D_House

That the second mock looks fantastic, and is exactly what I would like the Bills to do, position-wise. I don't really know much about the players involved, but I have heard good things about Scott, the T from Texas, and I think he may not be there at 70. And I think another need that hasn't been talked about much on here besides the O-line and DT is depth at HB. I definitely see the Bills spending a day one pick on a bigger back that can take some of the load off of WM and potentially start if injuries necessitate it. I am not confident in a backfield of Burns and Williams to carry the load if Willis is injured. I don't know anything about this Calhoun, but I like the RB pick after addressing the lines and S. Lastly, I do not want to see the Bills take a day one QB unless they trade down and Young is still on the board, and even then only if they make every attempt to trade the pick away.

This would be incredible. In this scenario, there'd be 3 top flight players left (IMO) - the two you mention, plus AJ Hawk would still be there too... he has put up some very impressive numbers in his workouts. The Bills could try trading down a couple, get an extra pick, and still have whichever of the 3 falls!

Jeez, relax. I don't see any complaining. I see Reuters reporting a problem the military is facing and the steps they are taking to try to alleviate the situation.

Ferguson would be great! I don't think the Bills can go wrong with any of Ferguson, Williams, Hawk, Davis, or Ngata... If none of these guys are available, that probably means one of the QBs has dropped, and the Bills should be looking to trade down and pick up more picks.

I agree, but the present reality of the state of government spending is that we are financially culpable for the mistakes of others. Working within this system, I don't think it makes much sense to cut a relatively low cost program that might actually save money through the prevention of situations that would end up costing the taxpayer more. Unless of course, there is another agenda at play - for example that which is stated quite clearly in the quote from the Missouri legislator.

I see that you are being ironic here, but I would argue that this program cut is based on emotion, and rather than being an example of fiscal responsibility, is an example of the government trying to legislate morality. See: "If you hand out contraception to single women, we're saying promiscuity is OK as a state, and I am not in support of that," Phillips, R-Kansas City, said in an interview. In general, when it comes to healthcare, the cost of preventive techniques are far less than the cost of treatment. Common sense leads me to think that family planning education and condoms are a relatively cost-effective means of reducing the spread of STDs as well as reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies. I agree that condoms are not that expensive for even the poorest of Missouri's citizens to purchase, but STD treatment and childcare are quite expensive, and guess who will be picking up the tab for these things? Yeah, that's right, the taxpayer. Not to mention the potential increase in the use of an even more morally repugnant (in my opinion) "contraceptive" technique that some women may employ in the case of an unwanted pregnancy - abortion.

I have no aversion to increasing the competition for what I see as the Bills' biggest weakness, QB. I have no idea what kind of contract Harrington would be expecting though. I also have questions as to his state of mind after the mess in Detroit. Something to consider about this is that given Juaron's time in Detroit, he probably has a good feel for what Harrington can do. So whether the Bills decide to express an interest in Joey or not, we can at least assume that the decision was well-informed.