Mickey

I agree, let her have he say and if this is the way she wants to do it, let her go for it. As for finshing the job, that is hard to disagree with and it sounds good but tell me, how are we going to know when the job is finished? What, specifically are the conditions for withdrawl? I think that is the big question.

Wow, little Cindy Sheehan has managed to "crush the morale of our troops and our country..." I think you are giving her too much credit on that score. Perhaps the lies about WMD's and all the rest, the daily death toll and apparent lack of progress are doing more to hurt morale than little Cindy Sheehan and her roadside camp. I am not sure how to address the hoplessly elementary idea that if the war is wrong we are bad and they are good thing. Even if she is right, not every man, woman, child and soldier in the US is "bad" because their government and leaders led them into what she sees as a needless war. Further, that doesn't make insurgents "good". There have been many conflicts where both sides were "bad". I'm not sure consulting with terrorists to find out what they like and then simply doing the opposite is a sound strategy. Though something like that worked for George Costanza, I don't think it would transfer well to the foreign policy sphere. I think you have Moore's "lajik" a little mixed up. His thoughts, to the extent they can be referred to as such, was that politicians who didn't send their kids to a war they supported should be called to task to see if they tried to talk their kids into serving. I think that is why he was trying to pass Army recruitment stuff to them. Apparently Cindy Sheehan in fact did try to talk her son out of it but failed. I don't really follow Moore's point but it was funny to watch some politicians squirm. By the same token, I don't see what it has to do with Sheehan. There does seem to be an awful lot of reaching for anything to try and discredit her but you know, even if that effort eventually pays off, the war isn't going to be transformed overnight to a rousing success. I don't think recruitment will suddenly skyrocket if she folds her tent. The daily death toll won't change much either. That is the President's real problem and the nation's. Little Cindy here isn't going to make that go away for any of us.

The idea that an average citizen who has lost a loved one to a war she feels we were bamboozled into by a dishonest administration using the same politically saavy tactics as the administration used in selling the war to begin with seems to me a poetic justice. The administration uses soldiers, their sacrifices and their very lives in their own propaganda to support their position. Why is that okay? Its a propaganda battle and as much as I don't want to see a battle of the grieving widows and moms, I am just as disgusted with the administration and their prop-a-bull-sh*t. They have so many memorable ones I can't even pick a favorite from the quote I use below to "last throes".

Wait a minute, don't we have a rule around here about Hitler references? Didn't I just win a toaster or something?

...and you know better than her what would most honor him based on what? Really, how dare she?!!? How dare she oppose a war which took the life of her son?!!? Where does she get off?! Imagine that, a mother stricken with grief over the death of her son in a war she feels was a useless adventure speaking out against that war. Its just crazy I tell you, crayyyyzzeeeee.

Besides, she is just plain wrong, if she was a fetus or brain dead there would be candle lit vigils for her and midnight sessions of congress upending the constitution by passing "Cindy's Law".

Smearing hate, yep that is your stock and trade as far as I can tell, I just don't understand why you are getting so upset just becuase someone else has horned in on your act. I don't think you can do much about Cindy Sheehan but you ought to be able to control your own vitriol but then again, everyone here knows that ship has sailed long, long ago. By the way, all blind hero worship aside, disrespecting George Bush is not disrespecting the country, the man and the nation are not one. As for what this youngman thought about the war and George Bush, forgive me if I take her word for it over yours.

I wonder if, like Saigon, we will declare victory or the Iraqi-ization of the conflict and skedaddle. Then the government will eventually fall to some sort of insurgency or to Iran or descend into civil war or maybe Osama will end up it's Prime Minister or some other unforseen nightmare we can't even imagine. I think we have run out of options here, we go and it all goes to hell or we stay and it probably goes to hell anyway. Neither his opponents nor the President have any ideas that I have heard that sound in the least bit promising. Sometimes I think that the day after we caught Saddam, we should have begun our withdrawl.

Yeah, that sounds like an accurate description of yourself. She lost her son, shattering her entire world, what is your excuse?

I agree on both points. Reed is not the player we hoped he would be and the disappointment over that is fueling a lot of the "cut Reed" talk. Apart from that though, for him to get cut he would have to get beat out by Smith, Wilson and/or Haddad. Smith is dropping a lot of balls and Haddad has had plenty of opportunities now to show whether he can play and he hasn't made it. I like what I have seen from Wilson in camp but he didn't get any balls thrown his way, as I recall, last Saturday. Reed has too much experience to get beat out by those guys. I am not a big fan of Denney and if keeping him means cutting Gause, I'd say cut Denney instead because I really like Gause. I did some research on him this morning and was impressed. At his pro day work out he came in a shade under 6-5 and was 269 lbs. He also ran a 4.69 forty. That is pretty serious speed for a DE. Other than making sure we have the roster space for Gause, I don't see how Denney gets cut.

I would point out that as for King, the Colts really liked that Staneford kid and threw to him repeatedly and he just happened to be the guy King was on for most of the night so his name kept coming up. I wouldn't draw any conclusions from his play in that game other than to say he made some plays but also was beaten a few times. He certainly got a work out. As good as our secondary is and as deep as it is, he may have trouble seeing much playing time even though he has a future in the league.

Back to the tapes!

Yeah, they are everywhere unfortunately. My favorite endzone story: I was sitting in the endzone and got there early to enjoy my chilli cheese fries before kickoff. As I am going down the aisle this babe, this blond haired, amply endowed babe does a double take on my chilli cheese fries. With her eyes popping out of her head she asked me where I got them and I pointed in the general direction of a vendor and then she said, "Can I try one?" Of course, my answer was "be my guest". She picks up a fry with gobs of cheese and chilli on it and before she gets it to her mouth, it slides out of her fingers and drops onto her chest scoring a bullseye on her cleavage with her bra stopping it from descending any further. Well, it got suddenly quiet, I looked at her and she looked at me and then I looked down and then back up and then down again. She made no move to retrieve the chilli cheese fry from its new found paradise and for a moment, a glorious moment, I took her inaction as an invitation to do the gentlemanly thing and help her out of this dilemma. I was only too happy to help. My fingers twitched ever so slightly as I began to make a move. Just then I saw her eyes look to the side and so I glanced in that direction. There stood what was clearly her boyfriend standing there with his hands on his hips and a look on his face that said "Do not even think about it". "Perhaps" I said, "you should do the honors." I handed him a napkin and he went for it. As they walked up the stairs he turned around and rolled his eyes as if to say, "She does this sh*t all the time..." That is my new pick-up strategy. Get some chilli cheese fries and then walk closely by some babe who looks like she really wants to cheat on her diet. The alcohol per fan ratio is best in the endzone area so that is a good place to start.

I like Leonhard too, he seems sort of "Tasker-like" to me. Yeah, Stamer looked a little iffy there but I still think we were in man to man which means either Leonhard or the CB on our right side screwed up since we had more than one man on that WR. I can't beleive the CB on the right was assigned coverage of the TE on our left side, with Leonhard assigned to cover the WR on the right where that CB was already situated. If it was man-to-man, I gotta figure it was Leonhard's man. Stamer might have started to blitz and then thought he read a screen or pass in the flat, or some other short pass in reaction to our blitz so rather than go after the QB, he drifted back into coverage. Hard to tell.

Meaning the section of the stadium in which one is most likley to hear obscenities. I see a guy there every game who chants over and over "Moulds You Suck" and "Moulds is an !@#$" from the opening kick to the final gun. My younger sister finally couldn't take it anymore in the Pittsburgh game and walked over to him, all 105 lbs of her, and said "If you don't shut the f**k up I will kick your ass blue you freak." He tried to take a swing at her but was too drunk to figure out which hand had the beer and which hand was free to throw a punch. He just sat there with a puzzled look on his face for the longest time until he finally muttered something like "awww, f**k it".

Let me guess, your season tickets are in the endzone right?

The inherent problem in hoping, in the short term, that higher prices will dampen demand is that gasoline is a necessity. Consumption can't be willy-nilly altered by the consumers in direct response to price shifts. Most of us have no other way in to work thus, whatever the price is, we have to pay. In the long term we might opt for better mileage cars with our next vehicle purchase and we might even start car pooling it when we can but those are all long term responses that will take time to develop.

I think if you check the tape (I can't right now), during the chase down of the TE, the only safety you'll see involved was Leonhard. I didn't see the SS anywhere in the backfield which is why I think he was blitzing or maybe a CB was and the SS stepped up to cover his man. If it was the latter, the SS would have showed up in the long chase that followed so I think he was blitzing and as a result was never really in the play. Check Marv Levy's comment on the play. He said we were in an all out blitz leaving man to man coverage and someone missed a man. I know for sure Leonhard was initially covering a WR along with a CB so if we were in man to man, he was on the wrong guy resulting in a WR double covered and the TE totally uncovered. Further, the ashes in the ashtray are from a distinct Indian tobacco sold only by a certain tobacconist in Leicester Square run by a former Leftenant of Cavalry in the Queen's Light Horse whose customer base consists entirely of former officers whose tradition, as everyone who has ever served in the Light Horse knows, is to wear knee high leather boots whose unique sole can be seen in the footprint left at the scene by the murderer, of a size so enourmous, it could only have been left by the former Captain of the Light Horse, Nigel "Very Large Foot" Worthington. Elementary by dear man, elementary.

Not when the SS is blitzing and I believe he was or if not, one of the CB's was so that the SS was on a WR. Leonhard was the closest guy to the TE and, again, I can't believe we were doubling a WR when we were blitzing like that, it had to be man to man and if that was the case, Leonhard wasn't supposed to be on that WR, there was already a CB on him. The result was one guy double covered and another guy uncovered. Marv said on the replay that the coverage was man to man and somebody, he didn't know who, simply took the wrong man. I think it was Leonhard but possibly Stamer. Maybe Stamer wasn't supposed to blitz. The thing is though, if Leonhard wasn't covering the TE, who was he supposed to cover?

I think it is high time this defense got some kind of nickname. Based on what Spikes told the announcers before the Green Bay scrimmage, I am submitting the following candidate: "The Downhill Gang" Please submit your own and say which of those already posted by someone else is your favorite. Eventually, we should have a few candidates for a poll.

My feelings exactly. I've always thought that almost all championship teams have one thing in common, they found a few gems in the later rounds of the draft or from among their UDFA's. It gives them a huge jump on their opponents. Think how much it meant to our SB teams to have dug up Andre Reed from nowhere. Look at the Patriots and Brady. They got a franchise QB for nothing then compare that to the personnel capital other teams have spent trying to fing their QB. NE has been able to invest what it would have had to spend on a QB into other positions. Finding those diamonds in the rough here and there has a ripple effect up and down the roster. Of all the people on our roster, the one guy who seems to be the best candidate for us to be that kind of rare find is probably Peters. The other guy that fits that mold would probably be McGee. I like what I saw from Gates as well.

I believe that he was the guy who blew the coverage on the long TD pass to that TE of the Colts. At the snap, he had moved over to the right as if to cover the WR on the the right who was already being handled by the CB on that side. Stamer moved to the line on the left side just outside our LDE and I think the other safety was blitzing. That left Leonhard man to man on the TE who came off the line on our left side. Leonhard jumped to his right going after that WR and you can see him on the tape stop after a few steps as he sees that TE going free up the middle out of the corner of his eye. You can almost hear him say "uh-oh". Stamer also backpedaled pretty fast after only going across the line a step or two after the snap. The way Stamer pulled out of that made me think he might have had the coverage of the TE and realized it too late but my money is still on Leonhard having blown the coverage. Given the blitz they were in, it had to be man to man across the board and Leonhard was actually doubling a WR along with the CB on that side, at least initially. I can't believe we were sending that many blitzers and still trying to double a wideout at the same time, not enough bodies. He did some good things but for an unheralded rookie trying to squeeze on to the roster, that was a disaster. I can't imagine what it must be like to sit in the film room with half the team looking at such a costly goof.

I just reviewed the tape of him for the third quarter, I haven't looked at the 4th yet. Basically, he didn't miss a block. The same, however, can't be said for Geisinger who gave up a sack to an inside stunt to the LDE. I believe the announcers quoted McNally as saying that Peters was the best LT prospect he has ever seen. A comment based, no doubt, on Peters' freakish speed given his size. This could get interesting.

No, I think we should celebrate May 1st as VI Day, "Victory in Iraq Day". We are already two behind, the first being May 1, 2003 when the President declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq under the "Mission Accomplished" banner.

As an old school fan, I really admire watching a crew of professional officials really work it and this bunch is sure putting on a show. How are we going to fit all that laundry on the plane?