CosmicBills

I guess now I have no excuse not to check it out.

Really? It's that good? The movie has been hyped so much I am dreading seeing it.

(Can't believe I'm about to do this...) Lohan, Hilton and Spears are celebrities -- not actresses like Grace and Audry were. Lohan is borderline. So, on that level alone it's not a fair comparison. A better one would be (off the top of my head): Grace and Audry compared to Natalie Portman (as someone just pointed out) and Hillary Swank. Real actresses and celebrities. But more than that, comparing the celebs of today to those of the old studio system is entirely unfair. Grace, Audry and Jackie all lived and worked in a very different "entertainment" business than the actresses of today. Studios used to control everything, including stars images. They protected them. They controlled the press. The tabloids were nothing more than a publicity arm of the studios. Audry and Grace were allowed to keep their dignity because they didn't have to deal with 100s (and I mean 100s) of Paparazi with telescopic lenses following their every move. There was no internet. There was no 24 hour a day celebrity news cycle. There was privacy. And that's the key word. And something that is sorely lacking from our society as a whole today. I assure you that if you transplanted Grace and Audry into this era, they too would be splashed all over the tabloids. Sorrid details of their romantic encounters, what outfits they chose to wear, and probably hundreds of compromising photos would haunt these women just as they do the celebs of today. So, the question to me isn't so much "is society degenerating" so much as it's whether society is just adjusting.

Again, this is why Lori rocks.

How do you know he is a good man? Do you know him personally? Have you spent more time with him than a handshake or a quick chat at Training camp? Truth is, we don't know anything about these people really. But there is one thing I do know -- that the players who DO know him, the ones who were on the team last year and the reporters who covered that team said the team was divided. That the situation was close to "unbearable" largely because of Mularkey's failure to be a leader. Coaches and players fighting. Split locker room. Then bailing on your team after giving your word you were going to stick with them? These don't paint a pretty picture for Mularkey as a leader, as a man of his word, or as a man. But I guess the adjective "good" is very subjective these days.

As someone said last week (Mad Buffalo perhaps? I forget), I would love to see the Bills use that money to lock up not only Nate and London, but JP, Willis and Lee for a long time. Let's keep our young talent in Buffalo blue.

But in truth, isn't that what you want your QB and team leader to say? Even if it's just PC-speak, it's still good to hear if you're blocking for the guy or catching his passes.

Hahahaha, okay. Fair enough. I still think it's interesting that, at least in the 20 something crowd, online dating gets more popular the closer you are to 30.

That's actually interesting -- if I had to guess (and apparently I'm a bad guesser) I would have thought it would be really popular in the 20-40 range and less popular the closer you got to 50 only due to the fact that the older crowd doesn't seem to be as online savy. And yes, I know that is a gross generalization -- just going off of my own experiences

I've known friends who've done it and had some success and others who have walked away with hilarious stories of faliure. What's interesting to me is that in my age group (27) it seems to be becoming more and more popular. I'm not sure if it's because the stigma has dissappeared (Myspace, Instant Messanger, Text messages -- hell everything seems to be electronic these days) or if it's more that my age group is reaching the point where we are getting just a bit too old for the college/post grad type bars and not yet old enough for the other social venues (read: have enough money). It's funny now for me being back in school, I have a wide age range of friends (from 20 to 35 really) and the ones closer to 24 tend to look down upon the online scene (though they are all about using both Myspace and Facebook to "cyber stalk" the people they are into -- more girls than guys which is interesting). However, the ones closer to 27=30 range are lining up to get online because they are "sick of the bar scene". I don't know if it's an age thing? Have the rest of you noticed an age amungst your friends where online dating has become the latest fad?

Oh...I see. But no, that's not my point at all. It has nothing to do with challenging the call and winning it or losing it. It's the fact that Jauron STOPPED the game for 13 minutes. Time kills momentum. You lose it just as quick as you get it. And knowingly pulling your team off the field for 13 minutes when you could have done the same thing with a 3 min break is foolish. That's what killed the momentum. The time on the sidelines. Not the failed challenge.

The whole Defense is watching on the sidelines. Coaches, offensive players not in that formation etc. It didn't go unnoticed. And I don't think it was insulting at all. If a Bills player did that on the road, think Georgia Bill would call it disrespectful?

I don't know how any Bills fan can dispute the existance of momentum. Just look back to "The Comeback". It's not a matter of being mentally weak. Momentum exists. I've seen it, felt it (anyone in the stands during the third quarter felt it). It's a real thing in sports. Happens all the time. March Maddness is built on that concept alone. Momentum is especially important when you're the lesser team like the Bills were today. Sure, great teams can overcome another team's momentum and still win. But it's extremely hard. And today, the Chargers were reeling from the loss of momentum. They were teetering on the brink. And if you don't want to believe in momentum (which I think is silly), just look at the realities of the situation. Regardless of the PI non call, the 3rd and 10 was THE biggest play of the game. Your players are loose and in the groove. How does putting them on ice for 13 minutes help? Think about teams that call time outs to ice a kicker before a huge kick. The coaching staff did that to themselves today. They put their team on the shelf for 13 minutes and then asked them to go back out and make a huge play. Momentum or not, it was a terrible decision. And not just because of the loss of time outs.

Settle down...Deep breaths. It wasn't like he was giving us the salute ala Cox. And he wasn't mooning the crowd after a TD a la Moss. The guy is a competitor. It was a big moment in the game, the crowd was giving it to him and he was telling them to be louder -- it doesn't phase him. He was trying to motivate himself and his teammates. I thought it was great that he did that -- especially since the D stuffed him on that run. It wasn't disprespectful at all. It's part of the game. God forbid he try to motivate his teammates on the road.

The first time out doesn't matter. It was fine. Take a time out, make sure you have the right play for the biggest play of the game. Meanwhile, have the coaches in the booth look at the replay to see if it's worth a challenge. It wasn't worth a challenge. So, why challenge after a timeout and suck all the momentum out of the team? That wasn't JP, that was on Jauron. Also, if you think it's that close, then challenge first -- worst case scenario you lose the challenge and one time out.

Not upset at the players. That wasn't their fault. But a tenured NFL coach with decades of experience in the booth and on the field should know better. The coaching staff took all the air out of the team with those two time-outs. They iced (pun intended) themselves right out of the game.

The problem with Tasker in the booth during Bills games is that he over compensates. He tries SO hard to be unbiased, he winds up being overly harsh on the Bills -- as if someone is going to fire him if he demonstrates any sort of subjectivity. Any time you hear him covering a team that doesn't have a Buffalo on their helmets, he is much more tolerable. And to be fair, I don't think he hates the Bills (hell, he still lives in Buffalo and works for Bills Digest). I just think he tries too hard to be objective it comes off as being overly critical/harsh.

There is a ton to like about this game and this team. Everything from the adjustments the staff made at half, to the heart and leadership demonstrated by JP, Schobel, Spikes, Reed, Parrish and Lee. This Bills team is becoming more sure of itself and more sure of the new system on both sides of the ball. The talent is not all there yet, but it's progressing nicely. This is a young team that will make you stand up and cheer one second and then turn around and make you pull your hair out the next. Still, there is progress. Next week will be a huge test. If the Bills can go into the Meadowlands and come out with a big W after losing this one, it will be a testament to how far this club has come. Next week will not be easy. But it's a game that the Bills have to win to keep this forward progress going.

Forget JP. He played terrible in the first half -- was inaccurate and looked rattled. But that didn't cost the Bills the game. JP came back in the second half and still looked shaky, but showed his guts on some great runs and his ability to rally the team. JP did not cost the Bills the game. Forget the refs. Yes, the pass JP threw for a completion that they called a sack was a blown call. Yes, the pass interference in the 4th quarter was also a blown call. But despite these calls, the Bills still had a chance to win. The refs did not cost the Bills the game. Forget LT. He was his usual, Superman self. He torched the Bills in the first half yet was stymied in the last quarter and a half. The Bills Defense buttoned up and held him in check. The Defense created momentum, and siezed control of the game. LT did not cost the Bills the game. Forget Gates. He was a terror across the middle, but he was realitively harmless in the second half until the final drive. He had a great day, bailed Rivers out a few times, but that was not the back breaker. Gates did not cost the Bills the game. So what did? Momentum. And Coach Jauron's failure to understand how fickle it is. Fourth quarter, driving, down by three to the best team in the league and your team has ticked off 14 unanswered points. 2nd and 10, a questionable call on the sidelines results in a big 3rd and 10 WITH momentum still on your side. What do you do? Jauron called a time out. Gave his coaches plenty of time to look and see that the call was not going to be reversed. Then, they decide to challenge -- eating up the team's final time out. But see, that was not the worst offense. What was so bad about that decision was it nullified all the momentum the Offense had built. JP and the gang were sitting on the sidelines for 13 minutes gathering frost while the coaching staff squandered two time outs. That decision squandered all the momentum the Bills had garnered up until that point and gave it right back to the Chargers. That is when LT killed the Bills. That is when Gates killed the Bills. That final drive. When momentum had been wrangled and won back to the Bolts' side. Momentum is a fickle beast. When you have it, you have to use it as best you can. Wasting 13 minutes on the sidelines prior to arguably the biggest play of the game is foolish. A Yale man has to be smarter than that. A former NFL player (and a good one) should understand momentum much better than that. That decision to challenge a call you already KNEW would not be over turned cost not only the Bills the momentum -- but the game.

That's a very good point...Especially with JP and Willis. Both only have 1 year left after this season, correct? I'm not an advocate of spending huge sums in FA anyway. I'd rather lock up the talent that the Bills have nurtured into players and reap the rewards from that.

I see two keys to this game: 1) Balance on offense. As soon as any team gets one dimensional, you lose. I don't care if it's a wide open attack of a ground assault, as long as the offense is moving the chains. But I suspect you'll see JP throw about 25-30 passes this week. 2) Third down conversions -- on both sides of the ball. . The Bills have to get off the field on third downs, and the offense has to be in more makeable third downs than not. It worked against Jacksonville, it will work against SD. I expect this game to be competitive -- unlike the disaster in SD last year. This Bills team has more swagger and more heart. You can't underestimate momentum. Is SD the better team? Yes. Will they be the better team on Sunday? That's what I'm not so sure about. Can't wait for this one, it'll be fun!

Not being a cap expert -- assuming Nate is resigned at top dollar (which, if they are going to resign him, will most certainly be the case)...how much will that hurt the cap space? Are the Bills looking at a situation where they can only sign Nate and maybe 1 or two mid level guys, or would resiging Nate still allow them to make a few more splashes in the market?

I agree. And I'd rather have JP over Rivers. Or Big Ben. But it was just kind of jarring to me to hear the difference in the interviews. One seemed to expect success the other seemed to be giddy about just a taste of it. Don't know which is better.

I'm a big JP supporter and enjoyed the interview as well. I like his style (even though he's picked on for it). It's more down to earth and no nonsense (as much as that can get in the sports world). Yet, I have to say, listening to River's interview after JPs was like night and day. Rivers sounded like he was focused, in control and had been doing this for 10 years. Whereas JP sounded like he was still new and learning the ropes (giddy almost about being on the radio). Obviously, interviews don't mean squat come Sunday, and I was one of the ones on record prior to the 04 draft saying I thought Rivers was the worst of the lot (yes, I might be eating crow on that one...but not yet since I haven't seen any Chargers games this year), but damn he sounded like a guy I would line up and play for whereas JP sounded like a guy I'd love to have a beer with. Not that this observation is worth anything, just rambling.