Rocky Landing

Jokes about menstruation are not funny. Period.

I wonder if Snyder conferred with the National Congress of American Indians, or if they'll even answer his calls?

Is there some press release, or statement by Washington, or Snyder saying this? I believe the "point" is to disassociate with a name that is considered an offensive pejorative.

Believe me, I am no fan of Peterman, and I only use his name rhetorically. I was at that Chargers game when he played historically bad football, and the five picks he threw in the first half only tell half the story. How he managed to extend his football career beyond that season is a true head shaker.

I have no idea why you are including me with people who "bash" Allen. I'm huge fan. I just bought my 10-year-old a #17 jersey for his birthday. I have never bashed him, and I don't imagine I ever will. But, I wasn't responding to what Glazer said. I was responding to what you wrote. To that point, what I remember from the pre-draft narratives from the "draft gurus", almost universally, was that he was an amazing athlete, with a cannon arm, but that he was raw as a QB, and would need time to ride the pine. That seemed like a fair enough assessment, at the time. Of course, he didn't get that chance, and instead was saddled with Late Nate Peterman as the initial starter, Derek Anderson as an excuse for a "vet presence," an O-line that was bottom three in the league, and IMO the worst receiver corp in the league. There's no point in denying that Allen was playing for a much better offense in year two. And, I still maintain that his accuracy, and athleticism were already there in 2018, and that his biggest improvements came from his situational awareness-- his decision making ability, his pocket presence, and the speed at which he was able to process information. How on Earth is that a "bash" on Allen?

Not having a league policy would be a mistake, IMO, for two reasons: 1) Teams with more fans in the stands will have a bigger home field advantage than those with fewer. 2) Because of the above point, teams that reside in higher risk areas (LA, New Jersey), will be under increased pressure to allow more fans in the stadium than may be recommended by experts. Lets keep a level playing field, so to speak.

I think the narrative from Bills fans, taken as a whole (with detractors, and supporters) has been reasonable. Personally, I would consider myself a staunch supporter-- I love the guy. But, I have to admit that his oft-sited improvements from year onto year two often ignore the larger picture. Yes, his numbers improved dramatically. But, compare the O-lines, and receiving core from those two seasons, and I dare say that even Peterman would have seen marked improvement between those two situations. To my mind, the most relevant improvements Allen made in his second season was his decision making ability, and the speed at which he was able to process information. That will be the factor that brings him up to franchise-level QB, IMO. The cannon arm, athleticism, and even accuracy were already there.

I have to believe that were all the teams to follow protocols that included no fans in attendance, daily testing of all players, and staff, and a vigorous cleaning, and disinfecting regimen, they would be reasonably safe, and manageable. I live in Los Angeles, the idiot city, in the idiot county of the idiot state of CA, and some motion picture productions are starting to open (mostly commercials), and so far seem to be manageable. Larger productions have yet to restart, but that has far more to do with production costs, and managing the safety costs of these shows. If the NFL wants to spend the money, they can do it.

I was there too on the shady side. The new stadium is going to be awfully nice, but getting to watch the Bills in such a small stadium was great. Not as great as the year before when the Rams hosted them in the giant, concrete sweat bowl that is the LA Coliseum. But, I'll take watching the Bills win in the blistering sun over watching historically bad football in the shade any day.

In fact, there are metrics for measuring freedom, the most respected being the Human Freedom Index sponsored by the Cato Institute, and others. (The Cato Institute was founded by Charles Koch, fo anyone wanting to cry "liberal.") Currently, the United States ranks 17th.

I voted no, as the question is posed, for mostly selfish reasons. The more teams are able to expand their rosters, the deeper they become. The Bills, last season, and this season, had an advantage in depth, especially on defense. We will also be carrying more continuity from last season than most other teams, especially in our division. I wouldn't want to dilute those advantages. I do think the PS should be expanded considerably. The risks of Covid-19, and the possibility of losing players to the virus aren't going to apply to the actual day of the game. Once there are 46 men on the field on Sunday, it's not like someone is going to drop out at halftime. It's during the week when a significant number of players might test positive, and have to quarantine. I would think having a minimum of 23 PS players, and expanding PS eligibility requirements significantly would be a good safety net for the season.

With only 24,000 seats, if you get a seat on the South side, which is shaded all day long, the Chargers' venue is a great place to watch an NFL game.

If Snyder were smart (questionable), he would sit down with the National Congress of American Indians, and discus different name, and logo proposals. He's been clutching onto this brand for so long, and the brand value is crumbling in his hands, and has been for quite some time. If he does this right, he could have an opportunity to increase his team's brand significantly.

As the team's home is in our nation's capital, the argument could be made that they represent our national identity. The Washington Americans. The logo could remain the same.

Reasons that preseason games, this year, are important: We want to see how well Moss transitions into the NFL. We handed off to Singletary in a preseason game last year something like fifteen snaps in a row. That was valuable. We want to see if Daryl Williams might be a better RT than Ford before the start of the regular season. If he could be an upgrade to Ford, it could be huge. We want to see AJ Epenesa in a real NFL game before the start of the regular season. We want to see how well AJ Klein fits into our defense before the start of the regular season. We want to see all of our newly acquired WRs (with the possible exception of Stephon Diggs) before the start of the regular season. We want to evaluate the #3RB position. Who doesn't want to see how Christian Wade has progressed from last year, and if he might be a viable #3? Regular season games are not a good time for experimentation. I don't understand why more fans don't want to see what we've got before the regular season starts.

Honestly, the back and forth on this topic is astonishing. Especially cringeworthy are the reliance on some clearly bogus polls, and blatantly irrelevant straw man arguments about other “offensive” team names. The National Congress of American Indians, founded in 1944, and headquartered in Washington DC, is the oldest, largest, and most representative American Indian and Alaska Native organization there is. They represent 573 member tribes. They are the same organization that produced the commercial advocating for the Redskins name change at the Super Bowl several years ago. Below is a link to their resolution regarding the Redskins name. It is the same position they have held for decades. http://www.ncai.org/resources/resolutions/opposing-the-washington-nfl-team-s-return-to-the-district-of-columbia-until-the-franchise-changes-its-offensive-name If anyone truly believes they have a more cogent, or authoritative argument than the National Congress of American Indians, they are a fool.

If people get offended by you kneeling for "Lift Every Voice and Sing," (also known as the black national anthem), it will be the second time in the history of mankind that people became offended by kneeling.

There are plenty of reasons to enjoy preseason games. We get to follow some of the camp competitions. We get a bead on some the third stringers, who we would otherwise rarely see. You get a first NFL look at the rookies (some of whom we will never see again). I remember last season, they handed off to Motor something like fifteen times in a row, just to see what he was made of. Is it "meaningful" football? Naw. But it's football. I watch, and enjoy all four, every year. And, for all those on here who get all sour at their very existence, I would think that not watching would suffice. I watch the preseason games religiously, and enjoy them. But, the pro bowl could be played as a bocce tournament, and probably be more entertaining.

I feel bad for some of the rookies, and especially UDFAs who are going to have a much, much harder time proving themselves.

It's a good point. But, I think if you look at the rest of the league, it has been historically pretty common for defenses to be given a much longer leash when facing exceptionally mobile QBs. Tyrod Taylor used to get mashed, as did Vick. These days, though, with the specter of CTE always present, I think refs are being pretty strict regarding roughing the passer. I don't recall hits on Allen getting ignored, and I don't think that was an issue with Lamar Jackson, either (although I didn't see many Baltimore games). All that being said, I think given his injury history, and the team he will be playing for, your point stands, and Jerry Hughs will have to watch himself.

Nathan Peterman.

Depends on the odds.

Such a Billsy thread....

I figure it's going to happen around the same time that my kid cleans his room.

These numbers more or less even out when you consider that Murphy got about twice the snaps as Shaq.