the construction of a Super Bowl-caliber team now and in the mid-80's is not really valid. You had the ability in those days to retain all of your 1st round picks and build around them for as long as you wanted to pay them. Now, with free agency and the cap, teams have to try to bottle their success for a 2-3 year period and hope everything clicks at the right time. You do not have 5 or 6 years to continue adding skilled, character guys to complete your perfect roster. It is the nature of the league right now that you will have some pieces on your roster that you would prefer to replace, but cannot afford to do so. Like I said, I appreciate the gist of your post, as far as building the team. I do see some similarities, and it's obvious the types of players Marv likes has remained the same over the past 20 years. However, it should be noted that the window of opportunity is much smaller now than it was then, and I hope Marv realizes that. If you feel like your team is on the cusp, you have to jump at the opportunity. If the window is missed, it will be more cap-saving cuts and several years of 6-10 records and rebuilding.

I'm pretty sure the point AD was making was referring to the fact that last season, Eric Stall was a 21-year old superstar on a Stanley Cup champ who was destined for greatness and apparently unstoppable. Now he's having a down year on a team that is barely in playoff contention. Fans and media alike love crowning the king before he slays the dragon. Things can change very quickly in the world of athletics. Points were so easy to come by and the game was so wide open that Lemieux must have been joking around when he lobbied to the league for YEARS about removing the clutching, grabbing, holding and hooking, and then eventually RETIRED when the league did nothing to change the game or enforce the rules. Lemieux was BEGGING for the rules to be interpreted like they are today. You can't say because Lemieux and Gretzky, possibly the two greatest of all time, were tallying 175 points per season that the entire league was a scoring bonanza. Those Pens won games 8-5 because they were that good offensively, and they did it despite the interference and hooking. Three 19-year old stars is very promising, but guarantees nothing. With this team, plus the arena announcement, I fully understand the excitement of the Pittsburgh fans. The reality is, based on their current performances, all three young bucks could be $5-$7 million per year players. Plus a goalie who was selected #1 overall. When it comes time for raises, there is NO WAY a team can be successful spending nearly 40% of their salary allowance on four players. They are not going to have the luxury of watching these guys grow together for 10 years.