Wraith

....Except Clements was out there getting burned by everyone, including 4th/5th stringer Kevin Walter on more than one occasion. Then include the fact that he's been eaten alive by the likes of Rod Smith, Keenan McCardell, and David Givens in recent weeks and the real picture starts to appear.

Borderline? We're waaaaaaaaaay past borderline....

OR, you could look at the first quarter, when he also wasn't on the field, and the passing game looked the best it had all year. Drawing credible conclusions from last weeks game is difficult at best.

Losman to Evans.........AGAIN!!!

On that fumble, Clements got BUUUUUUURNED badly but did make a nice play by punching the ball out from behind to cause the turnover. McGee recovered.

They made that mistake again... LOL Losman to Evans, 2 TD's, 90 yards, so far....

TD LOSMAN TO EVANS!!!!!

Also Losman did a beautiful job to look off the safety. It was a nice touch pass hit him in stride.

Perfect throw by Losman, nice concentration by Evans. Caught it around the 15 I'd say.... Closer to a bomb, though Evans did shed a tackle to get in. I'd say 30 in the air, 15 on the run.

Yep, another great game. This was a pretty thorough victory, too, against what is supposedly a pretty good Niagara team. It's really interesting watching this team develop it's identity after losing the identity that had been established over the past few years.

Yeah, the team looks great so far. Very interesting team dynamic now, with an interesting group of freshman. I was at the Canisius Home Opener and it was pretty intense. The upcoming game against Niagara promises to be nuts.

Gee, 230 yards, 2 Passing TD's, 1 Running TD, 1 sack. Horrible. Dallas had no running game and Denver blitzed the hell out Dallas O. Bledsoe was the ENTIRE Dallas offense. Idiot.

No it wasn't, I was at the game and the scoreboards were black until the bills last posession when they took a knee a few times.

Being a mechanical engineer, I have a little insight into this so-called "equivalence" matter. Really, the comments already made here have been exactly right for the most part: The measure of the rate at which a body, velocity, has no direct relation to the mass of said body. Fan in San Diego is right. Equivalent velocity is not a scientific term. An amateurish television producer with a dynamics text book could be taking a stab at comparing the mechanics of a baseball and a football, though. For example, they could be comparing how much effort the QB/Pitcher must exert to propel the balls a certain velocity. They might be saying that the effort a QB put into throwing a football a certain velocity would have propelled a baseball 90 mph. This seems, likely, because they are usually talking about how hard a QB throws when they refer to this "stat." To summarize, they could be saying "Given how fast the QB just threw the football, if they were throwing a baseball from the mound to home, it would be travelling 90 mph." This uses the equation F = m x a (acceleration). They might also be comparing how hard the ball impacts the receiver. This is not a measure of the force imparted on the ball but rather the momentum of the ball transfered to the receiver. Momentum, as I said above, is M = m x v. Finally, they could be talking about how much time the receiver has to react to the pass as compared to a batter reacting to a 90 mph fast ball. This would be determined by how fast (velocity, not acceleration) the ball is moving and the distance between the QB and the receiver. It's hard to make an exact determination given the amatuerish quality of the statistic.

Force = Mass x Acceleration Momentum = Mass X Velocity It's all about the Mo, baby.

Alright, that was one Kelly Holcomb - Joe Montana comparison too many. Do you honestly think Holcomb is even worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence as Joe Montana? It would've been a cold day in hell before Joe Montana, perhaps the greatest quarterback ever at just finding ways to win, would give up on 4th and 7 and throw a two yard out to a triple covered receiver.

Man I loved those state lines.... They were actually counting the number of hits he made?!?! Good lord. Last time I checked, HITS MINUS TACKLES EQUALS MISSED TACKLES!!!!. Hmm, let's consult the replay, I think Bruschi may have jumped in on that gang tackle at the last minute, AMAZING!!!

So what you're saying is that the way you appreciate football is the only way football should be appreciated? Isn't that a little self-centered? You're right, they might not be a "true dyed in the wool, old school football fan." But that doesn't automatically make them any less of a fan, as you go on to suggest derogatively. Frankly, the way some of you try to classify people as greater or lesser fans is trivial and silly anyway.

That was quick. Go cry somewhere else.

Try "They're," as in "They are." Go Bills!

Don't lump in all SUNY schools with the small colleges. UB, admittedly SUNY's largest and most well off University, has a heck of a lot more going for it that St. John Fisher, when speaking about athletic facilities and pretty much everything else.

You can't call that pass to Reed a drop. Losman through what can only be described as a duck five yards behind Reed, who made a pretty nice dive to comeback to the ball.

Those of you who follow UB Basketball might recognize that big dude getting dunked over (and then called for the foul) as Mark Bortz. Poor guy never had a chance on that one.

Kodak actually owns Ofoto. The kiosks are wildly popular. The problem with both however is that even with huge popularity they haven't generated a profit. That is because while Ofoto (now known as the Kodak EasyShare Gallery) is hugely popular, membership is free and the services you have to pay for (such as printing) go unused. The problem with the kiosks is that Kodak shouldered the expenses for installing the kiosks and all the necessary infrastructure in the retailers who use them. Both of these areas seem likely to improve as time passes, especially the kiosks. I am of the mind that Kodak will turn things around. They have generated more innovative ideas in the last three years than in the ten previous. Good, solid ideas that consumers want. Now they have to learn how to turn a profit with them. Part of the problem is that Kodak developed huge costs over the generations and didn't care, because the profit margin on film is huge., and a little bloat could be overlooked. That business model won't fly for them anymore.

Hahaha, Buffalo would kill to be Rochester at this point. When Rochester starts closing it's parks and running out of toilet paper, you can start with the snide comments again. Until then Buffalo has nothing on Rochester. This is coming from someone who has lived in (and enjoyed) both cities for years.