Dan

I have to ask.... Seriously, what have the Bills done in the last 3 years to make anyone think they would change things up or gameplan for a particular opponent? For the most part, I can sit on my couch gettin my drink on with some eats and easily call 80-90% of the plays just based on player substitutions and formations. Why would we suddenly change that just because TO is out there? Although I do suspect they'll throw in a few WR double reverse runs in for him each game.

I've actually had work to do the last few days (sucks I know), so I completely missed all this. I'm still not entirely sure what you're all talking about, but I can surmise the gist of it. I really can't imagine a more tasteless, shameful thing to do than to spread rumors of a person's passing. If ever there were a justification for a lifetime posting ban, I would think it falls into that category.

Why not keep the rules the exact same with one minor exception... The initial coin toss of the game determines who receives. Why not make whoever receives the opening kick also receives the overtime kickoff. It would give more potential importance to the decision to defer the opening kickoff if you win the coin toss. So Team A receives opening kick. Team B gets 2nd half kickoff. Team A then gets the overtime kickoff, if needed. Right now the vast majority of coaches are deferring the opening kickoff, make them think about that decision.

You got me to thinking.. .so here's more from a 2009 NPR Article: Perhaps we're both right? Interesting point in that snippet for me was the idea that field goal kickers were having a big impact in the overtime results. Makes sense, when you think about it. I just hadn't thought about it.

Actually, that's a misconception. According to a USA Today article, the team that has won the toss has won 169 times (52.0%). And both teams have had possession 235 times (72.3%). Based on those umbers, I would argue that history has shown that in the majority of overtimes, both teams do get the ball and therefore a chance to win the game. So, IMO, no reason to fix what's not broken.

Excellent suggestion. I hadn't tried that one. I shall, though. Yeah, I think it was some variant of win32.virut or some such nonsense. I wrote several names down but left all those notes in ID. So I'm going off memory. I can't help but be attracted to the dark side of the web from time to time. Occasionally it gets me into trouble, but what's life without a little risky adventure from time to time. But, sometimes don't you just want to see if you can get a program's title bar to be a different color or use your own image for the splash screen? There's several good programs out there that do great jobs at customizing/altering programs and all, but sometimes its more fun to figure it out yourself.

No doubt. I had to wipe, reformat and reinstall XP from the original CDs. I knew I had something as my antivirus was popping up several things here and there. But then this thing, apparently, gets into the system files. In less than a day, my laptop was dead in the water - nothing but a blue screen (fatal errors message) on start up. I mean it was toast! Panic, my familiar friend, settled in for a rather late night. I'm telling you now, Ultimate Boot Disk for Windows saved my life. I was able to start off the CD, and copy all my files to a backed up USB drive. Not knowing how severe it was, I tried some virus scans again. After another day of fartin around, I wiped the drive, did a low level reformat and started over. Got it all going again, reinstalled my files. The damn virus hopped onto the USB drive and got back on my comp. So now I deleted all my installers, wiped and reformatted the USB drive. Transferred my files back to the USB - minus the .exe types. Wiped again, reinstalled, and eventually got back up. Then I just spent a couple days getting rid of trojan malware type things that were probably remnants of the original infection that got transfered with my personal files. All in all, it was a real B word to say the least. Reading a little these last few days, it appears to be a fairly new virus only a month or so old. None of the antivirus programs are able to fully remove it yet, and most troubling it doesn't just hijack your browser and slow your machine down, it rewrites system files, infects most .exe files and shuts your machine down. Definitely a challenge. Worst thing was... I didn't even get it cruisin for porn. So I didn't even get free porn out of the deal. I'm fairly certain I got it cruisin some nefarious sites that discuss hacking into programs and such (a late night hobby, if you will).

Just as an update... I finally got that computer and was out in Idaho last week setting it up. Let me just say... it absolutely screams! By far the fastest computer I've been on. It'll be used mostly for relatively high end GIS stuff and it'll more than handle it. Installed: Vista64 SP1- no problems. It was actually quite quick and easy. No complaints what so ever. Avira. And some standard programs (Office, Adobe, ArcMap). Overall impression with CyberPower PC was great. The machine arrived excellently packed; looked good; and appears very solid in its construction. I'd say, hands down, best computer I've ever played with. (Cost was about $2100 not counting software.) As another aside: On a separate machine (on my personal laptop!) I got one hell of a virus - Win32/Heur (virut-type thing). It was an absolute beast. If anyone gets it - trust me - immediately back up your files (not the *.exe's) wipe your drive, reformat and start from scratch. It was a week of pure hell. By far the worst virus I ever came across.

I'm using this as an example that clearly several posters in this thread are commenting on Stewart and the Daily Show without ever watching the Daily Show. The program is actually a satirical parody of News Stations, not so much the news itself. Certainly, he will often mock news stories and/or figures. But, the foundation of the show is to mock the other News Channel's coverage of the news. And in that regard he mocks them all - CNN, Fox, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, you name it. And, yes, he's even mocked Obama and the media's love for Obama. No one is safe nor should they be. I watched that interview, and I must tell you.. that's about as serious and hard hitting as Stewart has ever been. It almost made me uncomfortable. All I can figure is he lost a crap load of money in the market. But, he clearly wasn't targeting Cramer as much as he was CNBC and calling them out for what they are - entertainment, as opposed to what they claim to be - experts. And Chef, I agree with you, people that invest based on what some guy on TV says are idiots. But the reality is.. a lot of people do. They do it because they don't know any better, because the guys on TV profess to be experts with inside knowledge, and because they're idiots. But, it doesn't change the fact that they do it, and these guys on TV know that people do it. So, as Dean's suggesting, shouldn't those TV experts be held to some level of accountability in the advice they spew or at least have the decency to post a disclaimer that says don't take me serious or something. Interesting stuff.

I don't have a problem at all with TO and Evans being properly contained but NE* or anyone's DBs. If so, that almost certainly means someone (Reed, Hardy, etc.) is open underneath and Lynch is finally not facing 8 or 9 guys in the box on every friggin run. The problem we've had for years is with no legitimate 2nd WR - Evans is double covered. The #2 is single covered. And 8 guys are at the line breaking up the underneath passes or run game. I'd love to see TO or Evans routinely single covered. But, if not, then maybe Lynch finally has some room to roam.

OK.. I was feeling completely uninspired by this team, but I got an idea for the patch finally. So here's my submission.... linky do. Granted, it took closer to 45 minutes, but I had someone over my shoulder constantly telling me to resize this or try that. I still say it's a little busy; I don't like the idea of both logos in there. But it seems all the AFL teams were doing that. Plus I thought I'd try to stick with their design as much as I could and just "tweak" it, as opposed to completely redo it.

Me, personally, I think it'd be pretty cool for TO to not wear 81 as a Bill. Perhaps it could signify a change in scenery, a change in attitude? If you get a chance to interview TO, I'd be interested to know if he has started to think about his legacy in the NFL. He's certainly put up HOF numbers thus far in his career, but right now most people don't seem to mention him as a lock for the HOF (perhaps I'm wrong; I haven't really followed all TO's press clippings - if so, ignore all this). So, is there a chance he makes a conscience effort to tone down his rhetoric, concentrate on his play and try to be part of turning a franchise around - all in an effort to leave a more favorable lasting impression on HOF voters in the future? Just a thought as hopeful and perhaps as selfish as it may be.

"...but Jauron won’t let that “character” dismantle his view of winning." I'm sorry, but that's exactly what I would hope TO can do. Because Jauron's view of winning has been killing us for 3 years sand counting.

I'll give ya a hint.. it starts with a Ka and ends with something that rhymes with Boyz. Hamdan's got it and there's no denying it!

I think you're completely right. Those were some bad years. Fortunately, I'm of the age that I don't quite remember them. I was just young enough to still be able to wipe them from my memory. Of course, its difficult to compare eras, but with FA and the "parity" of today's NFL it's almost more difficult to see a team stay perpetually bad. In an age where the Fins can go from 1-15 to division winners in one year, the Cardinals can be in the Super Bowl, and 2 rookie QBs can make the playoffs; you have to wonder how can anyone be as bad as Detroit and Buffalo have been. You do bring up an interesting point though about OJ, as great as he was what did the Bills do with all that talent? Truly amazing being a Bills fan ain't it.

Must be nice to have people.

Jon Stewart Eviscerates CNBC and Rick Santelli - March 4, 2009

First of all, signing Fitzpatrick never had any luster to begin with. I'll be somewhat surprised if Hamdan doesn't start the season as the #2 QB. Secondly, bringing in a litany of aging, big name, big price FAs has never been the way to build a franchise and make the Superbowl. It hasn't worked for Washington or Dallas. It didn't work for the Jets last year. So, stop the insanity. And C, despite the buzz over TO, we still need offensive and defensive line help if we want to do anything next year. Period. Although serious help at the LB position is a very close 3rd, if not second on the list. And just for good measure, a new coaching staff wouldn't be such a bad idea either. But, I digress now.

I think we could contend that our current streak of futility is coming in a close second. Since 2000, we've only won 9 games once (2004). We're also approaching our 0 fer streak against Miami, having beaten the Pats* only once in the last 7 or 8 years. Granted we've not had as many 9 or 10 loss seasons, but we're still pretty bad for the past 9 seasons.

Add to that... you're losing games and eventually out of the playoff race. I'm not sure I agree with all the drama, but maybe he had a point. More Barber and more TO and maybe they would have been in the playoffs.

Which is why there won't be any problems. Evans gets all the balls on Friday, when Jauron focuses on playing his best. TO gets all the balls on Sunday, when he focuses on playing his best. See, it really is a win win.

Yeaaah. I made the cut! Unfortunately, I couldn't quite figure out that whole "name (city)" concept; so I'm now known as "Dan from Parts Unknown". Excellent! Now I just need to get me a horse with no name.

You can delete mine... no sense causing the whole internet to crash.

I'm fairly certain I don't know what this play action thing is you speak of. The Bills' offense hasn't used play action or slant passes for years. Perhaps TO will change all that, but until I see it on the field, I'll be reserved in my enthusiasm for this great new NFL-style offense we'll magically begin to run.

I'd suggest that this is several players and coaches year to finally show some progress. And Trent falls squarely into that category as well. If he can't throw the ball down the field and into the endzone with Evans and TO on the field, I'd hope we go lookin for a new QB regardless.