Numark3

Okay.....the other GDT today.....http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/172739-jets-at-chefs-gdt/ no talk of penalties... I'm just stating bills fans love to complain about refs no matter what. If its a bills games the refs kill us EACH week. And if the pats play, the refs help them EACH week.

I'm just saying, I knew penalties were going to be talked about here in the pats thread. Go to any bills GDT thread, and fans will be complaining about flags. Go to any pats GDT thread, people will be talking about how much the refs love tom brady. Its like clockwork.

What a shocker, everyone is talking about refs in the patriots thread... ah bills fans

Variety & spread the offense more out in the passing game. So by your train of thought, our offensive coordinator should say "hey we are a bottom 10 offense because we have a bad offensive line and I deserve no blame." Again this a professional, shouldn't it be his job to try and figure this question out? If we have a bottom 10 offense (again?), at what point is the person in charge of the offense held liable? last year we were the 3rd worst team in the league on yards per play. Points a game, bottom 10. yards a game? not bottom 10 but 19th in the nfl. And just like this year, we were a bottom 5 team on 3rd down conversion. So again, I don't think last weeks game should be the focus point on why we have a bad offensive coordinator. I think it should be the results of the last 24 games. We have a bottom offense, we don't score a lot of points, we don't get a lot of yards, we are laughable on 3rd down. Again, when are people allowed to B word about the person in charge of the offense?

There is no one arguing whether or not the plays were effective in gaining yards/first downs, they weren't. The argument is if it was smart to be conservative and call ineffective plays, or was this bad play calling? It's a matter of opinion, so there isn't a right answer. We are a bottom 10 team team when it comes to points a game, yards a game, and 3rd down conversion. So yea... (and the injury excuse is horse crap. This is team that has brought in players like sammy watkins, robert woods, mike williams the past few years. Every game we have had freddy but one. IF an offensive coordinator cannot gameplan around injuries and try to minimize the impact of weaknesses, then I don't know what he is getting paid to do. Our interior offensive line sucks? Do your job and figure out a way to minimize the effect.....but he likes to run up the middle with no success so conclude what you will)

I'm not going to argue with you. But the question is, should a company that knowingly sells coffee so hot it burns people (they know because there had been hundreds of previous complaints and incidents including burnt infants and children. Several individuals were even spilt coffee on them by employees) be liable when someone gets burned by their product. I think so, most people do as well, but that is your opinion. However, if you think that notion is so frivolous and crazy it shouldnt make it to trial, then you should think about it a little more

actually some of the plaintiffs were split coffee on by their employees I'd suggest reading about it, its pretty interesting. For whatever reason what the media reported wasn't the full story/truth, it was a case where a lawsuit was needed

Look, I get where everyone is coming from. A lot of lawsuits are goofy (but very legal and not frivolous). This bills one is a goofy lawsuit, but a good one from a legal stand point. The bills violated a federal statute. However, just because some lawsuits are goofy, don't just assume all of them are. See how quick everyone is ready to side with the multi billion dollar mcdonalds and blame a 79-year old lady? That is scary. Over a span of many years, people were burned by their coffee. McDonalds was aware of this. They continued to sell their coffee at that temperature knowing how much harm it caused if spilled. A 79 year old lady spilled the coffee, and she suffered serious real injuries. She sought 20K from McDonalds who said no. Through the trial, people became aware of how many people were burned by their coffee. The trial actually helped discover the truth and award justice for real injuries. Oh I agree, its a goofy lawsuit! I was jsut saying it was a fair one. Most people wouldn't sue over something like this for moral reasons lol

Mcdonalds sold scolding hot coffee and was aware it cause serious burns. Infants, children, etc. were the victims of their coffee policy. And McDonalds continued to sell their coffee at that temperature. What is the matter with some of you? There are such things as good lawsuits. Its not so black and white where all lawsuits are bad...

That case was a 79 year old lady who spilled a drink (none of us have ever done that) and tried to get 20K dollars out of McDonalds after she suffered serious burns from coffee that was 190 degrees. And McDonalds knew their coffee caused burns if spilled. If they thought it was frivolous or could have been dismissed the would have. Sure they may have won the case and settled to avoid litigation, but the lawsuit was fine.

It is a class action suit...? No one is getting 3mil for their harm I'v already explained why this isn't a frivolous lawsuit, sorry you don't like the answer. I'm not arguing over anything, just stating facts. And the irony of your post is not lost. If this is what happens in our society, then it isn't against the spirit of the law now is it. Yea you get it. The bills would've had to litigate or settle, because under our legal system, this was not frivolous. I will say this though, the coffee case was a case that McDonalds should have lost and that lady had every right to seek damages.

No it wasn't. The violated a federal statute, I'm sorry its not frivolous or against common sense. If it was, the bill's lawyers wouldn't have settled. I'm fully aware parties settle to avoid litigation costs, but they don't settle frivolous lawsuits for millions of dollars. There was nothing wrong with the lawsuit or complaint. You can hate our legal system, but this suit was fair game.

Well the bills did violate a federal statute... but let's blame the plaintiffs and lawyers? But anyways, if you have a party that violates a federal statute, then in no way is that lawsuit frivolous...

Can he call pass plays?

Has anyone else noticed his new haircut? Seems to be helping us win

Ah yes, the bills won so everything worked out and there are no negatives argument. As flawed as it gets. Don't confuse people who B word about Hackett with people who like to B word or people that B word no matter what. Use your brain

run run pass!

Can we not risk our starting CB, starting RB, or are best offensive player? How about hogan? He can return the ball to the 21 yard line while getting pleasured by fans

I actually had an exact prediction of 5-2

Having a few extra yards actually helped expand the field a bit for us in a must pass situation. Those refs sure favor the bills

Let's argue about how a hypothetical statistical analysis would be used in a sport that does not lend itself to that tool!!!

How did they get that franchise QB? We weren't getting one with the 10th or middle round draft picks. Oh we have needs at QB, TE, G? So with the mid 1st round draft picks, you could get Manuel & Ebron!!!

That actually proves the point. Dareus is the other elite talent (top 3/4 player in the draft) that we have drafted. I'll take elite talent over two players a step below

How is he outproducing Woods and Williams?

He is going to have an extremely productive career elsewhere. No doubt about that