AKC

I'd say the developing pattern here suggests the guilt level of the antiwar losers is so high that they are prone to comparing everyone with a different viewpoint a "Nazi". Bravo!

Consistent with my position throughout the string and under the circumstances you've listed in this post, you've really done nothing that is hurting our mission except perhaps offering encouragment to others considering unpatriotic acts. How dare you compare the gutless actions of Antiwar Protestors to the Courage and Honor of a fallen soldier. You should be ashamed of yourself. Patriotism doesn't necessarily include the ability to discern between good and evil. Your comparison of the United States to Nazi Germany is another shameless and ignorant comment on your part. On the other hand anyone who spent time in Dachau would find the similarities to Hussein's Iraq quite consistent. Yes, your message is clear- shame on America for liberating 70% of the people of Iraq from the Hitler-like Hussien. You've obviously learned nothing from your family history which has led to your utter failure to appreciate the United States or it's right to defend itself against a regional threat. What's clear is you have it too good, you live in the greatest nation on this planet and render your distaste for it, going so far as to compare it to one of the most ghastly in history. One thing that is inarguable is that were we able to drop you off for a few weeks in Nazi Germany your apprecation for our democracy would immediately benefit.

You seem bright enough to grasp this, I'll give it one more shot- If, as you've alluded to, you've publicly opposed the war and been involved in anti-war activity you are part of the movement that has negatively impacted our military's recruitment of soldiers. When our recruiting is degraded by people like you, those who HAVE chosen to fight either are placed under greater strain to make up for less qualified recruits being accepted and unmet levels of recruitment. This makes the mission longer and requires more loss of lives. It's the simplest of concepts. Regardless of any guilt you suffer over your family's Nazi past you should make the most of your second chance in this country by recognizing your responsibility to the United States. I'd recomend you consider the awful thing you've gotten yourself into (much like your uncle) by putting a greater burden on our troops and immediately cease the activities that harm our troops.

We should always as a free country challenge our intellect and consider as many forms of action as we did. In fact, in this action that's exactly what was done- the country had a long and considered discussion after which our congress voted OVERWHELMINGLY IN A BIPARTISAN FASHION to enter Iraq. At that moment Americans had the choice to be Patriotic and do everything possible to make the life of our fighting forces as protected as possible. Another choice was to continue debating the issue already decided upon by our elected officials. Choosing #2 guaranteed consequences that would negatively effect our fighting forces, and the proof is overwhelming today that that is exactly what has happened. Now in their embarrasment those responsible choose to hide behind lies like "I supported the troops but not the war". It's shameful, it's unpatriotic, but unfortunately for us all it's not at all unAmerican. During WWII dissenters for the most part held their toungues, but our culture has changed now to the point where the selfishness of political aspirations have become the styrofoam foundation upon which unpatriotic activities are reasoned. To your second question- do I believe this has an effect on recruiting? All I can say if you don't recognize that it has negatively affected recruiting, especially in our big Metropolises WHICH ARE THE TARGETS OF TERRORISM, I will concede that I would not be blessed with ability to explain the shamefully and painfully obvious to you.

Of course everyone involved in a movement does not take the action of the fringe- but conversely it is those actions of the whole IMO that create the atmosphere necessary for the fringe to operate. As far as public protest of a military situation like Iraq, the damage both today and in the future to all who have and will serve is a shared responsiblity. I realize it's very common for those in a movement to attempt to distance themselves from any undesirable results of that movement, but as I've said before in my mind that's simply textbook denial.

I'm not convinced. You're saying that the anti-government ranters who preceded the OK City bombing have absolutely zero culpability in the atmosphere developing that led to that? That the anti-abortion marchers can erase any guilt over the killing of clinic staff under an equally weak and cowardly argument that "they meant no harm to individuals"? Not for me- if I enter into something that goes wrong I must accept it and do something about ceasing to support that which has gone wrong and possibly making restitution. Apparently your moral code allows you to replace responsibility with denial. If I were to stand by and watch a crowd rape a woman without doing anything to stop it, I'd be haunted for the balance of my life. I guess others can "compartmentalize" so far as to justify actions that they participate in that cause harm to others. As far as CBS, I haven't wasted time with their news for many years, you might want to check out some of the cable offerings today who at least offer some variation from the left-of-center network fare.

You're confusing intent with results. 'Nam Vets being spit on upon returning home had zero to do with anti-soldier protests, it clearly falls 100% on the public cries against the war. Are there Antiwar protesters who feel their decrying the war are today doesn't hurt the soldiers? Sure there are, but naivete is no excuse for the result: More kids will die because some of the best prospects have been influended by the Anti-war movement The climate for the returning soldiers has already been irretrievably damaged by the Antti-war movement. These heroes wil NEVER receive their full honor from the whole of our society because of the Hate Spew of those who refuse to recognize the consequences of their Anti-patriotic actions.

I'll explain it one more time for you- if you hurt recruiting, something we know the antiwar movement has targeted and affected, you reduce the quality pool of new soldiers going to the conflict. This causes multiple layers of mission degradation that results in unnecessary loss of life. I don't have a magnetic ribbon on my truck or car and I don't own a minivan. The last time I donned my old military uniform and medals it was to attend the funeral of a local hero named Cody Prosser who was killed in the initial stages of the Afghan campaign. There are surely many levels of support one might offer, but there's many names for one who claims support on one level while corrupting the mission on the other. Historically you could choose from among: Apostate, back-stabber, copperhead, double-crosser, hypocrite, quisling, treasonist, turncoat or traitor. I'd think Anti-patriotic would be favored by the PC crowd.

I'm of the opinion that you can be Patriotic and still oppose the action in Iraq, you simply must not interfere with the mission by publicly decrying the war and hurting those fighting. It's this ability to shut the &%$# up and control that opposition that divides the good and Patriotic American from the lesser American.

Supporting the troops in one manner in no way excludes the possibility of hurting them in another. One of the "Big Lies" of the antiwar movement has always been the claim to support the troops while popping off publicly about their opposition to the war and hatred of our command leaders, all during a time of conflict. It's simply an outright lie, something we can prove in any conflict including Vietnam. Ask almost any 'Nam Vet how much the Anti-war protests hurt their image and reception upon returning to the U.S. At least in 'Nam a good argument could be made that protest was responsible considering the circumstancs, but don't take the next step and falsely claim it "helped the troops" unless that claim is limited exclusively to the effect it had on our pulling out. In Iraq we have a completly different example, one hwere protest has already visibly hurt the troops and yet the conflict has recently received more and more support as a necessity from even many objective leftists. It's the few left who refuse to admit their mistakes and continue to hurt the mission, the Deaniacs if you will, who should be ashamed and should immediately cease their unpatriotic actions based upon the clear evidence of those acitons causing needless deaths in Iraq.

It's become perfectly clear that the best thing that could happen for the courageous Americans serving in the Iraq War is to have the best and brightest of our young people joining them to close this chapter in the most efficient manner possible. Unfortunately, and due directly to the lack of Patriotism excercised by many in the anti-war crowd, instead of the best of our youth considering the military as an honorable endeavor many instead view it as a jaded choice. Today, when the best among us are achieving their daily goals in Iraq, the gutless jellyfish who insisted on "excercising their right to rebel" have caused recruiting goals to go into the red. Patriotism IS NOT the excercise of our rights, it instead is the ability to recognize WHEN the exercise of our rights is appropriate. There has been much talk in politics the past few years about "admitting being wrong". Oddly it is those who most fervently demanded contrition of political figures who have gone silent on admitting that their actions hurt, and continue to hurt our country. Today needless strains on the manpower necessary to complete the task in Iraq are inarguably the result of the lack of good judgement by the vocal opponents of the war. There is no shame in being absolutely wrong and admitting it, there is eternal shame for handicapping our fighting forces and refusing to at the very least cease the unpatriotic attacks that continue to damage our country.

I agree the media isn't characterizing the ankle problems as "chronic", but old news reports lead me to agree with BadOl that that's a fair assessment. He's shown up on the Card injury list for ankle injuries (mostly sprains) while missing games and practice for the same in every one of his NFL seasons until '04. The question is did his surgery on the right ankle after the '03 season actually correct what had definitely been a chronic problem up to that time? The feud with Green seems to be almost exclusively caused by Shelton's failure to meet Green's directive to show up in camp at 320 pounds last year. Shelton gets relief in some quarters due to his two surgeries in that off-season, but obviously Green doesn't feel the same way. I have a lot of trouble accepting Green's decision as merely setting an example for the team- Green has gone further out of his way than almost any contemporary coach in cutting talented players slack. Reading between the lines another reason Green might have given up on Shelton is that Shelton may be a much better run blocker than pass pro OT. There's plenty of game results that seem to suggest this, and Green's weight demand would be consistent with the same. If this speculation is accurate, Shelton would be a poor fit in the pure passing O Green wants to play while the fit in Buff might be very good. We've already kicked a LT with superior passing skills but limited value in the running game to the curb plus brought in a bruising OG who is a far better run blocker than pass blocker. Along with the QB change it's looking more and more like the Bill's intend to immediately utilize the mobility of Losman to mask the pass pro issues of the superior run blockers we're adding. All in all, and the additon of Shelton may be the ultimate confirmation of this; it looks like the '05 Bills Offense will look a whole lot different than anything we've had in a long time- maybe ever. A power running team with threats at every backfield position using a combination of play action and moving pockets to force teams from cheating the line. The bad news is that much in that case would ride upon a kid just getting a feel for the speed of the big leagues. That's asking more of J.P. than Pitt put on Big Ben- onfield success at the offensive style we appear to be headed to would go far in elevating TD's reputation as a talent evaluator.

Des pops in every now and then. He's an honest and knowledgeable poster who has contributed much to the football wealth on this board. He also was the one who first brought to (my) (our) attention the exchange issues that made Dan Marino a running back killer, something old film always confirms. Not to mention that he was a betting man who kept his word; a true model for fans of other teams whose fine example of behavior in our forum is too often ignored by the trolls we've attracted in the past year.

Beased upon many of nominations in this string it's clear that the content in one's posts bears no relationship to their fitness for nomination into the TSW WOF. Therefore, under the authority of no one in any capacity to forward this process through to its inevitably unpleasant culmination, I hereby make a nomination of the historically appropriate TSW poster child of all content vacuum: Belinda Belinda Belinda Belinda!

My failure to consider your thoroughness is inexcusable. My penance shall be to read 20 BFinIND and 10 stevestojan posts.

4 pages into this string and I don't see FakeFatSunny mentioned ONCE? Either my age has finally caught up with my vision or I will join the rest of the posters in the string in being ashamed of ourselves.

And is there a more burning example of that than the fact that the name of a serious football contributor like yourself comes up first only in your own post? MyBad for not expanding the field earlier to include you and a dozen others in what I realized would become another "style" thread on TSW ignoring the fundamental attraction this board was built upon.

Very nice!

Let's make sure we reserve the absolutely devoid of original thought a seat up front as opposed to posters like Simon and BadOl who've merely been wasting bandwidth here with serious posts about football. yawn.....

And Gilbert Gottfried can finally get that Oscar he's done so much to deserve.

I'm with you on the vast majority of your analysis so of course let me point out the one thing I have trouble with: Those same concrete spikes that make Smith a non-factor in space on running downs would spell disaster on either edge of the line. He can hide them inside in pass blocking since for an OG pass pro is more of a slow dance with your feet, but on the edge you've got something more akin to a tango. I'd like to see him develop his coordination to the max by putting in 3 hours of jumping rope every day this off-season but even then I suspect he just doesn't have the liveliness in his legs necessary to ever be a effective pulling run blocker or pass blocker on the edge. If he did get a look at OT I'd have to believe they'd want him to get the protection of having a TE help him out more often on the Strong side, but even then there's an awful risk against any DE with lateral speed. It's also hard to imagine him picking up a smaller blitzer- IMO he just doesn't have the instincts to make the adjustments to his sides.

If you run through the OCs in the league you'll only find about 3 or 4 who are capable of holding their own with any regularity against quality interior linemen. Consequently few teams even ask their OC to hold singles against DTs. One exception we get to see a lot of is Kevin Mawae, one of the best in the league and one of the only OCs trusted to single teams, especially in pass protection, against better DTs. Would it be great to sign Mawae- sure, it's just not going to happen and even if a drafted OC becomes one of these exceptions to the rule it will almost surely take him 3 seasons to get competent at all the other duties associated with the position including making line calls and improving dramatically the speed in which he gets off his snap and up into his block from the far less demanding college game. The bottom line on OCs is simply that we're like most teams, and even most good teams, in that we've got a center who requires some protection from his sides and shouldn't be left alone regularly against any of the top 30-35 DTs in the league. The plus we have with Teague is that he at least offers us very good flexibility off the snap in our run game. I beleive the team likes him a lot and feels he's a big contributor, especially on the edge where they like to bounce Willis outside his blocks and really force defenses to play their linebackers and DB help wide- giving Willis more breathing room when he does go inside.

I think of an effective OLine as a little more complicated unit- no doubt we want power inside with a RB like Willis but it's important to maintain some versatility. If you plug another power run blocker in between to power OGs you really limit the things you can do on the edges and how you get defensed. The running offense we played last year asked a lot of our center to get outside and seal, and Teague was very effective at doing that. He has a good feel for moving through traffic and then he's flexible enough to get around for a block on a quicker and smaller player. On his right side you have a more classic power blocking OG in Villarial, someone who will work his butt off to pull all the way to the other side yet he just doesn't have the range of motion of a Trey Teague to finish in space. If we're able to address the LG spot with a big body with good run blocking skills at the LOS we are probably better served, at least if we play a similar offense to last years, in having one interior lineman who excels on the go. That could leave Trey Teague in a pretty safe spot on the depth chart.

From a column on www.nfldraftblitz.com: Kelvin Garmon has been a huge disappointment, even before his knee injury. Garmon can't play in space and protect, period. His run blocking appears overrated too. Apparently he has an almost unique penchant for idiotic penalties with incredibly poor timing. Atthe same time he prides himself on having the refs watch him closely because "you never know when I'm gonna' slap somebody upside the head". Last season strained quad, concussion and torn ACL and MCL. Sounds like a reach based upon the matter in his noggin' and maybe carrying 350 pounds on a chassis that would prefer 290.

I'll admit your ability to digest a compliment is peculiarly Mantis-like, as if it portends a visit from the more fair of the species.