billsfan1959

Yep. This is how I will always remember Orton...

I would describe my 50+ years of die hard fandom as watching the essence of mediocrity interrupted by moments of embarrasingly bad play, and even briefer moments of upper echelon / championship caliber play. So, experiencing a SB win would be an extraordinary feeling. But, no, I wouldn't cry

The 49ers had pretty much the same defense that suffocated the Rams offense the week before, and that defense was pretty much the reason the 49ers were favored by many in the game against the Bills...

Feel free to go back and look at my posts, and those of a number of other posters on this board, from the past two years. The success he is experiencing on the field this year didn't emerge out of a vacuum and shouldn't be a shock or something completely unexpected to anyone who evaluated him objectively, and within context, over the last two years. I argued over and over that he was absolutely capable of putting up the kind of statistics he has over the last four weeks. So, I am not going to say I am surprised to see him actually do it.

Actually, I think there are quite a few Bills fans, and posters on this board, who believed Allen was capable of reaching this level of play this year. I think it is more shocking to those who, to one degree or another, bought into the ridiculous narratives that were pushed about him from the moment he was drafted.

On one hand, I think people should be able to express their opinions and engage in open debate about all things Bills. On the other hand, if one is going to start a thread basically saying Hyde sucks, he or she should bring more than two stats (passes defensed and interceptions) offered in a vacuum. Offer something with a little more depth and thought to it...

It is a by product of the instinctive way he moves in the pocket and in traffic, which is one of his greatest strengths. Honestly, I don't believe it can be eliminated from his game without affecting the far more positive things he is able to accomplish with that intuitive style of play.

Yep. Some in the national sports media will never be able to fully admit to themselves they were wrong about him. For them, a typical review of Allen's play would be: "He threw for over 300 yards, accounted for 5 touchdowns, and led his team to the game winning touchdown, at the end of the game, to beat a very good Rams team, BUT... (insert choice of negative play here)"

I believed in Allen from the beginning and defended him in debates, over and over again. With that said, I absolutely understand why reasonable posters on this board had doubts or expressed skepticism about the level of play he could reach. Even now, Allen plays a certain style of football that will lead to negative plays (such as some of his fumbles and the phantom interception yesterday) that cause some people to still question him in regard to " ball security and high risk plays he shouldn't attempt." I understand that as well. Personally, I don't have a problem with it. Josh Allen has to pay his style of football. That is who he is and that is what is going to make him successful in this league. As far as apologies go, I don't think people need to apologize for legitimate questions they had (and may still have) about Allen, or aspects of his game. I would guess that almost every Bills fan is completely behind Allen at this point, whether they still have questions or not. There were a handful of posters that hated the pick from the beginning and were never interested in giving him a chance or being honest in their evaluations - only in justifying their dislike of him. I don't particularly care if they apologize or not. Everyone is entitled to their opinions.

Yep. If I was a Minnesota fan, I would be far more upset with the lack of return on their ridiculous investment in Cousins...

A++++ Love that kid. Just the kind of QB I have been hoping for since Kelly...

Solid A

Yeah, I'm sure a large crowd of protesters in a private residential area, that didn't exactly move past the McCloskey's house, and against the backdrop of many protests turning violent had nothing to do with them feeling threatened. BTW, you never answered my previous response to you: Where are your posts of outrage at the people in Atlanta that armed themselves, forcefully occupied private and public property, illegally stopped vehicles at gunpoint, shot several people, and, ultimately shot and killed an eight year old girl? Or are you like Tibs and feel all of that is ok as long as the "right people" are arming themselves and committing violence?

Not only twisting it into not accepting the results of a legal election, but also into a pretzel like conclusion of Trump barrricading himself in the White House and refusing to leave....

Kind of like Hillary and the entire Democratic party not accepting the 2016 election results and supporting non-stop, tax payer funded, political attempts to delegitimize the election and remove Trump from office. Kinda makes all of you "wannabe dictators" Don't you ever tire of whining....

I'm not telling you what to do. I support your right to vote for Biden, even if he is a racist. Or was Kamala Harris wrong when she pointed out his racist tendencies?

So, stop attacking others about Trump when you are supporting a racist. But, he is a racist in your party, so, that is ok....

Yep, when Biden sponsored a successful bill that prohibited the use of federal funds for busing, he really showed us he was about an integrated multicultural society.... Nothing says "send them back" more clearly than stopping blacks from integrating.... But, just ignore reality

I know Tibs. And we all understand how much more traumatic that is for you than the shooting and killing of an eight year old girl.

Yep, nothing screams "multicultural democratic society" like Biden's history of working with segregationist senators and his anti-desegregation and anti-busing stances....

Be my guest. You have the right to believe that armed individuals, forcibly stopping vehicles that drive through a public area and killing an eight year old girl is insignificant compared to two people arming themselves on their own property against a mob. Pretty much sums up who you are. In Tibs' world, two white people arming themselves on their property is something intolerable, while killing children is ok, as long as it is the right people doing the killing

In one instance, people are armed on their property after a mob of people break through a gate into a private community. In the other instance, people are armed, take over private and public property, shoot a number of people, and ultimately shoot and kill a little girl. And that is your answer? To turn it back to what the McCloskeys did? You have posted a number of times about the McCloskeys. Why don't you provide a link to your posts condemning the armed people that took over the Wendy's area and killed that little girl? We'll wait.

And the armed people that took over the Wendy's and surrounding area in Atlanta shot numerous people, including shooting and killing an eight year old girl. But, Yeah, what the McCloskeys did was far worse....

You seem to be quite upset over a couple arming themselves on their own property, in a private community. Were you as upset when people armed themselves and actually took over private and public property? Of course you weren't. Because you are an ideologue who who is incapable of entertaining any thought that is inconsistent with your mental rigidity. The slightest bit of cognitive dissonance might make your head explode. You are like one of those dolls where you pull the string on her back and she cries, except you pull your own string, over and over and over and over...continually subjecting everyone to your incessant crying and whining.

One cannot look at an instance of violence "regardless of the specifics." That is one of the problems when discussing issues of violence against blacks by law enforcement or non-blacks. If a black is a victim of violence, it is race first, "regardless of the specifics." However, it is precisely the specifics that tell us what happened, why it happened, and if it was justified or not. As for your hypothetical question, it is just that: hypothetical. There are violent crimes committed by blacks against whites every day in this country, and the outcomes depend on the specifics of the crimes. You might find this hard to believe; however, there are defendants in those crimes acquitted as well. It is interesting that these crimes do not get much, if any, national media exposure. In any given year, approximately 23% of victims of police killings are blacks. Which means, approximately 77% are non-black and approx 52% are white. Yet, when was the last time you saw a police killing of a non-black in the national media? Do you ever wonder why that is? The entire premise of current systemic racism and "white priviledge" rests on the sweeping generalizations that white people either (1) do not have the capacity to discern differences among human conditions; to distinguish between just and unjust behaviors, policies, etc.; to educate themselves in these matters; or to actively intervene or change these things on their own without being led by those who are more "enlightened" or (2) are so indifferent to, or, worse, propononents of, injustice, oppression, and suffering of others based soley on skin color, that they literally need to be forced to change. Honestly, I don't know which of these two options is more offensive. Again, I am more than willing to engage in honest discussions about racism. However, it seems that the starting point for any such discussion must include the initial acceptance of all terms set by one side of the discussion.