leh-nerd skin-erd

we're 1 and 175 against them since 1926. he's a non-factor.

Potentially very serious, right near the Fallopian tubes.

seriously? so they have to look at the end of the chain, not the stick? You place the end of the chain on the approximate spot of the ball? You'd think that wouold come up once or twice when they measured, no? i think it's to the end of the officials thumb, which in this case, was in his a** just moments before.

It's like Abe Lincoln said on the eve of the civil (or war between the states) war: "Some people just like Chick Fil-a." It always amuses me, the level intolerance displayed by people who preach tolerance.

it is what it is. no doubt in my mind that at full speed, the hits result in the same general uncomfortable-looking end for the qbs. i'd be extremely surprised to see a flag NOT thrown if brady was hit in a similar fashion as fitz. i think fitz would get the call if he was the recipient of a hit similar to the williams hit. i'm ok with the flag on williams, it looked ugly at full speed, regardless of his intent. still, i go back to last years game where we took a crazy penalty on an int where the flag was for something like 'blocking a player to the ground' when someone--florence maybe, blocked brady in the vicinity of the play. same game, fitz scrambles and steps out of bounds, edleman tags him two steps later and no flag tossed. the problem with judgement calls, when you see 'em over and over, and you feel like it's goign against youis it gets frustrating. where was the call when chandler got hit away from the play a couple seconds after the whistle blows the play dead? to assume that at full speed the officials somehow can tell that the hit on fitz was in the upper-backer-quad-area at full speed assumes they negotiated exceptionally good eye care in their new deal. at full speed, it's close to the knees and looks fugly.

i don't understand the reason for your response. if you don't want to complain about the refs, why visit this particular thread, where some people clearly want to complain? if you want to take the people are 'just human" angle, that same explanation can be applied to everything that happened on Sunday. 'we got steamrolled"--well, that happens. "we didn't adjust"--well, coaches don't always adjust. "fitz is inaccurate"---well, sometimes humans are imperfect. part of the fan experience is complaining about the **** that bugs you. players, coaches, owners, refs whatever. when i'm sitting in the stands and think a call went against us....chandler getting popped after the whistle was blown early in the game, i'm pissed because they don't call it. am i right? well, obviously not, since they didn't call it. refs are humans. chandler's human. the d back who hit him is human---and it's human to whine. cut us all some slack. btw-it's ok for you to point out there errors of everyone else's way, because you're just human. dumb monkey. (no offense, i'm projecting my anger at the bills performance on sunday)

was his knee down? I was at the game and on the scoreboard it appeared to be down. or he levitated. i'm just wondering what it looked like in high def?

I saw this on the internet: Tom Brady's HoF Quarterback Camp RALPH WILSON STADIUM September 30, 2012 Come Watch Tom throw early and often!

Hogwash, an oversimplification of a very complex issue. Employer are charged with maki g decisions for the good of the enterprise, while employees are charged with making decisions that make sense for them. Some decisions are painful, others less so. Compensation issues have ramifications decades into the future. If you believe the refs are in he right, fine. If you think the deal the officials are looking for is fair, great. But to portray it in terms of it's all about corporate greed (any more than personal 'greed" on the part of officials anyway) is unfair. Let's face it--- the officials could make less money as well. And if you want to take this to it's natural conclusion, why on earth are the players moving forward with the season when there's not an agreement with he officials. Where's the solidarity there? That's the real story here

you can only spend so much time worrying about the opposition. what makes this year different is that the plan is in place to defend all things patriot. you have to hope our guys are good enough, stout enough, tough enough to work the plan installed by the dc. i like the fact that they are trying to mould a specific type of defense. i literally could not spend another year of watching brady stand back there and pick us apart for 60 minutes. could our system fail, yup, but they did some major work and let's hope it plays out.

look, i'll leave it to the x and o guys to tell you specifically what happened, but to me it seems pretty simple. a player (good/bad/other) on a good defense probably has a better chance of making plays than a player (good/bad/other) on a bad defense. maybin plays for the jets now, i wish the guy no ill will, and if he had a great season with the jets and watched the bills win the SB from his living room couch, no hard feelings.

i can't think of any rational reason why you shouldn't make all those assumptions at this particular time. you're an anonymous poster on a message board with other anonymous posters, with no real knowledge of anything at all. if not here, where?

chemistry, luck, good fortune----all of which the pats have had to a great degree the past decade, all have to shine on your team to have a good run. i think our coaching staff is solid, we've got good football guys at the helm and they'll more often than not make good football decisions. you have to like the decisions the good football guys made this offseason, and upon reflection of what they've said in seasons past, it would appear this year is part on an ongoing plan to bring the wins back to wny. you still need chemistry, luck and good fortune----but watching tom brady set up/scan the fied and have 4 seconds plus to throw for, well, a decade was clearly not a formula for success. let's be fair, too, that we're in year 3 of a rebuilding plan, and expectations for success should be high. at the same time, bb and brady are not sitting around thinking how ugly it might be, they're game-planning to beat us as well. i like our chances.

why work any harder to dislike the pats than you have to? an unwritten rule simply means there is no rule at all. as much as i despise bb, i'd scoff too.

the ultimate hedge, when 28% of the 32 teams in the league squeeze into the top 5. i honestly don't get this, if it's an opinion-based piece, why not just rank them and be done with it.

it'll be interesting to see this play out. i'm wondering what documentation they have that reveals the nfl 'deliberately' kept information from them to put them in harms way, other than the obvious type of game that was played. i also wonder what role assumption of risk will play in this whole thing, it think you're sort of hard-pressed to claim that you had no idea that there might be long-term health ramifications to large people crashing into each other day in, day out over an extended period of time. Also...are they suing the college they played for? High school? Pop Warner? follow the money.

what gave you the impression that i'm not pre-chilled?

on the other hand, you paid for a service and assuming they delivered it as promised, everyone wins. i understand the emotional aspect of 'someone else is getting what i paid for', but that happens all the time. it happens when you buy car before the next big sellathon. it happens when you just miss the two-for-one carrot sale at wegmans. it happens when you go to walmart and but a couple suit's before the big weekend sale. additionally, i'd think the theory of attracting new subscribers that otherwise wouldn't purchase the product would ultimately keep your cost down, at least in theory. it's not free, by the way, if you have to pay for something else to get it. it's basic crack ho marketing. get 'em in, give 'em a taste and those that love 872 games of football every saturday and sunday are hooked, they sign up next year and so on. those that wouldn't have watched to begin with are largely inconsequential. i have the ticket and am no fan of Direct TV customer service, by the way, and have a bigger issue with them deep discounting for those who complain than i do with the price they charge to begin with. if the cost of service is $199, make it $199. not $162.50 for some, $0 for others etc. the promotional discount for new subscribers, well, that's fine one way or the other.

this is a train wreck. my favorite: 8. Broncos (8-8) If healthy, Peyton Manning should lift all of the Broncos' boats. We've already got them as tops in the division and they'll still be adding pieces around him. (Kuharsky) i'd think if you're a professional writer, you'd at least try to butcher a good horse reference (If healthy, Peyton'll ride 'em hard and put 'em away wet!"). I get nothing with Peyton, Broncos and boats.

if you keep saying it, eventually you're bound to be correct.

the guy has been a great owner and has been afforded the luxury of signing goood players at reasonable value over the past few years. he's done so because he has a system that works, with a great coach and an excellent qb. the question in retrospect is whether or not he would pay handsomely for an elite player if he didn't have one at a key position. let's be rational, too...when you extend/re-up a player like Tom Brady, you do so to avoid losing them. You pay a large amount of money to keep your guy in house. that takes money off the table as well, but makes your team better. the Bills have hardly throw caution to the wind trying to go out and sign every free agent they can fine. one guy--one key guy. And from a fan perspective, if he had his people shelling out major money to watch a hall of fame passer with 5 %$#@inf seconds to set up and throw the ball over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over---sorry, I got hung up on the last decade...well, one would assume he'd address the need when they stopped buying tix. put another way...in years past, we'd always do what we always did, and we always would get what we always got. the MW signing shows a clear departure from that philosophy.

does anyone know anything about this kid?

Absolutely. Wait---what? I just can't ever imagine a prosecutor in court, summing up his case in the closing arguments of "The People of NY v. Guy who yelled "fire!" I'n Crowded Theater" by saying: "You know that as a result of the defendants actions, over 20 people were trampled trying to get out of that theater! What type of person does something like that? I mean, it's not unlike a fellow dressing up like a zombie Mohammed in Mechanicsburg, is it? Can you imagine? Zombie Mohammed? Mechanics burg???. I think we all know how THAT story would end...". I think on this one, you have to just concede you typed a lot before you thought it through. It happens to the best of us.

Sounds like the guy has a special place in your heart, and that's fine. For what its worth, the pension issue is complicated and joe d is on just one side of it. when you utilize language that includes these words strung together...."piece" and "of" and "crap", i'd assume at some point you'd recognize you're a lightning rod. my assumption is that he knows that, and chooses to play it out that way. i'd be surprised if he gave half-a-well, crap about what some internet posters have to say about him. my one observation----these days, he sounds like a character straight our of Springsteen's "Glory Days"...I read one comment where he talked about taking it out on the field and settling things (a broad paraphrase)...and instantly I thought of Bill Murray in "Meatballs" muttering "Easy Francis...". I have no beef with the guy's fight, no beef with it at all, and it seems that on some elvel he's succeeding.

screw him, not because he doesn't like the hotels--because really, if you're worth $100m and you can't find a place that you want to stay in any city in the country, you're an elitist. i'm not sure what his roots are, humble or otherwise, but he and gisele are first class hypocrites. old gisele has been nominated an eco-ambassador by the UN, meanwhile throwing up a 20,000 square foot mansion that is supposedly 'eco-friendly'. what sort of chump buys into this garbage. eco-friendly? you know what's eco friendly? buy something already built and move in. buy something NOT the size of your average shopping mall. i hope he gets bed bugs on his jimmy in indy.