Bruffalo

Going with a WR is a hedge against Coleman not taking a step or Samuel not returning to form, and it's a smart one. I'm not saying I expect Coleman to not work out, but I'd certainly want a good contingency plan. Outside of Shakir and Palmer who do you have that you're sure is reliable? Samuel had a pretty awful season last year. Coleman started out great, and then burned out before the end of the season.

EDGE just doesn't feel like a position I'd expect the Bills to take in the first round of this draft, but maybe I'm naive here. CB-DT-WR just feels like the player would have way more impact immediately, based on (potential) snap count alone.

This is basically a dream draft scenario for me, but I don't see 2/3 top picks being offense. Golden alone would kind of make my draft. Him,Coleman, and Palmer would be a great 1-2-3 on the outside.

I kind of wish the NFL was like the NBA with alt jerseys that are drastically different. I'm all for the variety.

He's the best RB we've had since McCoy, but he was also the highest investment in terms of draft capital. He's very good, but unless he can be a 3-down back with good to great pass blocking, I don't see how you can pay him 15 mil a season when the Bills are up against the cap year over year to stay in that Superbowl window. Nothing against Cook though, go get your bag. If somebody else is willing to pay 15 after this season, more power to you. I don't think it's unreasonable to think the Bills could replace Cook's snaps with someone cheaper and get similar results.

My most recent experience in Ohio is going to a wedding in Sandusky where the entire groom's guestlist were Ohio state troopers and we were the only ones on the bride's side besides direct family that made the drive in. I've been to some bad weddings before but that one was one was miserable. Even the dancing was angry.

I've always wanted to go but then I remember that I've never had a good time visiting Ohio. It's a whole thing.

This comes from a presupposition that women reporting rape lie more often than not when a certain amount of time has passed. There's no evidence or academic study to back that up as far as I know. I don't think your feeling on this is representative of reality. I'm tempted to go farther on that but I won't. I'd love to hear what the magical cutoff for believable rape claim vs. unbelievable. I think you'll have a hard time coming up with something that isn't completely arbitrary.

"It's not a valid crime unless it's promptly reported" is a really weird hill to die on.

Coleman looked great in those early highlights. I hope he can return to form in a big way this upcoming season.

I think we're done in FA on guys who will actually make the team. I wouldn't rule out an unexpected trade though closer to the draft.

There's a philosophical distinction between the court of public opinion and an actual trial setting. One is beholden to the presentable facts and must make a judgement based on those facts (and those facts alone in an ideal world). The other is an amalgamation of preconceived notions and opinion, which let's be honest, generally aren't the best informed. I also stay away from the "believe all accusers" mantra that you're trying to pin me on. What I said had little to do with belief one way or another. I want people to feel empowered to come forward if they choose to do so, and that we societally shouldn't dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't fit our view of what's appropriate for a "true" victim's behavior. Having snap judgement skepticism based on the amount of time that's passed before reporting isn't an effective way of finding out truth vs. fiction.

Obviously it's easier for the prosecution or civil suit if they've come forward sooner, I don't think that even needs to be said. When you criticize someone for coming forward after the (in your mind) appropriate timeframe it has a chilling effect. Some other victim may say "well I might as well not even bother" if the immediate public reaction is to shame the victim for not being prompt enough. As to the "gold digger" point, you can argue the opposite and it makes just as much sense. Wouldn't they have a much better shot to extract value out of this guy when he actually was earning an NFL salary? Why would you wait 30 years after someone's high earning career had ended? Baseless speculation just isn't helpful.

I think they've shown that outside of the Ed Oliver pick (who has been fine, but certainly not lived up to draft status) they don't really put a whole lot of value into the interior D-Line. Combine that with their love or smaller DTs and I think it's a glaring issue in their roster construction strategy.

I responded above, but calm down homie. It was less than 3 minutes after I emoted on your post.