Rocky Landing

I don't see it as a question of whether they're right, or wrong. Why should Fauci care what the public thinks? That would be political. As they learn more about the disease, they amend their assessments. That's the way it works. Fauci makes the best recommendation he can with the information he as at the time. As the information changes, his recommendations change.

I certainly don't see it that way. Fauci has never been responsible for government policy, and he's been very clear on that. The government held off promoting face masks because it knew shortages were so bad that even doctors couldn't get enough. In their assessment at the time, promoting facemarks would have made the situation worse. How is that dishonest?

Fair enough. I would say that the fact that Fauci often changes, or amends his statements gives me more trust in him. He's a scientist, not a politician. When a politician changes their mind, it's called "flip-flopping." When a scientist changes their mind, it's called the scientific method.

You're making my point for me. "Fauci said US government held off promoting face masks because it knew shortages were so bad that even doctors couldn't get enough," is not political in any way. It wasn't advancing any political agenda. It was a matter of managing a pandemic for which they weren't prepared.

This statement is exactly the kind of narrative that I'm talking about. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Fauci, a 79-year-old epidemiologist, has, at any point in all of this, been untruthful. The narrative you're pushing, however, has easily recognizable political motives.

Political expediency is something that is done to advance something politically. Fauci's role is not political. The narratives being pushed about an epidemiologist trying to do his job, on the other hand, are the very definition of political expediency. That's my point.

Politically expedient? Do you think he's running for something?

Did you guys read the article? He's using words like "may," and "could." These are cautionary statements he's making. It's not really even about whether he's right or wrong. It's really about how serious the risks become, and whether the NFL can deal with those risks, both for the player's safety, and the safety of the communities they play in. Whether football happens, or not-- he's not wrong.

Serious(ish) question to those who are still clinging to the "kneeling is disrespectful" narrative: Is there another context in the history of the world where kneeling was ever considered disrespectful?

It is certainly your right to go crawl under any rock you want. But, what makes you think you can speak for those who are (respectfully, imo) protesting during the anthem? Do you not see that protest is a vital form of patriotism?

"Reason for despair The Bills have not made consecutive playoff appearances since 1998-99 and have not won a playoff game since 1995. The odds are against Buffalo making it back to the playoffs this year. They also will not sneak up on any teams now. They will get their opponents’ best shot." But... we just... huh...???

At best, I would say that you have a flawed definition of "freedom of speech" where someone's expression should be free of consequences. That's not the way it works, and it never has been. Gundy's opinion of OANN was strong enough that he wore their advertisement on his chest. That expression had consequences. And yet, you're against players kneeling during the anthem...

This "blowback" your referencing is literally based on people's perception, and opinion of OAN. So, you're saying that Gundy should have the freedom to wear a T-shirt, but others should't have the freedom to express their opinion about it? How is that not a double standard?

Honestly, I wish those who are trying to confirm, or deny systemic racism by blithely referencing statistics would just hush. It's clear that they're being used merely to support longstanding conclusions. It's only my opinion, but statistics aren't the key to understanding systemic racism. History is.

QB: B-: I just don't have the emotional capital to rate them any lower... RB :C+: I love Singletary, but he's not elite. I have reservations about Moss. I'm a huge Wade fan, but realistically, his transition to the NFL is far from a given. Yeldon is a damp sack of wheat. TE: C-: I believe that Knox could develop into a true playmaker. He showed flashes last season that are undeniable. But, he also had some egregious drops, which don't particularly concern me. Kroft is dry, white toast. I love Lee Smith, just as a fan. But, color commentators refer to him as "blocking tight end Lee Smith" when he is on the field. And, too many flags! But, the problem with all them is that none of these guys are complete tight ends. WR: A: I think it's safe to make a judgement on Diggs, before he takes a snap as a Bill, and say that he is elite. I've watched every snap of his NFL career, at this point, and I think that he may be the most versatile WR in the league. After him, we have the exact same cast, just bumped down a notch. Smoke as a #2, Beasley as a slot, and the supporting cast below them, all of whom belong on an NFL team, and all of whom offer a range of skills. IMO, this group could elevate Allen into the A range, all by themselves. The most exciting unit on the team. OL: B-: This grade might be high. But, I suspect that they have not reached their ceiling as a unit, and the continuity they have from last season is going to be a distinct asset. My biggest concern is Ford. But, we still have Nsekhe, and we shouldn't sleep on offseason acquisition Daryl Williams. CB: B-: Of course Tre is elite. But, Wallace was a bit of a disappointment, last season. It was a mistake, IMO, to let Kevin Johnson walk. I get the money thing, but I think, in hindsight, we may have been better off giving him the #2 spot over Wallace. In the end, I think he was the better CB. He just never got the snaps to prove it. Gaines, and Norman? Top shelf backups, to be sure. But I don't think they are going to light the world up. And, I'm a fan of Taron Johnson, to be sure. His effort is 110%, and he always seems to have one great play per game. Kind of like Trent Murphy... S: A: It's been said over, and over again-- Hyde/Poyer are the best safety tandem in the NFL. And Neal ain't no scrub. LB: B-: I suspect that the loss of Lorax is bigger than many of us suspect. I'm happy with the moves Beane made to address the position, but I don't think his contributions to the LB room can be overstated. I'm a huge fan of Milano. He's a workhorse. And, there is little doubt in my mind that Edmunds will be elite-- maybe this year? DL: B-: I hate to say it, but this may be too high. The biggest question marks, are on the DL. Between Oliver's legal woes, and the new acquisitions, it's the unit with the least amount of continuity on the team. But, some serious talent, here. ST C : I wish there were some more ST plays that would get me up out of my seat...

Good post. I've held since the pandemic started that continuity from 2019 to 2020 would be a distinct advantage for this season. That bodes very well for the Bills in the AFCE division, where all three of our rivals will have far more turnover than the Bills.

You are the one deflecting. If you read my post, I made it clear that it was not about stats. Instead, I gave what I hope you would agree was a thoughtful response of what I believe to be the essence of systemic racism, with examples-- all of which you have chosen to ignore. In fact, you have ignored the entire post, and instead engaged in straw-man argument. Frankly, I don't really think statistics are all that important to recognize systemic racism. If you don't understand its precepts, I don't know that stats are going to help all that much. Be that as it may, I did exactly what I suggested you do, and googled "stats for systemic racism," and immediately found this WaPo article with a bunch: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/if-you-dont-believe-systemic-racism-is-real-explain-these-statistics/2020/06/12/ce0dff6e-acc7-11ea-94d2-d7bc43b26bf9_story.html I suspect this will be my last response to this. I don't think you're really interested in an honest discussion.

Did you not read the post? I apologize if it was too long. But, don't hold your breath for me to post stats. Anyone can find them. Google "stats for systemic racism," and I'll bet plenty will come up.

I think a lot of people have a problem with the concept of systemic racism because they may take it to imply that racism is specifically written into law, and code. That’s obviously not the case. I could do some quick (very quick) research, and cite stats about how black Americans are treated differently in everywhere from the workplace, schools, the justice system, etc., or I could go on about this country’s 400+ year history of racism. But, historic racism, and statistics don’t seem to be enough to illustrate how it is systemic. That word, “systemic,” defined as “fundamental to a predominant social, economic, or political practice,” leaves a lot to interpretation. So, consider the following occurrences: In 2015, two armed men walked into a sheriff’s station in Oregon, leaving two men guarding the station’s front door armed with shotguns, and demanded that the sheriff not take two convicted arsonists into custody to serve their sentences, threatening the sheriff with massive retaliation were he not to comply. They left without incident, and no charges were filed. A few weeks ago, a group of protesters, armed with assault rifles, entered the Michigan Statehouse, shouted at police within a foot of their faces, and impeded the movement of police, and government officials. They left without incident, and no charges were filed. In the above two cases, no other information is necessary to know exactly the complexion of those involved. But, “systemic” goes beyond just law enforcement. It’s pervasive. A systemic disease affects the whole body. Ten days ago, CNN reported on some new information regarding a child who had gone missing over a decade ago. Not one more word of information is needed— every person reading this knows exactly what this child looks like. It’s almost as if black lives just don’t matter as much. But, to your last point, I just don't accept your equivalence. Saying "no offense, but..." and then saying something offensive, is a clear path to disrespect. Kneeling, in and of itself, is not an offensive gesture. The anthem, and the flag are symbols of the country as a whole. And, honestly, I can't shake the suspicion that the vast majority of people who are so stubbornly clinging onto the "kneeling disrespects our vets" narrative truly want this protest to be disrespecting vets. It's a much safer position to be against disrespecting vets than it is to be against protesting systemic racism.

I will say that I would proudly support McD kneeling in what should, in my opinion, be considered a respectful, silent protest in solidarity with fellow Americans' struggle for civil liberties, and the end to systemic racism-- ideals that are rooted in the constitution, and for which countless veterans have given their lives.

The United States flag is not a symbol of the military, but a symbol of the entire country, as a whole. The same goes for the National Anthem. That is literally a fact. It always has been. Until Kaepernick took a knee, it had never been suggested otherwise. Grenada, Lichtenstein, and Samoa also have flags, and anthems, and they don't even have armed forces. I cannot take the opinion that Kaepernick's silent protest during the national anthem disrespects the military, because it disrespects the flag, or the anthem any more seriously than if people were saying that his protest disrespects Denny's, or Micheal Phelps. And, honestly, I can't shake the suspicion that the vast majority of people who are so stubbornly clinging onto the "kneeling disrespects out vets" narrative truly want this protest to be disrespecting vets. Because it is a much safer position to be against disrespecting vets than it is to be against protesting systemic racism. But, as I mentioned in another thread, if you have a problem with players kneeling during the anthem, you best get over it. There's going to be a lot of kneeling going on this season.

So, it's down to the Bills vs. the Syracuse Stallions....

Cosplayers, I call them.

Giants lost to the Syracuse Crunch, and the Jets lost to the NY Islanders, LOL!

I actually own that same jersey-- Lynch #23. I now live in LA. If I had been at the Seahawks @ Rams game last season, I absolutely would have worn that Jersey, and I may have worn a Rams hat as well, if someone gave me one. I wouldn't have much cared who won, but I likely would have found myself cheering had I felt like I was watching good football. And, I wouldn't have felt at all worried about my safety.