Dan

If I were owner of the Bills... I'd walk into the locker room before the game. Lay $15,000 on a table. And tell the team that the first one to knock Brady on his ass gets it. Then, I'd lay $10K beside it and promise that to the second guy that hit Brady. Finally, I'd lay $5K down for the 3rd guy to knock him on his back. Then I'd tell them, if you hit him first and he doesn't get up.... you get all $30 grand.

What does this have to do with Seinfeld?

Thanks you. To ans4e64, I would ask... what is your definition of a Dynasty? It's been 5 years since the Pats* last Super Bowl win. Yes, they were in the Super Bowl 2 years ago. But, they lost that game. Yes, they've been a perennial playoff team. But, does that make them a Dynasty? I would say that winning 3 SBs in 4 years could potentially equal a dynasty, but it would be a relatively short one or perhaps average - certainly not one of the longest in NFL History. Granted, their dominance of the Bills is approaching the Fins dominance of the 70's. So perhaps it seems to us it feels like a long dynasty. But, again, in terms of the NFL at large I'd say they were an average tenured dynasty. If losing a SB is still factored into your dynastic reign, then the 90's Bills were definitely a dynasty. Thing is... no one ever refers to those Bills teams as an NFL dynasty.

If I may offer my completely inconsequential opinion, I think this board is very properly moderated. I'm on the internet every day. I visit a multitude of message boards on a variety of issues. Yet there is only one online community that I would care to register (with my real name no less - I still wonder why I did that) and visit every day. And that, of course, is this board. There a several other Buffalo Bills boards I could frequent but don't. Why? Well, I'll tell you. Because of the way this board is moderated. You guys let just enough of the crap through to make the place interesting, but no so much that the place is completely cluttered with inane ramblings and nonsensical posts. Its a good mix, and I for one, wouldn't change anything about this site. (Well, maybe update the video on TBD site more frequently but that's neither here nor there.) With that being said, I think there's also a fair amount of "community moderating" that goes on here. If I, or any one else, posts something that's completely off base or fabricated, I get jumped on by any number of posters calling me out on my claim. Now some posters may not like that. For example, Dog is concerned that Dean is being too harsh. Perhaps. But, at that same time, as a new poster deciding to post, I think it makes you think twice before making crap up and posting it. At least, that's the only way I can figure that this place doesn't get completely over run with crap threads like so many other message boards do. Perhaps, you moderators do more behind the scenes to quiet bothersome posters. I don't know. So are some posters harsh at times on others? Perhaps. But, I think it gets itself worked out. Taking myself as an example again, I'd never make some crap up and post it in 2 or 3 separate threads, because I know Dean or DC or someone would call me out. Personally, I think that's a good thing in general. Either way, I agree people should try to be a little more courteous to others. They should also make sure they have all their facts straight before they post. I'd suggest they also think twice about whether their post was actually adding anything of value to the discussion as well. But, I guess if everyone did that It be a pretty boring place.

Because the coaches.... ummmm... suck?

Agreed none of us have a choice. I really want this team to succeed as well this season and see no valid reason why they shouldn't this year - save one. But all teams have injuries. The Pats* lost their franchise QB and slotted in a guy that hadn't started in years.. yet they continued to win. You can't call that depth. And, yes, the team was stacked around Cassell. But, Bellicheck did it once before when Drew went down and a 6th round pick took the team to the Super Bowl. Like it or not, sooner or later, we have to say that the Pats* are a very well coached team. And, of course, they cheat. Fins, I agree, are a tough team to get a handle on. Was last year a fluke due to easy schedule? I'm not sure either. But, I would argue that their coaches took a less talented team (than the Bills) farther. Both clubs had a soft schedule last year. Yet one was creative and well-disciplined and made it to the playoffs, another didn't.

I agree with you to an extent. But, can't a good coaching staff turn those average players into playmakers? Put another way, are our players not making plays because they're not competent or because they're not in a position to make those plays? When you motion Reed across the line and run Lynch to his side every time, is it Lynch's fault the defense has completely read the offense and stacks that side of the line? Is it a coincidence that fairly average or aging players suddenly perform well in NE? Or does the coaching staff in NE consistently put those players in a position to make plays. Look at Miami, a decent coach came in, developed a new game plan to take advantage of his players, and suddenly they're 11-5. Can we really say that the fins have that much more talent than the Bills?

But isn't it partly or mostly the coaches responsibility to instill that winning attitude, teach them proper blocking assignments for their system, and emphasize the basics like tackling.

Precisely and that is why this coaching staff sucks. We can all point to several games lost because of a critical call/non call by the coach. The play calling as been amateurish at best. The uninspired, overly predictable, slow decision making, lack of in game adjustments team that we've seen these last few years is a direct reflection of our coaching staff. I would argue that one of the critical elements that a HC brings to a team is an identity. Whether the team is know as tough, hard hitting, finesse, resilient, whatever is typically instilled be the HC. So I ask, what identity do the Bills have? What style of football do we play? I suppose this season will be THE season, again. We have plenty of talented players in most positions. The vast majority have has multiple seasons to learn the defensive and offensive systems (if we even have systems).

I've been suggesting that for several seasons. The real problem is I think you can extend that to most positions on the field.

A great player. A sad ending.

Don't worry dog... you can talk to me any time. Feel free to ask any questions you'd like.

Am I the only one that thinks its an insult to Hardy that everyone keeps using that photoshoped pic of Hardy with Owens' name on it? If I were Hardy, I'd be pretty pissed. You make one good play all season and it gets wiped out just like that.

But right there, you state the problem with the Bills and it's in a line that extends directly to the coaching staff. When was the last time you thought this team was properly prepared? Name a game that they've devised a game plan for a specific opponent to take advantage of weaknesses? How many times has this team come out of the locker room flat and uninspired? How many timeouts have been lost because the play didn't get called in from the sideline properly? Add to this, the 2 or 3 times a game that Jauron just makes the wrong in-game decision and it should be obvious that yes, indeed, our coaching sucks. I tried to give these guys the benefit of the doubt. I'm a very patient person. But, it's been 3 years. Can anyone honestly say that they've seen the game plans improve? seen the clock management improve? seen a winning attitude instilled in the players? We haven't. This last season it became horrendously apparent with a colossal failure in the second half of the season, culminating with the complete ineptitude of our final game against the Pats*, that this coaching staff is woefully lacking. Can they suddenly become competent with more talent (i.e TO)? We'll see. But I, for one, won't be expecting much. Seriously, after witnessing last year's debacle, who can possibly get excited if we start this season 1-0, 2-0, hell even 4-0? Sure, it'd be nice, but until I see the words "clinched playoff spot" beside the Bills' name in the standings, it'll be hard to get too excited. Sucks, I know. But, that's what keeping Jauron and the status quo has done for this fan. I have all the desire in the world to see this team win, but no hope whatsoever that it'll be this season. I was disheartened when Jauron was retained. And, despite a decent off season or trades and drafting, I fail to see how any of it matters when they come out uninspired and unprepared. My question is what will everyone say when TO is running end around fake reverses and WR screens with no blocking 3 or 4 times per game or deep sideline routes while Trent is checking down? Will we fail because TO is old, a problem, or because the coaches are doing what they've done for quite some time now - call all the wrong plays at all the wrong times?

Let's face it both of these guys are complete busts and just further proof that th FO is run by idiots. Neither Wood nor Levitre are starters, not to even mention they've done absolutely nothing to help the running game. Has Lynch or Jackson had one decent run behind them? No. Have they provided a key block for a touchdown? No. Look at Lynch's stats... he's done nothing since we picked both these guys. Facts are facts and you can't argue with figures. And the fact is neither of these guys have done anything worth getting on Sportscenter. I say trade them both now while we can still get a 5th rounder and a bag of chips for them. Busts. Called it first.

There's plenty of love for Fred Jackson on this board. In fact, I can't readily recall anyone that's down on the guy. However, to suggest that he's the best RB on the team is a little more than love, it's borderline infatuation. I would suggest you're making the same mistake in interpreting the stats that many people make when they conclude that the backup QB should replace the starter after 1 or 2 good games. There's a reason some players are backups and some are starters. It's not necessarily who's better. But, more of a case of players filling the role they're being asked to fill. I would say we're fortunate to have a backup as capable as Jackson.

Thanks for the kind remarks. I would agree on one point. Certainly, I think almost anyone should be considered for a trade, barring a franchise quarterback perhaps. However, if we trade Whitner for a high round pick and select a top flight nose tackle, aren't we just continuing the trend of trading one hole for anther. Why not keep Whitner, allowing him to solidify the safety position for years to come and select a high round NT next year as well? Granted, this year not withstanding, we don't have a good track record for picking linemen. But, if I had input that'd be what I would lobby for. With Whitner, McGee, McKelvin, the secondary should be set for the time being. Now it should be time to concentrate on the line (then LB). But not if we continue cutting/trading the DBs.

This thread has definitely gone down a bad path. But you gotta admit, its kinda fun to read. It's almost like looking at monkeys in the zoo, you just can't believe some of the stupid crap they do (or say, in this case). However, given the premise of the thread, I knew it was doomed from the first post. Seriously, there's no way you trade Whitner. I don't think anyone was glad we drafted him initially. To this day, I'd guess about 50% of the people here still wouldn't draft him. None the less, he has become a solid player that's a leader on the team. No, he's not one of the top 2 or 3 safeties in the league. But, by no means does that mean he should be traded either. I would say that Whitner's biggest problem (for some people) is that too many people play fantasy football. All they know are certain stats that get them points. Whitner doesn't average a couple of interceptions a game, so they never see his name pop up on their FF sheets, ergo he must suck. Put Whitner on a team with a decent pass rush and decent HC; and watch his FF numbers improve. The entire argument over Whitner s indicative of most Bills' fans short sightedness which probably stems from watching a team lose as much as we have over the last decade. But, everyone is always ready to trash everyone for the next big thing. The optimism around JP was huge. Why? He wasn't Bledsoe. I remember at the time, we would win 2-3 more games just because Bledsoe wasn't back there. Trent is great. Why? Because he isn't JP. I said it day one, my biggest worry over starting Trent 3 years ago was that it would set our team back 3 years. Well, here we are. Same with our new center. He's great. Why? Because he's not Fowler. And I could go on for almost every roster spot for years. But, the fact of the matter is this: not all the Bills players are bad or need to be cut just because they don't make the highlight reel. No team has a probowler at every position. It may be difficult to spot the nuances of each player's play, but educated observers do. And just because there may have been better or good players drafted after the Bills selected someone, that doesn't mean the player can't become good. I was equally shocked and dismayed at the selection of Whitner; however, it's nice to see that he's become a good, solid player that's a leader on the team. (This post is not entirely directed at you Bill, justs the first half)

Saving money is easy. Just don't buy stuff. Nuff said. And if you get a job, get one at a restaurant. Free food. With free food and not buying stuff, you'll have all the money you'll ever need.

Best of luck. I'm a little late, but just remember.. you know more about your research than any of your committee members do. Also, it's almost unheard of for them to let you walk into that room unless they're prepared to accept your dissertation. Honestly, look at the defense as more of a celebration. You're done. Nothing left but some good discussion about your work. Your committee gets one more chance to stick it to you before you join the club, and they will - just because they can. But, in the end, welcome...

More secure with regards to malware/spyware. Plus less buggy in general.

Disconnect from the internet - either unplug your ethernet cable or tell your wireless to disconnect. Then when you open Firefox, it should almost immediately go to a screen that says it can't connect to the server. Then you should be able to change whatever settings you want. Close FF, reconnect, then you should be good to go.

Well that sucks. I was hoping you'd say you were using IE 8.0. That way I could just bad mouth Microsoft. But, what you're suggesting is a real dilemma. Usually, people can't get neww tab to open, but to open - and just not properly load the link is strange. There have been some bugs associated with IE 8, that are similar to your suggestion; and it's possible that IE could change the way all your browsers are operating. (its happened to me in the pasts). I'll do a little research and see what I can determine. In the meantime. It might be worthwhile to go to your "Add/Remove Programs" Control Panel and remove Firefox, then do a clean install. My guess is that some setting has gotten corrupted. You could go into "about:config" and see them, but without knowing which specific one to change you could spend days. I respect Fezmid's opinion; however, I'd do 2 things before a complete wipe and re-install. First update your spyware/antivirus software and run it to see if anything is picked up. Second, if no other programs are misbehaving, let's give it a couple of days to see if there's something else going on. Again, I'm thinking you just have a setting (possibly registry entry) that's gotten changed for the bad. (Of course, a complete wipe/re-install would fix that as well.) I'll keep thinking and get back to you... (right now I have to leave for the airport) Edit: Found some ideas. Most of what I'm seeing has to do with IE 8. However, maybe there's some carry over from IE to Firefox and Opera. But, here's a few things to try: 1. I've read suggestions that AVG antivirus' Link Scanner can cause this symptom. So, if you're using AVG or a similar antivirus that's checks website links, try turning that off and see if the problem is resolved. 2. This site has an idea. No idea how it may work, but maybe worth a shot? 3. Most discussion seems to center around possible conflicts with add-ons. So, if you've gotten any add-ons installed, I'd try turning them all off and then turn them on one at a time to see if and when the problem comes back. Perhaps youo could pin it down to one problematic add-on. The problem with all these is that with intermittent problems, it may take you a few days to see if any of the "fixes" work. Also, the fact that it's wider spread than just IE, makes me think it could be something totally different. But also leads me to think that the antivirus could be the culprit.

I'd agree. I think Tim's comments were spot on. Right down to the suggestion that too many Bills' fan try to rationalize his departure. But, I suppose that's to be expected. It's tough to admit we just traded away our franchise LT. I guess it remains to be seen if Peters was all that. But, I will say that for all Peters greatness and talk of how bad Trent is going to get abused this year, it seems Trent got sacked quite a bit last year - with Peters on the line. Rationalization or not. I guess if we had some assurance that the 2009 Peters was going to play like the 2007 Peters, then maybe it'd be more of a concern. But, let's not forget that even in 2007, Peters didn't finish the season. So, at any rate... now I think I'm rationalizing. So I'll shut up.

This kinda sums it up. Bottom line was regardless of Peters' talent, he had a miserable attitude and sand bagged last season. Do you reward a player like that? You can't. You'd have every player on the team trying to hold the team hostage for new contracts in short time. The real question should be, should the Bills have made Peters the highest paid lineman after the 2007 season? IMO, no. You can't renegotiate every 2 years based on a players performance. The FO locked him up for 5 years at a great contract and everyone thought it was a great move. They had their franchise LT at a great price. Next thing you know the guy has a good year and wants to throw the contract out and now the FO is bad? I don't get it. Again, I think the FO had little options and Peters forced the situation. So, is he a great talent? Yes. Do you reward a player with your highest contract that tanks the entire off season and under performs during the regular season? No. Was the whole situation unfortunate? Yes. And I'd suggest that both sides had a hand in it. Either way, it was time to move on.