All_Pro_Bills

That's exactly what I'm asking (bold above). And thank you for responding with a lot of insights. And sorting out the "liberal" label. So I guess I'm a "classical liberal" or perhaps used to be one? For reference my upbringing was in a Hubert Humphrey type household. My family was heavily involved in the labor and civil right movement and associating with members of those causes shaped a lot of my views. And when's the last time any leader from the labor movement was invited to the White House for a sit down? A party that claims to fight for the working person that ignores and abandons those workers while embracing all types of victims. And yes, I can't characterize anyone fighting for or advocating for the establishment, either the big government stepping all over the little guy or big powerful corporations as any kind of liberal. To me that speaks of authoritarianism. And ironically these are the same people shouting about dangers to democracy while ignoring their own inclinations and the dangers their views present. They seem to support and crave mandates, censorship, things like that. I also don't view this establishment, or deep state, or whatever we'd like to call it, as a left vs. right, liberal vs conservative thing. I see at as a basic operating system running in the background no matter which party is in power. I didn't vote for Trump in either 2016 or 2020 no matter what some posters here might think. I didn't have any strong opposition to Bernie Sanders and was dismayed the party sabotaged his campaign twice by throwing their weight behind Hillary and dragging in Biden in 2020 to provide some image of a moderate to the voters. The Democratic candidate that resonated best to me was Tulsi Gabbard but I knew she would never win the primary fight because of her anti-war stance. An agent of Putin, right? Because she doesn't want to see Americans fight and die for unworthy causes. War which fatten their wallets and enhance their power. My guess is that if Bernie or Tulsi happened to win the general election these establishment powers would have given them the same treatment they gave Trump. I don't understand how people identifying with being "progressive" can advocate for a constant state of warfare. And true, neocon elements do the same thing. So as far as that goes I put them into the same category and consider them both a danger to peace and cooperation. I'm not a fan of Trump as a person and don't support most of his positions but that doesn't mean I don't support some of them. And in many cases what I view as the extreme alternatives presented by progressives make Trump often outrageous positions appear to be moderate views. I thought his tax reform was a corporate giveaway and a big mistake along with being a slap in the face for anyone thinking he was a genuine populist. He's not. But I also don't like the Democrats singular focus on identity politics. I think that message has worn out its welcome. I don't like woke or social justice ideologies either. I view those people as mental and emotional weaklings. I don't understand how the current woke military leadership thinks they can purge "political extremists" from the ranks and fill the services out with woke soldiers and win a war with them doing the fighting. They just don't have the make up for it all. I could go on for another couple thousand words but I'll stop. And I feel that I didn't abandon the Democratic party by adopting more centrist views (extremist views according to the current administration). They abandoned me.

Big government and big media pushing the narrative that powerless individual citizens coming together to demand their legal freedoms under their democratic system stolen by an oppressive authoritarian central government are "insurrectionists".

From what I understand a conservative position in Canada might be characterized by the proposal to force quarantine citizens for 9 days instead of the 10 days the liberal government imposes. So don't expect many voices on the Right to speak up in support of the convoy.

Peter Strzok is a corrupt former FBI agent and Clinton operative that was banging FBI lawyer Lisa Page on the side. If you're going to play the ethics card then find a better source.

On the way to Ottawa exiting the expressway to stop at several Tim Horton's for donuts along the way! And as we speak, Canadian authoritarian government advocates and supporters masquerading as liberal zealots are prepared to form a human shield around their glorious leader PM Trudeau in order to protect the liberal imposter from the working class people that are upset with the government. What they haven't quite figured out yet is how to form a human shield while complying to the 2 meter social distancing mandate. But they vow not to break the law like the worker insurrectionists threatening Canadian "democracy". I'm finding the best way to address the faux liberal mentality is not to debate them but to mock and laugh at them. And its fun too!

If you're a Bills fan that 13 second sequence totally pissed you off. I'm over it and then I'm not. I think we all feel anger and frustration even a week later but I'm not quite at the point of firing anyone just yet. It hurts most because this team was so close to the end of the journey and the ultimate goal. And the reality it was in their hands and just slipped away in some inconceivable fashion is close to impossible to accept. While us fans are never going to get a clear explanation here beyond McDermott's "execution" statement if I'm in charge of the team, ownership and general manager, I want just such an honest and truthful explanation from the coaches. I would need to understand from the coaches what they expected to happen during the end of the game by aligning the defense and strategizing the last 13 seconds? Because the approach employed doesn't have many supporter among football people either before, during, or after it failed. The consensus is the scheme at the end of the game was a flawed approach that to a person none of them would ever employ under those circumstances. But that's exactly what they did. And if I'm running the team I want to better understand your thought process and whether or not there's potential for you doing it again. I need to be confident that some "limited" or "flawed" thinking in the minds of the coaches is not going to show up again in a big spot. And get in the way of achieving our ultimate goal of a championship when another critical in game decision or two determines if we succeed or fail. And given how competitive it is in most of these games such decisions and situations are almost guaranteed to happen. I expect these conversations inside the building have already taken place and I trust Beane will do the right thing in pursuit of a championship. In the end all of his achievements will be judged on whether or not this version of the Bills reached that goal. As for KC yesterday, I could ask the same question of Reid and Mahomes and Bienemy as I've got for McDermott and Frazier. They saw the adjustments the Bengals made at halftime and continued to try to force their original strategy. They failed to adjust when it was required. Why didn't they? But also kudos to the Bengals for winning the strategy and adjustment chess match.

That's what the mobsters in the movies say right before they shoot somebody. Or a woman might say breaking up with someone. "Nothing personal, but I just can't stand the sight of you". Or in the case of the thread title, "Nothing personal, but you've got to be the worst President ever".

The Babylon Bee reports: "When workers of the world unite against overbearing government mandates, that's literal fascism," said a sobbing socialist Prime Minister Justin Trudeau from deep within his top-secret bunker underneath Washington, D.C. "True, compassionate socialism is when the government partners with private corporations to force experimental drugs on the populace and threaten their very livelihoods if they don't. Everyone knows that." According to sources, socialists were initially thrilled by the trucker convoy, as they had mistaken it for a bread line. To their dismay, they soon found out that it was a toxic freedom march organized by the working class against the Canadian bourgeois. "As compassionate leaders, we must send heavily armed military and police personnel to stop these united working-class people before they take over and spread their freedom-loving fascism everywhere. It's the moral thing to do," said Trudeau. Reports say Trudeau is weighing his options to quell the protest, including calling them Nazis, hitting them with drone strikes, or releasing a herd of angry moose into the crowd. They're right. Its satire but it hits the nail on the head about pseudo-socialist posers and fakers. But I expect the left leaning and socialist type poster here will sympathize with the Canadian government. Maybe they should do some self-inspection of their views and conclude they're not socialists but really are fascists? Authoritarian government supporters of the world unite!

You seem to be suffering from the same affliction as me. Which is an ability to view events and situations objectively. And to understand the world is not right vs. wrong, or good vs. evil. What matters is perspective. Everything is relative not absolute. When negotiating with another party, working to produce an agreement, there are a couple critical things. Primarily, there needs to be a genuine desire to reach a negotiated settlement between the parties. Another is understanding what you want out of the negotiation. Maybe more critical is understanding what your counterpart wants out of the negotiation. And then, objectively and rationally assessing both positions and defining what you think both parties would agree to and what you'd be willing to concede and what you view as vital interests on which you won't yield. While going through the same thought process regarding your counterpart. Wha does Russia want here? Simply guarantees the U.S. and/or NATO will not park troops and strategic or tactical weapons right across their border in Ukraine. Plain and simple. If the U.S. conceded that point all potential hostilities would immediately come to an end. But at present the U.S. is unwilling to concede that point. You need to understand it is vital to Russia's interests to not have those weapons parked right across their border. The question from our perspective is what is our vital national interest in having those weapons systems hosted there? If you say to keep Ukraine from being invaded I'd suggest it is the very potential to host those weapons that puts them in harms way. And in your hypothetical Vancouver example with roles reversed the U.S. would also be insistent on the same terms and conditions as Russia is regarding Ukraine. And the same people shouting bloody murder over some potential for Russia to invade Ukraine to stop the deployment of NATO weapons there would be 100% insistent the U.S. consider all options to protect our country including the threat of invading Vancouver. Sadly, many people just can't think objectively. Whether its emotional or intellectual immaturity or a lack of life experience I am not certain.

Throwing Bass under the bus still doesn't explain sending out your defense in an alignment that allowed Mahomes to play 20 yard pitch-and-catch with Hill and Kelce on two consecutive plays in the middle of the field while you had the defense way too far off the LOS while also guarding the sidelines when the Chiefs had 3 timeouts in their pocket. Starting at the 25 they still needed 40 yards give or take and McDermott/Frazier were so afraid of the big play they forgot about stopping two consecutive smaller chunk plays. To boot they called a time out before each of those plays and still didn't adjust anything. So if they missed communicating on the kick off that was probably the least of the mistakes they committed in those 3 plays. That's a situation that an NFL defense should never mess up. Never. Its unforgivable. Especially in a playoff game, a 3 point lead, 13 seconds left, the opponent needing 40+ yards to attempt a game tying FG before time expires. It's a 1 in a million shot to lose there and the Bills hit it.

My expectation is that Stephenson is supposed to be that guy with speed.

If, and a big if, Barkley can stay healthy that would be a big pick up. A home run hitter that can carry a big part of the load. The other thing is how the numbers work out per the cap. And how it impacts other potential cap decisions. But other contenders do this all the time? There're examples in every major sport. So why not the Bills? Seems like it's time to go all in here.

The Bills are past the "build" phase and into the championship window phase. The draft needs to produce 3 or 4 players that can contribute to fill some areas of need right now. Not a year later or two years later. Guys that can either start or get a lot of snaps on either side of the ball. And that requires a change draft in strategy. No depth guys at stacked positions. No BPA players that need a year or two to develop. No players drafted speculating on future potential vs. a player that's ready right now. We need big contributions to fill some holes for September 2022, not September 2024. The Super Bowl window is open as long as Allen is effective and healthy. Maybe it's a 10 or 12 year window? And we're going into year 5. Patiently waiting 2 or 3 years for the 2022 draft class to mature and contribute is unacceptable given the situation. Plus a lot of us including myself are getting older. And I'm beginning to think this version of the Bills is the last shot I have to see a Super Bowl win before the eventual dirt nap gets me.

I won't be watching the remaining games either. But I'm not telling my wife that because she'll find something from the to-do list for me to do with my extra "free time" that I would otherwise want to avoid doing.

When my team hires somebody based on an "open" position we provide a job description and a list of qualification, education, training, and experience requirements. Then select from the candidates through evaluations, interviews, etc. Pretty standard stuff. I suspect no such job description exists in the field of Supreme Court justices. Even so, would you agree that before that question can be answered from a objective perspective we'd all have to understand what the qualifications for being a Supreme Court justice are based on some form of job description? List of duties, qualifications, expectations of performance, etc. Otherwise, the argument boils down to the personal preferences and philosophical interpretations of each of us rather than some quantifiable standard. Or maybe it all comes down to politics and qualifications are irrelevant to the nomination process?

The intelligent liberals are still out there. They've just been silenced and marginalized like most conservatives. Historically, liberals have fought the establishment, been against war, and generally fought for the working person against big oppressive governments and corporations. I grew up in an environment surrounded by men and women from the labor movement so I know what a "real" liberal looks like. I know what real people fighting for workers rights and civil rights look like. I know how they act and how to judge a persons genuine interest and commitment to a cause. I know what people look like that have sacrificed to help others. The current crop of liberals on the left are a bunch of posers. What they fight for is themselves. To acquire power by leveraging off the suffering of others. Never doing much to help them or solve any problems they face. Completely fake. Deceivers. Fixing nothing while taking for themselves. But the key thing is that today's liberals operate under a self-delusion. They see themselves as revolutionaries or resistance fighters against the forces of oppression. They see themselves as champions and advocates of the under-privileged and the oppressed. They see themselves as fighting for social and economic justice against some evil establishment system. But they're lying to themselves and for that matter to everyone else. Because how can you be fighting against the establishment, big government, big corporations, and other power centers when every view you hold is consistent and aligned with the views and interests of that establishment? The fundamental truth is that today's liberals aren't fighting the establishment. They are the establishment! Look at the views on the board. The self-identified liberals support government mandates, support endless war and aggression , support suppression of press freedoms, support discrimination through quotas and preferences, support powerful tech companies in suppressing freedom of expression. Claim to support democracy through the imposition of authoritarian restrictions on rights and freedoms. All things that harm the individual. Mostly people on the bottom trying to work themselves out of it. Claim to fight against the corrupt in government and business life while supporting the very officials and corporate executives and billionaires that are the most corrupt. The most frightening thing is they will not recognize a single word I write here. The have zero self-awareness and wouldn't recognize a real liberal to save their life.

There's no way they should have lost that game. The coaches just went stupid with the defensive game plan. I'm talking the entire game. And the last 13 seconds just magnified that problem to the extreme. They probably presented the only defensive alignment you can draw up that would give an offense the chance to get into FG range in that situation. They were so afraid of giving up the big play over the top that they forgot about giving up two very easy pitch and catch plays underneath to get the necessary yardage. And did they even realize the Chiefs had all three time outs? They played it like they had none. In their wildest dreams Reid and the Chiefs could not have expected a better situation to be presented to them on those last few plays. It couldn't have been any easier. I mean what were Frazier and McDermott thinking? What's the worst thing we can do? Okay, let's try that! Not a single pass defended was recorded by the defense during the entire game. How's that possible? As another poster pointed out on another topic playing the safeties so deep on almost every play made it a 9 on 11 game for the Chiefs. But after the game the HC explains it away as an execution problem. Sure it was. Nobody believes that. They too the defense and made them play passive and made them think too much rather than just go out and make plays. The positive is this passive approach to defense against the Chiefs needs to be replaced with something a little more aggressive and a little more creative. All doubts about that are gone. They coached out the defense's instincts and aggressiveness. A change is needed. As the defense needs to adopt the persona of the offense. Go for it! And stop playing scared. Our HC learned to be more aggressive with the offense. Now he needs to learn with the defense and overcome his natural tendencies to play it the too safe. The other positive is this game confirms Josh Allen is a superstar. And now the job is to provide him some protection, and a better running game to keep him healthy and dialing back on the designed runs in the game plan to cut the hits on our QB next season.

I can relate to your dad's text. I watched the game with family and didn't say it out loud but before the Bass kick off I thought to myself "how are they going to blow this one"? A lifetime of inconceivable last minute losses will do that to you. Hell, the week before I was nervous about only having a 23 point lead going into the 4th quarter. I don't think I can take another one of these. I'll need grief counseling or some kind of anxiety treatments. They need to win it all next year. That's just all there is to it.

The Bills will also be faced with a lot of decisions too. The Bills have about $2.6M of cap space so its likely Beane is going to have to restructure some contracts and make a few tough decisions in order to free up enough cap space to get any high end pass rushing free agent we all want. Maybe he uses some draft capital to move up into the mid-teens of the draft if somebody drops in the 1st round of the draft? Or does he go corner in round 1 or get help on the offensive line? Lots of questions. And probably too early to expect any answers. How much is the team going to allocate to the defensive line and is the 8/9 player rotation going to continue? Do you bring back Beasley at a cap it of $7.57M or release him for a dead cap hit of $1.5M and attempt to re-sign McKenzie or is Stevenson capable of stepping into the slot role next year at a bargain price of $868K? Is it worth bringing back Morse at Center at $11.25M or take the dead cap hit of $3.75M then look to fill the spot early in the draft? The contracts of other prominent players like AJ Klien, Jon Feliciano, Cody Ford, and Daryl Williams could be looked at too. Can next years starting offensive line look like Doyle, Brown, Dawkins, Bates, and a 2022 pick at center? I don't know anything about the college centers entering the draft yet. Can or does Beane want to sign Edmunds to a market rate extension which could lower his cap hit for 2022? Are there any trades out there that can be pulled off? How many draft choices can be expected to make the team? WIll Beane trade up and draft 3 or 4 potential starters in a quality over quantity strategy? Some things to think about but way too early to expect any answers.

Sad news for U.S. establishment war hawks from discussions held yesterday in France. Progress on what could lead to a peaceful and mutually beneficial solution. Notable is without the U.S. or NATO at the table. You need to pay close attention to the details here because its what you might call a "non-binary situation" as there multiple parties with multiple interests and multiple objectives at play. Not the simpleton good vs. bad world view. "Officials from Russia and Ukraine met in Paris on Wednesday and held what Moscow described as "tough" talks. Despite whatever difficulties there were, the two sides agreed that the ceasefire in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region must be upheld. German and French officials were also present for the meeting, which lasted eight hours. The four countries started holding talks together after the Donbas war started in 2014 in a forum known as the Normandy format."

When I saw you posted my first thought was how are you going to spin this to make it about Trump. And here it is. You're as predictable as the Sun rising and setting each day my friend. But you really need to let go of this Trump obsession. Accepting the fact he's gone is the first step.

So the MSM story on CBC is "Canadian insurrectionists planning attack on Parliament in Ottawa. PM Trudeau calls it the biggest threat to Canada since Gretzky was traded to the Kings"

The Bills coaches were already positioning the safeties (2) so far back off the LOS in order to avoid the big over the top play and adding a spy(1) plus 4 down linemen (4) leaves 4 defenders to cover 5 potential receivers. So its a pick your poison dilemma for the DC. The fundamental problem and truth is that even after the 2021 off season additions and changes the Bills defense still does not match up well with the Chiefs offense. But then neither does almost every other team in league. Its a work in progress and at the end of the day still plays too passive. What's crazy to me is the Bills passive defense is almost a mirror image opposite of the aggressive philosophy and approach of the Bills offense. Like the angel on one shoulder and the devil on the other.

I can't put all the blame on Frazier because after seeing it not work on the first play McDermott could have overruled his DC and change up something on the second play. But all he did was call a time out prior to the snap and line up the defense in the same formation. I'm resigned to the idea we're probably never going to get a legitimate explanation from anyone exactly what the thought process was with the coaching staff on that 13 second series. Other than an excuse it was an "execution" issue which implies they either believe the strategy was sound or they just aren't going to admit they got it wrong. That's what bothers me more than anything. Not that they got it wrong but they won't say they got it wrong. Even though everyone knows they got it wrong. Its accountability. Coaches and management demand accountability from players. And they should expect nothing less from themselves. Just admit the set up was wrong, you got it wrong, you'll fix it, and let's move forward. Otherwise, what was the plan? To let them get into FG range in two quick plays and hope their otherwise dependable FG kicker was going to miss for the 2nd time in the game?