shrader

To be fair, Cornell basketball players aren't the one's who wind up in the WNBA, so they don't have to worry about that pro stereotype.

If it's college sports, why was he trying to interview a WNBA player? But anyway, if reporters aren't allowed in college locker rooms (I have no clue, but I'd guess they aren't), we have to remember that we're dealing with a younger group of players. There are also going to be some 17 year olds in those locker rooms. That right there can cause a whole new world of problems.

It really has nothing to do with the discussion, but I'm curious. Do those off limit rooms always have a wall separating them? The showers and trainers room sound pretty obvious, but I could picture there being no natural border between a locker room and the players' lounge.

One of the one's that I found the funniest was a link in here earlier that said one of the uncomfortable things they did was running plays in her general direction. So let me get this straight. They tried to get the attention of someone covering the team? Shocking! I'm sure there were things that were far worse, but the "pile on" mentality by certain sections of the media out there is ridiculous. Next we'll hear that random reporter #76 thought Sanchez shook her hand 1 second too long and that was harassment.

I'm a little confused on where exactly the line is for things like this though. The reporter doesn't seem to care at all, but the players' actions offended someone else who wasn't even involved. Is it even possible for someone to do something that won't offend a single person on the face of the earth?

Until the day where physical appearance doesn't factor in on the hiring of any single reporter in this country, male or female (in other words: NEVER), this issue won't go away.

Exactly. Way to minimize the accomplishments of your own players, Giants.

I haven't been too crazy about 2010 either, but can't really offer you much in the way of advice. But best of luck to you. I hope you get things in order soon.

I'd say a Parrish punt return was the only chance they had there.

Remember when everyone thought the Bills would keep Levi Brown as the 3rd QB because he'd be picked up off of waivers immediately...

So does this mean that you approve of the Belichick cheating method?

Was he thrown to even once before that TD drive? I don't think he was, but I can't remember for sure. I might feel better about him being a weapon that can no longer be ignored if they actually threw the ball to him a little more.

What seems to be lost in the discussion is that the defense did their part in this decision. They got the ball back into the Bills' hands as quickly as possible. The ultimate factor in whether or not any strategy was going to be successful was whether or not the offense could get it done. They ran 7 plays in those last 2 minutes and gained what, about 6 yards? That clearly wasn't going to get it done. Whether or not people agree with this decision, it had absolutely no impact on the results of the game (unless you're a betting man).

Then there's also very good possibility that Miami winds up with 7 if the Bills screw up on that 4th down play. If we're going to break down that chances down there, we have to list everything.

If we're going to play that game, we might as well also mention that the scoreboard most likely would have looked different if the refs hadn't mysteriously ignored the PI on that bomb to Evans.

If they follow your suggestion, they lose the time it takes to run that entire play. By snapping it out of bounds, they lost maybe 1 second.

Before anyone complains about that throwback, wait until you see their poor plans for the name plates.

Are the dates in EiI's link from before or after some of those jokes started happening? If this new idiot latched onto them after that, I wouldn't be so sure it's proven. But anyway, in my idea world, the press would never mention any of these idiots ever again and they'd disappear. Of course, in my idea world, the Bills would go 18-0 this year (yeah, they'd play 2 extra games just for the commish) and then sweep through the playoffs, never allowing a single point.

I know a few disagreed with me when I said that we need to stop giving attention to media whores because their ideas will spread, but what you just posted (wikipedia obviously not being the greatest of sources) backs up that thought.

The script blue jersey is a one year thing for the 40th anniversary. That new white will join last year's 3rd jersey (the original logo) as the primary jerseys for the team. I guess it's possible that the script jersey sticks around longer, but the original plan that had been floating around the internet for a while now is the one year deal.

If I had created the poll I wouldn't have even included "yes" as an option. It's gotten to the point where losing to the Pats has joined death and taxes. I won't believe beating them can happen until it actually does.

This isn't the NCAA. Until they start seeding the playoffs based on power rankings, they mean absolutely nothing.

And there's the one other big possibility that you left out, injury.

Maybe it's my ancient browser here at work, but I'm just getting the standard page. I'll have to check this from home later.