VOR

OJ is guilty. And he had a habit of slapping around his wives and there was photographic evidence of it. Just because we never heard about it beforehand doesn't mean it didn't happen. Without any evidence that Lynch gets drunk, much less drives while drunk, it's nothing but supposition. But it was a different era back then. Do you think that alcohol and DUI's have suddenly become an epidemic in the NFL? Like players just discovered alcohol? Nope, this stuff was covered-up pretty well back in the day. With the internet and personal recording devices though, little is allowed to escape the public eye.

I agree with krazykat about how Edwards doesn't really deserve credit for the wins last year, since the Bills would have won those games with Losman, if not won the Cowboys game, and very possibly the Browns and Eagles games with Losman starting instead. I guess though I can give him credit for not losing those games, because he was a rookie. And given Fairchild's inane scheme, coupled with no audibles, the lack of a true #2 WR (Price was no great shakes in 2006, but he was still far and away better than Reed last year) and max protect schemes to protect the rookie QB that by definition limit offensive chances, it's not exactly hard to see why the offense was so abyssmal. Add to that a defense decimated by injuries and a ST's unit that fell-off quite a bit last year, and it's amazing the team made it to 7-9, with the 9th hardest strength of schedule (albeit tied with 9 other teams). But I disagree that this teams needs a complete overhaul. I think the Bills did a great job of addressing most of their needs, save TE, over the off-season, with the caveat that a lot will depend on the health of Stroud, not to mention the team overall (but that's always the case). Losing Denney and Hargrove at DE were big blows to the defense early-on, as were losing Simpson and Poz for the season, not to mention Kiwaukee Thomas. Shoring-up the interior of the D-line, having better depth at DE, replacing Ellison with Mitchell, getting Poz and Simpson back, and Greer having another year in the system with McKelvin nipping at the heels of McGee and James being a good veteran depth player, and this defense could be a good one, and with good depth. On offense, Edwards getting his rookie year behind him will be huge. So too should be the addition of Hardy, whose size and speed will force defenses to have to account for him. I also think that Schouman will be a nice receiving option for Edwards. WRT ST's, I hope they rebound, but this is the area of which I'm most unsure.

Well then, "everyone cheats on their taxes." Since you haven't said you don't, I'm calling the IRS and reporting you. Have fun with the audit. Oh and OJ had a history of slapping around his first wife Marguerite, as well as Nicole. That's real "past behavior."

LOL! So because Lynch has taken his own alcohol into bars in the past, this means he was "obviously" driving drunk that night, based on inference? Are you for real? If you want to talk about "past behavior," try whipping out something that actually happened, like him having been seen drunk, driving drunk, and/or charged with such. You are so far on the other side of the Lynch apologist side, you're irrational.

It was no worse than Kelly snapping the ball on the same count in SB XXVII. And that led to him getting knocked-out of the game.

Taking the 5th is using "hardball legal maneuvers?" And there's a difference between drinking and driving drunk. It will be almost impossible to prove he was impaired while driving because none of the bars' employees will admit that they served him alcohol if he was sloshed. The best they can hope for is eyewitnesses who saw him falling over himself, but they would have uncovered those already.

Can I add suing all the bars on Chippewa to the list?

It was a hoax: http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/91536

It's "Ka-WE-ka" but he accepts either.

Maybe if I'd see evidence of malicious intent or negligence in the things he's done, I'd agree with you. The evidence we have shows that the stuff that happened in college was bunk, the stuff that happened with the police the past year was such a non-factor it sounded like a joke when the BN wrote about it (he brought his own alcohol into bars! What a thug!), and in this instance, the evidence supports the claim that he didn't know he hit her, which as I said was mentioned by law enforcement officials and probably is the reason he's getting it pleaded-down to a violation. This is so far from Travis/Chris Henry and Pacman Jones, it's a joke mentioning them in the same sentence.

It's an embarrassment to falsify the events of an incident and your injuries.

You guys realize Lynch will be charged with just a violation, right? Admitting guilt in the beginning, while making everyone else feel all warm and fuzzy inside, would have led to him being charged with a misdemeanor.

The pre-draft stuff about the girlfriend and getting shot at were already discussed to death and found to be nothing. The girlfriend's story didn't jibe with what witnesses said (yes I know, they were obviously biased for Lynch) and her story was so inconsistent that the DA didn't proceed. Basically it was a case of a jilted ex-girlfriend. And if getting shot at makes you a criminal, so too should be getting run over by a car. But you have your bias against Lynch, just like Todd McShay, who was the one who perpetuated that stuff, did. As for the alcohol (which I thought was a joke for being mentioned) and sit down with the police, why didn't we hear about this stuff when it happened? What other stuff involving other players do you suppose we also don't hear about, not only in Buffalo, but league-wide? And if the alcohol were a problem, why hasn't he tested positive for it? Why no arrests for public drunkenness or DUI? Everyone is covering for him? And do you think it's possible the Hamburg Police were racially profiling Lynch's family? Naw, couldn't be. Lynch is the next Pacman Jones. It's all so clear. Coincidence? No, not really. When you're rich and famous, all sorts of weird stuff happens to you. And even the seemingly most straight-laced guy can snap (Rae Carruth anyone?). But there has to be real evidence of wrong-doing, not suppositions. Hey, why not make a Dwight Drane type bet about Lynch getting into trouble again within the year? If he's the thug you say he is, it should be a slam dunk. Should I put you down for $1000?

Lynch bringing his own alcohol to bars sounds like an alcohol problem to you? He's been involved with law enforcement for most of his life? Where do you get this stuff?

With ZERO evidence to the contrary, sure it should be challenged. Sorry but "everyone is drunk at that place at that time" and "obviously since he didn't answer his doorbell, he was drunk" don't carry much weight. And Lynch has no known history of problems with alcohol, unless you consider him bringing his own to bars "a problem."

Well it seems that there has been a plea deal reached, to charge Lynch with just a violation, not a misdemeanor. Check out the "Lynch's Punishmentl" thread.

Found this mentioned on BB.com. I didn't see this on Friday, the date it was written. Looks like no criminal charges and just a violation: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=txbi...t&type=lgns

I think you mean "No, no, no."

Exactly, even though law enforcement officials are willing to accept the "he probably didn't know he hit her" defense. And I "attacked" the victim for fabricating the "the car slowed down, stopped, and then sped way" version, not to mention exaggerating the extent of her injuries.

Or Kim Shpeley's MySpace page. But seriously, there is a TON of evidence against Lynch. Everyone is drives on Chippewa at 3:30 AM is drunk. The victim, despite lying face down and dying in a pool of her own blood, clearly saw the car slow down, stop and then speed off. Eyewitnesses and the video camera that captured the event were biased in favor of Lynch and clearly were wrong in saying/showing that the car never slowed down. Lynch texted messages to Bills' security claiming "I hit some chick, was drunk, and fled the scene. Beast mode!" but the authorities are hiding this information. And obviously after you've been involved in a crime, you keep the evidence in plain sight so that the authorities can find it.

At worst he'll get an unclassified misdemeanor (no less than 15 days but not more than 1 year jail time, which he won't come close to seeing) and at best a traffic violation. He, his agent, and the NFLPA will argue that his silence was within his constitutional rights, there was no evidence he was drunk and that he didn't even know he hit her, and there won't be a suspension.

My bad. I thought you were being serious until your "Are you oblivious to the fact that hundreds of cases of the driver not knowing someone was hit happen every year?" line. And the "he didn't know he hit her" defense was actually first mentioned by a law enforcement official in a 6/12 Buffalo News article: http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/buff...ory/368141.html

If only we knew who was drunk and who wasn't.

LOL! So going a step further, anyone who walks in that area at 33am is also drunk, especially those who sing and dance in the middle of the street, in the rain. So the victim's and her friends' testimony is not credible. Thanks.