That Aud Smell

That was some all-world sh1t.

That was an uninspiring, lackluster frame from the home team. Hoping for better in the 2nd. And, yes, Power looked like a greenhorn out there.

absurdly gifted. like, ridiculous. i say that as someone who doesn't much care for the material she recorded. edit: this clip still floors me.

Skinner's goal song choices are undefeated. What a goofball.

Aww. I like that tradition, btw.

Lesss get it. Go Sabres!

Then I will have a full report. And I will know the things disclosed. My desire to know will have been satisfied.

No idea what this is about - even after reading your explanation to Weave. I was just chuckling at Taro’s stringing those 3 Mikes together.

well-captured. i'm not sure i agree, but i get it.

that was a wild ride.

I don't follow the logic of this. The poster to whom you were responding was essentially saying KP's a private citizen who's entitled to the full benefit of privacy and confidentiality when it comes to her medical condition and history. And requests for thoughts and prayers from strangers are routinely made on behalf of such people, yes? Not a good take. We may need everyone to revisit the Legend of Lindy story. Remember? An addled Lindy in the wheelchair, giving the orderly a surprisingly strong handshake, made a bit painful by the Stanley Cup ring turned inward toward Lindy's palm? Chills, just typing that.

I funking love this deal and love the team's having identified samuelsson as part of the team's core. i love that kid's game. i'm confident that he already is and long will be a solid part of a good nhl team's d-corps. lez geaux.

I talked about this upthread and won't belabour it here. She's an owner of the Bills and Sabres - institutions of great public interest hereabouts. One of those teams was recently the beneficiary of a deal that will give them about $1.4B in public money. So, she's not just anyone. She's not a private citizen. As the people who support the teams and, perhaps moreover, help foot the bill (for the Bills), we're entitled to some information about how she's faring. More information than we have so far anyway. The question of timing is a murky one, I admit. I'm just wondering when more will be made known. This gif made me chuckle - although I have no idea what it's meant to imply.

I'll be honest: I didn't think we'd be 4 months out without a meaningful update on the health of one of the team's owners/presidents.

I really like the guy and want him to succeed. Fingers crossed. Continuity has worked well for the Bills. Let's hope it does likewise for the Sabres.

It looked like Davis was not at liberty to devote his right hand to the catching effort - as he was using it to manage the DB. Had the pass been picked or dropped, I would not have faulted Davis much. Things are changing steadily, I think. That said, there is still something to be said for "eye test" evaluations. The data say something in the abstract, in the macro, about going for 2, going for 6, going for it on 4th down, but what do the real life events of that game, the micro, counsel? There are relevant variables there as well - e.g., your team's defence has been playing lights out.

They looked to be hand fighting as the ball arrived.

Not sure. There's lots of data out there and articles regarding the same. And I'm sure the NFL teams are dealing with data that isn't in the public domain. There are definitely reasons that there's been a rise (a sharp one?) in teams going for 2 in situations where - traditionally - teams always kicked the PAT, or, relatedly, pushing for 6 to win a game rather than kicking a field goal to force OT. More than that, the DB had the ball in his hands. Then Davis ripped it away from him.

Some teams started going for 2 in order to win rather than kick a 1 point PAT in order to go to OT - or, as in the case of the Bills/Titans slip game, started going for a TD in order to win rather thank kicking a field goal to go to OT - when the data demonstrated that the better risk is to go for the win rather than play for the tie. There's a 2018 OP-ED from some University of Chicago business school eggheads that seems like a fair statement of the conclusions reached: "In research to be published ... we examined every instance over a recent 10-year period in which N.F.L. teams faced a choice in the final minutes between kicking an extra point to tie the game or going for a 2-point conversion to win. The teams overwhelmingly chose to avoid the risk of immediate defeat: Of the 47 times teams faced this situation, they opted to kick the extra point 42 times (89 percent). This bias can be costly. Teams that chose to avoid the 2-point conversion won the game only 40 percent of the time, which is well below the average rate of successful 2-point conversions (about 50 percent). Surely some of those teams should have known they were underdogs if the game went into overtime, and mistakenly avoided a risk they should have taken."

The irony here is that I liked this variation so much that it swayed me against your thesis. It is only occurring to me now that this board debate is reminiscent of the discussion of an unladened swallow in Monty Python's Holy Grail. Yeah - it's just a thing, imo.

NFL teams often roll the dice on winning (where they have offensive control over the outcome) rather than roll the dice on OT (where they may not get the ball). Isn’t that essentially what the Bills did in 2021 when Josh slipped against the Titans?

And if Peterka is too often not in the lineup — he should be back in Roch?

Who’s the 13th forward once Okposo is back? Hinostroza?

Is Okposo nicked up? I saw Lysowski’s Tweet about how he’s rotating in on the Asplund/Girgensons line.

Bills win by 30+. SMH - that team does not win close games. 😉