birdog1960

a majority of contemporaneous gm's would have begged to differ: http://thebiglead.co...peyton-manning/. some pretty big name gm's there including walsh who woulda (yes "woulda") waited til the 2nd round to take Brian Griese. i wonder where whaley would have sided. we know where polian did.

almost every talent evaluator thought that about ryan leaf as well. remember when there was serious debate over whether he or peyton was the better choice? if i'm not mistaken it was so hotly debated that there was an SI cover on it. there's no such thing as a sure thing.

since there are so many unknowns, statistically it would make sense to use as many picks as possible in order to best optimize your chances to obtain the highest number of top players for any given team during any given draft or series of drafts, non? the only exception would be if you were absolutely certain (or near about) of the future dominance of a certain player. after almost a year, i don't think even many here with an obvious bias are absolutely certain of that with watkins.

do you blame the bills failure to obtain a franchise qb on bad luck? the other teams success on good luck?

did a restorative class with the wife sunday.

no, it's more fun to be a fan of a winner which has been impossible in part because of lousy drafting. i'm not sure why everyone is so convinced whaley is an upgrade. i don't feel that's warranted yet. many here give him credit for the good picks but absolve him of the bad and blame nix.

sorkin doesn't petend to be the holier than thou. he's offered his mea culpa many times. has limpy? it's analogous to the torture report. he and his ilk aren't sorry and regretful about the acts. they're sorry they got caught and it went public.

he abused cocaine. freely admits it. publicly discusses his struggles. he said he doesn't use any more. shocking that an artistic, creative writer used drugs, i know. he wondered if he could write without the drugs. he can. very well thanks so much. and this has what to do with a liberal media conspiracy to win vulnerable minds and hearts? it's common knowledge and people still watch his shows and pay for the privilege.

you can declare what ever you want. you are essentially arguing that mid first round draft picks are not valuable. that's ridiculous and casts doubt any pretty much any judgement you make. "Keep in mind this is an NFL Draft study - so even if the player presently has a successful career, he might have been a bust for the team that drafted him in his first 3-5 years in the league, then went on to success elsewhere." - excerpted from the "draft study"- no methodology reported, no criteria for busts or hits, no credentials for the evaluator given and he gives brief unimpressive explanations for a few controversial players that he has subjectively labelled. it's what i imagine the bills have been using in their analytics dept to acheive such poor results. hardly a definitive source. i'm guessing he therefore rate marshawn lynch a bust based on his quote. can't be bothered to look. his opinion means little more than anypone elses.

how bout a link to the study. how do they define bust? and by you're reckoning 1st round draft choices for 2015 are of little value. how is it then that the brown's seemed to value ours so much? can you cite any source that state that 2015 1st round draft choices are of little value? being obtuse doessn't advance your argument. 2015 1st round draft choices are certainly very valuable . anyone arguing otherwise is foolish.

it's likely based on nfl history. it's statistically likely. isn't that what "analytics" are all about? isn't that what the bills profess to subscribe to?

no, the defense of the other position is that it's likely a contributing starter could be found at that draft position. his name or position is not necessary for that argument.

i think the onus is on the person defending the trade. it was an unusual if not unprecedented deal. so the question to you is: how likely is it that the 12th to 20th player picked by any given team next year will become a productive starter for that team. imo, it's quite likely. for a team with several holes that's significant.

no, everyone became less safe when the cia engaged in government sanctioned torture. you think that those that were tortured (or their compatriots) were unaware of this before this disclosure? the only people unaware were those who chose to ignore the evidence. the report only provides the gruesome details and confirmation for those that wouldn't publicly admit what happened. and why exactly wouldn't they publicl;y admit it if it is defensible by arguments like yours? i would argue the most harm to the safety of the world comes from pols and regular people who, when confronted with the facts of torture at us hands, defend it and show no regret. that's the real measure of depravity. no, they aren't. what evidence supports that conclusion?

sure. obamacare and torture are analogous. i think we can end any serious consideration of your argument right there.

the arguments made here that attempt to defend the use of torture are the same ones used by despots throughout history to defend their evil actions. almost any act can seemingly be justified by the belief that the ends justify the means as long as one defines their own ends as crucial and legitimate. to the nazi's and khmer rouge this meant mass murders. the romans systematically tortured and killed those that stood in the way of their ends. history has not judged them well. reasonable people agree that these actions were deplorable and vow to do everything possible to never let them happen again. yet in a country that espouses liberty as a core value we have those using the same ancient and fallacious argument to defend torture. almost comical if it were't so alarming.

i'll bet none of this is easy for john mccain. he's probably in the best position re experience to comment of anyone in congress, the white house or the supreme court. i think his opinion deserves serious consideration: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/John-Mccain-Speech-Senate-Republican-CIA-Torture-Report/383589/

at least cameron gets it (or at the very least, says the right thing): “Torture is wrong, torture is always wrong. Those of us who want to see a safer and more secure world, who want to see extremism defeated, we won’t succeed if we lose our moral authority, if we lose the things that make or systems work and countries successful,” the prime minister said. from today's guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/09/cia-torture-report-released

this is slippery slope that ends with no right or wrong, no virtue, no empathy, no concern, no horizon. it leads to the abyss and to eventual annihilation. even seasoned cia operatives on the scene were outraged by the acts and some asked for reassignment per the report. they were told that their comments weren't helpful. this is no ones model of governing except for that of madmen.

agreed. we are supposed to be a nation of laws, a nation with principles, ethics, morals…those virtues are worth fighting for even if frequently found to be wanting. the report is an effort to jump start our national morality. unfortunately, we have many barbarians and moral relativists in our country as evidenced by the comments of many here. the argument that we should be satisfied with the lowest common denominator of ethical national behavior re torture is truly sad and discouraging. if it wasn't suspect and embarrassing behavior then why all the secrecy in the first place? why not just admit and publicize these supposedly "reasonable and effective" methods from the start? then it should never have been done in the first place. your argument is that we weren't good enough liars. that's truly cynical and depressing.

as you say, you can get movies elsewhere without all the liberal stuff on hbo. there are multiple sources including starz. but hbo has the most subscription viewers of any of them. and their image includes commentators like maher and oliver who are unrepentant liberals. hbo is a very valuable part of the time empire. i understand its value was a major factor in the fox merger deal failing. so yes, i think people pay for hbo for the whol;e package which includes a great deal of liberal leaning content. and if you get a chance watch the most recent episode of newsroom. the writing is spectacular. i don't think there's a tv show that matches the wit and depth of the dialogue in it except for other sorkin shows.

oops. of course you're right. but that's more a scarlet letter than a badge of honor.

wade is the only half decent head coach there. he's the only one any other nfl team considered an hc candidate after his stint here. this thread distills why the bills have sucked for so long. it's time to start fresh. remove all the ghosts.

what's your point? because another teams draft choice didn't work out well it's ok that we overpayed for ours? i don't follow the logic. we should be using highly succesful teams as measuring sticks not other mediocre ones unless the desire is to remain mediocre. i you are already behind the most successful teams, you need to manage your team even better than theirs to catch up. and for what it's worth, the texans only spent one 1st rounder on clowney while already improving their win total from last year from 2 to 7. we've gone from 6 to 7 so far.

this. the offense isn't much improved with him this year. the two most recent top picks, manuel and watkins, that were meant to improve the offense haven't. they cost a huge amount in draft picks. fail. plain and simple.