dpberr

IMO, Michael Keaton remains the best Batman because he's the best "never saw it coming" casting of Batman that made his take on the character unique and captivating to watch. Most of the other guys who've played Batman absent maybe Bale, you know what you're getting. Clooney was the worst. (George Clooney plays the same character in every movie.) As for the kiddo in the video, I genuinely feel bad for him because there's a lot of kids like him in the world that get bullied every day and some take their own lives and to me, that's unimaginable to deal with as a parent. That mother however, strikes me as one of those desperate loudmouth single parent types that says "you don't know me!" and "haters" a lot during the course of a day.

You mean pedophile teachers, right?

I think the larger *female* harassment issue that gets ignored is the pervasive epidemic of female teachers preying on the children in their classrooms. Why do women do that? More specifically, why do attractive, successful, and more often than not, young (20s, 30s) women do that? Where does that pedophilia start? Is it always there?

Draft if you want to address the issue once and for all. You can get "good" with Cousins but you can possibly be great with your draft pick.

Men will reject it in two ways: One, men in hiring positions will not hire women. They will select a lesser qualified man simply to avoid the headache. Two, men will go out of their way not to say anything to women in the workplace which will make women feel uncomfortable and unwanted. You might think that's an extreme response but pendulums by design, don't have speed limits.

It seems like every week there is a congressman resigning or a new celebrity allegation. I think some real-world fallout is going to be nobody says or does anything to anybody at any time - so there will be no corporate parties, picnics, zero opportunities to have anything possibly ever happen on the corporate dime where they'd be liable. The corporate lawyers will say "avoid the risk" and just cancel social events entirely. I can see the workplace becoming sterile too. Men will hire men, women will hire women because you might say "Hey, you look nice today." and somebody feels harassed, files a complaint, and then resources have to be dedicated to investigating it because you can't really define harassment. Everyone has a different sensitivity to it. Plus, although it appears a lot of these cases have been going on a long time impacting numerous women, there is something about being innocent until proven guilty. These allegations have serious consequences. I'm assuming that the allegations are true since a lot of these men aren't filing massive lawsuits in court.

Whaley is a top notch pro personnel guy. Had an eye for those affordable high performers. Unfortunately, he's a lousy drafter. If he's a GM again, he needs to acknowledge this and get some draft nerds to help make wiser choices.

If the NFL were smart, they'd start showcasing some of the more obscure teams like the Bills to grow interest in those teams and overall interest in the league. I think one (of the many reasons) for NFL viewership decline is the average fan is bored of seeing the same teams over and over again.

Using the draft capital on a QB makes 100% sense. I'd also think they'd use it on a Ray Lewis type talent at Linebacker if the opportunity is there. I'm not saying such a player exists in the draft, but linebacker has been a need in Buffalo as long as QB has been. The position has had some *good* players in the drought, but no truly great ones.

The Bills need new leaders in the locker room. I know Wood and Williams are fan favorites but I think they are (and have been) part of the problem of the lack of fire and effort this team exhibits in games.

Getting over the hump matters. Don't care if we get blown out in a wild card game. The Pittsburgh Pirates were in a similar boat as the Bills. The season they finally got to the playoffs was exciting and for a brief time invigorated both players and fans. It was quite special. It reset expectations. It also got that monkey off the back of that team that dogged them for nearly two decades. It rewarded the patience of the fans. (Since then, the front office has burned through all the good will that special season created - but that's another story.)

Considering the odds: I'd run no-huddle the entire game and give Taylor the green light to audible! CBs play man full time. I'd blitz two guys, alternating, everyone else in coverage, essentially a 2-4-5 defense. Two linemen with hands in the dirt, two standing. (Do any of you recall the game years ago where the Bills did that for a half?)

I think Morgan will be a present-day crossover with both shows using the time jump mechanism to advance the story. I don't think Morgan dies, but leaves VA. My guess is that the mouthy dude from the Saviors lives and escapes west - and Morgan follows.

I suppose I'm a fan. I'm not in love with him as much as the national media is but I think he's a class act, 100% pro and is talented. I think what you see is what you get. It's up to the Bills on whether that's what they want and how to put him in the best position to win knowing teams will copy the Jets and Saints strategy. I think his growth as a passer has been limited by the mediocre "I've always done it this way" talent at offensive coordinator in Buffalo that's comfortable resting on their past performance.

IMO, he should watch what Kansas City did/didn't do. Miami beat Brady mercilessly yesterday and they still lost by two scores.

Inconsistent effort by the Bills is a consistent feature of each drought team. I don't necessarily see quit but I see a lot of "we get paid no matter what" on the field. Do the Bills need new captains? Probably. Would guys like Jerry Hughes go half the speed if he's not getting sacks? Not out of the question.

Ragland, Johnson and our Brown are all slow"er" linebackers. It really depends on what you want them to do. Run defense? Awesome. Defend the pass? You probably want some more speed. The future is not Reggie Ragland. It's more in the direction of Deone Bucannon.

I don't see it as a weak move by McDermott. In fact, it's a good sign. I'm relieved that he didn't start Peterman out of some demonstration of will or "trust" in the process but instead, made a decision based on facts to win a football game. Fact: Peterman was terrible, regardless if he "fits" what "their" offense is looking for in a QB. Fact: Taylor was better, regardless if he doesn't "fit" what "their" offense is looking for in a QB. I don't fault anybody who wanted a QB change. At the time Peterman was a relative unknown quantity. Nobody knew for sure how he'd do starting a game against the opposition's A team talent. Now we know. No need to have another grenade go off in an enclosed space. I just wish he'd do the same for the problems that plague the OL - and make some changes there.

Insubordinate...and churlish.

I literally LOL'ed that a FB in the NFL is *not* a skill player and he shouldn't be able to catch passes. You could be the greatest defense attorney America has ever seen.

Owners are paranoid because the success of the plan is not guaranteed by length of time nor commitment. It is often influenced by luck and random events they can't control. You can find a plan, sure. How do you know it's the right one? When do you know? The Belichick plan is awesome largely due to one random event and one lucky event. He's a good coach but let's be honest about what influences the plan there. The Marvin Lewis plan is not so awesome. Can't fault Mike Brown for sticking it out in Cincy. How many years would anybody give Chuck Pagano? Dirk Koetter?

I have two fundamental problems with McDermott so far and both have nothing to do with actual football: 1. An unwavering, near religious belief in whatever the "Process" is - as if it can't be wrong, as if wisdom from experiences can't improve said "Process." When he said that the "process will not change" in yesterday's presser - was a red flag for me as a leader. It's too simplistic. 2. Talk of working hard but little talk of working smarter, wiser. Focusing on working hard in its isolation is the stonecutter approach - again, a near religious belief that hammering away at said stone will eventually get you to where you want to go and that the sum of effort is all that matters. To be successful, IMO, you need the effort plus the intelligence to gin positive results.

What's the difference between McCoy and Dennison OL strategy?

I agree 100%. There's little doubt in my mind you have whole units in rebellion against their unit coaches up to the coordinators. I don't think guys like Hughes and Incognito are cancers but I see them as the disgruntled employee that can easily rub off on other young players. I think the offensive line in particular hates the scheme they've been told to use. One, you're obviously not opening up holes for McCoy or protecting the QB like you used to be able to do, but secondly, that also impacts your personal goals, bonuses, etc. Same goes for the defensive line. A guy like Hughes has a long memory - he wants to be the Jim Schwartz Jerry Hughes with sacks, not the Jerry Hughes, the defensive end doing the dirty work with less sacks. That guy doesn't make Pro Bowls and earn bonuses. I think guys like Wood and Williams have been around so long that the endless coaching changes, endless losing just beats you to the point where you get the "whatever, it's a paycheck" mentality and you've got little energy at this point to correct the above. It's the only reason I can come up with why this team has collapsed as it has.

Frazier first. I think there are units in complete revolt against their unit coaches and it shows.