Fake-Fat Sunny

There seem to be a range of reasons: 1. War is tough on weapons and even with good arms there can be misfires, duds and sudden explosions. Any captured weapons which have been stored for months and had uncertain care would need to be inspected carefully before use and stll would suspect. Better to render them unusable. 2. Like any global corporation use of an individual tool may be more productive for an individual, but standardization is actually more profitable for the organization as a whole. We have SOPs and folks trained to maintain and keep M-16s and our weapons. If we were going to also do this for Kalishnikovs and a range of foreign ordinance this means training and developing practices and standards for a bunch of different types of weaponry. It may bring better performance for the individual soldier to use a AK-47 to fight rather than an army entrenching tool (a shovel) but its is more cost effective as a whole for us to be set-up to service each individual weapon rather than a standard US issue. 3. Its hard enough to keep track of all the US equipment issued, and would be impossible to keep track of captured weapons if we cleaned them off and sent them out. Likely many of these weapons if not destroyed would simply end up sold to the black market and perhaps back in the hands of a terrorist using them on the US troops. 4. We could simply give these captured weapons to the Iraqi army so we did not have to spend money giving them US weapons, but quite frankly we'd rather have them used to using our stuff and dependent on the US for spare bullets and parts than addicted to old Eastern equipment. It gives us better future control and potentially future money if they rebuild the country and can buy replacements from US companies to have them dependent on our stuff. Destroying captured ordanance is the smart thing to do.

I was struck in a look at articles about individual players, their attendance at voluntary workouts and reports about their work that things look pretty good and many fears and complaints seem overblown Williams- I had some concerns when he missed the first OTA that he might be in a little funk because JMac had to threaten his future as a motivational tool last year by saying that he may be moved inside (a threat which seemed to fool MW and ICE even though it made little football sense). Even worse, I feared his missing OTSs might be a replay of the meltdown which saw him report in pre-season over 400 lbs and in horrible shape which saw him injure his foot as he struggled to shed lbs. Yet, an article not only reported that he had arrived for the 2nd OTA, but was at a supple (for him) 375 lbs. and he sounded like he was committed to elevating his game to the next level. He clearly needs/deserves to restructure his contract, but I think now the Bills are waiting on this in order not to have a bunch of caproom if they negotiate with someone like Verba. McGahee- It sounds like his workouts at UM are the real deal in terms of improving his body (I'm sure they are taking ample opportunity to enjoy the sex in Miami as well though) and that he will report here next week. Reports of him somehow being dissatisfied enough to hold out and Rosenhaus taking thia tack with some of his players sound completely baseless regarding WM. Losman- I actually do not feel bad at all to hear he is up and down in showing total command and control of the offense and the game in OTAs, because even if he impressed in practice all the time I suspect he will still struggle in games from time to time. I worry less about JPs development than fans and the media developing rediculous expectations of production from him that he likely not meet and MM and the Bills having to deal with a framework which over-relies on JP. I think the Bills will perform best when JP is utilized simply a cog in the machine because if we decide to depend on a first time starter to be all -Wolrd in order for us to win we are quite likely in for a rude awakening. I think the key to his play is for him to be asked to be more like Dilfer than like Montana. I also note in OTAs that Sobieski was out with injury yet again. See ya Ben.

I think you and the others who seem to think Denney is a total failure are simply flat out wrong. Like most NFL players (even some stars sd only a couple of players per team are so much more talented than the back-ups that they cannot be replaced by a combination of elevated play from a back-up who finally gets his chance and scheme changes that demphasize forcing the sub to do things he can't do or actually play to the subs talents. If you disagree with this assessment than look no further than NE which suffered a plethora of injuries but found subs who filled in nicely. If you want to claim NE is a special case that cannot be repeated, merely look across the league which is filled with individual cases of teams who were declared DOOMED when the starter went down but somehow folks such as Brady up for Bledsoe, Warner oicked up for Trent Green. Bills DT did the job on the OL in the redzone and Pittsburgh scrubs ran over the vaunted Bills D in the last game. There are some clunkers and bad choaches out there, but face it when you make it at the Pro level many players are simply interchangeable. Now back to Denney. He totally sucked as a rookie and was so bad that he was inactive for much of his initial season despire being a 2nd round pick for us that the Bills actually trade additional value for him to draft him off the phone from Pittsburgh. You only get one chance to make a first impression and Denney's was bad. However, his play and performance improved, but many fans refuse to notice this because his first impression was so bad. Why do I claim he has value as a player that if he stays at the same level or continues to improve as quickly as he has since his second year he will remain a Bill. I say this because: 1. If one looks at last year's depth chart you will notice that after Ritzman went on the IR the Bills actually only had 3 DEs on the roster. If Denney sucked so bad then why would quality coaches like Tim Nrumrie or Jerry Gray feel comfortable with him being an injury away from him starting at both RDE or LDE for us. 2. In addition to backing up both positions, we actually utilized a rotating DL which saw all three DEs play signitficant amounts of time. If Denney sucked so bad how did we run a DL rotation. 3. Some might try to claim that because we ran the run blitz it was actually Posey who often played the traditional DE role. This was true sometimes but when it was it actually points to why Denney and his play were valuable. When he did not rush and an LB did this meant he had short and even sometimes medium zone pass coverage. I think this area points to the biggest improvemnt in Denney as a player. As a rookie he had so many problems bending and using his body properly that he was benched. By his second season he had begun to master control of his athleticism and by 2004 he used his big winspan to cut off short passes and used his athleticism to even cover deeper than most DE can think of doing. 4. Denney is no pass rusher (the traditional role of the LDS, but having BBBrruuccee spoiled us) but he is a solid plater against the run. In fact, he lined up as a DT on several plays because he was solid enough to play inside if necessary/ Phat Pat routinely left the game on third down and depending on the down and distance we might sit him for a DB playing the nickel or dime. However, in some cases he was sat because we brought in Denney who might be rushing but he could also drop back into pass coverage. 5. If Denney struggled so much at D than why heck did MM actually draft him as a D player to play offense occaisionally in the redzone. If his DE play was so bad I doubt that Krimrie would have accepted him taking on this distraction or getting this reward. Look, Denney is no stud who will get a lot of FA offers and that should keep him as a Bill. However, it simply ignores the quality and improvement of his play to leep insisting he sucks. This D performed well statistically and the ONLY back-up DE we had played a significant role in reaching this result as a team. He will not be mistaken for Bruce by even the most lame watcher. However, one is not seeing the real game to insist he sucks because he played a central role in a very good D last year.

Thanks for providing thr overview above. It is merely one opinion and may not be totally accurate. However. it is detailed and specific and far exceeds the usual fact-free opion that a player totally sucks or that he is great. IF (and I mean IF) Verba is available and this assessment is accurate he sounds like his strengths and weaknesses match up well with our plans and ability to make up for the failings of any player. Specifically: 1. Verba missed all of the 03 season with what I assume was a huge injury, but he started all 16 games last year after starting all 16 in 2002 which is a tangible objective indicator that he has recovered. The ability to suit it up and start is essential for a player that we are going to give the big buclks to and Jenning inability to ever start all 16 in his 4 years is one of the reasons I am happy the Bills passed on giving him the kind of contract SF gave him. 2. The write up of his strengths in terms of keeping the defender in front of him, taking good angles and getting good leverage is a primary need for us in O that is going to run on the first play and run again. If Verba can play for us and force the defender to deal with him and if he does then deal with a WM stiff arm I feel good about the run. 3, Verba's weakness souncs like he is vulnerable to an outside speed rush. However, this pass pro problem is a far more huge issue when your QB lacks mobility and sometimes seems so focused on using his rocket arm to keep patting the ball until he can laser it in. Given the higher mobility of a JP and him showing a good pocket awareness and presence I feel fine about an LT with Verba's limitations being entrusted with guarding JPs blindside. 4. TD does seem to be waiting for the LT market to settle out before he makes a deal. The huge contracts which have 8 0f the top 10 OL cap hits going to LTs and marginal or potential talents like JJ, Petitgout or Clifton means at some point the ability of teams to simply come up with the $38 million over 5 years Berba is reported to want i simply not going to happen. Can TD sign Verba if he is available for much less? Maybe but may be not. However, his rape accuation, troubles with another NFL team, the large number of huge commitments by teams to LTs means that we may have the leverage to get Verba for a team which came within a game of making the playoffs last year. We'll see but overall I still do not feel our LT starter is on our roster yet and I would love to have Verba if it happened.

Folks are flat out right in saying lets have some success before we make a bunch of precipitous moves managing it. Its true that the FOLKS IN CHARGE need to think about the future and possibilities like the one raised, However, there is a long way between thinking about the future (legit) and acting precipitously to manage it (not legit) until we have some success with W/Ls and there is something to manage. Right now the first step is to answer the question why we have fallen short in the W/L area. My answers are: 1. TD's first coaching hire GW was well suited to design and run a D, and also well suited to be an AA for a guy running a team with his lists and contacts. However, he was not up to running a team in terms of his sense of the game and his offensive understanding and confidence. After getting canned by Cowher, TD wanted a guy he could beat if push came to shove over who was in charge and GW was that guy, but he did not have the security to hire guys capable of running an O on their own (as seen by his hiring of a bunch of guys like Sheppard and Vinky with less experience than him and advocating for a competent in the short-run but wounded duck like Killdrive as Sheppard's replacement. TD failed with GW in that he seemed content with allowing GW to fail as long as GW took the blame rather than insisting on his better judgement (TD advocatd for hiring Clements as OC to replace Sheppard after he failed to step in when GW put together an obviously underexprienced staff, but gave in to the GW choice of wounded Killdrive) and running the risk of getting blamed if his judgment failed. 2. TD also made a mistake in restructuring and extending Bledsoe's deal. Drew can still be a productive QB as shown by: A. He was a great back-up to Tom Brady and played an essential role in NE's 2001 season SB run by QBing the majority of a must-win game in the AFC championship and even better gracefully stepped out of the way rather than throwing the usual athlete's hissy fit when BB went back to the better QB Brady for their SB game. B. He proved very productive and merited his reserve Pro Bowl nod in 2002 with his on the field play for the Bills (if you think he did not then who do you think was better than him that was left off the Pro Bowl squad for him) until opponents got enough tape on a Bledsoe run O Killdrive stupidly refused to change and BB provided a roadmap on how to beat a Bledsoe led Bills team. C. Bledsoe flat out was non-productive in 2003, but Clements really got a lot more productivity out of Bledsoe last year using some good Bledsoe play fake ability (as on fleaflickers with WM and Evans) and even used "the statue" with not great but good enough success as a runner on QB draw plays that played a key role (along with the outside threat of WM and adult OL training from JMac) to really improve Bledsoe's performanc from horrendous in 2003 up to being merely inadequate in 2004. Bledsoe still has something left and improved, but still cannot be part of a winner without the ST and the D playing a co-equal (and actually more important) leading role in carrying the team to victory. Bledsoe is capable of being a good cog in the wheel, but is not capable of leading a team to a win if the ST plays poorly (as the Bills did against Pitts with Lindell missing a chip shot and Clements getting a TD. but also fumbling a punt) or the D is going to let a scrun gain over 100 yards. The good news for the Bills is that TD appears to have rectified the one error by hiring MM to replace GW and may have rectified (and has a good shot of this yougster being a non-relied upon like Bledsoe) at JP even as a first year starter equal to good/bad of Bledsoe. The two main TD problems appear to be addressed and new issues come up (losing our starting LT and Phat Pat) but for the most part their is actually contract stability here thos year and for the forseeable future. First things first and what happens to the D in a couple of years is down the pike.

Are there any firm plans to televise this in Buffalo? Empire Sports network would have been the obvious place to do this in the past, but that was the past?

The results this year will be interesting and in some ways make or break as to how folks will react to it. Folks really got turned onto it watching the 2003 results developing their likes and dislikes for the personalities involved. The 2004 results increased interest as new personalities entered the coverage and new favorites were found among the "good" players. However, one of the odd occurences I think in terms of really developing a fan following for the "good" players is that the usual turnover of good players making the final table occured as luck plays such a strong role in this game. I think only 1 of 9 players (Harrington unless there were others) made it to the final table again and its going to be tough to tell stories with viewers rooting for players if they all end up losing and new crew comes out. Several things were done which limited this effect: 1. The game expanded big time so there were ample opportunities for the old favorites to win/make some big bucks and support their reps even if they got flushed at the WSOP. 2. Viewers were still relatively new too the game so the emergence of new personalities was expected by the new viewer so they could ignore the fact that many new winners simply emerged due to the luck of the game. 3. The need/desire for TV time allowed ESPN to cherry pick their own fields and promote and designate stars with interesting stories to tell like the Lederers, Phil Ivey or Phil Hellmuth even if there records at WSOP or on the circuit was good but did not match the domination which was promoted in 2003 and 2004. It will be interesting to see how the results play out in terms of the story telling that the networks do and the growing popularity of the internet and gambling. it will be a nice story if some of the earlier peronalities like Jesus Ferguson, Annie Lederer or even grudgingly for me the peripatetic Phil Hellmuth do well in the game and good story arcs are maintained. However, if a whole new bunh of winners emerge and the game turns into little more than watching people play a more complicated version of the NY Lottery it may be pretty boring pretty quick.

I find the signing of Shelton by the Browns and the reports on the potential availability of Verba to be quite interesting from a football perspective. Its interesting to me because I don't know what the heck is going on with the Bills situation at LT and OL and I look forward to watching and learning. JMac has forgotten way more than I will ever know about building a productive OL and properly assessing an OL players's skill level and future. However, even with my addled view this is how I see it and I am curious what the minds of other folks who have way to much interest in the Bills to be considered sane think about the OL situation.. 1. Overall, nothing suceeds like success and JMac has a clear record of getting productive results out of OL players who in the past have been good at best and often have had flaws in their game. - The most recent example of this was last year with the Bills as he took an OL with: a player headed toward being a bust at RT after a meltdown in pre-season, a new RG to the team who had been solid for a poor team elsewhere, an athletic and smart C who sometimes got embarrasingly bull rushed, a vacnacy at LG being filled by a guy from the PS of another team, and a good but oft-injured LT and molded them into a unit which though not great was far more productive last year blocking for a talented rusher recovering from a horrid injury and protecting a passer called a statue by many Bills zealots. - In addition to that JMac got to an SB with the 2000 season Giants and produced an OL led by well-known recent Bills players Dusty Z. at C and Glenn Parker at LT and this crew was productive enough to block and protect this team to an SB. -In addition he was the OL coach for several productive Bengals teams which made the SB a couple of times. It simply is quite reasonable to hope and even assume that he will get production from the OL and that even if he ends up with pedestrian talents on the OL that with the running skill or WM, mobility of Losman and a little luck that the OL will be productive. 2. Being a Bills fan is frustrating right now because the OL has a ton of bodies but no one who does not have some significant troubles or issues on the OL. Maybe I ask too much and I'm not going to get Walter Jones/Orlando Pace at every position where I can virtually count on 16 starts and usually dominant play (even the best get badly beat sometimes witness how Aaron Schobel used and abused Ogden last year on particular plays the results were real but do not mean that Schobel is always dominant nor does it mean Ogden is anything but very good). However. though there is good upsside to many Bills OL player there is definite downside as well. Anderson- Upside- likely starter at LG and a definite upgrade over Smith who was actually on the PS of the same team season before last. Downside- Yes an upgrade but not a dominant player at this position though he opened holes for a productive Jamal Lewis and has a record of starting all 16 in 2002 and 15 in 2003 though he got nicked and started only 12 last year. He's a big boy who should be solid in the center of the OL. Bannan- U- On the roster as a G and was very productive in the red zone last year in place of L. Smith D- likely DT will be the place he makes the roster IF if he makes it at all. Gandy- U- Seemingly bright guy from Notre Dame who has played OK at a number of positions for the Bears. D- It was simply the lowly Bears and he missed a few games due to injury before switching from LT to G and eventually being cut by the Bears after some hammy issues. JMac better see something here if he really is going to step up be our LT starter. Makes more sense to these untrained eyes as the next Marcus Price in a key depth role rather than seeing him as the next Tony Boselli. Geisinger- U- Should make the team as a 05 draft pick D- Will only be on the team on the PS unless he impresses in pre-season. Doubtful we will get much of a contribution from this rookie. Gudmundsen- U- Great dinner guest of JMac's last Xmas. D Great dinner guest of JMac's last Xmas. Likely camo fodder though maybe he showed something in the JMac gameroom that indicates he will be a great Bill that we don't see yet. Jerman- U- 4 years as a pro mostly in spot duty at G for the Fins, there must be a reason why JMac went out of his way to get him- D- never been outstanding or very notable as a pro. The reason for getting him may be merely because competition is good and he is simply camp fodder. McFarland- U- Made the roster as expected last year but even got into a couple of games last year which was not expected. D- Not dominating at all and only has hope because of oppeness of Bills situation rather than his play demanding time. Peters- U- Tremendously high praise for him at LT from JMac that this "phenomenal" athlete can become a quality LT despite not being used in this role in games at any point in his carreer. He has demonstrated that he is in fact a phenomenal athlete showing great speed and soft hands as a TE in camp that got him on the PS despite a rediculously low Wonderlic score. In addition, his rep and the potential for opponents to steal him off our PS got him onto our roster and once on the roster he proved unblockable on pass rush and got this job in games for the Bills which led to him blocking a punt and being an athletic enough ballhawk to recover and fall on the ball in the opposing endzone for a TD. Really outstanding. D- However, he seems to be dumb as dirt as he failed to notify the refs when he got into his first game as a TE with a tackles number and we took a penalty. Nevertheless this excitement leading to bad play is not atypical for even a bright first time player (it happened to RJ last year who took a delay of game call when he failed to control the huddle in mop-up duty his second performance). The question remains how good is he, how quickly will he be trustworthy to guard RJ's blindside and why are the Bills nullifying him as a receiver by our choice. He struck me as getting a tackles number because he showed great receiving skills and this sent this player (who may well be a mental doofus) a clear message that learning how to block would be the key to him making this game as a TE. It simply seems like asking more of him than can reasonably be expected that he will be trusted to guard RJ's blindside so quickly no matter how phenomenal an athlete he is. I expect nothing more than ST contribution from him in 05 and given the injuries to Everett this year and Campell and Euhus last year it may still be TE where he makes his mark for the Bills. Preston- U- Very well regarded player in a deep draft at C and after a couple of rookies made the start for others at C it is not outrageous though quite unlikely he can make the jump to start. However, his making the team as a back-up C is his most likely role and contribution. He is a bright guy known as a technician who did not make mistakes in the Bills write-up on him. D- No real downsides in reports i have seen though I suspect flexibiity in mastering other position will be a key to him being a true contributor. As a C he should understand the details of G/T play but he has not done this as of yet because he was such a good C and a durable player he always was the C on his teams. Pruce- U- Great performance at LT in NFLE in winter of 04 snd 03. D- Likely camp fodder because NFLE and NFL are two different things. Still a big boy at a thin position. Smith- U- Made a huge jump moving from the PS of the Ravens to start at LG for the Bills. Oddly a better pass blocker than run blocker (usually the other way around for NFL youngsters) and thus saw sme time at LT for the Bills when JJ got injured (again) and also at RG when Villarial got nicked. Despite disappointment by some Bills fans that he did not become the LG equivalent of Orlando pace for us after we plucked him from the Ravens PS, his big improvement and flexibility give him some prospects that I think Bills fans are silly to discount. D- Was bad enough in redzone he got replaced and production improved. Tucker proved to be a better option at LG so he really got driven out of his position to T rather the quality of his play taking him there. He will need to prove himself to make the roster, but the big jump, the sense he actually is a better blocker in space rather than a roadgrater and his flexibility will give him the chance to win a position if he is tough enough to do so. Sobieski- U- well regarded player who showed good stuff at a number of positions in college and in camp. D- Injury bug has repeatedly interrupted his career and nullified the good skills he showed. Was cut last year when puch came to shove demonstrating the Bills know they cannot count on him, but made it back to the PS demonstrating they do see the flashes of talent. We are too deep (though not dominately talented) for an inconsistent player and he likely is gone unless he shows he is not injury prone. Teague- U- Great mind and a good athlete. D- Has had trouble multi-taking early with Drew. He can read and make line calls, he is athletic and can put his smallish OL body in the right position for him to excert maximum leverage. he can make the long distance snap in the shotgun. However, though he can do all the individual pieces he sometimes had trouble doing them all at the same time and the result ended up being he sometimes ended up on his butt. He does represent one of our last realistic options at LT as he was adequate at this position for Denver (though not great and they let him go to FA), however, if we are forced to do this because Gandy fails, Peters is a year or more away and no one else steps up (Smith, McFarland, Pruce) he can be replaced by Tucker or potentially Preston at C but the tremors of these moves creates new issues be dealt with so the Bills and JMac seem to want to avoid this. if it happens it will be likely presented as Tucker or Preston demanding PT at C rather than the more likely Gandy/Peters failure to step up to be startigng LT. Tucker- U- Bright guy (PU graduate) who filled in nicely at C when Teague went down to injury and took the starting LG role from Smith. He originally entered the league and surprisingly for an Ivy League stuck as a T so he has great flexiblity for positions. D- Generally good across the board though not dominating at any position. he is more likely to be part of a great OL unit than to become a great OL player in his own right. I think he will be great if those around him are great. Vilararial- U- A rock who probably has as much to do with MW becoming better was a solid consistent upgrade to Pacillo. D- The rock is getting older and though he history allowed the Bills to go without a back-up RG on the depth chart last year, this came back to bite us a little when he missed the Pitts game and we had to press Smith into service at RG after we gave up on him at LG. We'll see how age treats this 10 year vet. Williams- U- He really was on his way to reasonably being called a bust last year mincamp due to the outside impacts of the death of the grandma who was really more like his Mom and the Bills always lining this rookie up next to an RG who actually needed more schooling than him (Sullivan and then Pacillo who were both cut by the Bills). However, he did come back with a vengance last year as he rebounded from the semi-veiled threats of JMac to cost him big FA bucks by moving this wide-body inside to G instead of up the economic chain from RT to LT. He got high marks from outside obsevers for his RT renewal (he definitely wanted to come back and even hurt himself trying to lose some weight after he missed minicamp having to go to the bike to train was probably his lowest moment to outside observers. He even got a gameball because of his efforts and this year is a make-or-break for him to show the advancement in hisgame to have the flexibiity to move to the LT position and guard Losman's blindside. D- His past inconsistency and the disruption to team chmistry of having him move probably makes him the RT this year. His current missing of minicamp and the first two OTAs is potentially troubling as it mimics his problematic attendance last year. However, JMac and the gang do not seem to be squawking about this excused absence and if he has used this time alone to come into camp with a better body and in control of his weight perhaps this will be the sign that he reasonably may well step up to be the player at the position he was drafted. 3. Looking at this crew, it is easy to see from the numbers and the multiple positions that many of these players have held that there is a lot to work with here. JMac had les to work with in terms of certainly numbers and even in quality last year and our OL production increased. However, the lack of clarity as to who will merit the starting LT role is simply a puzzle. Though there are several potential good answers, they all involve leaps in improvement or trigger other changes which can be dealt with but are additional issues: A. Is there something about Gandy that he merits the startiing LT slot? Not that I see but it is possible though it seems unlikely B. Is Peters such a phenomenal athlete that he will trusted to guard Losman's blindside? Not this year from what I see. If he has the intellectual problems he seems to have had I don;t expect this jump and if he is such a phenomenal athlete it seems dump to take the ball out of his hands particularly when injuries create TE uncertainty. C. Would a Teague move create more difficulties than solve problems? It depends upon Preston's rate of development or Tucker stepping up at C whether Teague leaving is a solvable issue. Teague at LT may be our best option there but it is not guranteed to work either. I actually am disappointed that Shelton did not work out at LT not because I think he is a good player, but because I think his past stengths (strong upper body so if he locked up with a passrusher the play was over but not so good in space) actually lent themselves well to having a team which was going to run first alot and then run it again. I was more intrigued having a roadgrater at LT than having an athletic guy (though both abilities would be great but I'm just a fan so it is fine for me to be unreasonable) but it appears we will go in the opposite direction. This is my overview and congrats for lasting through it. I am not cliff-noting this one as I really have no conclusion as to how this will work out, but I appreciate the opportunity to think it through by writing about this.

Its really impossible to make such a call without you knowing what the Bills docs said. Given that they made an extraordinarily good call regarding McGahee, if they expressed any doubt at all about how Shelton's ankle injury would impact his game I would pass on him. The Browns docs could actually have made the same risk judgment about Shelton's ankle, but taking him to back-up Verba rather than start at LT for the Bills are completely different uses and costs if the ankle blows that I wouldn't have signed him if there was any doubt.

For non-synthetic toxic approaches call the group Beyond Pesticides in DC at 202/543-5450. The first intelligent they will probably say is do not panic (ala Hitchhiker's Guide). Carpenter ants can do some serious structural damage so you definitely need to solve this problem and defend your home. However, as is pointed out above they often can go undetected for years and if it takes you a couple of months to do research on this and take some time to figure out the size and location of the problem it can be done. Folks usually panic because bugs are around and seeing garage size silhouettes of bugs on TV, magnified pictures of insect jaws and pincers you might not even feel if they chose to attack you (which they won't) but based on what we see on TV would snap you and your kids clean in half we have been trained to want to kill these bugs. The key is to find the nest in your home (often difficult to do) but as pointed out above they like moist wood and actually the leak in your home may lead to a bigger structural and/or health problem than the ants who took advantage of this. If you have an old home, having a house inspection may not be a bad or too costly idea to identify leaks in your home which may be leading to unseen water damage (a potential structural issue of which ants are but a symptom), mold build-up (which if bad can be a real health threat) or a route for heating or cooling leakage which may be costing your big bucks over time. House inspections are done all the time for realtors and usually when ownership changes hans. Its a competitive field so prices are usually fairly competitive/ If you know a local realtor they can probably be give you several recomendations of inspectors they work with and trust. Be sure the inspector is separate from a home repair person as this eliminates them trying to create business by giving you a horrible report. If your or your spouse are freaked out by the presence of bugs (when one pest company use modern animation to do a fake commecial with a bug crawling across the screen several folks destroyed their TVs throwing heavy objects at the bug because they somehow thought this crisis merited the use of lethal force) just wait a few weeks. Most carpemter ants prefer the secretion of aphids to food they find indoors. When the weather is warm enough for in-wall hives to become active, but there is not enough leaf cover outside to create alot of aphids the ants will forage inside for food which is why you see them. As better food becomes available they will disappear becaise they are outside, but the nest is still there so continue your research. Some pest companies will try to bulldoze you into an immeidate application because they know that the bugs will disappear even if they do not get the nest. Annual treatments are usually a rip-off. The problem may not reappear not because they are killing them off but because it is the job of the insects not to be seen. At any rate, don't psnic. Carpenter ants can usually be killed off with a less toxic boric acid treatment and if you must a lesser toxic barrier treatment around the outside of your houe rather than poisoning yourself and your kids with an indoor treatment of category I or II pesticide. Give Beyond Pesticides a call and good luck.

I appreciated the post which noted the Jennings twisted ankle. The sense it is not serious does make this fall far short of being THE story regarding JJ. However, I would disagree that it is a non-story because: 1. He got a huge contract from SF and some advocated the Bills should have given a huge contract to JJ because of the hole we have at LT. 2. From my view JJ was not worth a huge contract from the Bills because he has never started all 16 at any point in his career and last year saw him not only fail again to start 16, but he actually proved unable to finish play in a couple of games due to injury. I think we fans are too quick to label a player injury prone because this label is falsely thrown around after a player get injured even once (ex. claims that JP is injury prone after his break last year are silly). However, though i did not devolve to the shorthand of describing JJ that way because I don't think the facts support that claim, it is simply true that the facts say he never has started all 16 and that it a real issue when it comes to the $ numbers the market would force the Bills to have paid to keep him. However, I do think it will be legit to lay the injury prone labol on JJif he agains suffers a serious injury which causes him to miss real game time this season. The twisted ankle is NOT this story because real games have not started yet and the injury was not serious. However, this occurence is not a non-story or in anyway the same as a player deciding not to appear at a "voluntary" workout because of his injury history and big contract.

It really was overhyped and really disappointing. One should probably never believe someone trying to sell you something, but I had such fond memories of the music of my extended youth in the 80s, I did tape it with the thought of getting together with a friend to watch it. I think we'll just go out to dinner instead. I actually will tape next week because like a poster above I want to see Tommy Tutone and The Knack but it was over-produced and quite silly. It's only good point was that the studio audience did actually vote a preference for the one group which re-interpreted the cover tune they did after doing their old stand-by in a way that fit their style. I haqve little artistic connection with Tiffany anyway and even less with Tiffany merely copying Kelly Clarkson who I have little artistic connection with either. Even though Arrested Development ain't a favorite of mine either, at least they did a remake of a pop tune in their won distinctive style which was at least different though not a earthshaker for me. Blllaaaagh!

Yeah, but life is hard. The question for the players if they have enough capital to prime the pump for this is whether it would be harder to do the difficult work of organizing enough players to get the larger capital holders at the networks to throw in or it is harder to deal with Bettman and the occaisional Rigas the owners allow in. Given their bad feelings about Bettman, the bad businessmen who have overpaid for NHL players who are now looking to get reined in with a salary cap because they lack self-control, and the occaisional involvement of a felon like Rigas and it may be the case that taking the massive opening left by the NHL abandoning (at least for a season) and alienating their customers, starting a new competing league will be a hard thing but an easier hard thing than sticking with the NHL. As seen by the dealings of Roenick and Pronger organizing the players is no picnic and not assured at all, however the concept of getting replacement owners does solve half the problem.

It is far easier said than done, but you have to agree that the current situation with the NHL is a unique one which makes competing with this existing league a whole lot different than trying to lauch a USFL to take on the NFL. Having sat out a whole season, the potential for finding a TV contract if you have a product, finding unused arenas if you have a product, finding qualified game officials if you have a product etcetera is really the case. The pressure point is that it ain't easy at all to create a product. However, with a ton of players lose in the marketplace, if folks organize the capital to produce a product there are larger sources of capital out there in the TV markets looking for product to use to sell advertising and there are miscellaneous entities like munipalities sitting on empty arenas who would be happy to help in the process of providing a venue so they can make nickels selling popcorn and parking. it aon't easy but the lockout makes it a lot more possible to do than at other times.

Even if the market is clear about the price for Henry (which it isn't actually. the key top the market is that the same player can have have a totally different value for different teams. Was Peerless worth a Bills first round choice in 2003? Not on your life, he was not our #1 WR because we had Moulds and we had a #3 Reed who had been productive in his rookie year. We had used a second rounder to acquire him and if the Bills had traded even a 2004 1st to replace PP lost to FA Bills fans would have screamed like Jets fans during a draft. However, PP was clearly worth a 1st to AT because they had no real #1 WR and had invested heavily in Vick. Arthur Blank cinched the deal for Buffalo by publicly declaing PP had great value and that he would spend what it took to get him. PP's market value was different for different teams and that is how deals get done. Reality revealing that PP was not even a #1 quality WR and the Bills getting WM with ATs pick and him having a tremendous year last year is what has made this an outstanding get by TD. TSW posters really are making a huge error in acting as though there is some static value for a player based on draft choices. TD has done a great job in assessing player value for trade/contract purposes not so much in his assessing whether a player will make it or not (this is important, but due to injuries and other uncontrollable factors who knows really what the future holds) as though he has some absolute value, but he has proved to be prettty good at assessing what the market value is for players and positions of other teams and acting boldly to take advantage. The AT read was an easier one because Arthur Blank made it easy. However, he acted boldly by tagging Price and even more boldly by picking WM. His reads on the Campbell trade and moving Gary were not bad either. it has actually been the draft where TD has made some extraordinary reads merging his knowledge of the Bills needs based on his plan with is knowledge and estimates of others needs. 1. Picking a WR eith our 2nd pick in 2002 when most thought our need would lead us to pick a DL player and then trading up at the last minute to pick a DE on the phone with the next draft choice was a great read of the market. Reed has disappointed after his first year achievements and Denney got a rough start but allowed us to go with only 3 DEs last year, but the read of the market was great. 2. Seeing that with our 2003 1st choice we could pass on taking our more immediate need of a DE because the run on DEs prior to our pick meant that Kelsay (seen as a 1st rounder by some pundits) would still be there when our 2nd choice came around was a great market read. 3. The Bills overarching success in signing UDFAs like Peters or Baker the last couple of years which has paid off in a high performance ST last year looks like a great job of reading the market. TD ain't perfect by a long shot (if he was we would be in the SB or have a much better record under him he made a serious error in choosing GW and in restructuring the Bledsoe deal and it cost us). However, the one thing he clearly realizes is that the market varies alot from team to team and good trades and draft performance comes from reading these differences. In addition to the error of assuming some illusory static value for a individual player, the idea that the market is set for Henry ignores the fact that the market changes a lot with events or time. An example is the Jags correctly assigned no market value to Henry originally, but as their medical exams have revealed questions about Taylor's health, the market value for making Henry a Jag seems to have gone way up. Right now there are three spots seemingly which fit Henry and his all important contract situation: 1. The Titans have a likely RB need due to injury Henry appears to be one of the most hopeful and marketable choices due to his contract status and achievement of a Pro Bowl. 2. The Jags say they are not interested which is the correct thing to say if you are interested but it probably does not matter whether they are as it leverages the Titans to make a deal or they may lose out. 3. The Bills themselves remain a potential landing ground for Henry as though Henry has cut ties the Bills have not. Since Henry has little choice but the Wickey option if the Bills choose to keep him and like even Wickey in the end money talks this one is still a live option which allows TD to sit and wait. 4. Once camp starts, the potential for RB injury increases (even for WM) and it is far from certain but not unlikely that new markets for Henry will be created and the Bills may be able to get someone to pay through the nose. The market for Henry is not set at all.

The connection comes from the comment that there needs to be more trust by the players of the owners. My answer is that in terms of some owners regarding your negotiations with your team maybe yes (I assume the trust is there with an owner like LeMieux in Pittsburgh) and in some cases no (Rigas left Golisano with a lot of work to do and I would not be surprised if his players are still bruised from the experience of negotiating with the felon Rigas since Golisano decided to hire former mouthpiece Larry Quinn who then kept current mouthpiece Darcy Regier. Even beyond the differences from team to team, the NHLPA correctly has a hard time trusting NHL owners who are demonstrated business idiots for paying the players far more thant they are worth and for puttimg their faith in taking on a Rigas as a fellow owner. I certainly am not impressed with our elected officials here in WNY for buying a bill of goods from Rigas. I elected them to among other things not get taken by crooks. It is amusing to me that Jim Pitts is probably owed a debt of gratitude by WNY so single-handedly holding up the Adelphis Bldg. deal while he was trying to stick up Rigas for contracts for his buddies. If we had broken ground to build the Adelphia Bldg before the cops knocked on Rigas' door our problems would be even worse. Feel free to forget Rigas if you want and to claim we are past this and want to move on. However, those who forget the past are destined to repeat it. While you may be happy to drop trou and say thank you sir may i have another, i doubt that the NHL players are as charitable as that and after their experiences with owners who include a number of poor business men who give the players unsustainable contracts to downright felons, trust but verify is the best one will get.

I stated my sense of why sacks dropped in total for the Bills in conjunction with the general use of WM as RB versus TH. The better teaching of JMac, the establishment by TC of even Bledsoe as a threat to run and to fake, and WM's outside threat (much better than TH's) rather than his blitz pick-up ability (not hugely different from TH's from what I saw) were the bigger factors in the reduction of sacks by the Bills. In fact, if you want to look game by game, I think in 1 of the 4 games Henry started there were a ton of sacks but actuallyit was one of the games he cramped up and WM got a lot time so tracing these sacks to TH being in and WM being better at blitz pick-up is not supported by the reality. One of the other games which TH started before he was benched due to W being a better runner actially sae the Bills only give up 1 sack in this losing cause. Again the facts do not support a day and night difference on blitz pick-up between the two.

As piointed out above no compensation is given for a specific player, but this black-box calculation is done for the entire year amalgamating gains and losses to FA together, thus it was judged that the loss of AW was offset by our gains from FA through the play of Villarial and Vincent. The one item i would add also is that in addition to the level of play in their first year, the contract they signed to get them is also taken into account. The Vikes giving a huge deal to AW to buy him out from under the noses of the Jets made me think we would get some compensation. However when factoring in the to the fastidious dealmaking of TD, but alas and alack this did not happen.

In terms of naming a few games and the ircumstances surrounding the reed droppsies in 2003, this actually can be researched but it will be time consuming as there is not spoon-fed stat on drops by a player. Nevertheless, one could research this by: 1. Finding the spoonfed stat of receptions in 2003 and even per game receptions for Reed. 2. Checking a subjective but more immediate game description on the billsdaily site for 2003 games. My general recollection without the specific stats to back it up are: A. Reed had an impressive pre-season and we went into 2003 with confidence that TD had made a great move by letting PP go and getting a 1st for this FA and Reed was a great replacement prospect. B. Reed did disappoint in terms of production in 2003 (and the whole O imploded) as Moulds got hurt and we simply did not have WR weaponry. C. Reed did drop some key catches early on as happens to all WRs sometime, but it seemed to really get in his head as he had the added pressure of stapping up to replace a 94 catch guy. he improved over the course of the season and the droppsies went away but he never was a threat to the opposing D and we spent a #1 on Evans because we had a clear need for a #2 WR. I am happy to do some of this time consuming research with you. If you are certain that you are right and I am wrong about Reed and YOU judge this issue to be of enough importance I am happy to split the research with you. I sugggest we split the first two games of 2003 look at Reed's work looking at the old NFL Gamebooks which should be available and the old BillsDaily write ups which should also be available if you are confident enough in your view to to go ahead with this. We can post the results as we find them game by game and thus niether of us would go on this wild goose chase without the other. Let me know if you want to do the work with me or if not I will just assume my view of Reed not cutting the mustard in 2003 is generally not controverted.

In TH's second year he hauled in 43 passes with an average of over 7 yards a catch. While he is clearly is no Marshall Faulk (few RBs are) he has recorded good numbers when used as a receiving threat out of the backfield in the real world. He certainly had a few noticeable drops (as did many Bills in the O meltdown that year) in 2003 but as all players have occaisional droppsies (even a great player like Moulds) this issue never rose to the problem level at the time it happened as it did for a player like Josh Reed whose 2003 drops were not merely notable but recurrent. The TH pass-catching "issue" really only became an issue on TSW when several folks who really indict Travis as a bad RB (despite him being deemed a good RB by the subjective measures of adulation on TSW when he logged over 1300 tards rushing and the league gave him a Pro Bowl reserve nod. Along with the indictment of his pass catching ability which does no square with his real world production in 2002 the idea of him being some sort of recurring blitz pick-up problem also was manufactured. Henry struggled with blitz pick-up initially as most first year players (even WM) seem to do. However, this issue went away as he became a vet. If one believed every indictment on TSW then between having a "statue" at QB, a center who is easily bullrushed, and the other blocking issues the Bills have then one would expect that Bledsoe would get sacked every play if Henry is as bad as folks seem to claim on blitz pick-up. the reality seems to me to have been: 1. The biggest issue for sacks was that we had two not ready for primetime OL position coaches in Vinky and Ruel and the pick-up of JMac delivered immediate benefits. 2. Bledsoe is far from the most mobile of QBs, but even his limited running ability must be used so that rushers delay for a second for fear that he may run into positions they abandoned if they pin their ears back and sellout to rush. The Bills did run Bledsoe effectively just enough last year as he even ran a few QB draws and pulled off a nice fake of the QB sneak and pitched it back to WM for the TD scamper. 3. Having WM in instead of TH made a big difference in the rush production, however, this difference was seen in his ability to run outside and use a vicious stiff arm which caused pass rushers not to sell out going inside. The convept that TH cannot be used as an outlet or that he the threat of him being used that way can be ignored does not correspond to reaity. Despite the 40+ catches in 2002, Keving Killdrive did not use him that way in 2003. i don't think anyone is putting Killdrive's 03 work up as an example of how to run an offense.

Fair enough, but the question is why if the key to this was players understanding the true financial situation and realities of the league, why were the teams unable to open their books and share the financial situation with the NHLPA before now to get them to operate within this reality. I think the answer is that like the NFL there is a dynamic between small market teams and large market teams among the owners which has the individual teams operate in secrecy that makes it difficult and in fact virtually impossible to build trust between the NHL and NHLPA. Is the NHL as a whole trying to screw the NHLPA as a whole? No. Are some individual owners in it only for themselves and would be quite happy to screw their players, other owners, their fans or whomever if they judged it suited their individual purposes? You bet! If you don't agree with this assessment, that is your judgment, but just to choose and example you may be familiar with as a Buffalo fan, I submit John Rigas. Any assessment of the NHLPA needs to start with an understanding that for the individual player assessing the fiscal realities, the demand that he trust the ownership which they know to be bad businessmen because they have consistently given stupid contracts to the players and to trust the individual owners when they are not made partners in the economics of the game and of the teams when their owner might be the next John Rigas. Do you really expect the NHLPA to trust in the business saavy of owners that give them unsistainable contracts? Do you really expect the players to trust the word of owners when examples of folks such as the Rigas clan have been part of recent league history and decison making.

It is funny watching the coverage. It seems the media is so overwhelmed with trying to tell a story and wanting to boil things down to their simplistic views where one side is good (us) and the other side is evil (not us) tget seem ti having some trouble with this one. Felt betrayed his employers, clearly broke the code of government secrecy and most likely violated the law with his Deep Throat activities. Yet, the opposing force in this drama was Dick Nixon and the media has trouble portraying the truth of Felt's actions if this forces them in their little play to try protray Nixon as good or one of "us". Clearly the most accurate portrayal of Deep Throat is a nuanced one. It recognizes that he did some things which were dishonest violations of his own promises, his employment and his friendships AND also recognizes that the results which his help of W&B along with McCord's letter promising the judge he would give up info in exchange for leniency and Nixon not only being so self-centered he made tapes of everything and then didn't burn them all brought the house of cards thankfully tumble.

He could do a better job at hiding though. Its one thing for him when he is the sole focus of Parcells attention as he was in practice versus gameday when reality forces eveyone to recognize the QB is merely just a cog in the wheel and not even the primary focus for winning the game when the D or ST is on the field. Also, there is a difference between having the prime focus on the practice field yelling "just throw the damn ball" at you when you go into your familiar pat-pat-pat-sack than having him as one very loud voice among 70,000 screaming fans. I can certainly see how Sundays became a plesant day off for Bledsoe. However, as when Parcells HC'ed a Bledsoe QB'ed team to the SB it was all the yelling during the week which got the team there. The MM alarm clock played a riole in almost getting the Bills to the playoffs (though ultimately it was the inability for Bledsoe to play well enough to overcome the deficit of the D allowing a scrub to rush for over 100 yards, Lindell missing a chip shot, and nate Clements giveth but Nate Clements taketh away which were the reversals MM woulda/coulda/shoulda done to make the outcome different last year. The irony here is that if getting older makes it easier for Bledsoe to let go and not try to do things he is not capable (and never has been) of doing, then the 'Boys may actually do a lot better this year.

The article seems long on theory and states little as fact beyond a deal is imininent 9any person halfway connected with reality has long seen the logic of a deal being made but will believe it when we see it). In addition to stating little in terms of facts, it thus has even less in terms of detail. The article seems to invest in the same mistake which may well have caused this stupidity in the first place which is seeing the NHL as Bettman and the NHLPA as Goodenow. Both are merely sideshows to the real game which will determine who wins and who loses which is how far have these two parties gotten in establishing a truer partnership between the two. Goodenow could leave before the lockout ends, but if the players get more control over running the game they win. Goodenow can stay forever, but if the owners win the ability to not trade control for a sensible salary structure the players lose big time. The owners have demonstrated no ability to exercise self control in ladeling out unsustainable contracts. If the players merely aggree to cap which exerts some rationality on the owners business practices but they do not gain from this concession real constraints on individual owners being whackp as businessmen and merely using these sports franchises as toys then the game and the players lose. The fate of Goodenow and Bettman are mere sideshows.

If you are right then I guess the Bills are the only ones who want him. Get ready to root for this former Pro Bowl RB to be a back-up on YOUR team dualing with Lee for the #2 RB slot. All-in-all thought Travis henry boosters would love to see him cut, I don't feel baad at all about having a former Pro Bowl RB as a back-up. It may be a small issue that this player will be dissatisfied, but if his value is low that no one will even give up a 4th for him, he really has little choice but to shut up and wait for his shot. If he were to become a cancer and develop a rep for not watching his teammates backs he will even further lower his value and ability to make big bucks in a future contract.