OCinBuffalo

Just heard Walsh's lawyer? on WGR. He unequivocally stated that Walsh knew what he was doing was wrong, was told not to get caught, tried not to get caught, and that some teams definitely denied him access to certain areas of their fields, because they knew it was against the rules. Misinterpretation, my a$$.

The worst part is: I'm pretty sure I used to know that guy. (supposedly, I obviously never asked him directly) Just a dude that hung out at the same after-hours club that I did, but he was always cool = he was funny and his Russian accent made it funnier, until somebody shot him, then he was dead. Edit: I forgot-->I hung out at an after hours club because I usually wouldn't get home from the airport till Midnight on Fridays, but apparently I have character issues for being in the same club, along with 200 other people, with a known drug dealer.

The good new for you is there already are: MoveOn.org Huffington Post Media Matters Enjoy! There's enough blatant BS judgment based on BS premises there to solve the alternative energy problem, and it's renewable BS. These folks can come up with enough fascist, judgmental BS to power this world for years, and the best part is: they barely have to put in any effort and zero thought to do it! It's like an improbability drive that runs on BS! Hooray!

Wow, what a thread.... Doesn't "Innocent until proven guilty" factor in here somewhere? Oops, that's right, you actually have to be CHARGED, arraigned, and tried for something for that phrase to matter. Sorry, I forgot. So I guess it's OK to randomly speculate, assume, character assassinate, condemn and publicly convict to your heart's content because Hardy wasn't actually charged with anything. IF he is charged, ONLY THEN we are supposed to apply "innocent until proven guilty". Right? Am I getting it?

What? Are you honestly suggesting that Comcast(Philly) has a problem with the NFL over the NFL Network and they have tuned up their Senator to start trouble with the NFL as leverage? No way, it never happened. This is perhaps the only time in my life where I am not angry about political interference in business, because A. I hate the Pats* and their bandwagon fans, and B. The NFL is a monopoly and as such they should expect to be held to a higher standard.

Now that's a tough game of horseshoes if you need sniper gear just to play. I would definitely have a record, especially in college. Lot's of trumped up crap from little town police who were obviously bored, they'd even start trouble with us once in a while as we were walking home from the bar, because we were on the "wrong" side of the street(no sidewalk). No schit. Thank God for reasonable judges. 5...4...3...2..

More evidence of why we need to get all "liberals" and "conservatives", read: people who deny truth, accountability, and the pursuit of effectively solving real problems, in favor of, ideology, appearing to be "right", and hiding behind BS emotional arguments to get votes, out of our political process. We need to stop paying attention to the infants on both sides(phony anti-Iraq war "righteousness" as well as phony anti-Gay "righteousness"). We have a growing storm coming whose name is China, who will present clear economic and military challenges to this country, supports our enemies right now, and is gaining ground on all fronts against us. But, we are supposed to be worried about Obama's word slips or Bush's word slips. Stupidity in the extreme. Yes, let's all have fun acting like 7th graders. Perhaps it's time for the piss ants on each side to grow the f up and realize that 90% of what they concern themselves with regarding politics is bad for this country and therefore worthless, and about 80% of their "ideas" are stupid as hell. They are doomed to be stupid because they are: 1. poorly researched(initial Iraq war policy/strategy or Global Warming, both are retarded) 2. not based on sound long term thinking("free" health care from Obama or Hillary, take your pick, both are galactically stupid, or, weakening the dollar with over-borrowing = Compassionate Conservative) 3. have a 90% chance of doing more harm than good(anti-Gay Marriage BS, illegal immigration policies, again take your pick, both sides are wrong and "comprehensive" means solve the whole problem, not just the parts you like, or worse, the parts you get to make your emotional arguments with). I am tired of it, and I am not, by far, alone.

Churchill said: "I'd rather be right than consistent". As Ramius has laid out here, clearly the best teams focus on what's right for the whole team, each year, rather than "being consistent" and always drafting D and O lineman. Oh, and by the way, we have an object lesson in what happens when you "consistently" draft O and D line high: The Houston Texans. Look it up here.. Yeah, fine example of building a "winning tradition" there. How long have they been in the league again? How many winning records, playoff appearances, etc? Their last 5 #1 draft picks have all been consensus "great" lineman(mostly D). Too bad reality = these lineman have a whopping 0 Pro-Bowl appearances, and they have been drafted in the top 10, except when they traded down, each year. If we are to believe that "consistently" drafting O and D lineman high for 5 years automagically = SB, then the Texans should have won at least one by now, or they should easily win one this year. Right, they are going to beat the Colts, Titans and Jags at least 3 times and crush most of their non-division opponents. Too bad they were 1-5 in their division last year, and the 1 came against the Jags' scrubs the last game of the season. Meanwhile, the Colts, who have been treating the Texans as whipping boys for those 5 years, have drafted mostly DBs. But, since supposedly "the game is won by the lines" , and not QBs, WRs, RBs, CBs, and Safeties(or the actual truth, which is games are won by entire teams, not units or individuals-->see Giants SB win), somehow the Colts have eluded the sensibilities of those who supposedly "know something about football". Yet, these "knowledgeable" folks demand that we follow the Texans draft model, and hurl insults at anyone who dares poke holes in their "holy scripture". I'd love to hear how the "Big guy good" draft "thinkers" resolve the Texans drafts against their utter lack of performance on the field, and in the win column.

I agree that's it's debatable, in May, regarding the Vikes, Browns, Titans and Panthers. But you have to be kidding me with the rest. First of all, based on records, you have to drop every NFC team, yes every, including Dallas, at least 2 spots because they are an NFC team. Right now, the best 4 teams in the league are easily the Pats*(cheating or not), Colts, Chargers, Jags, and then maybe Dallas. Next, winning the NFC South or West is hardly an accomplishment. It's who sucks the least, with the NFC North being just a little better. 1. Redskins: besides the fact that we beat them on their own field last year, with 12 starters on IR, which by itself should be enough to put them below us, they have a new coach, no real QB, and a nut job for an owner/FO who produced yet another questionable draft. Weapons? James Hardy is a weapon. Who'd they draft/do they have that is even close to him, or Lee Evans, or Marshawn Lynch? 3. Texans: another fine example of why only drafting O and D line high keeps you in the game, but doesn't allow you to win it, especially late in the game, when a big play/stopping a big play makes all the difference. As I said above, their .500 record is based on beating candy-asses, but going 1-5 in their division, and they still don't have any "weapons" that scare anyone. So how does that make them better than us? We have lots of real weapons that people are going to have to game plan for this year, they have 0, but they are better than us? Who has a better QB? 4. Broncos: the "ultimate leader" somehow has done horrifically in the draft and FA for the last 4 years, and somehow forgot to get a pass rush, again. Wait till week 4 and let's see how we do against these turds. The only reasons we lost last year is shell shock due to Everett and lame-ass play calling from Fairchild, and a last second FG. 8. Bucs: Who plays QB for that team? Seriously. Winning the NFC South? Seriously? If we played them tomorrow who would win? Seriously. 9. Cards: This unlimited power has been around for the last 6 years! What? Did they just find a way to choke 6 years in a row? Isn't this the same team that had the SB Bears on the ropes but found a way to lose/got beaten by Rex Grossman? Again, if we played them tomorrow, who would win? Once again, Cards, Texans, Bucs, Redskins have been vastly overrated in the pre-season last 5 years, but with the markets they represent, it's better to tell everybody the Emporer's new clothes look just fine.

Yeah but Stern is Stern. You aren't going to turn on Stern to take anything he says seriously. Or, at least I hope not. I would assume most consumers of football analysis don't want to be put on, they simply want to know what's happening and don't have/don't spend the time that the average TBDer does on football. Also, if we were talking about local talk radio, who is speaking 90% of the time about the home team, I would agree. Look at WGR or the radio stations in Philly, and it's all negative all the time, and the intent is draw the listener in with ridiculous premises so that controversy ensues and the listener stays put to find out who "wins". Jim Rome has perfected this to the point that of his "smack downs", listener v. listener, have little to do with sports content and more to do with who is a better snap/cheap shot artist. But, this is not any of that. This is a supposedly "objective" look at how all the teams relate to each other, in terms of who is better, and I am sorry, the Cardinals, Redskins, Bucs, and Texans have not been better than us for 2 years now, even though they have been consistently rated as such. Never mind the fact that we have beaten some of these teams on their own field in the last 2 years.

Once again, we see another validation of my "tell a lot of people what the want to hear = big money" instead of solid football analysis theory. They are going to keep ranking the Cards, Texans, and especially the Redskins and Bucs higher than us every year, all the time, no matter what. Why? Because those are big market areas, and why would USA today want to lose that revenue? Here's some sad but true headlines that are guaranteed to lose USA today money if they actually printed them: "Tampa has 7 QBs and no starter, RB problems, again, and their defense is getting old" "The Cardinals play in a division that has been weak for 5 years and can't win the big game(same thing for the Bucs). Their QBs are either too old or having too much fun doing other things." "The Texans are a loser team with a 2nd tier QB, no real RB, and backup WRs starting. Continually drafting D and O line doesn't change that. Their 8-8 record is due to playing the weak-ass NFC South and AFC West, and Miami, while going 1-5 in their division with the 1 being a throw-away game against the Jags the last game of the season." "The Redskins, (insert anything that is wrong with any football team here)<-- and it's applicable. Some could say that those headlines could apply to us: the difference? These headlines have been applicable to those big market teams for the last 6 years. When we were bad, we knew it and that was that. Every year they keep shoveling the same crap for these big market teams and every year it's proven to be crap. The only reason Miami isn't being added to the list of teams that are "better" than us is that they had to go 1-15 to finally break the media BS. Last year they were supposed to be 2nd in the division. But, if they go 8-8 any time in the next 2 years, how much do you want to be that they are SB contenders immediately? The exception to the rule, because of course there has to be one: Philly. They have rarely been given the attention they "deserve" based on their media status, unless it's about something being wrong with McNabb, or some other negative story. I have no idea why, other than maybe the 5 years in a row of losing the big game(4 NFC, 1 SB) has made the media tired of them.

Same here, nice work. Steve Johnson was a Juco transfer who only really got to play in spots due to the team and the O they ran(Kentucky). The good news for us is: if you watch all the youtube out there on him, the spots he consistently showed up in was either: "the winning catch" or "the catch that got them into overtime". I will take clutch over Willie Gault speed every day. The other thing about Johnson in those films is he is almost always 10 yards wide open. That's way too wide open, way too often, in too many big play situations, to be a coincidence. Either they are running the best offense of all time at Kentucky, or this guy is as least pretty good. Both Johnson and Bell are in the same spot now = they have only been around for a short while, but they have flashed big time potential in that short while. I see both of them as likely PS players who might be able to work themselves up. If either makes the team this year, they will have accomplished a lot, given who we already have at their positions. In all cases, if Bell can spend time developing this year and next, which is what a backup is supposed to be doing, btw, he might just turn into a solid 6th man for the O line, or even start. He certainly has all the physical characteristics, now it's just a matter of hustle and attitude.

Root For: Bills, Sabres, Cubs, Yankees,(Bulls/Sixers when my NBA ban is lifted) Root against: Cardinals, Mets, Jets, The NBA in general = I won't watch it until they win a Gold Medal in the Olympics. If they can make all this money from this country, the least they can do is show up for the Olympics. Show me a gold medal and I might start showing you some attention, same thing for college basketball. There's no excuse for any of it, period. It's once every 4 friggin years! If we are supposed to buy in to how "great" these guys are... Might as well go down to the park and save yourself the $60, it's the same thing right now . Hate: Dolfags, Pats*, The NFC East(- the Giants, how can you hate them now?), Women's Lacrosse, Nascar, Flyers, Senators(mostly their fans not so much the team) Don't mind seeing them do well: Steelers, Browns, Bears, Giants, Any college football team as long as they aren't Miami, and they deserve to be there/win.

Link to that scene here or in his signature.

My thing is this: if they think they have their O line settled, then I want them to leave it alone and let the guys play together. I don't want them to keep moving new guys in every year, maybe one at the most. They have to get used to each other and learn how to play with one another. I don't mind depth, but I don't want our O line treated like a fantasy football team. O line is more of a team thing than any other position and constant disruption isn't going to get us anywhere.

On the surface, no O line before round 5 looks/sounds alarming. However, consider the fact that for the last 3 drafts, there has been a huge run on O line in rounds 1 and 2. When it's our turn to pick in round 3, and you're looking at the 15th best tackle, or the 10th best guard, it's kinda hard not to pick the 3rd best QB(Edwards) if he is still there. Edit: Not saying Edwards is worse than anybody, just talking about his draft grade at the time.

I can't believe we are still arguing this: Big Guy doesn't automatically mean Good Guy, and, O line is 10x more about continuity than individual players. We don't draft in a vacuum and the argument that: "All these top lineman go in the top ten/first round" only serves to underscore that fact. This year, by the time the draft got to us, we were looking at picking the 5th or 6th best guy at the T and G positions, and there's no way in hell that is better than taking the #1 guy at his position. It's only going to get worse the better we do and we have to use every tool there is to get the best players at every position, every year. Or, as in this year, what if nobody is graded higher than the 3rd round at an O line position(Center this year)? Why should we draft 3rd round talent in the 1st round? Just so we can say we drafted an O lineman? Continuity: NFL '= fantasy football, and there is no position on the team where that fact is more clearly demonstrated than O line. These guys only played together one year. Hopefully the coaches give them a chance to work together this year(run blocking) before they start monkeying around with them. We had to make the wholesale changes we did before last year because things were a mess. That's not the case this year. I expect to see dramatic improvement now that these guys have a year under their belt together(that means you Mr. Fowler). And if I don't, and there isn't some other position that isn't killing us worse, then I expect the FO to act accordingly, just like they did last year.

I don't know about all this "great in shorts" stuff. This guy was very good when he played for the Rams. The problem was: Dan Snyder went after a Cover 2 safety and forgot to ask Greggo what kind of defense he runs(hint: not Cover 2). Snyder way overpaid for a guy that didn't fit their scheme, and then blamed Archuleta. Just sayin' he started on some pretty good Rams teams for 5 years. Either way, we don't need 'em.

This is the reality that everyone has to come to terms with. With FA being what it is now, this is how you have to build your team. You pray that you get good guys who are willing to take a lesser paycheck in order to stay on the team/in the area, and you hope that you win enough for them to want to do that. But, as long as there are retard owners like Dan Snyder/Jerry Jones throwing crazy money and/or draft picks around, you can't hope to keep even 30% of your players. Drafting an O lineman high is no guarantee that he will stay on the team, be any good, or not demand a new contract after 2 years, any more than any other position. So it really doesn't matter, and all of this angst about always drafting O line, in today's game, is really a waste of time. I will say that we need a center next year in the draft, and if there is a good one at pick #32, then I say we get him.

Not much else going on now, so I figured I would take a look at what everybody else in the division is doing. Found some things that range from hysterical to the (straight jacket)delusional. Miami Dolphins: The Code I wonder if the code includes giving your defensive captain/All-Pro DE a ton of hassle because you don't want to pay him what you owe him? Looks like they are laying it on thick in Miami. I also wonder if The Code includes not leaving the game in the first half/when your team goes down by 2 TDs? Hooray! More "Commitment to Excellence"(remember that with the Raiders?) fun for us this year. http://www.miamidolphins.com/respectthecode.asp Miami Dolphin Movie Ideas(Mine is: Extralarge: Miami Killers starring Jason Peters, Derrick Dockery, Melvin Fowler(ugh), Brad Butler, Langston Walker and Robert Royal, with Trent Edwards, Lee Evans and George Wilson) http://www.phinatics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11491 Gotta love it when the reporter can't tell if it's Henne missing throws or the WRs not running the right routes. Well, at least they've got it narrowed down to two possibilities. Looks like we won't know who the starting QB is again going into this season. Henne "also got schooled by tryout quarterback Willie Copeland on a touch pass drill that had them throwing over a barrier and trying to hit a target. Copeland, who did nothing special for the first three practice sessions, hit the target twice." Twice? Twice? "Lord almighty we are saved, Parcells is takin' us to the promised land, one of our QBs hit the target twice at practice" http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_footb...ry-of-dolp.html New York Jets Can't seem to get over the Pennington delusion. After all this FA/draft hype I still have no idea who plays QB for the Jets or the Dolphins for 3? years running, and I don't think anybody else does either. Worse, it's not like anybody they have is any better. How can you go 3? years with no QB, and not even trying to fix it? At least Miami tried to draft a QB high last year, and um, this year. Wait, I forgot we're supposed to be scared of Ainge? http://forums.theganggreen.com/showthread.php?t=32537 Now this is a thread. Jest fans analyzing Pats* fans analyzing the Jest. Some great quotes: "Mangini needs to kill the pennington era here in NY, or we will look like fools all over again." No, sorry, it doesn't take that much for you to look like fools. Your FA period and drafting Gholston that high took care of that already. Meanwhile you've done 0 to get better on offense-->Yeah, yeah, Keller, let me introduce you to Mitchell, Poz, Crowell, and Whitner. Can't wait to see what we do to them, especially if Pennington is in the game with all of our D healthy + Stroud, McKelvin, Ellis... And this is great: "this thread gets a rating of 3 Brady Pops (out of a possible 5):". Scroll down a little to see that one<--- Now that's funny, I don't care who you are. It's almost enough to make you wish we were allowed pics here at TSW, but then again.... http://www.jetsinsider.net/forums/showthread.php?t=169521 Pats* Caption the picture of Belechick--> mine is: "Hey, move that camera to the left! No! Your other left you stupid SOB!"(Runs over and kicks intern in sack) http://www.patriots.com/homepage/ Crying that Harrison isn't getting as much heat as Benson. Crying that Harrison isn't getting the beating their team got. Using any port in the storm to try and go after Goddell for smacking down their phony "good guy" team = Priceless. It's like they don't understand that: the cat is out of the bag and running down the street with the draft pick they lost in tow, and there's no getting that cat back in the bag. Perhaps they should try another petition. It's kinda bizarre. It's like the rest of the NFL isn't allowed to hold them accountable, because they are the Pats*, as though that entitles them to special treatment. http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patrio...ead.php?t=82158 So all in all, given what else is going on in the division, I think we are lucky that our biggest problem appears to be O line depth-->I'm betting Edwards can play well enough with a full camp as the starter under his belt.

This is a good point. Why shouldn't we simply ignore them? I doubt even the most ardent Conservative wants to legitimize those idiots. I will be pissed if they do, because it is flat out bad for the country. McCain's too smart to pull that one out unless he is desperate, and he's leading both Dems right now, so why bother? Edit: Oh, and hey In a Space...., nobody can forget about Obama's pastor because he says idiotic things, goes out and says even more stupid things when he should be apologizing, and refuses to STFU = the best thing he could do. You can wish that we forget about him, but we can't as long as he keeps talking. He's digging himself a hole, he just keeps digging it deeper and deeper, and nobody can ignore this Moron Grand Canyon anymore. I posted before that I wanted to ignore this. How can I when nobody(except Hillary) on the Democratic side will call this guy the idiot that he so blatantly is? I think Wright is on the Clinton payroll. Nothing else makes much sense, does it?.

We already tried living in Molson's Utopia: Jimmy Carter's presidency. Since the Democratic primary is still going on, each of the candidate are trying to prove who is the bigger, badder, Democrat. I don't believe that either of the candidates are really going to take these Carter-esque policies they have discussed into the general election, for real. They are likely to do what Clinton, Bill did and run to the right. If they actually stay with this Carter crap, the are going to get McGoverned, or Mondaled, take your pick. Back to the point of the post: This headline is the worst sort of lame crap I have seen in a while. They obviously don't understand how West Point works, and once again, don't even bother to try and find out before they run a headline. This guy was third in his class, which means he has a ton of choices(medical school, law school, business school, engineering masters degree, etc. all for free-->you pay in years of service), NFL football is merely one, and few of them lead to Iraq, unless he personally, and nobody else, was to choose that. The Army has little to do with the choice that is made by the third cadet in a class, or any cadet for that matter. They simply line up the slots(2 med school, 5 law school, 10 business school, 10 101st Airborne, etc.), and Viti gets to pick whatever is left after the top 2 choose theirs(obviously a lot is left). So yes, the last guy in the class(the Goat) gets whatever is left, and even that may or may not be an Iraq stationing. In fact, I doubt it is, because many of the top cadets purposely take elite combat units because they want to be generals some day, and if you want stars, you want combat. This is why, when you watch the Army Navy(fuggin squids) game you see unit insignia on many of the Seniors' uniforms, because that's the unit they picked. Same thing for the Navy/Marines, Air Farce, even the Coast Guard. The media today, or at least this idiot, is either hopelessly biased towards liberals, or, hopelessly incompetent. Either way, they suck ass.

This is Marv/DJs team and they will put their players, not somebody else's, on the field, win or lose . They rarely have said that as definitively as I have here. Rather, they demonstrated it with their actions. Clearly they believed, as did I, that you aren't a "star" if you are on a team that can't make the playoffs for 6 years. Especially if there are multiple so-called "stars" on the team, meaning you're not all by yourself(like OJ was at first). I think it goes a lot deeper than just Clements, I think they basically wanted to get rid of everybody, and they have so far with just a few more questions left. They even drafted a QB high last year. Looking back, and taking the whole team into account, the Edwards pick isn't surprising at all. It even looks purposeful now, and not just about value/highest grade on the board. This transition all started with getting rid of Donahoe(thank God), and it won't be over until final decisions are made about JP, Evans, Parrish, Reed, and I'd even add McGee to that list. They already decided about the players you listed plus Schobel and Kelsay, and cut everybody else from Donahoe's teams.

I think if they can burn enough teams with Hardy, and if they can make Josh Reed into the slot receiving threat that we think he is, that the RB screen becomes a real danger for our opponents. Imagine this: Hardy O-Line TE Reed Evans Edwards Lynch/FB If you have everything going on to the right, and they have to respect Hardy on the left(let's say he takes his man 10 yards down field), then that creates a really soft zone on the left side, a perfect place for Lynch to sneak out to. Now you have Hardy blocking on a CB, and Lynch hitting top speed at the LOS, with basically one man to beat for a 1st down, and he probably has 2 steps on him. I like those odds. Meanwhile, if they are in the wrong D, and Edwards gets to audible, then you might see Evans against single coverage out of this as well, which, I thought, was the whole point.

I dunno. I like having a bunch of QBs. First off it doesn't let Trent get cocky. Second, seriously how many Trent Vs. JP threads have there been(not exaggerating) 2000? It's way too easy for everyone to get tunnel vision on 2 players, and forget to look around and see what else is out there. Besides the Hamdan Fan Club(and they are just type Bs doing that to stay out of the dreaded JPvs.Trent debate = as is their nature), who here can claim they haven't had tunnel vision on those two players, even though there may be college QBs who are worth talking about? By the way, neither of these guys have proven much as NFL QBs and that means neither of them should be a foregone conclusion to make the roster, never mind start. Some of these guys could be better than Edwards, JP, or both, but simply have't demonstrated their ability yet. You never know, one of these guys could be a Kurt Warner, etc., and each of them deserves a shot. If nothing else, this reminds both Trent and JP that nobody is above competition until you put the big #s on the board, consistently, for years. For example, what if we find out that one of these guys can likely beat JP out for the backup spot? That makes a trade a hell of a lot easier to take, but it also means that OUR TEAM GETS BETTER when he is traded. This QB controversy thing has been so polarizing that it's easy to forget that the main job is to look for guys that are better than what you have, every year. If the Bills have found 3 other guys that they think can give JP or Trent a run for their money, by all means, bring them in and give them a shot.