daquixers_is_back

I suppose thats a good arguement. Although some believe Bennet, and Tasker deserve their jersey numbers retired also. Dave Moore?

If you retired every number of a player that deserved it from the Bills '90 glory years than their would be very limited jersey numbers left.

Your right! McGahee is the fastest Bill to ever reach 2,000 yards. Yep even faster than Thurman. So yeah your right you can tell a lot by the way someone PLAYS McGahee through 31 games : 2,375 yards, 18 TD's Thurman through 30 games : 2,125 yards, 8 TD's This of course does not mean that Willis is better than Thurman. Thats just stupid to say (at least this far into his career) , but it does show the wrong part of your response.

I love when people say Willis is not competitive or doesnt have heart ... like they actually know

Thats the realism many people cant get a grip on ... if we get rid of Nate our secondary is poo

Whitner on the Bills Afinogenov on the Sabres

I think you have watched a few too many trial shows on TV. Im not sure about the OJ case inparticular, but most of the time evidence that is dropped is usually small and the DA will know ahead what evidence will be dropped. Very, very, very rarely is the evidence large enough to hurt the outcome of a case. Well kinda. The civil suit ruling was that he killed Goldman, but not his wife. He just assaulted his wife. Not to mention that the rules was for less than 10 milion, so I didnt know how he did not pay that by now ... that was until I found this. While scrowling through the library of the OJ Simspon Civil Trial transcrips this stuck out in Stanza 4, starting line 13 Feb 5th. "13 MR. BAKER: Then, Your Honor, you're well aware 14 that he indicated that he believes that this is 15 speculation. And it is clear speculation on what 16 Mr. Simpson will earn in the future; and his earnings 17 in the future, I would respectfully submit, are not 18 part of his present net worth. 19 In other words, his image and likeness 20 is not part of his present net worth. What the 21 plaintiffs have attempted to do is to create an asset 22 by attempting to turn speculated income stream into a 23 balance sheet item. And I don't -- there's no 24 precedent for that. That isn't his net worth. That's 25 nothing that he can pay and punitive damage award now 26 after one is rendered. 27 As the Court or Supreme Court said in 28 Neal versus Farmers, the purpose of punitive damages 5 1 is not served by financially destroying the defendant 2 and an award is excessive if it is disproportionate to 3 defendant's ability to pay. 4 Defendant doesn't have any ability to 5 pay based upon a future earning award. 6 He has to have the ability to pay now 7 on Egan versus Mutual of Omaha 24 Cal.Ap. 3d at 804, 8 824. You've got to have the ability to pay and any 9 award that is rendered that he doesn't have the 10 ability to pay is, by definition excessive, as we put 11 forth in our papers. You can't get a loan on what 12 they're talking about. 13 If you listed that as an asset on your 14 balance sheet and took it to the bank to -- To try to 15 get a loan, they'd laugh at you. 16 This is creative accounting at its best 17 or worse, depending on your point of view. 18 But it is attempting to say that 19 Mr. Simpson has good will when all I read in the 20 L.A. Times today is there is a lot of ill will and 21 they're trying to say this good will will create 2 to 22 3 million dollars of income a year over 25 years and 23 that that then reduced to -- with their accounting 24 hocus pocus to some sort of present cash value is 24 25 and a half million dollars. 26 It should be included on his balance 27 sheet and his net worth and that would be, I would 28 suggest, attempting to destroy the defendant, which is 6 1 not the issue of punitive damages. 2 And in Adams versus Maricoma, 3 suggests -- which is our Supreme Court, talking about 4 punitive damages, suggests that public policy 5 precludes awards based on mere speculation. And we 6 don't know if Mr. Simpson will ever have a personal 7 appearance contract again. 8 We don't know if he'll ever have an 9 endorsement contract again. And all of that is what 10 they're trying to base this line item in a balance 11 sheet upon. And we believe it is fallacious and it's 12 not in accordance with any generally accepted 13 accounting principles for net worth statement." and they are right. In Neil VS Farmers, it will state that the penalty is not fair if it excedes what the defendant is worth The defense then goes onto argue that the defense team originally supplied them with a net worth list higher that time when the original court appointed them to send the finance sheet. Then they go onto argue that the value of a name is part of your net worth (him being famous) starting in line 22 "22 In terms of the value of name and 23 likeness, it's exactly the same as the good will of a 24 company. That's absolutely standard and included on 25 virtually every balance sheet of every country in the 26 world. 27 It is something that you can take to the 28 bank. It is something, the risks of the future 7 1 earnings, the discount rates are applied to them. All 2 that is figured in. All this goes to the weight of 3 the evidence. It's a standard component of net worth. 4 In marriage dissolution cases celebrity good will is 5 generally accepted as an element that gets divided up 6 between the parties." Pretty amazing case.

No. For one he was not found guilty of the crimes and the book if fictional. Secondly the "Son Of Sam" law has been ruled unconstitutional once by the supreme court ... so if they tried to pull that B.S. he can simply take up a lawsuit.

Im pretty sure the Bills wont be touching a QB in the the first 4 rounds of the 2007 NFL draft if at all.

Sorry its a long night. I just keep finding new stuff. Going on. Nate Clements after 5 years ... 20 INT's, 45 pass deflections Champ Bailey after 5 years ... 18 INT's, 62 pass deflections Patrick Surtain after 5 years ... 18 INT's, 44 pass deflections Shawn Springs after 5 years ... 16 INT's, 44 pass deflections Ty Law after 5 years ... 20 INT's, 50 pass deflections Chris McAlister after 5 years ... 14 INT's, 63 pass deflections Now lets see what year was their best year Champ Bailey - 7th season Patrick Surtain - 6th season Shawn Springs - 8th season Ty Law - 11th season Chris McAlister - he is one pace to have his best year, this year, his 8th season So according to the stats above, Clements is above or right on average with all of the other dominant CB's in the league at this point in his career (through 5 seasons). Not only that but only ONE of those CB's even came close to having their best season by their 6th season (which Nate is playing in now). In fact Nate resembles closely Ty Law ... its my recollection (according to his pro-bowl appearances and super bowl rings) that he didnt turn out to bad. Although its funny. His 5th and 6th season were his worst seasons before he turned it around and started doing great again! Would you imagine that. Its just kinda funny that Nate Clements 5th season was somewhat poor and his 6th season has started slow. Hmm ... Lets talk about old DB's losing a step. In Law's past 4 seasons, he has averaged 5.25 INT's and 8+ pass deflections per season ... Of course someone will come along and argue concrete stats.

Just to add a little fuel to the fire Nate Clements - avg of 4 INT a year Champ Bailey - avg of 4.1 INT per year Chris McAlister - avg of 2.3 INT per year Ty Law - avg of 4.5 INT per year Shaun Springs - avg of 3.25 INT per year Patrick Surtain - avg of 4.1 INT per year DeAngelo Hall - avg of 4 INT per year just though I would throw that out there

Even better.

The only thing I dont like is how they split it into 3 parts ... it just takes away the flow of their previous movies Scene 1: Some hawaii background music Scene 2: sad music with mularkeys quote and fans leaving+pics Scene 3: actual game footaage I would have done Scene 1: sad music with mularkeys quote and then seemlessly go straight into the game footage But otherwise great job

I dont know if their sissy or not, but I do wish we brought back the red,white,and blue glory days jerseys.

Here you go guys. I uploaded a better version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLJh1sKZNpg

Ditto! Although I didnt realize he grew up being a Bills fan.

Im in the process of uploading a much better, lighter version.

Its dark but im gonna upload a lighter one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Dxa4WZ8MUs

Its taking a little time to process.

Alright should be up soon. Sorry its kinda blah, but its the best I can do right now (I just did it on my camera and uploaded to YouTube)

Give me 5 minutes and I will have it for you

Put the alcohol down. #22 with Clements on the back of the jersey

I keep rewinding it bud ... its definately Clements. Unless Hansen turned his number to 22 and put "clements" on the back of his jersey for that one play

Uh Oh ... this thread may spark all of the McGahee haters.

Why cant I remember this? Fill me in?