IndyMark

I feel pick #6 is the limit for Indy. Anything above that puts at risk who they are targeting. They gained picks for virtually staying in the same vicinity. Jets gave up way too much, and will likely regret it.

It is interesting how people, when viewing the same thing, have different conclusions. I look at the above and think the opposite. To me, Beane and McD want to add talent, in bulk. They have gone on record stating we are "...not as far along as people think....". Moreover, it is not like QB is the only missing piece. We have a lack of talent in more than one position and a way to address that, now, is with premier draft picks (6 of the top 100). The recent maneuvering indicated to me that want to improve via the draft, not sell out on one high risk player. Fun times!

Respectfully disagree. The typical endorsers of "cannot miss QB's" - think Mike Mayock, et al. - are adding qualifiers to their support of these QB's as a way to hedge any bets on where these QB's will eventually end up performing. It is patently false to think any of these QB's are near the reputation Luck had coming out. That is my point. Also, as some posters above are noting, there is just as good a chance the second tier will end up outperforming the first tier of this class. Knowing this, why in the world would someone forfeit 5 or 6 premier picks for a high risk? Does not make sense. I cannot see McD or Beane differing here. I have been wrong before, but the smart move is to add key talent in volume, now.

Given that McD himself has said the Bills are "...not as far along as people think...." and our GM has acquired fairly high draft pics to the extent that have 6 of the top 100 pics, it appears to me they want to build a team via the draft; gain solid day one starters and add essential depth that could contribute sooner rather than later. When Beane was acquiring these picks not once did I feel or sense he was doing so to turn them around and pay a ridiculous price for what would be a high risk player. It would be counter intuitive to forfeit those picks for one position and at that a high risk QB; in what some NFL people view is a very overrated pool of QB's. I would think Beane should be fired if he were to do the bold suggestion above. I think staying at 12 and seeing how the draft unfolds would be the prudent and smart thing to do.....panicking and unloading draft picks (ala Ditka) is short-sighted and not what a seasoned GM would consider. Sure, if the next Andrew Luck were available that is one thing, but there are severely evident flaws in each of the QB's noted at the top of this years draft and it is not like the only missing piece for the Bills is QB. The Bills have many holes and limited depth, having 6 premier picks addresses that, now.

Well, Obama actually did not do it.....he tried, failed, and then ultimately apologized ( http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/documents-show-obama-white-house-attacked-excluded-fox-news-channel/) and I thought it was classy for the Fox competitors to stand by Fox to force this change, I wonder why it was not reciprocated this time, by the CNN competitors? - to the same extent. You must admit Obama proved to be a bigger man then than Donald is now, on this topic, no? However, I feel with your excitement on watching some of the left become unhinged all the time that you most likely can't see or will not admit this. And let me preempt the goof balls and call myself a: snowflake, libtard, someone needing a safe space, blah, blah, blah....just to get that out there and over with.....in the hopes one of the un-ending Obama bashers could actually have a decent conversation, yet I fear this forum is more of an outlet than a place for civilized and thoughtful discourse. I know, stupid me. I do say, the one thing that is consistent here is that there is rarely a decent, well thought out conversation....watching the many Trump supporters is so very predictable. Yet, I have to say good on them, really ....if the last 8 years were really that horrible for you, literally (not idealogically - or who is the real snowflake?), than I am glad (seriously) you feel good about Trump and yourself and hopefully this makes you a better person and more productive citizen; as a rising tide raises all ships. Personally, I think trump is an imbecile of epic proportions, but you know what.....to steal the quote from John Kasich......"when you are on the plane you cheer for the pilot"... I certainly did not take glee from watching the "right / christian conservatives" become angry, confused, and unproductive when a "black man" became president - I held empathy for them and wished them well; and knew the many checks and balances would not allow too much extreme-ism and this proved true. In retrospect, really, the last 8 years (undeniably) were a strong 8 years for this country on many fronts, this cannot be argued (certainly, idealogically it could, but idealogues of either side or impossible to accommodate). And I am confident 8 years from now, we as country will be as strong...unless of course, there is more to this Russia-thing than we know....then all bets are off. ....

Healing thoughts, from my family to yours. I appreciate you. It takes a lot so share in the hopes it may help others.

Uh, so what I typed comes across to you as my "panties in a bunch"? And your use of "snowflake" is solid. To your point, no, actually I found Scalia quite thoughtful and a great view on the high court. His death was sad and nothing to cheer and I certainly did not wish it nor for the acceleration of it ....unlike that of the poster I highlighted. Yet, your reaction to my post is totally illustrative of my point that an idealogue, regardless of political slant, is unfortunate and hypocritical. You are exhibiting the exact behavior of those you are calling out (the protesting libtards?) by the attack on my reasoned and calm post - de facto, you are as much of the problem as them. Just saying. You would do well by being a bit more reflective. Good luck. Agree; yet as evidenced of the tantrums of some here continually bashing those not supporting Trump is a bit hypocritical, no? Note the one response I got earlier......I called it, it was 100% predictable, and not dissimilar to the "libtards". I did not even provoke anything, beyond calling out that hoping for a death simply for a seat on the supreme court is a bit amateurish and low brow. I would have hoped any one associated as being a Bills fan would be above that level of dimness......and yes, I know there exist "libtards" that say the same thing - I never rebuked that. Being a centrist is really interesting in these times. This stated, I will predict a response that says I am not a "centrist" blah, blah, cuz life is black and white and one is either "with us / or against us".....such an american thought. Anyway, my original point, that both sides (especially the idealogues) are the issue and the hypocrisy is amusing - that is all.

I get that but I only have a few times during the week to read this site so the amount of time between a response (or lack of response) is not really relevant for me. Plus, if you follow other threads in this forum the terms "punching, brass knuckles, shoot" by that poster and others are directed to the "whiny libtards" (did I get that right?) and protesters or those who do not view Donald Trump with much reverence. I wonder if those so impassioned to support Trump or put down people who do not particular like Trump note their own hypocrisy? Most likely not, but lesson learned on my behalf and hopefully one for their behalf.

This is a really well thought out and reasoned thought. Stay classy my friend. I will await the predictable "verbal thrashing" on how I am a whiny liberal.......5....4...3...2...1...

Utilized Xbox One, wired, the stream was pretty poor quality. Buffered about 10-12 times, minimum time was about 15 seconds longest was nearly 30 seconds. When picture came back it was standard definition for the longest time eventually got to HD but that did not hang on long. I would say about 25% of the game was seen in HD with the remaining in SD. My picture would seemingly fast forward for no reason, for example, one second you are watching the teams break from their huddles, respectively, and then a nano second later, the play is finished and the teams are trotting back to their huddles again.....where did the play go? I understand this is 'free', but I much prefer paying for DTV Sunday Ticket, every day, all day. I would not waste my time watching another streamed game again. Good for the vocal minority without issues, yet the silent majority would vote against this swiftly and strongly if given a voice. As someone mentioned earlier, the commercials were flawless, no buffering, 100% HD, easy to watch. Which seems a bit backward to me. But then again considering this is money issue and not a market demand issue, I guess it is about right. I have the highest internet speed I can get where I am at, a high-end TV and the stream, overall, was junk and wasteful. This is a trend that should go away and never return.

Like many have said, thanks for re-birthing this. I thought I slept at the wheel and missed it. This stated: Week 8 - Bills @ Jets - WIN Week 10 - KC @ Buff - WIN Week 11 - Bills @ Fish - LOSS Week 12 - Jets @ Bills - WIN Week 13 - Browns @ Bills - WIN Week 14 - Bills @ Denver - LOSS Week 15 - Packers @ Bills - WIN Week 16 - Bills @ Oakland - WIN Week 17 - Bills at NE* - LOSS

(a) Pass (b) Watkins © 9 yards

And, ironically, I just caught the tail-end of a show with Mariucci and Irvin focusing on "top prospect" WRs.....where Irvin teaches elements of the pro-game......anywho, what was interesting is the Bills are now in possession of 2 of the top 5(6?) WRs highlighted on the show and who were brought in to work with Mooch / Irvin.....Woods and Rodgers.....pretty interesting and informative piece, especially in light of this draft. Me thinks this could pan out quite well for the Bills in 2013 and beyond.

Actually, it took two years to identify the Olympic bomber and nearly seven to make the arrest......just as a friendly reinforcement to your point that this may take a while to figure out........

Oh, like based on my original answer. Ok. Got it. The other posts simply reiterated my original point. ........and even funnier when one constructs a 'riddle' based in flawed premises and logic and tries to make it something it is not; clever, challenging, and palatable, no?

I respectfully disagree. First, if each man paid $9 then the hotelier is holding $27, but he is not, he gave $5 from the original $30 back so he is holding $25. Hence, your math "question" is based on a false premise (holding $27 versus holding $25) ....de facto this makes the ability to answer the "question" as situated impossible. Again, cute but your question was flawed by my accurate logic. Take a Logic 101 course, you will get it.

It's accounted for; easily so. First, the hotelier is holding $25 and the bellhop $2, for a total of $27. Then each occupant is holding a refunded $1 (x3) so $27 + $3 = $30. This was a cute question, but defaults to a common distraction element. Logic 101. Next.

Bottom line.......Lovie excelled with Defense; Whisenhut with a QB and pair of WR.....realizing Spiller has been under used or misused here the last two years, clearly Lovie nor Whisenhut would positively impact Spillers play. At least with Marone, it is conceivable, he will properly use CJ and maximize the all-pro level talent we have on offense. One hopes Marone will bring in a DC that will capitalize on the strengths of our Defense......Wannstedt certainly could not do this and Chan did not use Spiller ideally and these were known commodoties to effect both ( D and O, respectively).........Marone is a gamble but probably smart enough to see what our recent coaches did not or could not. This will be a pleasant suprise hire to most. In fact, to some extent, the doom and gloom and sky is falling speak from most here makes this a more attractive hire. Collectively we know little to nothing about pro-football and what we believe to be intuitive is probably a bit more advanced then we realize.

Well said. I lol as I thought the same thing - winning 6 straight is impressive and suggests a winning culture to some extent; expecting to win. Something that is clearly absent here currently......good hire.

Absolutely. Thanks for the friendly request.

Yet, you are trying to serve as a "gatekeeper" of this forum......and I am the prick? Ok. You must feel entitled to this gatekeeper position you so actively seek, no? Regarding, your claim of my reading comprehension problem, condescending post, etc.....I have one word for you......mirror. You are self-absorbed and you do not realize you sound petty, entitled, and desperate. You are in the deep-end son. I suggest swimming to the side; quickly.

Your righteous indignation is classic. You made a poorly thought out statement.....proven wrong by another poster, yet still keep yapping as if you have something to say. A little defensive are you? You should be, your "argument" cannot withstand debate. Again, you should really stop digging....the hole you are in will only get deeper. Yet, I predict you will not heed this advice, rather you will attempt to position yourself as some mental giant, when in reality you lack basic reasoning skills. You simply do not see how dense you are. I feel bad for you and those around you. Punk.

You want to redact this post yet? Didn't think so.....you do not strike me as someone who has that type of personal compass........suggestion for you.....think before you post.

Still admire the previous post.......this one, eh, another point of disagreement. And, if I have the motivation, I will address the limitation of believing introducing religion into schools (properly?) will solve anything. But, that is for another time!