LSHMEAB

In all fairness, the Republicans would have pounced on any chance to impeach Obama. POUNCED. I fully believe there would have been a strong push to impeach for precisely what Trump did. Really do. I don't think either side is capable of realizing how similarly they operate. Let's say Trump is re-elected, McConnell is still Senate majority leader, and RBG were to buy the farm in Trump's last year. You think Mitch is gonna play it the same way he played the Garland nomination? Politics is an ugly business. Just is.

Completely understand where you're coming from, but the volume of dumb is probably higher than we'd like to believe. And to be clear, Trump is not my guy; at all. So I'm very much biased. Also never cared for Michelle's shtick to go high when they go low. As to the topic; do the dems really have a choice? There's literally nothing they could present in a trial that would lead to an impeachment. It was an impulsive, ridiculous decision to go down this road, but the only play they have here is to block the Senate trial because a Trump victory tour would end their chances in 2020.

The thing with Lawson is that he's going to get paid 10 plus mil a year, so Beane could get into a bidding war just to keep him. Yannick will get paid more, but I think he's well worth the difference. They didn't land Clark, but they were definitely in on both he and Clowney. That action demonstrated that Beane is very "in" on landing a stud DE.

My dream free agent is Yannick Ngakoue, but I'm not sure that's realistic. He'll have a ton of suitors, but I hope Beane get heavily involved. Also quite possible he'll get tagged, but they did just draft Josh Allen. We shall see.

I think it works and I'm surprised they SEEM to be taking that approach. It's quite frankly something Trump would do himself. Call the "trial" rigged and keep it moving. He sat out a debate because of something; forget what it was. This is obviously much more serious, but the Dems could actually win with the general public(largely misinformed) by citing all the R Senators who've already said they'd exonerate Trump regardless of the evidence presented. Demand Trump, Bolton, Mulvaney etc. testify or you'll just move on and "let the voters" decide. It would be unprecedented, but I think the "rules" of politics have been turned upside down. Clearly you don't believe it would work and I respect that point of view; just beg to differ. Perhaps risky, but I believe it's a winning strategy.

My personal impression is that he was most concerned with an announcement, but that's merely an interpretation.

Does that mean Trump would testify in a Senate trial? I'm thinking no. And I disagree if the insinuation is that he DOESN'T want his day in court( an exoneration). The smart play for Dems would be to put so many conditions on the trial that it never happens. Claim victory on impeachment and call the system "rigged." You and I would know the game, but the general public would not. Last thing Dems need is a Trump victory tour. That would be the SMART play for Dems, which means it's highly unlikely.

Phillips ain't getting anything close to the kind of deal I'm seeing in this thread. He had a grand total of 5.5 sacks in FIVE SEASONS prior to this year's outburst. Teams are gonna be leery about giving out a huge deal with that track record. On the contrary, Shaq is gonna get MORE than the kind of deal I'm seeing theorized. His numbers have steadily risen, plays a premium position, and has everything you look for "on paper."

The clip started with fatboy essentially saying he didn't want to see the Bills on primetime. I think their takes are based more on the fact that people just don't care about the Bills enough to pay attention. Several reasons I suppose; small market, haven't won in LONG time, etc. The only way to change that perception is to WIN BIG. They were extremely harsh and uninformed on Allen, but he does need to get better as a passer to get respect. It's a much tougher hurdle for him playing in Buffalo(as the perception stands now). There is tons of room for improvement in terms of the supporting cast and he is much better than he was a rookie. That's a positive sign. Still gotta continue to improve and FORCE them to respect his game. Opportunity is right there for him to do just that.

Whitewater something or other; pretty much the moment he was elected. I visit this board to have fun and discuss the Bills so I don't want to get into a bunch of mudslinging. I read through all the responses and there are some interesting, well thought out points raised. When I take a panoramic shot, I see both sides playing the exact same game, but it's unlikely we're ever gonna find common ground on this.

Agree with your measured approach as well as this post, but I disagree with the bolded. He wanted Zelensky to put out a press release stating they were investigating the Biden's. I didn't even get the sense from the transcript that he wanted an actual investigation; just a press release. Honestly, I don't care, it's not a crime, and I don't like the impeachment. But the notion that Trump was rooting out corruption in this particular case; not buying it.

I'm 39 so I followed the entire Clinton process. The argument that THIS sets a dangerous NEW precedent because Clinton lied under oath about a ( ) seems flimsy. At any rate, many of the same people now decrying the procedure spent the entirety of the Clinton presidency HOUNDING him the same way the left now hounds Trump. Difference being, Trump was crafty enough to avoid ever testifying under oath. Clinton was loathed by the right for the same reasons Trump is loathed by the left. Politics were a bit different, but it centered around morality. Ironic in a sense. What the Dems are doing now is pretty much the same thing Newt and company did in the 90's, and I reckon a good number on the board thought that was great! At the end of the day, Clinton would have been re-elected to a theoretical third term in a landslide and Trump may very will win re-election because of these proceedings(and the economy.) But we've been here before.

My prediction is that Shaq is gonna get overpaid and the 7 mil/per is a pipedream. Some team is gonna view him as a late bloomer/cusp of dominant type end, which he is not. Nice player and I WOULD resign him at 7mil/per, but I'm not buying it. I would resign Phillips because the guy gets after the QB. He's not gonna get some massive contract that'll "set the franchise back" so the fear that he stops "playing hard" just isn't a compelling argument. Gotta get a stud DE and first and foremost, which makes paying Lawson unnecessary. Boom.

Alright. Gotta chime in here. How many of you were outraged when Lindsey Graham said impeachment didn't require a crime and that the moral fabric of our society, something or other? Is there really a difference here? Clinton lied under oath about a sexual encounter, so that distinguishes this process from THAT process? Is that the argument? Didn't like that impeachment. Don't like this impeachment. Let the voters decide. BUT, hypocrisy is never cool. This will help Trump politically in all likelihood, but I'm not seeing a difference and the idea that THIS impeachment will end government as we know it seems way over the top.

My view on the whole "mentor" thing is that this is the job of the coaching staff. Not a fan of using a valuable roster spot on a player who's more of a liability than an asset. How much mentoring does a RB really need? I have a ton of respect for Gore, his professionalism, and what he's achieved in his career. But he just doesn't bring much of anything to the table. He's had some decent possessions where he'll get you a tough 5-6 yards, but the NFL is full of guys who can do this(better) and bring much more versatility to the table. Ivory isn't even really part of the equation because he's shot as well. Coulda/woulda/shoulda acquired a different back, but that's history. I would like to think they'll go into next season with two additional backs, preferably a young banger and a young guy capable of housing any given touch. Asking a lot, but that would be ideal. Gotta roll with what we have for now, so DS needs to continue to produce.

I would agree that he "inherited" a talented team, but they weren't a talented team once the season began. Gilmore, Watkins, Woods gone. Dareus gone midway through the season. The approach can certainly be debated, but the roster he coached in 2017 was not particularly good.

I think Hughes is tailing off a bit, but would look a whole lot better if he was playing opposite a premiere pass rusher. I've always viewed him as a very good player, but not quite good enough to be the "number 1." Kind of like a John Brown is a 1B/2 type receiver. Bills have a ton of resources and adding a stud DE would change the complexion of an already VERY good D by adding a certain havoc wreaking element. Murphy's a goner. I wouldn't pay Shaq what I think he may very well get in the open market. Wanna see a big move here.

Gotta disagree here in the grand scheme of things. Going into New England and winning would be a huge symbolic victory regardless of the Miami result. McDermott has yet to beat BB and this would be a huge confidence builder. The Bills, along with MANY teams, seem to get caught up in the Patriots mystique when they play the Pats, especially in Foxborough. Get a dub, get that monkey off your back, and I think it shreds some of that mystique and portends good things going forward. I'm not generally into momentum/"confidence building" or any of that stuff, but this feels like a situation where it is applicable.

Watt did whiff on the ball, but he made significant contact with Allen's arm which could have easily lead to a fumble if not for strength/awareness. I wouldn't say it was amazing or anything like that, but it was solid. Play also makes me think more guys should do what Watt did. You don't see it very often, but a punch seems like a pretty effective method to jar a ball loose. More effective than just slapping or grabbing.

They should have started extension talks as soon as he spontaneously began looking at an opponents play sheet that was flying in the wind. It's easy to set-up humor, but that level of QUICKNESS is what sets people apart in terms of comedy. But yeah; Tremendous football player they absolutely must re-sign. I think the INT jump can be attributed to a certain level of comfort which allows him to take chances and jump routes more often.

What in the world are you talking about in this thread?

I don't think he does that either and I view that as a positive. When you start admonishing young players for "honest" mistakes, it often leads to failure. I don't want these guys playing to avoid mistakes. Psych 101 tells you that's not the way to go. Unless you believe Knox or Singletary are liabilities, you trot them back out there and let them do their thing. Much more likely that the Bills went to Kroft more against Pitt for his blocking than some kind of punishment.

McDermott absolutely does not get the credit he deserves for the Bills revival. We talk about the QB; lot's of good, but still a few question marks. We talk about Beane; lots of good, but a number of misses. Not to say that Allen won't get there or Beane won't prove to be a great GM. But if we're talking about RESULTS, McDermott is the guy. 9 wins with junk in 2017. 6 wins with TRASH in 2018. 10-4 with an average roster in 2019. He gets a (maybe deserved) bad rap for being too conservative, but all his teams do is win more games than they're "supposed" to. Almost always wins highly contested games which past teams would find a way to lose. When was the last time the Bills had teams you "trusted" to avoid a "Billsy" loss late in the 4th QTR? He's been winning these games since day 1. McDermott is far and away the most PROVEN element of the Bills resurgence.

Right, so I fully understand and even agree with your post. But ball placement remains an issue. As I said, some really headscratching throws a few times a game and the deep ball isn't there. There is plenty of room for improvement. BUT. Your point stands that with an elite player (or two) at his disposal, some of those below average throws become completions or at the very least, incompletions. The offense is far from great in terms of raw talent. So what will happen is that Beane will (hopefully) acquire at least one elite talent at a skill position. The Josh Allen story is only a chapter or two long. We'll find out much more when he's got a stud "weapon" at which point alot of the hypothetical stuff becomes moot. There are plenty of reasons for optimism and some reasons for concern. My prevailing "feeling" right now is that the formula is working to a great extent considering the talent. The defense keeps them in the game. Allen very often makes plays in the 4th. The BILLS are 10-4!

What's happening this season with regards to the TEAM is that Allen has gotten the job done when he's needed to. He often makes clutch throws in the 4th and plays his best football while the DEFENSE generally gives the offense AMPLE opportunities. So it's working. But let's not pretend like Allen has been great. He's been average overall, but definitely better than last season. That's good. He had a great 3 game stretch that demonstrated he's capable of playing extremely well, albeit against lesser competition. I know this thread is ABOUT JA, but I don't quite get the constant need to demand we believe what our eyes and the stats are telling us. He needs to get better and he's got the tools to do it. The hope is that with a better supporting cast he'll up his game, which is a reasonable assumption. But he makes more headscratching throws than what I would consider to be acceptable. Right now, THIS SEASON, it's fine. I never expected the Bills to be 10-4, so whatever they have going on is working. The Bills are winning for the first time in a LONG time. They're often winning "ugly," but so WHAT? As a fan, it matters very little to me who gets the credit.