Ennjay

If you want to carry a grudge (and I do), we never got compensation for Pete Gogolak.

Yeah, yeah. But when a CB has a lot of tackles it means people are throwing at him. As a green corner opposite Clements, of course he was going to get thrown at -- but still . . .

Actually for DF/RJ that's backward. At the beginning, RJ was the starter and DF the back-up. DF took over when RJ got injured (NEWSFLASH!), caught fire, lost the Miami playoff game and went to the Pro Bowl. The next year the Bills made the playoffs again, DF got "rested" against Indy in the last regular season game (giving RJ the start), and Wade (Ralph?) stayed with RJ for the Tennessee playoff game. So it was Flutie who played well in relief of an injured player, not Johnson -- Flutie wasn't injured when RJ replaced him. If you think the Bills should stick with the hot guy replacing the injured dud, keping WM over TH is what you want and the exact opposite of RJ over DF.

I agree about the "entertainment" types, especially if you're distinguishing Mort from the rest. He's one of the few reporters who, I think, really does his homework and doesn't speak up unless he has something to say. That doesn't mean he's always right, but he's always worth a listen. He said he spoke with TH's agent, which is more than the Buffalo News could say.

About half an hour ago on Mike 'n' Mike (ESPN Radio), Chris Mortensen said a deal would be announced maybe by the end of today (Friday) or early next week. He said Tennessee looks like the favorite but TH and his agent favor Jax because the Jags would pay him more. The ESPN guys, including Mort, talked about Tennessee as "home" for TH because he went to the U of T. Apparently none of them know he's from Florida. The deal would be a third round pick either way. I'd much rather have the Tenn #3 than the Jax #3. With Travis, the Jags will be good enough to win some games even without Fred Taylor. Adding Travis to the Titans won't make them that much better, especially in that division. Even with TH the Tenn #3 in 2006 may be ten to 15 picks better than the Jax #3.

The buyout is two-third's of a players salary AFTER you apply the 24% rollback, right? (I can't believe I even care.)

The consensus seems to be optimistic about how prepared the Sabres are for the new NHL. Thanks to everyone who helped with my education.

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned more often: SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE. 1972: Bills go 4-9-1 behind Dennis Shaw, who had been rookie of the year a few years earlier. 1973: Lou Saban switches to PURE ROOKIE Joe Ferguson. With a decent defense and a stud runing back, Bills go 9-5. Is Willis another OJ? I don't know if he needs to be. JP is better prepared than Ferguson was (he's not a rookie even if he hasn't played) and this defense is better than '73. I'm not saying we're a lock for the playoffs, but if your game plan is to run first and stonewall with your D and your excellent ST's you CAN be competitive.

Actually, it must mean forget Fred Taylor for this year (or at least much of it). Why would Jax talk contract with a guy they want for the bench? They wouldn't want to tie up the money it would take for a TH extension on someone they don't expect to play. If they just want a back-up they should be asking about Shaud Williams.

That's why I'm asking about the front office. This is really my point -- that with so much chaos and nobody's roster set, it's going to come down to management in a lot of cases. It almost feels like the NFL did years ago when they went with replacement players during a strike. Some teams were ready to play and some weren't.

So you think management is competent?

Is that where the scoring will come from, other than Miller?

Since I don't live in WNY anymore and I'm lukewarm about hockey anyway, help me out. It seems to me the next few months for the NHL (assuming there really is a labor deal) are going to be a free-for-all, with 60% of the players already free agents and more to come with buyouts and cuts. I've read (like, on this board) that the Sabres have a nice roster of players already under contract and enough cap space to add quality. In other words, they could be a contender. It also seems to me that there's a big difference in hockey from one team to the next in front-office competence. For this reason I believe that, whatever the ground rules are, the Devils will be good because Lou Lamoriello knows what he's doing and the Rangers and Blackhawks won't be because their managements don't. So here's the question: I know next to nothing about Quinn and Regier, if that's even who management is. Are these guys any good? Can they take advantage of what looks like a break for the Sabres, or are they just going to shlub it out?

Oops. Meant to say the Rangers couldn't be dumb enough NOT to clear out dead wood, although it's been pointed out above they only have six players. (But if one of them is Lindros my observation stands.) Is there a website that states who's still under contract, or which teams have how many players?

At the outset, I admit I haven't missed hockey at all. The NHL of recent years has been profoundly boring and most teams don't really compete. OK. If the early reports on the new deal are at all accurate, we're about to see a once-in-a-lifetime -- hell, a never-before-seen event in the history of an established sports league: the entire league, from top to bottom, is going to change rosters overwhelmingly before anyone plays again. More than 60% of players are free agents NOW. Teams will have a one-time option to buy out contracts for 2/3 their value, which will separate even more players from their current teams. For example, even the Rangers couldn't be dumb enough to take advantage of this chance to clear out expensive dead wood. There will be an insane scramble to sign new players under the cap, and when the smoke clears it will be like studying rosters in a new league (think of the WHA or USFL in their first years). The handful of teams with a good number of reasonably priced players already under contract (hello there, Mr. Golisano!) should have a huge head start on the 2005-06 season. What I'm also curious about: hockey front offices strike me as generally the least smartly run in major sports (and I'm being kind). It'll be interesting to see which teams are actually prepared for this (the Devils?) and which ones mess it up like hockey always does (the Blackhawks?).

My problem with the college system is that, by starting each team on the opposing 25, you've changed the game from what it was during regulation. It takes a big play or a successful series to get that close to the red zone in regulation, but college OT makes field position into a gift. I would start overtime drives on the 50 (or, in the CFL, the 55). That way neither offense nor defense has a territorial advantage as the series starts, and maybe a decent 24-24 game wouldn't end with a score like 61-58.

I thought he got 11 because he was our highest pick (#1 but not first round) and a second round pick (= 1 + 1). And he's skinny.

Jay Fiedler is just good enough to let you worry about something else for a few minutes instead of obsessing about your quarterback. Brooks Bollinger is not an NFL QB. The Jets need Pennington if they want to make any noise this year. As good as they think Vilma is, they don't have a D that can win 10 games by itself yet. (Assuming 10 wins is enough for the playoffs in the AFC.)

The Jets are always a mystery to me. It seems every year their talent gets diluted and they have significant in-season injuries (like last year, Pennington and Abraham). Herm doesn't strike me as a brilliant planner or organizer, and firing his coordinators the last two off-seasons (Ted Cottrell and Paul Hackett) is a way of saying he wasn't responsible for the offense or the defense. Bradway doesn't pull rabbits out of hats on the scouting front (Victor Hobson?). They get more dependent every year on a RB (Curtis Martin) who is an all-time great but is still getting up there. Yet there they are signing Pete Kendall, and Martin is always productive, and never mind they haven't had a receiving TE since Rich Caster (or was Jerome Barkum the TE?), and they still make the playoffs with some regularity -- last year with a QB who couldn't throw deep. Herm just must be the best thing going in the lockerroom.

The Cardinals used to have a head coach named Charlie Winner. Yeah, the Cardinals.

Today's NFL Truth and Rumors on SI.com leads with this item: "Injured star Fred Taylor is scheduled to intensify the rehabilitation work on his injured knee in the next couple of weeks. If it responds well, the Jaguars are set at the position and will be feeling good about making a serious run for a playoff spot this season. If it doesn't respond well, their interest in Buffalo running back Travis Henry probably will increase. --Buffalo News" I think Mark Gaughan wrote that in his Sunday notes column. Gaughan knows absolutely nothing whatsoever about what people in Jacksonville are thinking. He just applies a little logic (I guess) to the Bills' situation with Henry and comes up with something plausible that his readers will eat up on a Sunday: "If it doesn't respond well, their interest in Buffalo running back Travis Henry probably will increase." So SI.com does what KFFL and so many other "sources" on the Internet do: it reads the local papers and runs an unresearched item. But now the item has appeared at least twice (the News and SI.com), and KFFL may carry it, and maybe more reporters elsewhere who don't do their homework (how long before it's a PFW "the way we hear it" ?), and there will probably also soon be a thread in TSW beginning with "Sports Illustrated says Henry's going to the Jag's." All based on something that a News sportswriter just made up.

Absolutely right. How could I forget a thing like that . . .

Thanks. . . . so did Humm wear #10? I remember he was left-handed.

Didn't Mike Mercer wear #5? The kicker who made us forget Pete Gogolak (who wore #3)?

Didn't David Humm wear #11? Or was it Dan Manucci?