UConn James

That was the Jests hoping our D would get antsy and flinch, by thinking it was all an act and it would be a direct snap to a RB, etc. It didn't work.

Constitutionally? The wheel's still in spin on that. Just how segregation and Jim Crow was 'legally right' in the South for so long... it was 'legally right' in one sense that enough people voted to allow descrimination, winked at lynch mobs, etc. But in quite a different sense, it wasn't legally right, b/c subsequent SC rulings said what those states were doing was legally wrong. It's just going to take time. And then, maybe we can get a govt that can concentrate on governing rather than delving into peoples' sex lives.

Oooo! Nice shot by Ko Simpson.

No sh--. A prime chance to crush Pennington as he dove headfirst and the tackler (Denny?) gives a softee as he's laying on the ground to the left. Schobel should've had the runner for an 8-yard loss. Instead it's a 2 yard gain. Don't get me wrong, he made a nice initial contact... but he didn't complete it.

I see my share of Jests games, and let me tell you.... Every QB gets flustered under a little pressure. Pennington turns into a 5-year-old girl.

Our inability to rattle Pennington in the first game is what killed us. And it's repeating itself here. As someone said this week --- and it's the truth --- Pennington is a different QB after you hit him a few times.

Like Greggo and Meathead before him, Dick Jauron has inherited the uncanny power of challenging when he shouldn't and not challenging when he should.

Fletcher = MVP.

Looking at his left knee on the sideline.

It took like 6 guys to take that Jets runner down, and he was still pushing them forward.

Willis threw up all over his uniform?

Nice catch and run by A-Train.

Wasn't arguing about the concept of majority rules. A majority in elections that are decided on the margins does not mean it is morally or even legally right. It simply codifies descrimination.

So far, it seems like Willis heard Marv's criticism about dancing behind the LOS. Attack that sh--!

A travesty in that he almost ended Harrington's career? Yes.

I was watching the game. They showed the replay like 4 times while Harrington was down. Wilfork had no one around him for 5 yards and was rolling around. Talk about homer-ism. Don't piss on my leg and tell me its raining.

HA! The ing guy was rolling around trying to roll up on the turqouise sock he saw. You've gotta be ing kidding me.

HD, that DL was doing barrel rolls so he could roll up on the legs of Harrington. I give a to the hyperprotectiveness of the QBs, but that penalty was well deserved and he should be fined.

Did you see the look on the ref's face when he had to daintily drop the flag ~ 4 minutes after the play? Sheepish with a side helping of 'O sh--!' I'm not sure about the loss of down there, tho. I wouldn't necessarily trust Wandy Cwoss on it. I would be a little more giddy about this game if they weren't playing the Dolphags.

Bill, how many nicotine patches are you wearing? I dunno... 15... 16.... [cuts to ambulance]

Yes, and let's have the privlege of paying $30M for a guy that's just as likely to be a hit or a miss as someone whose name is called 5 spots later and costs $5M. Sounds like a plan! Bear in mind that LSI and Daquix are both ~18. They don't care how much things cost or whether it's even possible to obtain. Youth wants what it wants when it wants it. I'm not saying Ralph should be Scrooge, but we need to spend the cap money wisely. Which precludes high-high draft picks. Someone needs to send them the memo that this upcoming draft is pretty deep for OL talent.

Say it ain't so!

That's a change that needed to happen in order to win. Jim Webb, Heath Schuler, Tester, et al. bring new life to the Party. And hopefully it will continue.

More than just possible. I'd say this offense, and especially in the Buffalo & division climate, needs true grit at RB. And hell, all around. Screw finesse.

I don't know about those people who do accuse the Cheneys of whatever; it's pure crap. They love their daughter, they quite evidently accept her sexuality. But the fact remains that they are in a party that as a whole, does not accept it and they choose to 'graciously abstain' from commenting on the issue of how to codify homosexuality and its trappings in the law. I believe this was the same argument made in the pre-Emancipation South, pre- women's sufferage, and anything else where a certain segment of the population wants to deny people of their rights and dignity. 'Well, if you move to X, you can have your rights' does not cut it. Civil unions are a great compromise; it's worked in VT and it's done as an issue, no more bally-hoo about it. Bush even said he supported CU's during the campaign. This whole issue continues in the undead only b/c people on both sides see it as one they use to motivate their 'base' to the polls so they can get elected or pass other crap.