ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

I got busy and did not see your above reply until today. I was not defending Peterman. I specifically said that I was "quadrivalent about Peterman" and had no dog in this fight. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Dr. C. Macchiato must have been unavailable.

I'm quadrivalent about Peterman, so I don't have a dog in this fight. But for some perspective for those who were wondering: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000445192/article/troy-aikman-peyton-manning-among-qbs-with-bad-first-starts

My brother Darryl says doing that always gets you answers - -they just might not be the answers you were hoping for.

Bill says they call it "downward facing dog" because it lets you lick your own junk - - I must be doing it wrong.

If Orton had not demonstrated that we had personnel capable of winning, would the Pegulas have even bought the team? Maybe it's just me, but I think keeping the Bills in Buffalo more than qualifies him for the Wall, even if he had brought a shovel on the field, dug a hole, and crawled in.

Coffin or an urn, not sure which yet.

Although I like country, I'm not much of a Blake Shelton fan. But the lyrics on "Don't Make Me" hit home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtBgkT2Sjzc

Always thought we should have kept Kamar Aiken. We cut him, and he later had a 75 catch 5 TD season for the Ravens in 2015. He won't be in the Hall of Fame, but he would have been serviceable at a time when we were (are?) very thin at WR.

We are running short on guys named Williams. But there are several in this draft - - so take the best 2 Williams available.

"Passing is for sissies."

I wouldn't mind seeing Scarlett Johansson in her birthday suit this year - - or was that covered in the "minus the obvious" part of the question?

Information I could have used 17 years ago.

The Statue of Liberty is kaput? That's disconcerting.

So were you OK with the throat-slitting celebration that was becoming popular among defensive players before the NFL outlawed it?

Because I have no reason to believe that James Comey, the director of the FBI, posts here, I'll post for him: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/james-comey-admits-under-oath-he-hates-new-england-patriots Would have been better if his reason for hating the Patriots was that they have a history of cheating, but when the Director of the F'n FBI testifies under oath to Congress that he hates the Patriots, I'll take it. Is this a great country or what?

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=Can+landlord+prevent+satellite+dish%3F

YOLO: Thanks for the input. Maybe I'm the clueless one. It just seems weird to me that if the agent's job is to get the best deal he can for the player he represents, the agent has to keep any offer received from team "A" a secret from other teams who might want to bid for the player's services. I wonder if the agent is free to disclose team "A'"s offer to the other 31 teams, but isn't supposed to disclose info about that offer to the media. Maybe NFL teams don't want to have to deal with the extra public relations issues that arise when their fans learn of unaccepted offers (as this thread somewhat demonstrates)? It could be as simple as NFL teams wanting to control the timing and manner in which they announce player contracts so that teams aren't blind-sided by media questions from reporters who got the inside scoop before it was publicly announced. That type of limited restriction on disclosure would still allow the agent to disclose Team "A'"s pending but unaccepted offer to the other 31 teams, but give teams control over how contracts that actually get signed are publicly announced. In any event, I'm curious about what the disclosure restrictions on agents about player offers/contracts really are, so if I have time I'll do a little digging and post back in this thread if I find anything. But right now, March Madness calls.

There seems to be a common perception here that a player's agent can't disclose the terms of an offer from the Bills to other teams. Apart from everyone's off-the-cuff based-on-no-facts opinion, does anyone have a link to some sort of code of conduct that governs what NFLPA agents can disclose about the contents of a team's offer to a free agent player they represent? In most fields of endeavor, if someone is your "agent," that agent has an obligation to get the best possible result for you, the principal party that he represents. That means it would be misconduct for the agent to FAIL to disclose the terms of Team A's offer if doing so would help the player get a better offer from Team "B." Playing one party's bid off against another to get a better deal for their principal is probably the main thing agents get paid for in most business contexts. Be it real estate sales, talent contracts for movies, whatever. It's certainly possible that there could be some negotiated aspect of the NFL labor agreement that puts unusual rules in place that are specific to NFLPA-registered agents, but I would find that surprising. In part because if rules restricting disclosure do exist, they would be pretty tough to enforce. So again, anybody got a link? Or are y'all just clueless about how business works?

Doesn't it work the other way around? If good WRs are in short supply in the draft (I said "if"), teams that need one will tend to pick them sooner than they otherwise would, out of fear that the good ones will all be gone by the time they get to pick again. Conversely, if there is a lot of say good DB talent on the board when a team picks in round 2, they are more likely to select a different position in round 2 because they know that a pretty good DB is likely to still be available when they pick in round 3. It's basic supply and demand stuff - - don't over think it like it's rocket surgery.

If they don't get Webb you could always legally change your last name to Williams. Historically, that would be a pretty good bet.

Roasted?

This post won't be popular with the "hey ladies look at my fancy wheels" crowd, but if you're serious about cutting costs, here's what i'd suggest. The article linked below is from 2013 and shows projected total cost of ownership for then new 2013 models. If I was looking for reliable transportation at lowest total cost, I'd try to find a 4 year old low mileage 2013 model year car that was on this list: http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1082509_misers-models-the-ten-cheapest-cars-to-own After 4 years, depreciation is less of a factor, and if you find one with low mileage, it ought to be fairly reliable. P.S. My brother Darryl says I should remind you - - "Your mileage may vary."

Best place for Chad Kelly to get drafted? THE ARMY Might knock some sense into the entitled jerk.

If McDermott super glues my knuckles to my cheek I'll fire him, too.