SageAgainstTheMachine

Well I don't know how you can call him a Giants homer when the referees agreed with him on both of those things.

That is a stretch. Remember how McGahee was allergic to touchdowns?

I think it'd be better if New England won because I think they have the best team overall in the AFC East. Our goal is to make the playoffs, not necessarily win the division, and I feel like we'll be fighting with the Jets for that last wildcard (if we can shape up). If the Jets lose to New England, and then to Tennessee the week after that, they are 6-5 and not in such great shape themselves.

But just to make myself clear, your assertion that Dick Jauron purposely prevents Trent from throwing for 250 yards and that he purposely prevents Marshawn from gaining 100 is ridiculous. Why in the world would a head coach do that? I respect your opinion, but it sounds like conspiracy theory stuff to me.

Dude, the post was just my excuse to use the Billy Madison reference, don't freak out.

He's been breaking tackles left and right the last few weeks. I know his returning style is a little bit different. He takes a couple seconds to size up his blocks and tacklers instead of sprinting right off the bat, but as long as the results are there I'm not complaining one bit.

Hell yeah, brother. I've been doing my best to battle all the chicken littles over the past two weeks. People just fail to see the big picture. The only that matters in the game of football (or any other sport) is your record. We're 5-3 and people are panicking because we've lost two straight. If we had started the season off with 3 straight losses and then won the next 5, this board would be an entirely different, optimistic place. I say we take it to the Cheatriots today 24-13. LET'S GO BUFFALLOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! THE BILLS MAKE ME WANNA SHOUT

No, a thousand times no. I'm not a huge JP detractor and I think he'll make a decent starting QB for a different team, but you never take your starter (and future of the team) out after a bad half. Now, if he's thrown for 40 yards and 3 interceptions or something ridiculous like that, then you consider it. But if he's just struggling like he struggled against the Jets and Dolphins, you leave him in there and let him work it out. If you take Trent out at half time, you introduce a quarterback controversy into the mix of a team that is already struggling. That's basically ASKING not to make the playoffs.

My older brother (a very smart guy) is extremely dyslexic and has struggled with illiteracy his entire life. It is definitely not funny.

Dude, there is a TON of parity in the NFL this year. Losing to the Jets and Dolphins stings because they are division rivals but losing to either of them carries no shame in my opinion because they are much improved teams this year just like us. The pick six that Trent threw was either a 10 or 14 point swing in the Jets' favor and pretty much lost us the game. So if that interception never happens, we probably win. According to you, if we had won either of those games you would have said we would play the Patriots tough. Don't you see the gap in that logic? We've been playing every game "tough". I think that every NFL team that is sniffing the playoffs plays tough. If the Bills were really just a bunch of wimps and losers like you say they are, why would they be 5-3? Losing two consecutive games...it happens. It hurts more in this case because it is against division rivals, but hey that means we have a shot at revenge against both of them.

Same question I asked myself when I read this thread, but the primary reason for him being cut is to make room for that sack of sh*t DeAngelo Hall. Redskins don't know what they're getting themselves into.

I'll admit it's time for Poz to make a big play, but predicting an interception from your MLB is not usually a good bet to make.

Can we please make people take IQ tests before joining TBD? I'm afraid that this entire board is dumber for having read your comment. You are awarded no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

laaaaame is this one of them? http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u33/che.../ugly_woman.gif

pictures please, i am quite skeptical about this claim

buckeye, the logic and level-headedness you use on this board is simply unacceptable.

Actually the invincible bears part is toward the middle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARMoJ-9G68k Watch til the end for the part with the bears.

Yeah, you're right, but I thought I'd try it once.

Aaron Rodgers had 3 years of NFL experience before he got a start. And if you don't think Chris Johnson, LenDale White, Keith Bulluck, Cortland Finnegan, etc, have been fun to watch, then you don't like football. If the Bills weren't on at 1 o clock most weeks, I'd try my best to catch all the Titans games that I could.

So how about the Titans? They aren't good or worth watching in your opinion? You know, they haven't even had a 200 yard passing day yet this season.

Clearly this guy knows that the more question marks you use, the more logical your argument becomes.

Remember the ALAMO Remember the TITANS

I don't get where the conservative argument is coming from. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that you can own guns. It says you have the right to bear arms. Now, that's a little bit ironic because generally speaking you would use a gun to kill a bear and then take the arms once it is dead. So from that perspective, I can understand why you'd think you need guns to acquire the bear arms. But honestly, you could just buy bear arms somewhere else without having to hunt, and that's safer for everybody. Furthermore, I'm sure bear arms had a purpose back in the pioneer days (scaring off mountain lions and such) but why do you need them in this day and age?

Valid points, but the main issue is that we just have to hang onto the rock better. We had subpar efforts the last two games, but I'm still convinced we would have pulled out W's if it weren't for the turnovers.