Delete This Account

ah, it must be football season, the critics are coming out in bloom. jw

i currently believe 10 is a realistic objective, and 12 should be a possibility. however, i won't lock in an actual number until early september. to quote a certain four-man outfit: "i won't be fooled again." jw

another first, wawrow sober! jw

screw supper. let's cut to the drinks. and let's see if dc tom can keep up. i know one poster who can. jw i'd have dinner with Sage, given his musical tastes.

yowza. hate to be judgemental. i like where i live. didn't realize i needed an excuse. jw

yes romney! jw yes obama! jw yes, Ron Paul. jw YAH! newt gingrinch. ... is he still in this thing? not sure, but why question. stalin!!!!!! jw i'm a goddam reactionary who likes to cover all bets,. so two bits on hannity. jw wait, three bits on dc tom. jw and a parlay on magox why nox. jw

oddly enough, there have been several rants against the suburbs raised recently. i might not be alone. good luck, GG, in your gated communities. jw aaaagh! gates is closing.

see, missed the point again, there's no need for conversation when we have the visuals. ... jw

jeepers, quit overthinking this. there's no room -- or time for that matter -- for any touchy-feely philosophical musings. this ain't cosmo, or a lifestyle page. there are far more important questions at hand here, such as: shouldn't there have been more photos taken during this shoot? and where the crap are they? jw

... leave. (not a fan of the city and it's overpriced beer) jw

yes, he asked Jim if he had stopped beating his wife, yet. oh, wait, that was Stern. sorry. jw

well, that does it. all i've got left to believe in is pro wrestling and Santa. jw

jw

ummm, don't think we need to do a lot of heavy lifting here, or jump to get hopes up. the math, really, is simple if you read between the lines of Russ' tweet. tuning into GR to welcome a new addition more than likely equals John Murphy's long-anticipated move. workers are just in the process of completing Murphy's new radio booth here in the media room. so please, alert all those posted at the airport looking for someone to be flying in to stand down. jw

yes, deal was redone back in late february. i remember it well, since the news came just as i was in syracuse preparing to cover orange game against south florida. it turned out to be a bit of a hectic night. McGee restructures deal. jw

picked 29 and 30 because that was the natural break last year. He threw between 30 and 34 passes five times last year, all losses. so, it seems that 30 was essentially his limit. you could break it down and say he was 4-5 when throwing 34 more fewer passes, but that proves little the numbers are more definitive when you get under 30. and, if you go back to since he started in Buffalo, he's 12-6 overall when attempting 29 or fewer passes. jw

i'll keep telling you to fix your title until you actually get it right. and now your title's just plain silly, as is your argument in attempting to defend your reasoning. you began with a title about the refs being on strike, and then changed it to they "might" strike, and now there's this three-eyed monster of a title that you've created. good god, have you no editor? a simpler way of putting it would've been "NFL/Refs in labor dispute" or, simply, "NFL locks out refs." but, as is the case when it comes to the intrawebs, some hardheads refuse to acknowledge their own mistakes. they instead keep digging and digging in an attempt to find a thin thread of reasoning from which to hang their point upon. which, of course leads to the obtuse point you attempt to make with your world-ending thurst. what on god's green earth does the world potentially ending on 12/12 have anything to do with this? ok, i'll play. since you seem to be locked on "might," and all it's many potentials. by using your logic, let me further your point by suggesting that a far more appropriate title of this thread should go something like this: "refs are locked out, but one day they might not be, because the nfl could lift it's lockout, leading to the refs to go ahead with a strike vote, though the refs going on strike would most certainly depend on the results of the vote, which by that point, the nfl could once again lock them out or give up and settle. then again, none of that might happen, and the lockout may not be lifted for quite some time, leading to the possibility of replacement refs, which would likely lead to the locked out refs suing the league, thus potentially leaving this for the courts to settle, unless, of course, the players go on strike or refuse to cross picket lines in support of the refs, thus potentially disrupting the season. unless of course the world ends." now look at what you've done. jw

very strong song indeed. i didn't come across until hearing Steve Earle's version on "Townes" ... but why filthy it up by including it in a thread with such a dreadful topic, involving such a poser, with nothing but baloney left to shill? ... jw

here's an interesting stat i couldn't work into my Fitzpatrick story today (Fitzpatrick getting crash course from David Lee), but will likely in the future, in regards to explaining how there was too much being asked of the Bills offense to carry the load for an injury-depleted and patchwork defense. because let's face it, there were too many times by the end of the season, the offense was either facing a long field and/or in the position to have to play catchup. the Bills went 4-0 in games Fitzpatrick attempted 29 or fewer passes last year. they went 2-10 in games where he had 30 or more attempts. and the two games that he won with 30 or more attempts, were the back-to-back comebacks against Oakland and New England. the offense wasn't designed for Fitzpatrick to throw that many passes, nor in the end did it have the receiving weapons to do so. also, the defense didn't help. after manufacturing numerous turnovers during the first seven games, which translated into points for the offense, that side of the ledger dried up dramatically during the 1-8 spiral. jw

umm, looks like your reminder, didn't take, Simon. the refs are still locked out by the NFL, and yesterday disputed the league's claims that they were going to take a strike vote, which led to, of course, the NFL lockout out its officials. evidently, the original poster has difficulty telling the difference between employees striking and an employer locking out its employees in a labor dispute. at this point, the refs CAN'T go on strike, because they've been LOCKED OUT, thus making the new title of this thread just as wrong as the previous one. jw

title of this thread is incorrect. the referees are not on strike. they have instead been locked out by the NFL. there is a significant difference. jw

ha, ha, ha. that's freaking hilarious. let me add one: admit to us that you, in fact were SCOOBY. oh, wait, we'll actually follow that. jw

number of losses. jw

i'm all in favor of a good witch hunt, but there are a few big holes in the case you lay out against Jason Peters. -- he held out only once. -- he didn't exactly bolt, he was traded, though it's clear that he wasn't against the move. also, a little perspective is in order as to why things escalated to the point of the holdout. in negotiating his first contract (after his rookie year), Peters signed a deal based on him taking over at right tackle, a job he eventually won after beating out Mike Williams. a year later, the Bills thought he was so good, that they installed him at left tackle, midway through the 2006 season. the Bills then went on a big free-agent spending spree in March 2007, when they committed some $60 million in salaries to sign Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker. Peters continued as a fixture at left tackle, and played so well that he earned a Pro Bowl selection that season. it wasn't until the 2008 offseason when the trouble began. Peters felt he had already out-performed his contract, in making the Pro Bowl and making right tackle money while holding down the most important position on the line. it was also not lost on him that he was getting less money than two other linemen playing less-important spots, Walker (taking over at Peters' former position at right tackle) and Dockery (at left guard). so much for being rewarded for becoming, as even you concede, "one of the best at" his position. though Peters could be criticized for going the hold-out route too far fast, it's also fair that the Bills were open to criticism for failing to be pro-active in realizing a problem could develop, because their offensive line salary structure was way out of whack. and, when it comes to karma, it proves to be a two-way street. Peters did get his money, while it could be argued that the Bills LT spot hasn't exactly been the same since Peters' departure, and is now going through another change. jw edits: changes "too far" to "too fast."

i still can't believe they're making him available to the media. jw