Campy

2 things: 1. -> One might argue it's much easier to put points on the board when your drives start at or near midfield than when you get the ball at your own 20. Field position not only matters, but with a ball-control offense, it's critical. 2. -> I took a look at the stats for NFL kickers from 40-49 yards. I took the NFL kickers who have attempted FGs of 40-49 yards, and the average is 66.67059%. Which isn't too far from the 70% figure you used, but does not take into account the average FG% from 45-50 yards exclusively. Had those stats been broken down by the NFL, I think that average would drop dramatically. Since the earlier poster said punting from the 30, that makes for a 47 yard FG. He later said the 35 yard line in the same post, which would make it a 52 yard FG. At 50+ yards, the NFL average is 60.037%. What it comes down to is: Would you rather take a 60-67% chance of scoring 3 points while giving the opponent a 40-33% chance of getting ball at midfield, or do you like the odds of that an opponent won't be able to march the ball 80+ yards and scoring against our defense? I'll take field position every time.

We've since moved, but last year our neighbor had a grease fire while doing his bird in the driveway. The burning grease rolled under is Expedition and... well, you can guess the rest. It did make for an exciting Thanksgiving though!

Line of Scrimmage at the 30 is a 47 yard FG. That's pushing the range of most kickers, isn't it? If they miss the kick, the opponent gets the ball where the hold was, so punting from there is all part the field-position game. I agree with Mularkey there. It's much tougher to move the ball 80 (or more) yards on our D than it is to move the ball 53.

Tacklers are not supposed to lead with their forehead. They should lead with their facemask. Leading with the forehead puts a tackler at risk of receiving an axial load or flexion injury to the C-Spine. Leading with the facemask, or more specifically, the nose, greatly eliminates the risk of those injuries. The only exception would be it another defender came over the top of the tackler and hit the tackler in the crown, which could produce a hyper-extension injury (neck rolls -or horsecollars- like Adams and Gash's help reduce those). Having a player come over the top and impacting on the tackler when his head is down (leading with the forehead or crown) produces flexion and axial load injuries, the most common football-related neck injuries - think Dennis Byrd.

You guys make it too complicated. I watch football, drink beer, and wait for Mrs Campy to let me know it's ready. Very little stress that way

I always thought the whole Paul-was-dead-thingy was from Sgt Peppers.

Don't know if you guys have seen this. I thought it was interesting. NBC war reporter Kevin Site's "Letter To The Devil Dogs Of 3.1"

Please link to a post where I said I thought Vick was a "career-choker." I did say that he hasn't won a game with a big play. Therein lies a difference. And no, I don't think Bledsoe is a "career-choker." A couple of Bills games played in NE about 5 or so years ago proved that.

Sam Adams had a monster game and they beat us. Maybe 5 or 6 years ago? EDIT: Oops! It was the last game of the 2000 season, and we won 42-23. But Sam Adams still had a good game.

Luckily for us we've had four years of John Ashcroft.

You don't think that was in reference to a certain special teams coach?

There's little doubt the Bills have struggled on the road -which incidentaly is where the primetime games have been played. I would disagree with calling him a career-choker.

His 3 TDs to Campy were read progressions, and a QB rating of 108 is "mediocre"?

Wilfork's shot to the back of Jonas' head AND the leg-whip were illegal. Big difference.

An excerpt from a very lengthy article in the journal American Criminal Law Review

I've read that many of these people believe that when the Tax Act (of 1913?) was repealed and replaced with the internal revenue code in 1939, Congress left out the part where they specifically said that you must pay taxes. Something tells me that if that was accurate at one time, that's a loophole that would've been closed looooong ago..

I watched the game, but I don't recall seeing this incident. By all accounts it sounds like the play was away from Holt, and tackling him would've been defensive holding. I'd rather not see our guys do that stuff. I love the way our D lines up, looks opponents in the eye, and smacks 'em around, but dirty stuff like Nate's play is an invitation for someone to take a shot at Willis' knee.

When our QB has a rating over 100, I'd say my expectations have been met.

Considering that St Louis had the #4 ranked passing offense in the league, I think that the D played lights out. They also held Faulk to 6 yards on 13 carries.

http://www.greenbaynewschron.com/page.html?article=128703

I thought that his middle name was Frederick. I just took a look at the roster on bb.com, and that's not the case.

JP's post-game comments. "It's time to take this seriously. I have to be able to go out there and not screw up." I don't remember the exact quote, but he also said something along the lines of "I don't know when my number will be called, so I have to know the plays, pay attention, and be ready."

Is it just me, or does the football look like junior-sized nerf ball when it's in Sam's mitts?

Special Teams are exciting to watch again - for all of the right reasons! I remember posters coming out of the woodwork ripping April when Mularkey hired him. I wonder if they've changed their tune?

NFL.com