CodeMonkey

What makes you think there is no undisputed #1? Trent is the man.

Fixed.

They already do cut off beer sales after halftime at the Ralph. I think there is a per-person limit as well but I'm not sure. The problem is more people arriving at the gates hammered from the parking lots.

Wasn't it not that long ago that a couple people got hit after a Bills game by a drunk driver right near the stadium? You might not hear about it, but I'd be willing to wager lawyers are engaged there.

I understand the point of your post and generally agree with it. But the last part that I quoted above detracts from the rest of the post in my opinion. Drinking beer, wine, or bowling ball shots of (disgusting) cherry liquor in moderation is not the issue here. And if someone wishes to have a beer with their burger or brat at 11am before going into the stadium what difference does that make? It's the people that drink a 12 pack before staggering into the stadium that ruins it for a lot of the others. Not the guy or girl who enjoys the taste of beer with their grilled food.

Hmmmm I never thought of that. And money is usually my first motive when trying to explain NFL behavior!

For you that is obviously true. But if you read some of the other threads, the "atmosphere" is keeping some people away as well (more specifically the people who are a little over-atmosphered). Just because you prefer to be in the stadium screaming your brains out doesn't make it laughable that some would prefer to watch the game without all that. To each his own. I agree completely with your high cost points though.

Very true, but 5% of 70000 people is still 3500 !@#$s. More than enough to litter every section with several. Like you I did my share of drinking back in the day, though I was never stumbling drunk at any sporting event. I have no problem if people decide to get annihilated in the parking lot (as long as they aren't driving) and going to the game if they so choose. And they shouldn't be upset if they are tossed from the game or worse if they become obnoxious (disorderly conduct is still a crime is it not?). If I don't like the behavior of people attending an event, I just don't go. It's only football after all. But that said, I still don't like the idea of the NFL doing things like harassing long time fans like Kenny. If the Bills decide something is wrong and they want to do something about it, then fine. But King Roger and his boyfriends should stay the hell out of though in my opinion.

I watched half of their last game and they didn't look bad. Still very early in the season I know and I am certainly not conceding this game yet, particularly at home. But they may have turned the corner and are starting to improve. I wouldn't be so sure that this game ends with a W for the Bills.

That's exactly the thing that I don't understand. Can the NFL seriously think the downturn in attendance pretty much across the league is due to families not going due to the drunken !@#$ factor at games? My wife purchased our tickets this year to the kids day game. So when it came time for the desperate Bills ticket office to cold call people trying to sell some, she was the one they called. They asked about seasons and when she said no they asked why. One of the reasons she mentioned was the family unfriendliness of the game, along with the cost, the weather (and being a outdoor stadium), and the Bills sucking major ass for a decade. Maybe the NFL has been compiling information for a few years and the a-hole factor is a recurring theme, and the easiest (IE least expensive) one for them to fix. That's all I can come up with. But if they really think this will pack the stadiums again, they are delusional and truly out of touch with their fan base.

I cannot imagine a way for the Bills to win this game short of the entire GB first string coming down with the flu Sunday morning. But I would love the Bills to cover the spread for all of our fellow Bills fans who cannot bear to bet against them.

I am one of the 9, but I do miss tailgating. If the NFL is more or less getting rid of that now, then I truly will have no reason to go to the stadium (except kids day for a few more years).

Yes.

For about the 5th or 6th time in this thread, the reporter herself made no complaint about anything that happened. It was only the womens sports reporters organization. There is no reason that I know of to be hating on her at all.

There are actually 8 guys on there, with 6 out of the 8 having us last and the other 2 second last. If we aren't last, we are close to it this year. I didn't expect any differently going into the season, we basically have the same team as last year with new coaches. Hopefully next season and beyond we will be getting better. The fan consensus has us 2nd last.

You should do one. The way the NFL is going, who knows how long you will be able to even do one in the Ralph parking lot.

Ahhh but you see, that's when you have to stand, scream, beat on the seats, blast the vuvuzelas (if they were allowed). 12th man stuff.

The athletes are told beforehand when the reporters are coming in (at least that's how it was back in the day) and they are supposed to be "decent" when they come in. But some simply don't care and will walk back to their lockers sans towel if they feel like it. having reporters, particularly female ones, in the locker room is very weird at first. But like anything else you get used to it.

They were talking about this on TV this morning. The reporter herself did not raise this issue, has not, and will not file any charges. It was some association of women sports writers causing the stink. They had some uptight B word spokesperson for the organization mouthing off on that show. As an athlete you are taught how to handle the situation in general and female reporters in particular once you reach the college level. But these guys are not that bright and are raised in this "locker room mentality" so this kind of behavior, although wrong, is bound to happen. I do have to say though that I think reporters in the locker room are unnecessary. If a reporter absolutely needs a cliche sound-byte catch the player walking out to his/her car or wherever. I understand why it is allowed, it saves the reporter time not having to wait for the interview. And it saves the players the hassle of maybe having to hang out in a media room after a game (probably not a big deal for football for example with 1 game a week, but could be a big hassle for hockey players for example who are often catching a flight to another city immediately after a game).

The more HD depends on whose ad you are watching/reading. DirecTV claims 160 channels and says Dish has less than that. Dish claims over 200 HD channels compared to DirecTVs 160. I know Dish has been adding HD like crazy and recently put up another satellite recently that will be for more HD channels when it goes into service sometime later this year. In reality count doesn't matter as much as if they have the HD channels you want to watch. Which is largely personal preference. I have had both as well as cable now (unfortunately). I think the service is about the same, and varies largely by the quality of local installers. I think the price of dish is a little lower in general, but probably not by enough to make that the decision point. I am pretty sure dish has more HD channels and should soon have quite a few more. But again, what is important is the channels themselves and not so much the count. Also a consideration is the quality of the HD channels. They are not all created equal. Compression has a huge impact. Dish has been adding capacity via new satellites. I'm not sure if DirecTV has added satellites, or just compresses more as they add channels. I know that both providers can and do change compression not just channel to channel, but between programs on the same channel which can be very annoying. If the Sunday Ticket is important to you, then DirecTV is the only game in town. All the other sports packages are available on both providers. Bottom line, don't believe what you read. Talk to friends who have both and look at their systems and decide what is best for you.

Not to mention when RBs are swapped in frequently based on the situation, what !@#$ing difference does it make who is there for the first snap?

Nice road trip!

Well I'd pick the Bills in this case to cover the spread I suppose

Anyone who uses the word "lame" is a douche.

You would have been on your way downhill if he had made it after chugging 3 of those bad boys