zonabb

Redshirted as a freshman.............

I have railed against dumb players on many occasions in the past, mainly due to stupid mental errors above all bad penalties. I hate mental errors. I would prefer, like in the real world, a guy with brains that shows an ability to learn as well as skills. This guy scored a 10 on his Wonderlic.

Scouts Inc. says "isn't much of a red zone target." As always, everyone has an opinion!

I agree, everyone here is a GM waiting for the call to the big leagues. But, with this pick, you have to ask yourself, how does this improve a 9-7 team on the verge of the playoffs that had needs at OL. And I would go so far as to say CB with the impending departure of NC. I think that this pick means more about Moulds than Reed. EM's number is high next year and if Evens continues to develop into a #1, Moulds could be gone. That being said, EM is under contract beyond 05, making a CB more of a need as a backup. But, I'm not a GM, not a scout nor a coach. I have no idea if the CB value, or even OL, were 2nd round. So that's why, although I question, I don't act like I know more than TD.

I would disagree about TD being found out. First, is there credible proof that he was offered that 44th pick in any scenario? If so, where? Second, why would he take Shelton and a higher salary (I believe) when, even according to one analyst's contact within the Bills organization, he's really a RT and overmatched at LT. He doesn't fit this team. So Henry straight up for Shelton would be stupid. Also, AZ has it's line set with Shelton as a reserve, meaning he's a possible June 1 cut. Again, TD had leverage there. Lastly, there seems to be no deal with AZ that made sense to Buffalo. Bottomline is, TD did what he felt was best. Why trade a guy for the sake of tradig him? Yeah, he's a pain, but making a move because it's draft weekend is foolish if the right deal isn't there. Anything can happen. We can all second guess the guy, but if any one of us had a clue, we wouldn't be here typing away in our rooms, we'd be on a staff somewhere!

Good for TD. I was hoping he'd balk at any deal involving Shelton, who is not a solution at LT. Now it remains to be seen what he can do. With AZ taking a RB, it leaves the Bills with one less suitor.

Two things: 1. That grout removal saw, or whatever they call it, is about the only thing I can think of to remove the grout. I've installed my fair share as a contractor but never regrouted so that's a guess. 2. Most importantly, do you have the original grout left? Maybe somewhere in a bucket in your basement. We always leave the extra mix with the homeowner for repairs. If you do, great, regrout whatever you remove. If not, you'll have to remove everything and buy new grout or the new grout will never match the old grout! It'll look worse than leaving it be. Other than that, good luck. Not a job I'd want to do, so more power to ya!

Hardy, if you want some advice, drop me an email at zonabb@hotmail.com. I work remodeling in Bflo. I also have remodeled my own home before I got into the biz. So I have learned alot and am honest. As for the window argument, let's put it this way. It's not black and white. $5k for nine windows seems steep but it depends on what they were. If they were just prime vinyl replacements, you probably got robbed, unless there was exterior trimming to be done, maybe on second floor windows. As for installing windows yourself, it can be a huge job if you are actually installed brand new double hungs by removing the entire old window (unlike replacements where you use the existing casement and only remove the sashes). It will more than likely require special order windows if the house has odd window sizes. It the opening has to be re-roughed, you're talking about interior drywall works and probably exterior trim and siding. Bottomline is, nothing feels better than doing your own work, IMO. I have done so much on my house I can't keep track... built a new garage last year and am siding it this year!

Was this guy's face mangled as police say because he jumped from a third floor window or because of a run in with the cops after he killed a detective of with his own gun? The only way his face got that messed up from jumping out the window, including the black eyes, was if he landed on the fists of every cop on the force, along with their service revolvers and night sticks! http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/18/detectiv...d.ap/index.html

I hope you were joking! The craftsmenship in that house is 100x that of the 300k, pre-fab, particle board, built by stoned out losers, houses you speak of. For 300k, you get nothing but the cheapest, second-rate materials, unlike the miles of hardword wainscoting in that living room. I've driven by the place since I live near it and the lot alone is worth more than the dumps that impress you.

Said it many times, as a former reporter (4+ years at a carppy small daily with a circ of about 20,000 and had to get outta the biz, what a joke the news biz has become) these guys get away with it because they're the only game in town. We can't demand better by buying the competitor, because there is none. They're all big town wannabes that are either A) resigned to the fact they've never go anywhere and therefore willing to pass on the obvious facts and observations we already know (i.e., Mark Gaughan) or B) Have an over-inflated view of themselves and feel they should be at a better paper, despite their lack of skill, grasp of the english language, and complete lack of credibility (i.e., Jerry "I Wish I was at the Boston Glove" Sullivan). Like I want to read Sullivan's piece today on my beloved Red Sox. From past experience, I know this guy knows less about baseball than my 1-year-old but he can't help but write about his hometown team. His "specialty" is you want to even give him that much credit is basketball, which I don't follow. He's also good at being a complete arrogant, self-serving, big-mouth who can point fingers at anyone in hopes of inflating his broken ego. I met this guy once at a Raptors game (against who else, the Celtics). What a piece of work. He's outside the press entrance with myself and some other reporters, complaining about having to wait for it to be opened. Bitched non-stop for 10 minutes while we waited. Hey Jerry, remember this that everytime you bust someone's chops in the news, be it members of either of our professional organizations ot other pro athletes or personnel........ they've reached the pinnacle of their field. Unlike you, they've risen to the top and whether they succeeded or failed, they got there. Your career has come to a grinding halt in AA Ball at the 41st largest circulation in the country! OK, my newspaper rant is done.

First, the costs for RWS improvements were under $100 million. Second, that money was made available when this state was doing better, unemployment was not very high and jobs were available (see Clinton presidency). Third, should the entire state, including fiscally strapped residents everywhere be paying nearly $1 billion, that BILLION, for a stadium for a franchise that makes much more profit than Buffalo's AND is not as important to the NYC as the Bills are to WNY? Basically, it's a huge gamble aimed at getting the Olympics, which 99.9% of New Yorks won't be able to attend because they'll be living somewhete in the south where taxes are fair and jobs are plentiful!!!!!! So when Paris wins the Olympics, we'll have jack squat to show for it but the Jets will have a nice new stadium on our billion dollars. By the way, that's $53 per resident for this stadium. So my household will pay $159 for the Jets to have a stadium they don't need. F this state, I can't wait to leave.

I agree with the above poster that an Ugly Stcik is the way to go but 6.5-7 feet is way too long for panfish and bass. I do ma fly in in upper Ontario every year for walleye, smallmouth and pike and I use a 5-foot ultralite Ugly Stick and also have 5.5 and 6. I mostly rely on the smaller rod. Easy to cast and better yet, great fight on light tackle! And Shimano makes a great reel, I believe mine is a Spirex 1000, small enough for the ultralite and not too small for the long poles. Have fun anyway!

Limited bargaining rights? The only limit they have in terms of salary is to declare an impasse during every negotiation, go straight to BINDING ARBITRATION and win what they wanted anyway. To say they have no rights is a F*^%ing joke. When was the last time they didn't get a raise, despite the economics of the agency they work for? When was the last time they were forced to pay for their health coverage or even any significant portion? When was the last time anything was taken awy for them for the betterment of the city, county, muni, region, whatever? Never. But when they lose their jobs when it really hiots the fan, we're supposed to feel sorry for them after all the grabhandedness they have shown year in and year out. Tough s&%* for them. Welcome to the real world. I hate public unions in NY. And I hate the Taylor Law too, which keeps them in power. By the way. Any idea why many places our young people are moving too are doing much better? No unions, among other reasons. But no unions keep salaries under control (and not ripping the employees off either while not ripping off the taxpayers). Example: We pay Buffalo and many area cops well into the 40s to start, and a GED is all that is required in most cases and no college degree, maybe some credits. Troopers start in the low 50s, same requirements. Saw an ad in the Buffalo Snooze for cops near Richmond, Va. Around $30 to start, $32 with a bachelors. That's the way it should be. Not getting rich for driving around on your fat arse all day.

OK, as a former reporter (worst job ever) and current social science dork, I found this AP snippet disgusting for numerous reason and emailed the AP about it. I know AP sports guys and they all suck. Anyway, here's the main point of my anger about it, based on semantics and data/statistics (not rushing yards but "significance in point no. 2). As a former reporter, nothing drives me crazier than vague verbiage that intends to pick a side in a story while circumventing. When a reporter uses terms like "regularly" and "well", it provides them an out for not providing further details or data. Having a masters degree in a social science, I feel it is imperative to provide at least some summary data when trying to make a point or stance. Now, as a Buffalo Bills fan and lifelong Buffalonian, I had an extremely hard time digesting a short piece I read in the LA Times about an NFL game in Mexico and potential other games being moved to neutral sites. Here a short piece of the story that is the problem. "...That the NFL would discuss playing a regular-season game in Mexico is no surprise, considering commissioner Paul Tagliabue's desire to make the sport even more international. That the Arizona Cardinals would be the host also is no shock, with the Cardinals routinely drawing small crowds in their current home on the Arizona State campus. If such an experiment works, where else might Tagliabue propose in-season games? Toronto, which has the 53,000-seat Rogers Centre (formerly SkyDome) is a potential choice because the Bills have a strong following in Ontario and they don't regularly sell out home contests. Vancouver might be another choice, but the Seahawks do draw well at home...." Reading that, one would assume the Bills aren't drawing. And it puts the region and fans in a poor light while making it seem like Seattle is a better football town. So here is my problem. The sentence in paragraph two uses the phrase "doesn't regularly sell out home contests" and follows it up in the next sentence with "...the Seahawks do draw well at home." The most obvious problems is the writer is using two different ticket sales marks to attempt to justify something. One is a "sellout," in the Bills' case, and the other is "do draw well." So my question is, what is regularly? Fifty percent of the time, 75 percent ? And what is well? Fifty percent of capacity, 75 percent? The next problem is, where is the data? How many seats does each respective stadium hold and what is the average attendance for each? Where does each team rank in terms of average or total attendance? So it took me all five minutes worth of internet research to pokes holes in this story and argument. Let's look at the stadiums. The Bills stadium, Ralph Wilson Field holds 73,967. Seattle's stadium, Qwest Field, holds 67,000. First off, the Bills have averaged 70,651 per game the last three seasons. The Seahawks have averaged 64,120 . I used the last three seasons because the Seahawks moved into the new Qwest Stadium previous to the 2002 season. Basically there are a couple things here that should have been noted in this story: 1. Over the previous 3 seasons, the Buffalo Bills have drawn more people than Seattle. Obviously stadium capacity is a factor but Seattle built a smaller stadium, so that's on them. The following are ranks for 2002-2004 2002 Buffalo 13th Seattle 23rd 2003 Buffalo 8th Seattle 22nd 2004 Buffalo 9th Seattle 18th 2. Over the same span, Seattle has had a 95.8% capacity rate. The Bills have had a 95.5% capacity rate. I would argue that a new stadium would easily account for the three-tenths of one percentage point difference and at the same time argue that if the author considers this "drawing well" it should also be considered the same for Buffalo, despite the attempt to make it seem the opposite. Three-tenths of one percentage point difference is not exactly what can be called statistically significant. And it hardly enough to write a story about how one team draws "well" and infer that another does not. 3. Sellouts. According to a story on in the Seattle Times, Seattle needed a deadline extension to sell 6000 tickets for a PLAYOFF game. Unheard of in Buffalo. They sellout immediately, even though games are in the dead of winter here. However, it was the Seahawks 16 consecutive sellout, meaning that for the two previous seasons, all games but the 2003 home opener, were sellouts. However, Buffalo sold-out the entire 2003 season and 7 of 8 this season (none sellout out was against the Cardinals, always a poor draw). So over the last two regular season, both teams have sold out the exact same number of games, 15 0f 16. Playoff games are another matter altogether and not relevant since the Bills haven't made the playoffs in the last 3 years. So the bottomline is this story was poorly researched and sheds a deceptive look at the Bills and their attendance when in fact, the Bills have a slight attendance edge due to the number of seats and average attendance. The ability to write clear, concise, substantial and properly-researched stories is a lost art. The population doesn't demand it; reporters don't strive for it and big business and the media itself only care about ad revenue. I doubt I'll get a reply but they'll get my point. A-holes.

I have taken some graduate level econ classes and there is really no sense arguing economic impacts because the I think that the social (i.e, quality of life) return is more valuable. I worked with a professor from Colorado who was trying to create and measure what he called SROI, or social return on investment, in simple terms, a way give a philanthropic organization an measurment of social benefits from its investment, say in a community based non-profit. The bottom line here is, just like the libraries, parks, etc. the social effect of the Bills far exceeds the economic. The problem is, many people have a problem with tax dollars being spent on a multimillion dollar organizations. But I say, as an urban planner who hates economic development with a passion (aka corporate welfare), as long as we're paying Ford, Chevy, Geico, Bass Pro, etc money, how are the Bills different? Chew on this...... ECIDA or some other development agency gave Ford in Hamburg $1 mil to upgrade its equipment a few years back un threat of "well, we have to remain competitive or we'll have to leave." So as long as it works for Ford, it should remain working for the Bills.

Nirvana was and is to post 90s hard rock/metal/emo, etc. what Led Zeppelin was to everything that followed them. Cobain's genius is undeniable, love him or hate him. And Grohl is one of the most talented musicians playing right now, although he should play more skins! Best band of the 90s, unquestionably. That being said, I am the proud owner of the most sought-after piece of Nirvana music collectibles, a hand-numbered copy of their first single on vinyl from Sub Pop, titled Love Buzz.

First off to the person who started this post..... 3-chords is the basis for punk and Green Day, despite Blvd of Broken Dreams (the most overplayed song of this millenium) is a PUNK BAND. If American Idiot isn't the epitome of punk, nothing is. I actually don't like them, but they are punk. I hate talentless, created, marketed "entertainers" because that's all most of pop music is today. But my number one most hated band is U2. You want to talk about ripping people off. I heard a song today that sounded straight from Pearl Jam's Vs. album. They suck and should be destroyed. So much for Bono(er) and his 3rd World Debt Relief stance, since I heard on the radio today that tix for their Bflo shows are as high as $160! You're an idiot if you pay that.

Are you serious? This is a football board and although non-football topics are tolerated to some degree, topics involving crappy, whiny, Lilith Fair chicks are way off-limits. Do you need a hug today or something?

Well, you can't cut and paste!!!!!!!!! I had other means!!!!!!!!!

The process to cut and paste from there is hell, but here it is. You're welcome! On Feb. 22, NFL teams can begin releasing players in advance of the free-agent signing period, which begins March 2. Veteran quarterbacks Drew Bledsoe and Jeff Garcia already have been told of their impending release. Who else has their contract on the chopping block? Our scouts have examined every roster and compared on-field performance with salary and contract status to come up with an extensive list of veterans still under contract who nevertheless could find themselves out of work this offseason. At the very least, some of these players will be candidates for contract restructuring. Some of the players on the list might surprise you. Would you believe Marshall Faulk? What about Jerome Bettis? Check out the rest of the list: Offense | Defense | Complete free-agent list Quarterbacks Steve McNair, Tennessee He is due $7.5 million in 2005 and an astronomical $50 million bonus in 2006 on a backloaded contract. Durability is a big concern, and those numbers will be restrictive for the Titans even if McNair does stay on the field. McNair has said he's willing to restructure his contract, but he hasn't said definitively whether he plans to return next season. Brooks Aaron Brooks, New Orleans Coach Jim Haslett's reprieve in New Orleans might have saved Brooks. He is a great talent who doesn't play with a sense of urgency. The Saints might ask him to redo a deal that will pay him $5.5 million in 2005. Jake Plummer, Denver It isn't a lock the Broncos will pay the $6 million roster bonus he is due March 1. Plummer's salary isn't out of whack, but the organization could go another direction after an up-and-down season. Drew Bledsoe, Buffalo The Bills already have announced they will release Bledsoe and elevate second-year QB J.P. Losman to the starting job. Gannon Rich Gannon, Oakland There is almost no chance he will return. He has a huge, $8 million base salary in 2005 and is not a good fit in coach Norv Turner's offense or on this club. Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Unless he takes a dramatic pay cut, he won't return to a roster that is pretty well set at quarterback. A salary of $6 million in 2005 and $7 million in '06 is outlandish for a 37-year-old third-stringer. Jay Fiedler, Miami Neither Fiedler nor A.J. Feeley appears to be the long-term answer at quarterback for Miami. Fiedler is too pricey (more than $5.7 million in 2005) for a backup, and his biggest supporter (Dave Wannstedt) is gone. Griese Brian Griese, Tampa Bay He carries a $2 million salary figure for 2005, but also is due a $6 million bonus in March. Griese isn't likely to see that money, but he played well enough in 2004 to earn a restructured deal. Rodney Peete, Carolina He gives the coaching staff a level of comfort, but he isn't worth $1 million annually at his age. Peete could renegotiate and return for a year, but the Panthers need to start developing a young backup. Chris Weinke, Carolina At 32, he is no better than a journeyman backup and no longer can be considered a developmental project. It's unlikely Carolina will pay him the $1.2 million he is due in 2005. Fullbacks James Hodgins, Arizona He was expected to be a force in the run game, but it didn't happen. (He finished the season on injured reserve.) Though Hodgins has great size, all he can do is block, limiting his usefulness in Dennis Green's system. Mike Anderson, Denver A severe groin injury hampered him all last season, and he will be a 31-year-old injury risk carrying a $2.16 million base salary in 2005. The Broncos have other options at his position. Running backs Marshall Faulk Marshall Faulk, St. Louis He is starting to look like a part-time player, with age and durability becoming big concerns. He has a $7 million cap number for 2005, so it might be time for he and the Rams to part company. Jerome Bettis, Pittsburgh He is the comeback story of 2004 and is running like a player five years younger than his 33 years. Turning him loose will be a tough call for this organization, but Bettis is due more than $5 million in 2005. Michael Bennett, Minnesota Though not a candidate to get cut, he very well could be traded. The Vikings are loaded at running back, prefer to build through the draft and could net a fairly high draft choice for him. Tight end Kyle Brady, Jacksonville At age 33, he still is a physical and effective run blocker, but he offers little as a receiver. With more teams using offensive tackles as short-yardage blocking tight ends, can Jacksonville live with Brady's cap number (almost $3 million)? Dwayne Carswell, Denver He has been serviceable, but Denver uses many tight ends, and Carswell hardly is dominant. The Broncos could go younger and cheaper in a committee approach. Jay Riemersma, Pittsburgh He is 32, comes with endless durability questions and isn't the blocking tight end Pittsburgh wants. We can't see the Steelers paying him $1.3 million in 2005. Wide receiver Mason Derrick Mason, Tennessee His name seems to be on this list every year, but he always dodges the bullet. But Mason's $3.2 million base salary and $1.5 million in incentives for 2005 might be too much for the cap-strapped Titans to handle this time. Rod Smith, Denver He could see his skills start to decline soon, and his salary will be in the $5 million range in 2005. But he is Denver's most consistent weapon, and the Broncos don't have a replacement ready. Isaac Bruce, St. Louis St. Louis has good, young depth at receiver, and Bruce's salary over the next four years (from $4 million to $7 million) isn't a drop in the bucket. The Rams might have to let a good player go before he becomes a liability. Kevin Johnson, Baltimore Once a solid No. 1 receiver, he has been no better than a No. 3 for the Ravens, who need an upgrade. His base salary of $1.4 million and potential bonus of over $2 million is too much. Do you renegotiate or cut a 29-year-old backup? Johnson might do the Ravens a favor by opting out of his contract in favor of free agency. Koren Robinson, Seattle His off-field problems and favorable salary make him a strong trade candidate. The Seahawks are turned off by his act and dropped passes. Brown Troy Brown, New England He is the ultimate team guy, but he is 34, his production on offense is in steep decline and his cap number is around $5.7 million. Coach Bill Belichick doesn't play favorites. Muhsin Muhammad, Carolina Carolina almost dumped him a year ago but wisely chose not to. Due a huge $10 million bonus in the offseason, he likely will renegotiate and receive a more cap-friendly deal. Jerome Pathon, New Orleans The Saints aren't known as big spenders, and a $3.25 million salary for a quality No. 3 receiver probably is too much. But he is a tough matchup in the slot, so the team might try to restructure his deal. David Terrell, Chicago The ultimate teaser, he never has lived up to great expectations. He no longer can be considered a developing talent, and the Bears' offense desperately needs a playmaker. Hakim Az-Zahir Hakim, Detroit With Charles Rogers and Roy Williams making a lot of money, the position is financially out of whack. Hakim, the No. 3 receiver, has a $4 million cap number in 2005. Derrius Thompson, Miami He has the size and skills but never has played up to expectations. The Dolphins have a new coaching staff, loads of needs and won't want to pay $1.2 million for a No. 3 receiver. Center Jeff Mitchell, Carolina One of the most underrated players in the league, he rarely makes a mistake. The Panthers want to keep him, but his $2 million salary and $1 million bonus are steep. He could be a candidate for renegotiation. Trey Teague, Buffalo The Bills would like to upgrade the position in free agency or the draft. They are not likely to keep Teague, who is scheduled to make a $1.25 million base salary and is due a $1 million bonus in training camp. Jeff Hartings, Pittsburgh He still is a good player, but at age 32 he is starting to slip. With a $4.2 million base salary, he could renegotiate and get another year or two out of his career. Mike Wahle, Green Bay He is due a $5 million salary and $6 million roster bonus in 2005. The Packers likely will try to bring him back at a more cap-friendly cost, but Wahle could be released if he balks. Offensive guard Ruben Brown, Chicago His 2005 salary ($1.265 million) is acceptable, but he has lived on reputation the last few years and the Bears probably want to get younger on the offensive line. Allen Larry Allen, Dallas The Cowboys would like to save some money and get younger at this position. Allen's base salary of $4.5 million in 2005 could lead to him restructuring or testing the open market. Ron Stone, Oakland He had a subpar, injury-marred 2004 season and at 34 is a shell of the player he was a few yeas ago. Due $2.6 million in base salary and incentives in 2005, he isn't likely to return to Oakland. Rex Tucker, Chicago He is tough, but his body has taken a beating. The $2 million Tucker is owed for 2005 is a steep cost for a guy who isn't likely to give you 16 games. Doug Brzezinski, Carolina A journeyman backup who has limited range and athletic ability. The Panthers want to rebuild their offensive line with younger players, and his $1.5 million salary in 2005 is reason enough to look for help elsewhere. Mo Collins, Oakland The Raiders seem committed to Collins in the short term, but his base salary and incentives in 2005 exceed $6 million. The cost is steep, but starting over at quarterback could ruin any progress that has been made. Frank Middleton, Oakland Coming off an injury-marred season and possibly breaking down physically, he is due $3 million in base salary and incentives next season. It's unlikely he will be back. Offensive tackle Samuels Chris Samuels, Washington A tremendous talent, he has been an up-and-down performer whose pay is commensurate with a much more consistent player. His 2005 cap number is more than $9 million. Will the team try to renegotiate? Kyle Turley, St. Louis Beyond obvious durability issues, his rift with coach Mike Martz seems irreparable. Add to that equation a $3.65 million base salary in 2005, and Turley is likely to be playing for someone else next year. Runyan Jon Runyan, Philadelphia He no longer is a dominant player, and first-round pick Shawn Andrews is being groomed to replace him. With a $5.5 million base salary, he could be let go by the cap-conscious Eagles. Brad Hopkins, Tennessee Tennessee might have to clear out both starting offensive tackles due to salary-cap problems. Hopkins still is a good player, but the Titans probably can't afford his $4.75 million salary for 2005. Matt Lepsis, Denver His move from right tackle to the left side was impressive, but with a base salary of $3.5 million and reachable incentives of $1.5 million he is a renegotiation candidate. Fred Miller, Tennessee He is part of an overpaid offensive tackle tandem, with $9.1 million in base salary and easily reached incentives due him in 2005. That is too costly for a 32-year-old right tackle. Scott Gragg, San Francisco At 33, he has a lot of wear and tear on his body and is starting to slow down. The 49ers have severe salary-cap problems and need to get younger. Dumping his 2005 salary ($3 million) seems a likely part of the solution. L.J. Shelton, Arizona Overrated athletic ability and nagging injuries make him a target in the Cardinals' housecleaning. He was placed on injured reserve during the season, and the coaching staff has no confidence in him. Anthony Clement, Arizona He's getting almost $2.5 million to be a backup. Dennis Green wasn't happy with the play of the offensive line, so big changes are in store.

The only way a cap helps the Sabres is a couple other things happen as well: 1. Revenue sharing in some form that provides a substantial revenue increase for the lower economic teams. That's a simple answer but how it is accomplished and works is completely another. 2. A better product with more parity. This is particilarly important to teams like Bflo, Pitts, Calgary, Edmonton, etc. The game has to get better on the ice, which in turn should/could increase its popularity and revenue/TV contracts. 3. Dedicated leadership/front office, which I think the Sabres have. Golisano seems to want to increase attendance and revenue AND provide a better team/product. I think a more level economic playing field and competitive team cures the Sabres ills. A better team will bring more people to the Arena. Face it, this town, loves hockey and a good team. You win, we come.

Give the guy a break. If you had enough sense to actually read the caption, it said he hasn't run since surgery in August. Idiots on this board never cease to amaze. How are you looking today?

Just chew on this a little. Everyone alwasy talks about how bloated the goverment is. And it couldn't be truer. But what everyone fails to also recognize or discuss, including the media, is the money public employees make. I agree that police and fire protection is vital. I also agree that public education is vital. What I don't agree with is Bflo cops starting in the upper 40s (I believe) with NO COLLEGE DEGREE REQUIREMENT and teachers with REQUIRED MASTERS DEGREES starting in the upper 20s low 30s in Bflo public schools. The best example of the overpayment we make here is this. FOr those of you who read the Sunday Employment section, you might have noticed an ad for police in Atlanta, a GROWING southern city on the upswing. The starting salary for a cop there, with a bachelors degree is $32,000+. Without is can be below $30,000. It's not just the number of employees here, it's the salaries. It's a damn joke. NYS Troopers start at $53,000! I have friend who are troopers in rural areas and they're bored out of their minds. One said he'd barely see a single person on a 12-hour overnight shift. So next time you go to the polls or are at a debate, as the candidates why we pay cops so much. Oh, and by the way, save the "its a dangerous job" argument. It's not even in the top 10 for workplace injuries. It's a perception helped along by media and unions, which are also killing WNY.

Same people that want to see Gibson's bat. When a guy plays hurt and goes above and beyond the call of duty AND it gets him a win and WS title, it matters to all baseball fans, not just Sox fans. The guy played with a medical prcedure holding his ankle together that was never tried on a live human before. It was a medical risk. It should be in some medical hall of fame as well. Typical Yankee fan crybaby whining because his favorite, dedicated, hard working player isn't in the hall.