SDS

I know the purpose of sarcasm, but this was a bad time to use it IMO, since there are no threads dealing with NC and the cover 2. I assume you are alluding to the LM thread, yet there is little discussion in there about Nate, so I don't even know where the basis is for your 1st post. Now, I suppose he could attempt to hijack KtD's thread about Milloy and turn it into a thread about Nate. Perhaps you think that is a better solution? Do you think people wanting to read about Nate would naturally search in a thread that is specifically about Lawyer? Does KtD, who asked about LM and not the "secondary" in general, mind that someone is trying to take his thread in a different direction? I looked through 4 pages of posts before I made my comments, so it wasn't obvious to me that the natural place to talk about Nate Clements is in thread about Lawyer Milloy.

the problem is that the Houston Oilers had some very, very talented teams. A lack of supporting cast for at least a portion of his career shouldn't be an issue.

it is named that out of respect to the AFL/NFL, not because of the CFL.

If you could point me to "KtD's Nate thread" - that would be great. I see a moderate sized thread dealing with Lawyer Milloy and his position in the cover 2 and after scannning it, Nate Clements is barely mentioned.

I wouldn't want ANY employee who would jump ship like that after making a commitment to provide his services. Once you say "yes", you are on the hook as far as I am concerned.

Isn't this getting a tad petty? We have a poster that wants to talk about a legitimate Bills topic. If it is being discussed elsewhere - why not provide him a link? I'm sure he would be appreciative of the kind gesture, it would cut off this thread from becoming a duplicate discussion, and as a bonus you get your message across in a more helpful and less snotty way.

It will also be carried live on NFL Network, ESPNews, and SuperBowl.com.

nm

"you hittin' that?"

At least you're not rubbing it in...

I couldn't be that ugly if I tried...

A pet peeve of many is the lack of descriptive information in a subject line. Haloti Ngata cutler High character-lol Jamal Lewis are examples of bad subject lines. Please be more descriptive when starting a new thread. Thank you.

I guess some people think that I should chime in here, not that it will help the mess that is this thread.... First, let's get this out of the way - there is nothing wrong with KtFaBD initial post. What he suggests is indeed common courtesy and I encourage everyone to follow his advice. For those of you who gave him crap, just read his initial post and try to understand the spirit in which it was posted. If you can't understand it then you have issues.... Now, to some other specific points and some generalities... 1. As you can see from the responses in this thread - everyone has their own idea of Nirvana, their own idea of what is "broken", their own idea behind what causes these "issues". Notice many of the diagnostics and proposed solutions conflict. This isn't a discussion about particle physics where just the fact that you are discussing the topic means you have a certain level of education and sophistication. This is football - enjoyed by the very young, the very old, male or female, USA or foreigners, rocket scientists or high school dropouts. The shear breadth of the backgrounds of the posters here on this public forum will always be an impediment to achieving a certain set of standards followed by all. We all need to show a little more tolerance... myself included. 2. This notion that people are posting to see their post counts go up is seriously off target IMHO. I have only seen that twice - once back in 2003 when we used wwwthreads and the notion of a "top 10 poster" was born and once when ICE thought Jay would beat him to 10k. 2003 was a LONG time ago - I do not see anyone posting for the sole purpose of seeing their post count go up. Even when stojan had diarrhea of the fingers it was just because he was just talkative. So I really reject the notion that post totals are some sort evil attribute that is causing disruption. 3. LAMPs. I apologize if I'm not on board with this either. I pretty much despise the whole label. We are on a public message board sharing our opinions to the world - anyone who takes the time to post WANTS their words to be read! I fully understand the feeling that some people have when they start a new thread for fear of their efforts being wasted. This is not inherently a character flaw. I wanted to post this as a new thread because I want people to read it! Many may have tuned this thread out already. The next reply will remove me from the Last Poster line, so those who may be interested in my response may never know I chimed in. In the end, it's not a big deal. It's just a message board. So while it is no big deal if someone misses my post, it's really no big deal that I want people to read what I had written either. I just find the "LAMP" label to be a bit hypercritical. The LAMP accusation can often be hypocritical too depending on who is laying the charge... if someone is slamming another poster just to get a chuckle from their friends (when the same insult can be done via PM) - that seems to me to the king of all LAMPs - no? 4. LAMPs accusations is another way to accuse a poster of being an "attention seeker". Again, anyone who posts here wants attention. It is the nature of the beast. Just because we have had a handful of posters who have had an unhealthy appetite for attention, it doesn't mean 50+% of the community does, just because they start a new thread on a similar topic. Again, I find this to be a bit hypercritical. 5. WRT to Dan's assertion about seeing "your name in lights", again I don't agree. We all use the thread starter/last post tool to see who is active in a thread. This is a feature that HELPS people identify the posters they want to read and where they are. I guess this is similar to what I have already stated, but there is a certain level of attention everyone wants because they are actively seeking interaction with the community. I reject the notion that a few people are "good-attention seekers" while everyone else is a "bad attention-seeker". 6. The Dean mentioned self-policing. Well, the moderators get PRECIOUS few complaints from the "report post" feature. With 1000-2000 posts per day, you can't expect a handful of people to be fully engaged in every thread and every post 24/7. Reporting posts or posters is the surest way to call attention to problems to the moderators. Please use it. 7. BTW, we have a couple moderator spots open - apply via PM to me! 8. Losing football wears people down. There are a lot of short tempers here - including my own. Let's hope this upcoming season is a good one. The ups and downs of the offseason are upon us. Take a deep breath and relax. If the football talk isn't too great these days, join in another topic. From my perspective, the Bills have always been the vehicle to bring together a diverse group of people who can share opinions on ANY topic - not just football. Thanks to everyone who posted sincere, constructive criticism and opinions. Good night!

because it is the offseason. because the SB is this weekend. because there are articles and highlight shows reminding us of the game. because there are people here who were very young at that time and maybe they haven't discussed it as much as those who were older... to name a few.

although I understand the appeal during the season, a Bills only board is always tough to take when they haven't played in over a month.

in retrospect, it was more gay than funny.

THAT is an image I could do without...

Although not a primary concern, SW is NOT a suitable backup in any way shape or form to WM. SW may try his heart out, but he just is not an acceptable option. While pushing WM would be a luxury, backup RB is one of many, many positions that need to be addressed.

Exactly... Of course, I stay away from the regular stuff 'cause it wrecks havoc on my figure. Seriously, if you want to get fat - pound regular sodas all day long. Might as well as inject fat right under your skin.

I have no reason to think Lee Evans would pull a Peerless Price and not attempt to run someone down... I also think JPL would give an effort...

just don't show them any clips of SBXXVI... nice hands Don.

was this in response to my post or voices in your head?

The theme of this post is "misery loves company"... Is it better to wish Cowher blow another big game (and thus cement his place in the Hall of Fame), so that Steeler fans across the nation can experience that agony once again. Or is ot better to wish for Seattle to lose, less another miserable franchise (see Baltimore, Tampa Bay, St. Louis) wins a Super Bowl before Buffalo...

Stay in touch. I'll probably try to give the the pool winners their choice!

I have prizes that initially were slated for weeks 1-8 winners, but since I doubt we will get weeks 9-17, I'm thinking of handing out the prizes based upon other obvious figures of merit... Overall winner, survivor winners, maybe the high week, etc... What do you think?