Dibs

Ooops, sorry Nick.

I was under the impression that purple represented sexual frustration. ....just saying.

Good call. Cool as anything & multiple movie performances of the same character. How did he not get in? Who voted for these anyway? 18 & unders? I'm trying to think of my top 10 here...... Clint - The Good the Bad and the Ugly Harrison Ford - Star Wars Trilogy...how was this missed???? Michael Caine - Italian Job Christian Slater - Pump up the Volume. Matthew Broderick - Ferris Beuller's Day off. I don't believe I'm saying this but..... Kantactu Reeves - Matrix(1)

Loved the sting. The thing is...9/11 stopped the world. I (& everyone I know) was absolutely stunned/shocked/in tears etc.(BTW I live in Australia) This event was monumental in its scale. How anyone could think that anybody would be sitting back thinking "Hmmm, how do I spread some propaganda(etc). Should I spread the word on human rights abuse in the middle east? No. Tell of all the oppressive governments that subjugate their populace to systematic torture & abuse? No. I know, I'll crash 2 planes into the trade center buildings killing 3000 people. That's a good idea." Why is it so much easier for some to believe a democratically elected government would do this over a group of people who regularly blow themselves up to kill innocent lives.

I don't know anything about their boss & I guess if he is as good as you say he will act, but.....did you watch the speech given to the police by their Sargent(?). Those police need some serious re-training.

I've been reading most of the posts & it seems to me that the only mistake people are making 'possible' excuse for is the INT. His fumbles have not been defended....he held onto the ball for too long & got sacked. I have not seen anyone blame the line....or say it wasn't a fumble....or anything like that. Have I missed pertinent posts that you are referring to?

Absolutely amazing isn't it.

I don't want to get embroiled into this debate....I don't really care since whatever is decided I can see a logic for doing....I trust the coaches decision. Also, in a few days, this argument will be meaningless....but..... "I've got to look at all the tape," Jauron said when asked after the game if his QB depth chart would juggle. "I don't feel like much will change, but we'll let you know as soon as we have an answer to that question." from...here Sounds to me like they'll go with JP. Like I said, if they go with Nall, cool...&....we'll see soon.

Just have a goooood look at your avatar. See, eyes aaaaall better.

Dude, rather than waste your time on wild conspiracy theories which even if(& this is just for the sake of the argument)they are true only goes to show that power corrupts(gee, nobody knows that, do they? ) why don't you concentrate on real issues in your country. Next door to this thread is a good example of where you could perhaps 'make a difference' if you want to spend your time doing so. thread

But editing footage to show things how you want them to be seen will not make you right. The footage is clear of the woman. Elizabeth Ritter The article(thanks millbank) shows what sort of person she is. Why do you defend the police in this instance. FYI, I am not anti-establishment/police/world trade/democracy/law/etc/etc/etc/etc I am pro all of those things....that is why when the police shoot peaceful protesters in the back(walking away!!) I do not defend the police. When the protesters are spitting/throwing things/etc/etc & the police are in the thick of it, I defend the police if they step over the line. Just because radical hippee types instantly jump to condemn everything the police & authorities do, does not mean that sometimes they do not deserve to be condemned for their actions. This case seems to be one of those.

Did you watch the footage? I don't care what had previously happened nor what was happening with others, to shoot that woman was wrong, plain & simple. You could not get a better embodiment of peaceful protester. Shiit, she is a lawyer who was only there because the courtroom was closed. By your rationale, THIS GUY should have been run down because he was told for days not to be there. The woman & the guy in the link represent the American ideal/dream....the police actions is the reality.

Shhhh. No need to shout.

LA LA LA LA. I can't hear you. Until I hear myself, Tasker is the best announcer EVER....just as he was the best ST player EVER. LA LA LA LA I'm not listening.

Usually is the right word....no arguments....not every time though. ...how about 30 carries for 65 yards? Sometimes it is a useful tact to remove the 'long' run from a RBs stats. I don't know what point you think I'm making here.....I'm not knocking anybody(RB) in particular, certainly not WM. My point is:- There are some games where a RBs stats will appear awesome but upon closer inspection, they are inflated by an unusually long run & the RBs team actually has lost the game. It happens. The reason I am harping on the point is that when those games occur(around the league), people actually argue the merits of the inflated stats & proclaim said RB good. To discount the concept now is to invite buffoonery later. BTW, I do not think Sanders was an example of this. IMO Sanders was one of the most talented & dynamic RBs of all time.

Now that may well be so but..... for law enforcement officers to be the ones shooting the idiot hiding behind a peice of cardboard is downright scary.

The take away the long run/pass/etc has it's merits.....but not in this instance. WM only played for 1.5 quarters & only rushed 9 times. That is not a large enough number to really judge anything(on top of it only being preseason) Since nobody is saying "Oooh 9.8yards a carry! He's fantastic." The 'taking off the longest' theory really does not apply in this instance.....but it is valid at other times IMO. For instance....if a RB runs for 155 yards in a game on 31 carries he averages 5 which is really good but....if his longest run was 90yards, the other 30 carries average 2.17 which is pretty bad. In that case, taking off the longest run shows that the RB might have gotten a lucky break but overall was not productive for the offense.

Hang on a sec....they want to offer an apology for making jokes about shooting her in the head. What about an apology for actually shooting her in the head? That's nuts!

....but the radio sounded like our 1st units did pretty good....except for a few BIG mistakes. I think some people have simply lost(or never had) their objectivity.

Um....if that is what you meant to say, why didn't you simply say it? Don't expect others to assume that you didn't mean it like you wrote, because there are plenty of 'real' dumbasses here who write far more ludicrous things....& they do mean what they write.

Agreed, but the original post implied KH had the reputation as the worst 'back-up' in the NFL. That is just plain incorrect. When he was in Clevland & upto this years training camp, many considered he was close to OK starter level. I don't want him starting for us & I won't care if he is cut but slandering the guy just because he is declining is IMO wrong. Before last season, how many reports did you EVER read saying KH was a terrible backup? None because he was at worst considered an OK backup. Give the guy a break & let him retire with pride(assuming it goes that way)

It's not rediculous that he could get cut & it is well past his...ahem....prime but it is rediculous to suggest he is known as the worst back-up in the NFL. That statement is simple stupid. He has been recently considered (nearly)good enough to start....he has recently been looked at as one of the BEST back-ups in the league. I wish people would pull their heads in. He is declining & never had good physicals to start with. Yes....cut him if he has lost it....but don't make out the guy was always a terrible player. Geez

I'd be happy for this also....though not because of his performance today. It would be beneficial to 'actually' see what he can do.

Pretty valid.