All_Pro_Bills

While I think scheme, play calling, and execution are issues that contribute to the Bills problems the biggest issue is poor drafting focused on the defensive side and ignoring obvious needs on the Oline and at WR. Likewise, I'm not expecting magic to happen which suddenly transforms the Bills drafting. Too much depends on Allen and I think this is a 7 win team without him. They have cap issues and there aren't good players on the roster to replace any free agents that might be lost. Another problem is the Jets and Dolphins seem to be getting their acts together and another poor draft in 2023 parks the Bills in 3rd place in the AFCE. Immediate help is needed, not more developmental PS picks in the 3rd round.

The indictment of McDermott and Frazier is the Bengals fielded 2 Oline starters and still managed to punish the Bills defense. As for Beane, all the Dline resources, draft choices, free agents, and cap space yielded little. Nothing they did appeared to confuse or surprise the Bengals. Which should have been expected as the same defense didn't seem to faze a 3rd string rookie the week before.

I don't expect these tanks will do much good given the timeline to get them and the necessary personnel onto the battlefield. But already I've seen calls to up the ante by sending F-16s. I can only guess what the lead time to train crews with that fighter jet are but my guess is its measured in quarters to years in order to develop the necessary proficiency. Add in the expense and logistics involved for support. I believe assessments produced for domestic consumption that the Ukrainian military has the upper hand are greatly exaggerated. I think there are several different ways this conflict can play out from here and one of them, which might be worst case scenario, is that no amount of funding or arms shipments of any kind are going to ultimately lead to victory and the Russians prevail, the Ukrainian capitol is occupied with a pro-Russian government installed, and their armed forces are neutralized. So then what? Does the administration, seeing this playing out, intervene and send in US forces to prevent this outcome. I'd say that would be a very unpopular decision domestically both socially and politically. Or do they just throw in the towel and let the country fall into Russia's sphere of influence? Or before that happens does some deal get worked out? There's a lot of things that can happen and also go wrong. My concern is there's a lot of risk and danger already baked in here for people beyond the borders of Ukraine and a lot more likely that can result from escalations on both sides. And when I hear American officials such as Kirby speak and they nonchalantly dismiss any concerns about harming US strategic interests or Russian foreign minister Lavrov make thinly veiled threats it makes me worry all the adults have left the room and we're a lot closer to an all-out escalation and confrontation that will leave no winners.

If you operate under a baseline assumption that 90% of these causes have no material impact other than to impose some rule or restriction that creates a nuisance and inconvenience for the general public you'll be right more often than not.

So its not "cost effective"? That's the bottom line. When you run the numbers on the renewable "economy" or even an all electric economy, it will just cost too much along with being less efficient and less reliable.. And if you want to adopt an energy source with those characteristics the implication is you as an individual and society as a whole will become less productive and as a result your standard of living and quality of life will suffer. Look at EV's. If they were cost effective you wouldn't need $7,500 tax credits to entice rich people to buy them.

No technical data on the servers, standard stuff AWS monitors and tracks such as access logs, download logs, IP addresses, firewall and security alerts, user sessions and log in records, etc., has ever been provided to FBI or other law enforcement experts that enabled them to establish definitive proof the DNC was hacked by Russian operatives.

That's the fictitious story the resistance continues to peddle but to this point in time there's nothing that shows Trump and Putin have a relationship outside the diplomatic channels used by heads of state from 2017 to 2020. As Putin does not speak English and Trump does not speak Russian any conversations were attended by other officials and interpreters. nobody said peep about any irregularities. Do you think they used secret hand signals over Zoom to collude?

You're just flailing away here. Like a fighter that takes a beating you just don't know when to stay down.

I'm no expert when it comes to elections or party politics but I do know a bit about forecasting as it can be a very tricky venture. Fraught with lots of assumptions and expectations for the future. The writer could be correct, or not. A lot can happen between now and November 2024. But assuming some Parliamentary like or party line action by voters regardless of other factors is suspect. One thing to examine would be the actions of independent voters that tend to vote issues and concerns rather than party. Another is the condition of the economy leading up to the election. And probably most important the quality of the candidates and how they relate to the voters. As an example, I'd be hard pressed to believe that Democratic voters, or Republicans, would reflexively vote party line for their party's incumbent candidate when faced with unemployment, losing their homes and cars, huge unserviceable debt, high food and cost of living, and personal bankruptcies and other hardships. I mean, they'd have to be real mind blowing imbeciles.

It's extremely irrational that you won't admit to something that the people doing the assessment have admitted to doing. Why can't you just accept the fact the IC community assessment was formulating without examining the servers or any data related to the servers? That's exactly what they stated. But you're insisting they lied.

Because they issued their assessment and called it a "conclusion" while noting they did not examine any server or forensic information. That sounds like a guess to me.

These IC people rendered an opinion without facts. As for their motivations, don't ask me, ask them.

Firing the Safeties coach! That should resolve all the management and coaching deficiencies in the defense, the offensive line, and a poor draft record. Can the locker room attendants and laundry crew be far behind?

You just don't want to get it. They provided a consensus opinion without examining any evidence. An opinion absent fact. Which in my business is what we call a SWAG, a stupid wild ass guess. Wrong? How about irresponsible and unprofessional. I'll leave it at that.

That's not the truth. That was a conclusion expressed by specific members of the intelligence community. Without associated evidence. Without any examination of the servers. Without questioning anyone with access to the machines. An opinion, nothing more. Because the DNC refused to allow the FBI or any other law enforcement agency to examine the servers. It could have been a hack, it could have been a leak.

Did Biden's legal team that lacked security clearance to examine and assess documents they found also self report?

2016 was one of the most secure elections in our history and there's no evidence of cheating. And rather than being the victim, the truth is the Democrats manufactured the environment and conditions which allowed them to perform and act in the Academy Award winning role of the victim when they created the entire Russia collusion fantasy. And further, supported Hillary's whining and complaining victim tour instead of acknowledging she was one of the worst Presidential candidates in history. So bad that an extremely flawed and crude character like Trump beat her. That's what really keeps the Trump haters up at night. He sucks but your candidate sucks even more and you still can't wrap your heads around that truth. So they make up excuses.

I might argue on the exact number of good and great players but I agree with your conclusion that the biggest problem with the Bills is personnel, specifically poor draft and free agency decisions. After these failures in the playoffs my unemotional assessment is that the only difference between this team and the drought teams before it is Josh Allen. The Bills have always had a good player or three and most seasons an above average defense but not a QB. You plug Josh into the Jets, Dolphins, or Patriots offense and that team wins the division. Excluding the QB position, I'll argue that the other teams in our division have better overall talent and personnel. The finger points squarely at the front office and Beane. Sure he gets credit for maneuvering up the draft to pick Allen in the 7th spot but what has he done lately. And yeah, McDermott's game management skills are subpar and Frazier's scheme is soft and predictable but the personnel decisions have been the worst thing of all things.

I'll suggest without Josh Allen and his Superman impersonation this Bills team is a 6 or 7 win roster and organization. While McDermott the person seems like a good guy Sean the coach has some shortcomings that experience isn't eliminating. A bold move from ownership is needed. But unlikely to happen.

They just found more classified documents this afternoon at George Washington's former Revolutionary War headquarters. Activists are demanding a full inquiry and the elimination of President's Day. The threat to democracy is clear! One basic question here might be who doesn't have classified documents? And Garland, the DOJ, and the FBI are looking like first class a-holes for that raid on Trump. The idea he's doing something unique or unusual is out the window. Total clown fest.

I don't want McDermott fired. What I want to see is some demonstration of a learning curve where he evolves his thinking and decision making based on experience and learning from similar situations. Not a HC that keeps making blunders over and over along with being unaware or unwilling to see it and become a better decision maker.

Three part series: Part One: Classified documents with information and communications the government doesn't want our enemies to know about. Part Two: Classified documents with information and communications the government doesn't want the American public to know about. Part Three: Discussion and analysis of which pile of documents is larger, part one or part two?

The guy who hastily arranged an unscheduled visit to Zelensky last April and delivered the message the West would not allow him to agree to a negotiated peace deal between Ukraine and Russia brokered by France and Germany implores the allies to send more weapons. What a phony.

Most frustrating about these schemes is both predictability and inflexibility. During the regular season, you had the 49ers and Chargers show you how to slow down Miami's offense in consecutive weeks. In last weeks wild card game the Ravens provided some clues on how to address Cincinnati's offense and dealing with Burrows. But Frazier ignored both of these examples. And on the offensive side defenses have had the Bills number for most of the 2nd half of the season. Dorsey has no answers. And by watching the Bills all season you can become pretty efficient in predicting the Bills plays just off the basis of personal packages and formations. If I can do that then the professionals employed by other NFL teams can do it too. Now why isn't the HC questioning the coordinators and demanding some creativity, surprise, and flexibility in their game plans along with designing them for the specific opponent? My guess is Zac Taylor just dusted off the mostly unused regular season game plan they devised against the Bills and took most of the week off before the game. He knew exactly what to expect and got exactly that on Sunday.

Another poster mentioned this today. This is a blatant example of "soft". Score 14-7, Bengals, the ball at the Bills 14 with 2:48 left in the 2nd quarter, 3rd and 4. 4 receiver set with Chase wide to the left and 3 receivers on the right. Bills blitz with 7 rushing against 6 blockers. CB's White on the left, Jackson on the right both 7 yard off the line. 2 other defenders at the 5 yard line. Burrows gets the snap and stares down Chase then makes quick throw he catches at the 12, he cuts inside as White misses the tackle and Edmunds tracks him down after the blitz attempt failed and brings him down at the 7. First and goal. You want to argue Frazier didn't want to give up the big play which in this case would be a 14 yard TD. So instead you concede the first down unless 1) the blitz gets to Burrows, which it didn't, or the receiver drops the ball or fumbles or something else which didn't happen. Frazier's/McDermott's scheme is based on the idea that the offense is not going to execute 10 or 12 plays in a row and will make a mistake but good and great teams in the playoffs don't make a lot of mistakes. You need to make a play against them. Not wait for them to mess up.