Observer

The chance of developing Alzheimer's is 14-35 times more likely if you've played football. Even the NFL's actuary admits the chances of developing dementia are about 8x more likely for players. No real debate on those topics even if you can find a happy older player bucking the trend. The real issue is and always has been kids playing football. Who cares what a grown man does? But the 9 year old getting head trauma that will put him at risk later in life is a real issue.

Having a heartbeat but not remembering your kids and someone cleaning your diapers for 15 years is not living.

i like that it's possible but the Bills haven't won 3 games in a row this season, let alone 5.

Oh ye of little faith. If you don't think the Bills will figure out a way to hurt us worse than yesterday, you must be a young fan. KC will lose next 3. Bills will win next 3. Then there will be a catastrphic bad ref moment/dropped sure TD/kick off an upright/etc to send us to a 16th season of oblivion and pick #17 (a defensive back) in the draft.

For $200,000/year, I can rewind my Tivo and call Rex when he needs a replay reviewed.

Gannon said it about 20 times: Aren't there 20 plays centered around getting Watkins the ball? Couldn't he be put in motion just once? Set up a WR screen. Run a pick play. At half time I was thinking that all they had to do was just keep letting him get chances and he would make plays. Then comes the second half and time and again, I'd see Watkins on one side and Taylor not even look to Sammy. I blame Taylor some but I've got to blame Roman more. There need to be "Get Sammy the ball" plays. Lucy is holding the football for Charlie Brown right now. Bills will win next 3 and get our hopes up only to screw us. It's coming Bills fans. Brace for the rise of hope followed by it getting dashed on the rocks.

Ryan may not be the answer but one thing is for sure: Marrone was DEFINITELY not the answer.

Hard to call this political. Just a grade A kook. People weren't meant to live alone. The Internet is a poor substitute for community.

Strange that the media hasn't been able to find anything out about him yet. It's coming, I know, but he must be one out there guy to have no story yet about who he is. Looking at him, he has "hallucinogen eyes." Somewhere out past Nick Nolte.

They lost by 7 with a chance to tie on the final drive. Did you think they'd win? in Foxboro?

You minimized the injury/concussion issue with children playing football. I took the counterpoint. Why so aggressive? Sure, include boxing too if you consider it a kids sport. Except on the kid issue, the parents control the ability of the kid to play.

He's an unhinged person. I'd rather have a level headed and calm presence with that much power in his hands. While I said "finger on the button," a better choice would have been "in charge of the military." I don't trust that power in his hands. And I don't trust him to navigate foreign or domestic policy. The fact that Trump's facts are often straight from the Snopes false list is the new normal his supporters are looking for. Better to make a headline with some wildly false statistic or distorted urban myth than tell the truth. See latest black violence tweet or his remarks about the partying in the streets as the towers fell. I don't want a president who's an entertainer first. I want a president who actually cares about his country more than himself. Not one other candidate comes close to being as utterly frightening for the future of the US as Trump. Sanders is a socialist ideologue but at heart, he means well and Congress would check most of his ridiculous machinations. Trump would send the US economy into a tailspin of uncertainty, the world into a foreign policy mess, and who knows what hellish things he would do with the military. He is the only person who may truly unwind the country. The rest of the people in the race would just create Bush/Obama style messes of a style we're used to.

Hillary is just a power hungry part of the old Dem machine. She won't wreck the country. She'll just be an iteration of things we've already seen. You won't like her and neither will I but it won't be a disaster. Trump could literally blow the entire world to bits. Do you really want someone that mentally unstable to be president? I truly fear for the USA that you and others would vote for him. I would vote for gatorman with a VP of Tom Brady before I'd vote for him

Wow. You want President Trump. He would do more damage to the US in 4 years than any other president in history.

Truly frightening to imagine he could be president. You want to see the stature of the US crumble to dust? Elect a hair trigger guy with no economic sense (don't confuse business with economics). Definitely the most dangerous man in the race.

Except that it's getting clearer every day that blows to the head are really bad for you and football is the only sport where they happen on almost every play and are part of the game. It's the kid issue that is the tough one. I can't imagine letting a kid play football hear days. A million other safer sports where a kid can be tough.

Trump is a "choice" for you? I'd vote for Bush W, Gore, Obama, Clinton, Carson...even "the rent is too damn high" before Trump. Has there been a more frightening candidate in the last 30 years. Seriously, could you pull the lever for Trump? ▶ 1:36

Is that what comes to your mind when discussing Augustine?

Humble? When did that happen?

Not an MMA guy but I somehow got dragged into some idiotic discussions with people about Rousey vs Mayweather in the last month or so. My contention being that unless Mayweather flopped on the ground and had zero training, he would knock out Rousey in less than 60 seconds and maybe less than 30, and that any male boxer in her weight class would do something similar. That's not to take away from her amazing training or judo/jujitsu. Watching the replay of the Holm/Rousey fight, it was exactly what I would guess any male boxer would do by staying upright, except the men would hit 5x as hard (I once sparred with a trained boxer and though I have big hands, this guy's hands were like blocks of granite), be faster, and harder to take down than Holm. And if you watch the fight, Holm didn't just land one lucky blow and win--she dominated the fight right up until she won. I mean: Rousey wasn't just defeated, she got her ass kicked. I know Rousey is a promotion machine. Maybe if she's smart, she backs off the Rousey machine a bit and hits training a little harder. I am sure she's a great fighter or she would not be where she is, but she got exposed by a top striker and now everyone will copy that formula.

Sweden has a border control problem of a different sort. They are taking in about 300,000 people in a year. That is 3% of their total population. They've had a rise to power of a one-issue anti-immigration party in the last 6 months and it's making a mash-up of their politics.

That's at best an incomplete version of what they pray for. And I say that, trust me, not trying to align myself with JTSP, whose opinions in this thread have been deplorable.

You support my point. You do get that there are different sects of Islam don't you? And that Catholicism is a sect of Christianity?

Muslim leaders (not the kooks who will no doubt make the headlines...the Reverend Sharptons of the Islamic community) have resoundingly condemned what happened in Paris. And those who haven't probably don't feel the need to comment on it. Does Pope Francis need to tweet out his outrage every time the Westboro Baptists do something awful? Or the White Extremists who operate as defenders of Christianity? As someone has said a few times, the key word is "extremist," not Muslim. It just happens that the extremism is easier to manipulate at the moment in a bunch of poor countries where Islam is prevalent. If those countries were mostly Christian, be sure that it would be a Christian movement. Tomorrow I'll be in an office in Delhi with about 20% Muslims. I don't expect any of them will feel celebratory about the Paris bombings. I don't plan on asking them if they condemn the attacks--of course I assume they condemn the attacks--otherwise I'd be working with monsters.

My side point on Obama Bad is that we were talking about Ben Carson, and you went on a diatribe about Obama. The lefties did the same thing for years during Bush. Stick to the topic. On that topic, if you support Carson because you think he's a proven leader, that's your call to make. On the issues (pretty much all of them), he's shown an at-best shallow understanding and that makes sense: He's a brain surgeon who is new to the world stage. But I totally understand that people want an outsider, and perhaps a more civil outsider than Trump.