The Big Cat

If you really want to nit pick, Bills win pct since he's been GM: .479 vs. the rest of the playoff drought: .394 I'm still waiting for somebody to explain how this will be used in court. Please be the first.

Because their job is to foment sensationalism. Because it's been sensationalized to the point of absurdity, but absurdity far-reaching enough that it required a response. I'd caution you to gauge something's importance based on whether or not Stephen A. Smith says it's a big deal.

The statement was inevitable. Whether it was decreed by the Pegulas is uncertain, and whether it was decreed by the Pegulas because they were angry is even less certain. As someone who issues statements for a living and has for quite some time, you can either take my informed perspective on that speculation or not. EDIT: It's just as likely that the decree from the shield itself.

I haven't evaded the question of whether the Pegula's are happy. I doubt they are. I think it's just as likely they're not terribly UNhappy with his comments either. I doubt for them that this is an issue. But I will ask you again, how does this leave the door open for civil suits? What nature of civil suits does this spawn? And how are his poor choice of words so unique that they make the suits more likely? I am certain the Pegulas have attorneys on retainer in addition to the ones working in house. You shouldn't be concerned with them having to get into any sort of legal scuffle, unlikely to occur though it may be. I assure you. They'll be fine.

Yeah I'm curious to hear any reasonable explanations for what legal gravity his comments hold. Because he admitted the human body isn't equipped to handle the rigors of football? Hasn't the helmet requirement been making that admission for decades? On what grounds would anyone sue? That they were deceived into thinking football wasn't a physical contact sport with injury risks? What could possibly be presented to any judge in this universe to convince him/her Pegulas organization was culpable in that deception. How many times have we heard--from coaches, GMs, pundits and players--"it's a violent game for violent men." Exactly what was Whaley's admission today that was in any way new or revealing as to carry legal muster?

Nobody pretends Doug knows his way around a microphone. He does not. I've said as much here several times. But I believe you are drastically overstating the consequences of what he said. Used in court how? To demonstrate what?

Why do I get the sense that the people who are the most outraged about this are the same people outraged by safe-space, microaggression outrage too.

Looking back then ahead: Absurd conclusion reached Absurd conclusion amplified on team message board Absurd conclusion questioned Questioner = mindless shill, blind to reality

And the consequence of any of this is...?

I think we've adequately addressed all the factors that makes the metric weak...on its own. EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is that I think we'd be able to draw many more conclusions from this ONE stat if we knew more about how the teams finished in all the categories that would impact it. And three and outs would absolutely impact it, unless the majority of a team's voluminous three and outs came after turnovers or good ST's positioning. A three and out from your own 20, and your opponent is likely taking close to mid-field. Didn't a bunch of you spend three days in another thread, hand-in-hand, congratulating one another on your misunderstood desires for balanced, reasonable, constructive dialogue?

Because if there's one thing we would want to see a lot of in the Ryan Bro's D: it's constant substitutions.

But if you have a team that goes three and out a lot, has poor coverage, turns the ball over frequently and gives up points on turnovers and ST then you have a metric which be very negatively impacted yet will have virtually no correlation to the team's defense... And given what Rex's offenses have...uh...achieved since 2009, I can't really say that this has anything to do with his defenses, which he--as a coach--has been largely defined by. Sorry, just not buying what your selling here. What were the Ravens rankings when he coached the defenses there?

being ranked low means teams had to gain fewer yards to score points? isn't that mostly a result of field position?

How dare you besmirch Sweden's greatest pop group of the 1970's. How. Dare. You. As for the pod: between Rodak and Graham and this being recorded one a shoe phone in a wind tunnel at the Indy 500, I didn't last more than 40 seconds on the listen.

I don't know if I'm as confident as you that he has some in the tank. 8 sacks in 11 games last year was impressive, though.

If it's tangents you're so terribly concerned about...

If Dwight Freeney--the pass rush specialist--is being thought of as a stop gap until Shaq gets healthy, then it's a perfect time to discuss since--from what I gather--Shaq will be doing nothing at all like what Freeney does/has.

Is now a good time to discuss what Shaq's role in Rex's defense will be? I get the sense that the presumption of him being a pass-rush specialist is setting up a lot of Bills fans for disappointment/misappropriated critique.

All I know is when he’s healthy, you can’t cover him, it’s as simple as that. No cornerback in the league can cover him, and you can quote me on that, and I’ve got video proof of it. The best of the best can’t cover him. Love it.

And you say MY opinion is too black or white!

In all those years, aint nobody posted heat maps, bruh. Isn't there a DB somewhere awaiting your death threat?

And thus they're glad he's hurt? That was your take away? Can we have the link to get some actual context here?

That sucks. One of my favorite eps.