The Dean

I doubt that. Ralph has been right about league issues far more than he has been wrong. But this one I simply can't understand. Why not play a SB in the cold. That is something the Bills should desire, IMO. EDIT: I'd really like to hear the Bills reasons for this. Perhaps it is a fan issue. Staying in the NYC are is probably far more expensive for the average fan than staying in most other NFL cities. I'm not saying that's their reason, it's just one I thought of off the top of my head.

Just as useless to me. At least I can use a mug.

I'd rather have a mug. I don't think there is anything more useless than autographs or pictures of players.

Bingo! You could also try Enterprise or Rent a Wreck, but I think they have become expensive, too. Sometimes Alamo or Budget has a good deal, but not as good as you get from Priceline. My other piece of advice is this: Get the extra insurance ($0 deductible) and have fun! It's a rental car, after all. Dive it through a field, spill stuff in it. Get a convertible and drive in the rain with the top down. Now I'm not suggesting you trash the car. Well, maybe I am.

They are not, from what I heard a week or so ago.

Same thing happened to me this morning. I can see "Insert Coin" in IE but not in my Firefox. Overall, pretty trippy. Oh, then there is this: http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/vi...Sunbelt+BLOG%29

I would argue: if side A can walk away from a multi-year contract and owe side B nothing, while side B is bound by the terms of the contract for the entire life of the contract, the contract is egregiously benefiting side A by definition. The very thought of it is unconscionable. The courts have not taken that position, however.

And you can leave at any time and work for a different company, doing your same job. YOU are not under contract. When an NFL coach has a 4-year contract and gets fired after year #2, the team typically still has to pay that coach for two more years as that was the term of the contract. If they choose not to pay (they have to claim insubordination or some other egregious violation) there are lawsuits to fight. Same goes for an NFL GM. Any contract that binds one side but not the other is a one-sided contract.

I love me some bacon and sausage, but I'm with Chef on this one. I'll take a pass.

I'm with you on the appreciation of civil discussion and disagreement. There isn't enough of that here, or anywhere frankly. And one quick comment on your non-compete. I don't know what you do, and I am not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV) but I do know that non-compete clauses are sometimes overturned in court. This is particularly true when they are too strict and don't give the employee a reasonable opportunity to find meaningful work in their field. Best of luck to you, should you decide it is time to make a move.

I've been to the one in Jacksonville a couple of times. It didn't suck, but I wasn't impressed either. The Buffalo burger was very dry and fairly tasteless. Now, I eat my burgers and sandwiches with no condiments (except for cheese and/or bacon, but no mayo, mustard etc.). A good burger has great taste. These did not. Maybe all dressed-up they are better. Anyway I ordered mine medium-rare (or perhaps medium if they didn't allow medium-rare, I can't remember) and it was dry. I know Buffalo meat is very lean, but I have had much better. The next time I had either a hamburger or perhaps something like a French Dip. Anyway, again I wasn't particularly impressed. I think I had a decent glass of wine there though.

You are right, sports leagues have been made a special case. As a fan, I'm very glad they are. But I have to ask the question "Should they be?" The existence of the NFL (or any sports league) is hardly so important that we ignore some of the basic rules of our economy/society. The truth is, I have no really strong feelings one way or the other, but I think when we (as fans) complain about salaries and prices, we keep in mind the rules for these businesses have been bent all to hell so we have a chance to root for our teams and favorite players. I think we need to understand it is a very complicated situation. I'd also add to KD's excellent point, "how many of these other companies have one-way contracts with their employees?' As timmo notes in his post quoted below, there are at-will contracts in many fields. His company can terminate him with a 30-day notice. I have to assume that he can also leave to take a more lucrative offer, at a different company where the skills he uses for his current job are also applicable. That simply isn't the case in the NFL. It would be similar if timmo was required to stay with his company and not allowed to work at any job remotely connected to his current profession. Very well put timmo. I took an issue with one of your points above, and also wanted to mention that I am NOT for ending the draft. I was just pointing out that in a scenario whre the NFL operates like regular companies (and where one would expect an employee to honor their contract) a draft probably doesn't exist. I am well aware that a change in the the current structure (including revenue sharing) would likely mean the end of the NFL in Buffalo and many other markets. It was also mentioned in this thread the system is "broken". I agree in a sense, but I suppose it depends on how one defines "broken". The league is fabulously successful and labor and owners are becoming fabulously wealthy in the current system. Those proposing change need to keep that in mind. With that said, I have no problem with some structural changes in the NFL revenue/salary structure. I don't really like the idea of a rookie cap, but think it probably will be necessary. (More on this later.) Also I don't think there is any good way to make performance incentives a major part of the salary in a league that is so team-oriented and where performance is so subjective. It's a huge mine field, IMO. But I also don't oppose some incentives based on some objective performance measures (I just don't think you can have the entire salary structure built on them). In the league today, all teams pretty much pay the same salary and have the same contract terms for rookies. Slotting is a fact of life. The teams that don't like to pay rookies a ton of money trade away their high draft picks. Owners simply don't have it in them to march to a different drummer and when one does (like Ralph) he is labeled "cheap", "stupid", "out of touch", etc. If one or two teams make stupid signing decisions, it becomes the new de-facto standard for contracts down the road. The owners don't have to make the stupid contracts the new standard, but they tend to do just that. So, things like rookie caps are really just methods to help the owners protect themselves from themselves. And, as those protections go, a more rigid rookie cap is probably the way to go. But if you are going to limit a players 1st NFL contract, there needs to be a way to make sure he is protected financially should he suffer a career ending injury in that first contract, IMO. OK, enough rambling for now.

Well, you are right, the business is the NFL, but the teams are supposed to compete with each other much in the way businesses compete with each other. (The goal of a business is to thrive and make a profit, not to drive a competitor out of business. Is the goal of the NFL to drive the NBA out of business?) But your point makes the situation even more dire for the players. Many only have ONE real possible employer for their skills, the NFL. It's a freakin' monopoly and that screws both labor and the consumer (fans). The rules they set for their dealings with labor are tainted by that monopolistic approach. The argument that the NFL isn't a monopoly because it competes against other forms of entertainment is fairly obviously spurious. That's the argument they make, but it is completely transparent. We fans are lucky our courts have looked the other way on this for so long. EDIT: We are getting away from the point of the thread, of course. Irrespective of whether the NFL or the team is the real employer, any contract that can simply be broken by one side, and has all the limitations of the NFL contracts, isn't exactly an unfair deal in the players' favor.

Contracts will be "fair", and operate like "real contracts" when/if the NFL teams have to operate like other businesses. That is, 1. a.No draft. Players are free to negotiate with any team they like. b. Also, no salary cap, no minimum or maximum salary rules (other than the minimum wage laws). c. Players could be signed directly from High School, or junior high, or jail. Can't Dell hire anyone over the legal age to work? Well, why can't the Bills? 2. If player X signs a 3-year contract you have to pay him for those 3 years. You can cut him, but you still have to pay him. (Of course there are some situations that would void the contract, but you couldn't simply cut him because his play isn't as good as it was previously.) 3. At the end of the contract a player is free to negotiate with any team. Just like you can go to any job after your contract with one company expires. There could be a non-compete clause, I suppose, that could keep you out of the division or conference. But that would be part of the initial negotiation. In other words, the NFL will never have "fair" or "real" contracts. And if they did, it would likely mean the end of the NFL in Buffalo and many other cities. The contract rules you see today are totally biased toward the owners, and many of the rules that are in place (salary cap, restricted free agency, etc) were put there by the owners to protect themselves from themselves. Do NFL players make too much money? Probably. Do the owners make too much money? You be the judge. But don't cry for the NFL owners, or blame the players for the current system. If an owner doesn't like the contract he just cuts the player. What is the player to do if HE doesn't like the contract? The only option he has is to sit out, and you want to take that away too?

So, I think the biggest question I have after watching that is, "which of those women were you trying to bang (or actually banging)?" I recall a post way back, when you had a little crush on one of your co-workers. C'mon, you can tell us.

Anyway you would like to spin it, he made a comment. Specifically: I don't know if he was speaking his mind, or the mind of someone else. People are now commenting on his comment, and you are commenting on their comments. Seems like the way it is supposed to work, to me.

What am I missing here? He spoke his mind and others are speaking theirs about his comments. Your post suggests you only support differing opinions you agree with. Dont the protestors have the same freedom as Jackson...and you?

If you lived here on the First Coast, you could ask these guys to take a look: http://frpionline.com/ One of these guys (or someone from a similar organization) handed me a brochure the other day while I was walking down St George Street. I think I laughed for a good twenty minutes. Apparently they have an office locally. Who you gonna call?

Nice job for a 12-year old kid with no voice training (from what I understand). Crappy song, no doubt. But a good performance. Needs to polish up the piano work a little, though.

Pretty sweet.

The supermarket landscape seems to be changing (for the positive, mostly) based on my experience. While SF didn't have Wegman's, there were a number of very good grocery stores (Tower Market, Central Market) including some of the larger chains (my local Safeway was pretty nice). Plus there are a number of Trader Joe's there. And there are also plenty of Whole Foods, Real Foods and stores of that ilk. It is even more apparent here in FLA, where years ago the grocery stores were so bad we would get very angry, or laugh uncontrollably, while shopping in them. A friggin' local B-Kwik had a better selection than some of the bigger stores down here. Now, there are some very nice large Publix and Food Lion stores that almost compare to some of the lesser Wegman's stores. Still, I'd take a Wegman's, or even a big Tops International, over most of the markets down here. By far, the best single grocery store I have ever shopped is Fairway Market (I frequented the one in Plainview, Long Island). There really is nothing to compare it to, except for maybe the Broadway Market when it was hopping years ago. But the one place I feel really lost without is Trader Joe's. Those who know, know why. The TJ's in California can't be beat as they sell beer, wine and alcohol, along with Joe's terrific food inventory. It pains me to buy coffee or olive oil anywhere else.

Your gallery claims there is 1 image (in the stats) but is showing 0 of 0 images. Nothing there. Strange indeed.

Well, I agree that he won't fail due to outside issues, like too many endorsements or lack of focus. But he may simply not be good enough to be a starting NFL QB. That's what remains to be seen.

If you are looking to save a buck or two, Panasonic makes decent irons, too. http://www.consumersearch.com/steam-irons I really like my Rowenta, though. Best iron I've ever used.

Damn, I miss Bib too. His passing left a giant hole in the heart of TSW. RIP, Paul.