Mark80

I say no to Jim Bob Cooter. That would be the first NFL HC younger than I am. A realization that I am not yet prepared to face. Sweet name though.

Finally some sense around here. EJ deserves a shot. He was rushed in, rushed out, and was a class act pro the entire time. He has shown flashes of brilliance although most around here only like to point to his minutes of calamity. I'd like to see what he can do for 3 weeks. Why rush Cardale? He'll be here next year no matter what.

We will definitely win 2 of the last 3 games to ruin our draft pick slot. Heck, we may even win the next two games, have slim chance of getting in week 17 at 9-7 and then proceed to get blown out for an 8-8 finish.

No worries. I was ridiculed last year too when I said that I really liked Dak and thought he was going to be the best value pick QB wise in the draft (along with Kessler who I still like but the Browns...oh the Browns) and the Bills should take him round 3.

Personally, I don't think there is any way possible he makes it out of the third round when all is said and done. Well, unless there is some problem with his recovery from knee surgery.

His injury and off field issues drop him out of the first, not out of the second in my opinion. The talent is too good.

Really hope we draft Chad Kelly with our second round pick this year. Not because he is Jim Kelly's nephew and Buffalo born; to me, those are just bonuses. But because he has a tremendous arm, makes remarkable plays, has played well in big games, and he is a team leader who can fire up his teammates when needed (which is non existent with our current QB). I see a lot of Brett Favre in him, from his style of play to his fieriness and I think if we can grab one of the top WRs round 1 and him in round 2, that would be a huge win for us.

Cardalle Jones has some serious accuracy issues, even compared to TT or EJ. He had them at OSU, he had them in the camp, and he had them in the pre-season games. I don't think they have magically resolved themselves. What made him have a good run at OSU for a handful of games was the fact that defenses were keying on stopping Elliot and WRs were getting wide open. Regardless, he often still under threw them and over threw them, but the WRs made great plays. Add to that the fact that he was able to use his legs a bit at the college level. Unfortunately, he's not fast enough to do that effectively in the NFL in my opinion. I don't think he will never be a successful NFL QB. Sorry to say.

I agree, but showing it with the player and the games missed would provide insight as to what makes up that "bubble" size, instead of just showing said bubble and taking it as a definitive result.

Calmer than you are, Dude. Yes, Lawson was going to be one of our top pass rushers. Probably why we took him in the first round, certainly not for his pass coverage skills. Yes, Ragland was slotted to start at MLB during training camp when he was healthy and by most accounts looked tremendous. AW compared to JJ Watt? Are you serious? How about comparing Dareus to JJ Watt? Maybe that's a bit more realistic, no? I'd sure as hell take 3 Dareus' over 1 JJ Watt.

I disagree, because it misdirects people to thinking that this is a true correlation (as evidenced by you starting this thread with it and it being posted in the other thread). Man games lost is a good stat because people understand it doesn't account for quality and it's just a number that is what it is. When you start pointing to things like this, it just creates more confusion and debate. I'd like to see man games missed by player with their PFF or something to make my own conclusions.

Pretty much my exact post from the other thread and spot on. Some arbitrary "bubble" does not truly reflect the quality of player missing....how does this bubble account for Lawson and Ragland who never got to play a down before being injured? Explain that to me please.

It's cool man, you can point to bubble sizes and charts all you want, but you can't list out those "significant" players. Cool, I get it. Maybe you are just lazy? The only team that is even close quality of players wise is the Vikings (who at worst will have the same record as us after this week). I could not care less about what a bubble is arbitrarily trying to represent. And I am curious, how does you "bubble" account for Lawson and Ragland who got hurt before ever playing a down? That's a top pass rusher and starting MLB that they are, most likely, not accounting for with very much weight.

Pretty easy huh? Perhaps you missed the part about "significant difference makers". That chart in no way accounts for the quality of player injured. Where is that list? The Bears could have their entire team injured and it wouldn't equate to the level of talent we have had injured as they simply don't have it. Or maybe you think that missing Lamarr Houston for 9 games is the same thing as losing Marcell Dareus for 8+ games, I sure as hell don't.

I'm so sick of hearing this. No, not every team has their best WR injured most of the year, their second best WR missing significant time, their third best WR missing time, their best RB missing time, the best defensive player missing more than 1/2 the season, their number 1 pick missing significant time, their number 2 pick missing significant time, their best safety missing significant time, now their starting CB missing time. I implore anyone here to find ANY team out there that can put up a list of injuries to significant difference makers that is even close to ours. And yet, we are still over .500 playing with some guys literally signed off the street. Rex and Whaley deserve a lot of credit in my mind, our training staff, however, can all find new jobs in the off season.

I continue to be amazed by the complete lack of knowledge around here on the cap impact of trading Dareus. It is not going to happen any time soon regardless of what happens on (or off) the field. Stop talking about it for another year at least. You're just wasting everyone's time.

My connections to police are chiefs and those that manage the budget and I can tell you for a fact that this is not true, for the most part. It's not like a police department is a company trying to grow their revenues year in and year out. They are a public service provide to and paid for by the people. Their main concern is keeping people safe, not how to maximize their budgets. If they could put resources to things that actually matter and are of real safety concerns instead of MJ, they would gladly do it. Most departments oppose recreational pot because it is illegal (state most of the time and fed all the time) and it is their duty to uphold the law. Also, they oppose it because of driving under the influence reasons and the safety concerns of that. Not saying that pharma's are responsible for making it illegal or how it's prosecuted (especially minimum sentencing rules), I'm saying they are one of the main reasons, if not the only reason, that it remains illegal.

Not sure on this one. While I would certainly agree that Private Prisons and their lobbying are to blame as well since they are paid by the number of inmates they house and they house a crap load of criminals just because of weed offenses (or previous weed offenses which are priors and lead to bigger sentences for other crimes, that is, getting them "in the system"). Knowing policing relatively well as I have family involved in higher levels of policing, I can guarantee you that most police would welcome not having to police this so they could spend more of their time on crimes that actually matter.

I respectfully disagree with most of this. It doesn't have to be a "candy cabinet" as you describe it. Even when you are taking these extremely powerful prescriptions as prescribed (for legit pain issues) they are highly addictive and dangerous. Again, that is when they are just used as intended. Players often subject themselves to a lifetime of addiction issues because of this. The improved regulation and monitoring of these medications has gotten slightly better, but it's still a ways off from strict. And that says nothing of legit prescriptions and dosages which are still very, very dangerous. Especially considering these guys can be taking these prescriptions for years and years (not just for recovery from, say, a surgery or something for a short period of time). And, once addicted, these are some of the hardest substances to break free from, snowballing their side effects. I do agree that, most likely, a majority of players are smoking for recreational purposes (with the added benefit of pain relief as secondary reason possibly). However, I disagree that there is not a notable portion of players out there who are consciously doing it just for pain relief to avoid the dangers of pain medication.

Tank a season before we even play a single regular season game with a team that is loaded with talent. Yeah, sounds like a great idea.

There is a legit reason to risk it, it offers an alternative to powerful and much more addictive prescription pain medications. Some (not all for sure, but some) players use it because prescription pain killers are flat out dangerous to use at the levels these people need to use them on a daily basis. On the other hand, you could smoke a little weed, not become physically addicted and cause minimal (if any) additional harm to your body. The ONLY reason it is still illegal is because giant pharma lobby big time to keep it that way so they can keep patients addicted to their artificially created medications instead of someone growing their own medication. The gov't is bought and paid for. It's that simple.

Yeah, but they have Cam Newton and Luke Keuchly.

Sorry, but this is flat out untrue. People do not come back better from an ACL injury. They may get back to 100%, but they are not getting stronger and better. He won't be getting a "new" ligament. He'll most likely get a piece of his kneecap or hamstring tendon, or an ACL from a cadaver donor. In either case, they are used ligaments and none are stronger than your original ACL.

There should be a minimum requirement of at least 1 playoff game played as a Bill to be considered for the Wall. Sorry Stevie and sorry Fred.

Nicholson, DiCaprio, Del Torro. I'll watch pretty much any movie with one of those actors in it at least once. When I watch them I never think to myself "this guy is obviously acting." That's the real test of a great actor to me.