CosmicBills

Okay, we'll see how this all plays out. As long as I make it out alive so I can make my flight home for the game tomorrow morning, I'm happy. Thanks for the help everyone.

So...final answer Meazza...you think she meant what exactly? I think there was a typo (or two) in there.

Well, I guess I'll find out shortly. I have a few more minutes to figure it out. Either I have a stalker or I'm going to have a good night. "I see you seems" wrong...I'm going to be all cocky and confident and say she meant to say, "I want you". But maybe that's because I don't want to end up with a rabbit head boiling on my stove.

I was hoping for the later...maybe it was mispelled. If it was it's "I see you"? I don't know if that's hot...or creepy.

Hmm...okay. Thanks for the help, though now I'm more confused than ever. Must be the beers.

You guys all rock... What I need to know is what "J'ai vu tous" means. Sadly I don't think it's as dirty as I hoped...

Thanks, good advice. Sent him a PM, hopefully he's still up. Kind of a time limit on this thing.

My most random post ever... But, I am trying to decipher some French and all the online dictionaries/translaters give me different answers (none of which sound right). Anyone still up (and sober) who knows a little French?

Who, me?

Bengals.

It's good, check it out. Actually I'll be interested to hear your thoughts having seen the American version first. Should be interesting. The original is called Infernal Affairs.

The ending is the same (virtually) as the original...though he did throw in one nice twist which I won't discuss here so not to ruin it for those who have seen the original but not the remake. The thing I hated about the ending was the very last shot. It made me cringe. Marty, we get it. I have to see it again before I can totally judge the movie though.

PF Changs is good (at Eastview), unless you're tired of it.

K-Fed will also have a three episode arc on Entourage starting in January. Sigh...and I love that show too.

His take on Peters was correct -- he keeps improving. The best move the Bills made in a long time is locking him up this past off season and not letting him reach the open market.

Neither did Gregg Easterbrook.

All valid points. But the game still has to be played on the field come Sunday. Not on paper. Any given Sunday....

Let's not forget that Duke got a lot of pre-season reps with the first unit OL this year. The coaches knew CV was an injury waiting to happen, so they prepared Duke well. I don't anticipate much of a drop off in continuity among the OL because of the this -- and that, almost more than anything, is often the most damaging ripple effect when a starter on the OL goes down. Peters & Fowler got plenty of reps with Duke between them in live action. The transition should be smooth.

This game will be a good measuring stick for the Bills. Playing a team as good as teh Bears on the road will be tough and on paper should be a loss. The lack of depth at OL, the inexperience of the QB and the offense in general matched up against the best D in the league spells trouble. However...anything is possible. With the Bills going in 2-2 rather than 1-3, a loss to the Bears wouldn't dash their season. Of course a win would make a powerful statement -- but even a loss with a good effort on both sides of the ball can give this young Bills team confidence. Either way, this weekend should be fun.

Other arguments aside, the hit in question WAS a penalty. Was it intentional? No. But the NFL has really tried to make the game "safer" in the past five years -- and enforcing the rules on hits, even unintentional ones, such as this is part of that plan. I hate the Pats, but had that been Roscoe or Lee getting hit in the mouth like that, we all would have been up in arms as well. As for the Pats getting more calls than other teams, I think there is something to that. But I don't buy into it being a "conspiracy". I think it comes down to human nature. Good players get the benifit of the doubt over lesser known players more often than not. This is true in virtually all sports (see: Jordan's career in Chicago with his "push offs"). And face it, the Pats have some great players on that team. Is there a conspiracy in the NFL to have the refs "help" the Pats? No. That's absurd. But 12-1 in penalties in the Week One game is a bit alarming. Truth be told, you can call a penalty on every play if you wish. And Refs make good calls and bad calls vs every team. Still, when one team gets called 11 times MORE than another team, something is wrong with the refs.

Could be wrong, but I think Ellison is listed at 228. But having seen him in person, that number is most likely inflated. I'm guessing he's closer to 210 than he is to 230...which is a LOT diferent than Hawk/Sims/Greenway 230-250 range. Ellison is a small dude. Still, you're right, he plays bigger than his frame. But he has a CB body.

I didn't accuse you of anything. The anti-Losman crowd is a select few -- HA/JDG being the most prominent. And yes, I believe those two in particular would much rather be RIGHT in their assessments of JP being a bust than for the Bills to win with him. Read any of their "objective" posts and you'll see the same thing. There isn't a JP supporter I've seen that would rather see the Bills lose than JP bust. That's a key difference...and again, I am NOT lumping you in with that crowd, so settle down

Exactly. As I've said to those guys all along: Narrow, unenlightened self-interest does not impress me. Never will. They want to be right -- and will stop at nothing, including manipulating every play, analysis, statistic and outcome until they are proven correct. It would be more tolerable if they were at least made their attempts entertaining

My favorite comment...when JP drew the guy offsides (and he leaped over the line) the color commentator goes.... "That was just like a beer commercial".... I was just waiting for a Major Leage-esque comment: "Dynamite drop in, Marty! That color commentatitng school has really paid off!"