DonInBuffalo

I'm convinced that something isn't setup properly. I'm not in the mood to tinker with the box settings and possibly screw up an entire weekend of football broadcasts. I'll probably call Time Warner early next week.

My TV is set to "normal". (16:9) The cable box is set to "stretch". One more little twist that might be relevant - when I turn to non-HD channels, they are stretched to fill the entire screen. I need to change my TV setting to 4:3 to get them to display normally.

This is the weird part - it's set to "stretch" for the HD channels, but the aspect ratio is correct. The picture isn't "stretched", it's just subtlety grainy if you look closely. When I set the aspect ratio to normal while watching an HD channel, I have bars on the top and bottom.

I doubt it. The tech who installed the new box setup the HD channels so they were the proper aspect ratio and filled the screen. I can press the # key to change the aspect ratio, but the only changes I can make either gets a picture that overflows the screen, or doesn't fill it properly. The bottom line is the feed itself is grainy. When I called Time Warner to ask them about this, the person answering the phone didn't even know what OTA meant, and tried to tell me that the cable feed isn't supposed to look "exactly" like what the networks provide.

One of us isn't laughing.

If anyone else is looking for a freeware flac to mp3 converter, I found one last night on the third try: http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/freeware/convert/flac-to-mp3 The first one I found was free to download, but you had to pay for a fully functional copy, and the second one I tried had viruses embedded. As far as I can tell this one works fine.

Actually, I noticed the quality difference in HD mode before I noticed the zoomed/no bars in SD mode.

People need to keep in mind there is a fundamental difference in the role of the #2 and #3 QB both during the practice week and on Sunday. During the week, the #3 takes the reps with the scout team. The #2 takes a few reps with the "regular" offense, probably with quite a few backups sprinkled in. On Sunday, the #3 is wearing a headset, holding a clipboard, and learning, as he is keeping some sort of log of the offensive plays being run. As such, it makes perfect sense for now to keep Brohm at #3.

No, there's nothing wrong with my TV. It was obvious to me what was going on once I saw the tech setting things up. The picture is the proper aspect ratio and fills the whole screen, but is obviously inferior quality to the box I had previously.

I've had Time Warner digital cable for about 3 years now, when I bought my HD TV. The cable box they gave me when they installed it back then was a Scientific Atlanta model 8200. I also have a pair of "rabbit ears", and pick up the local OTA channels most of the time. I compared on several occasions, and couldn't tell any difference between the cable feed and the OTA signal. Last week, my cable box started making some noises, then displayed some messages indicating it was trying to reboot, and eventually simply shut itself off and wouldn't turn back on again. I called tech support, and they sent someone out the next day to repair/replace my box. The tech told me the box needed to be replaced, and installed a Scientific Atlanta model 8300 box. When she was setting it up, I noticed that the HD signal had bars on all four sides before she finished setting it up. Yesterday, I watched the afternoon football games OTA. I started watching SNF on channel 2 OTA, but the signal got choppy so I switched to the cable feed. There is an obvious difference in quality compared to the OTA feed. (and my old box) I'm noticing the same quality difference watching MNF tonight. The logos in the endzone are noticeably blurred, for example. So apparently when people's boxes break, (or maybe they're just systematically "breaking" them) they are changing the feed people receive to be significantly more compressed, to save themselves bandwidth. One other obvious difference is now when 4:3 commercials play during an HD broadcast, there aren't any bars on the left/right. Instead, the picture is blown up so portions on the top and bottom are cut off. Cheap bastards.

For starters, they would have to cut somebody to free up a roster spot

The odds of Lynch being traded just dropped dramatically

I went back and watched all the defensive snaps during the week. George Wilson played all the "base" defense snaps, and Byrd played in all the nickel/dime sets. The linked article implies same. Looks like they're hoping Byrd can play all the snaps this week.

+1 Bell would get most/all of the reps with the scout team.

Regarding the Batavia Party Zone issue - When I watched the KC game Sunday night, I noticed only one "fan" small banner on the lower stadium wall. Perhaps the NFL did put in a new regulation prohibiting banners in that portion of the stadium. It's the only portion that's seen during game action, as opposed to a special shot. Maybe some NFL pencil pusher decided that it therefore constituted "free advertising" and decided to prohibit it league wide.

I'll take Miami

I went back and looked at the defensive snaps. The Bills started the game with McGee and LCB and Florence at RCB. When they went to nickel, Florence played the slot ant McKelvin came in at RCB. About halfway through the 2nd quarter, McKelvin replaced McGee at LCB when they had the base defense on the field. When the went nickel, they stayed with the lineup that they started the game with. They stayed with that lineup for the rest of the game. McKelvin and Florence are both bigger and more physical than McGee. Probably better in run support.

http://www.covers.com/sports/nfl/nfl_lines.aspx?t=0 This is my favorite odds site, because they have so many different sources. They won't have next Sunday's odds up until tomorrow.

Seriously, how much information would they be able to pick up from Bell? Probably not a whole lot.

Just think what it's going to be like next Sunday after the Packers coaching staff looks at the game film from yesterday. It could get real ugly. In the final preseason game, the Bills showed a 4-3 look, with Stroud and Williams at DT, Edwards and Kelsay at DE. IMO that's the only "look" that Kelsay should be on the field in. He has no business playing OLB. He was just getting abused.

The point that you're missing is that the important odds here are not the generic odds of making 10 yards on one play. It's the specific odds of making 10 yards in that specific situation. After watching the entire game, and in particular the previous 3 plays, Gailey determined that the odds of making that 1st down were just too remote to take that chance.

http://www.panthers.com/stadium/policies-information/banner-policy.html http://www.patriots.com/stadium/index.cfm?ac=prohibiteditems http://www.seahawks.com/qwest-field/stadium-guide/gameday-policies.html Those are the banner policies I found when I googled "NFL banner policy". There doesn't appear to be a blanket "no banners" NFL policy. Looking at the Bills Stadium Guide, apparently they revised it this year to add "Banners and Signs may not be affixed, hung, or held over the field level ring wall". Where else is there to put them?

On the armbar play, the official closest to the play couldn't see it, because the players were blocking his view. Apparently none of the other officials was close enough to see a clear view of it. On the play when Trent got "roughed up", the players were trying to let up but still fell on him. That wasn't a penalty. The refs didn't beat the Bills. In fact, Miami didn't really beat the Bills. The Bills beat themselves. They played so poorly they were virtually assured of losing the game. People complaining about the call in the Detroit game simply don't understand the rules. That was absolutely the correct call. If you catch the ball and fall to the ground in one continuous motion, you have to maintain possession when you hit the ground or it's an incomplete pass.

The people complaining simply don't understand the rule. Here's the logic behind it. We've all heard the expression "the ground can't cause a fumble." That's the rule when a player is already in possession of the ball. If he has possession, and falls to the ground, he is down, even if the ball comes out. When a receiver, catches a pass and falls to the ground in the process, he is in the process of gaining possession. He doesn't have possession yet. So if the ball comes out during that process, it's an incomplete pass. The way the rule is written is much more consistent than something arbitrary such as two feet down.

I'll take Chicago