ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

Well, at least we know who bought a Supercolloquial Mundane Adjectival And Onomatopoeic Accentuator: http://www.theonion.com/articles/amazing-new-hyperbolic-chamber-greatest-invention,1321/#

I was going to suggest that maybe you meant a hyperbaric chamber, but after considering the reference to TO and thinking about how TO claims to be the most dominant force in football, I decided you were right and I was wrong. With so much public money invested in the development of the single most revolutionary invention in the history of not only mankind but all other intelligent lifeforms anywhere in the universe, the Bills definitely absolutely must be the very first sports team to buy their own hyperbolic chamber. http://www.theonion.com/articles/amazing-new-hyperbolic-chamber-greatest-invention,1321/# Uhh, wait a minute, I think Chris Brown already has one of these things to promote the Bills, and Roger Goodell has one to promote the NFL in general. The above quote is just a taste, and I can't do it justice. If you want a good laugh, read the whole link!

The previously posted link to the official 2010 NFL rulebook confirms that no tee can be used on any field goal attempt, including the "fair catch kick" variety.

Technically, I think a "free kick" is one where either team can recover it after it goes 10 yards - - i.e., after 10 yards, either team is free to grab it and try to advance it, resulting in offensive possession for the next play from scrimmage. In any event, the official 2010 NFL rulebook describes a "fair catch kick" as a type of field goal, and specifically states that it is not a "free kick." See Rule 11, Section 4, article 3 near the bottom of page 72 here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_uI2zLhGzaRMWMyZjkzYjUtZjRiYy00MTU5LWE5OWQtMjc1ZDEzNTFlM2E4&hl=en_US Among other things, it states:

Not sure how some people have concluded that KW's problem is a bone spur or a problem with his heel - - although I suppose it could have been reported somewhere. Here's info about Schobel's foot problem: http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2008/11/05/the-nature-of-a-lis-franc-foot-injury/ We don't have much info to go on, but based on the treatment options KW talked about in the interview, it seems at least possible that KW has a Lisfranc injury. But immobilization followed by surgery if necessary is probably recommended treatment for a whole host of other possible injuries, too.

With this year's game in Toronto coming up, here are some updates: 1. The Ford brothers' power grab designed to reshape the development efforts of Waterfront Toronto failed: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/doug-fords-quashed-toronto-waterfront-plan-reveals-rift-with-mayor/article2177167/page2/ 2. The annually published Canadian "Rich 100" list for 2011 recently came out - - Larry Tanenbaum's net worth went up an estimated 6.4% - - he is now listed as having a net worth just over $1 billion: http://list.canadianbusiness.com/rankings/rich100/2011/Default.aspx?sp2=2&sc1=0&d1=a 3. The sale of MLSE is still pending but moving slowly. Tanenbaum is an existing 20.5% minority owner but has a right of first refusal to buy the shares being sold by the 79.5% majority owner: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/09/27/grange_mlse_sale/ 4. One reason why Rogers Communications and BCE, Inc. (Bell) were rumored to be interested in buying MLSE was the fact that making the purchase would allow either company to be the exclusive provider of certain popular sports broadcasts to their existing mobile device subscriber base - - a very profitable endeavor. But the Canadian regulatory body that governs such things has decided that at least some types of program content must be made available to competing companies. Maybe this will decrease the value of owning MLSE to both Rogers Communications and BCE - - because they may not be able to charge monopoly prices to those who want to see sporting events controlled by MLSE: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/crtc-lays-down-new-rules-for-tv-industry/article2174847/ http://www.wizatbusiness.com/what-crtc-decision-means-for-mlse-sale/2011/09/

http://people.howstuffworks.com/witness-protection.htm Must be tough having to look over your shoulder all the time. Why should we believe a guy who rats out his friends?

Actually, I prefer to howl at the wrong moon. But until we know exactly how Collins calculated his $20 million/yr figure, none of us know which tree to bark at. Have you seen anything that shows how Collins came up with his number?

Agreed. If the Bills left Buffalo, there would be a net loss of sales tax money - - but some portion of it would be collected anyway based on substitutue purchases. If you had the data about where the game day fans live, you could make some reasonable estimates about what % might actually be lost on a net basis. Sounds reasonable - - but there's a chance that the money that's "talking" to the political decision-makers is private developer money. For example, if the AEG backed stadium gets built in downtown LA, the value of nearby AEG-owned downtown properties will go up. If the AEG money is what's talking to the SoCal politicians, it's not so clear to me that the public as a whole benefits financially. OTOH, if you're a football fan in SoCal who likes to attend NFL games in person, quality of life is worth something, too, even if you can't put an exact dollar figure on it. And I admit that I tend to be cynical about government spending in general.

At least so far, I haven't seen any explanation of just how Collins came up with his $20 million figure. So at present, we simply don't know if, from a purely financial perspective, any proposed stadium renovations would be a good investment of public funds. As just one example of how politicians create biased studies, they sometimes estimate the amount of sales tax that fans will pay at the stadium. Even if they don't pad that figure, it's only an estimate of a "gross" economic impact. It ignores the "net" economic impact created by related changes in consumer spending. Think of it this way - - if the Bills moved to another state, would every dollar that NY State residents would have spent on Bills-related tickets and merchandise (thereby creating sales tax revenue) be saved instead? Obviously not. Some of those dollars would get spent on other merchandise and entertainment within Erie County and/or NY State, thereby generating sales tax revenue anyway. Do you have any idea if the "study" Collins mentioned took this into account? Until you do, you have no idea if the conclusions of the study make any sense at all. "Garbage in - - Garbage out" applies just as much to economic estimates as it does to computer programming. Personally, I would like to see the stadium renovated, as I suspect most of us would prefer. But in a society where everybody thinks they are somehow entitled to their slice of the pie and then some, I'm not yet convinced that the public funds that get spent on stadium improvements will ever be recouped on a net basis. Let's see the actual "study," and critically examine the assumptions it makes. Just my 2 lira.

Seems there's a lot of that goin' around these days. I hope CJ aint Irish: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/8783929/Irish-pensioner-died-of-spontaneous-human-combustion.html

Although I did read your article that the OP posted a link to, I somehow missed the part about the Collins $20 million estimate. In hindsight, I can see how you interpreted my posting a separate link to an article by other sportswriters to confirm that fact as a jab at you - - but that wasn't my intent.

Sadly, even the Taliban found them useful: http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/09/13/us-afghan-stadium-idUSSP12564220080913 http://www.rawa.org/murder-w.htm

If anybody wants to read a thought-provoking article about the impact of public stadium spending on local economies, try this: http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1997/summer_taxes_noll.aspx Although the article is almost 15 years old, I think it makes some interesting points.

Why do you have a problem with a link to the article about the 1997 study? It's obviously out-of-date, and not directly applicable to today's calculation of costs and benefits. But unlike Collins' comments, it gives some insight into how the older study arrived at its conclusions.

Confirming what Collins said: http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article601613.ece For comparison, here's what a study found the last time around, in 1997, before the current lease was signed: http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/stories/1997/06/09/story4.html

Not sure how authoritative this site is, but FWIW: http://sportsfeens.com/nfl-quarterback-salaries/nfl-quarterback-salaries/

Thanks for the info. Pulled up a couple old but interesting articles on Pellman: http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3644940 http://www.braininjurylawblog.com/brain-injury-news-nfl-sacks-elliot-pellman.html For those who may not have seen it, there was also a pretty informative segment on "60 Minutes" about this topic: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/09/60minutes/main5371686.shtml

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_19155864 Some of the suits allege that the NFL concealed dangers it knew about - - will be interesting to see if there is any evidence to support that contention.

If there's only one football, then some of the games that the NFL says are being televised live must actually be shown on a tape-delayed basis. Kind of like that OJ movie about the moon landing, except not really because that was totally staged and not just tape-delayed. I don't think that's happening - - - I think they have more than one football and really do play several games simultaneously each week. And some people think I advocate conspiracy theories!

If Edwards contributed to making Heard look like Ted Washington, isn't that a good thing?

Yahoo Sports box score says he he had more total tackles (combining solo and assists) than any other DL or LB against the Giants: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/boxscore;_ylt=ApE_QUCj0RqNIbcYI33CMTRDubYF?gid=20111016019 He also leads all DL in YTD tackles by a wide margin: http://www.buffalobills.com/team/team-statistics.html

I have no problem with the team negotiating to extend him as cheaply as possible - - maybe ask him if he thinks he will have a more successful QB career with some other head coach. But in the end, pay him whatever is required to extend him. Ralph can afford it: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/sports/football/espn-extends-deal-with-nfl-for-15-billion.html Based on current trends, you can expect other networks to also pay significantly more for their next contracts. Per Leigh Steinberg: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Television-ratings-show-NFL-dominance.html

Mr. Spock just called. He says that because your question presumes an unexpected contribution, the answer is: "Other - Someone or something totally out of left field." Anything else would be illogical, and the result of mere emotion.

If he could do it over again, he'd probably go with W.C. Fields' epitaph instead of Marv's pregame ritual.