VOR

Produce the quote. Otherwise it's "misremembering" on your part.

You must be twelve years old.

No, he wants the Bills to move there because he knows that the Jaguars are going to be leaving town soon and Toronto is a prime destination.

Took you long enough. And you know what they say: "fool me (you) once, shame on you (me), fool me (you) 4 times..."

Okay, this one is legit and what I was going to post originally, before I figured I could sucker you in one more time:

Well all we have to go off of is Peters' 2007 season, Deano. I've consistently said that the Bills were right to not give him a huge deal without him coming-in and proving he was 100% over his torn groin at the end of 2007. So I think it's plausible to wonder if he's not the same player after that injury. Maybe he is, but I can't say with enough certainty, that I'd give him the richest contract for a LT in NFL history.

But it brought labor peace...[/stupidramblingsofMr.WEO]

So close and yet so far.

Sounds like he had this:

Ouch! Joyner had him at 12 sacks? While I don't know how much I can trust his analysis, the fact that he tagged Peters with 12 and STATS, Inc. tagged Peters with 11.5 tells me that it was indeed in the double digits. But wait, Tim just wrote an article saying that losing Peters will be a blow for the Bills' offense. But that other article said he surrendered 12 sacks. So which is it?

The sack numbers are impartial. They're kept by STATS, Inc., which is the NFL's official stat keeper.

I didn't realize that Jones would routinely miss training camp and pre-season, yet still return to dominate from the first snap of the first game of the season. Pretty impressive. If Peters had done that, I'd have had no problem with the Bills making him the highest-paid LT this past off-season.

The union angle is a lot more plausible than the "other teams trying to screw the Bills" angle. And when it comes to the coaches, they recognized Peters' name, after his 2007 season.

Hasn't Poz read what the media has said about TO? What a doofus.

I'm not sure I can. Hence the reason I asked you to find it, since you obviously think you saw it.

Please provide a quote where Brandon said that "under no circumstance would the Bills be re-doing his deal in 2008 since he had 3 years left." It may exist, I just haven't seen it yet.

I've heard him claim it, but I've never seen him caught in the act of being one.

No one can claim, with a straight face that is, that JP deserved to be the highest-paid LT based on last season. And in the NFL, you're only as good as your last season. One good season does not a career make. The Bills were justified in balking at giving a guy who skipped ALL of the off-season last year in a contract dispute (I can't recall a player missing training camp even, outside of Sean Gilbert's year-long holdout 12 years ago) and who had a sub-par season for even an average starting LT, the biggest contract for a LT in league history. I couldn't care less about the Pro Bowl bid because the Pro Bowl is a joke, something to which the players readily admit. A true "Pro Bowl" and "franchise LT" shouldn't be allowing a sack to a rookie DE period, much less a safety late in the season. So he's now someone else's problem.

So do you, when it comes to defending the Patriots or bashing the Bills.

Yes, the owners didn't feel it was a capital offense, but they allowed Sir Roger to mete-out the harshest punishment that he could deliver to Belichick. Because nailing the 3-time SB champs for cheating, and thus tarnishing their accomplishment and thus the league, if FAR better than merely coming-out and admitting that everyone does it, making it truly not "a capital offense." And Belichick mostly-silently took it, offering the lamest of lame excuses as to why he did it ("I didn't understand the rules [because everyone knows I'm dumb]"). But you were right when you said that he didn't point a finger at anyone else, because he had no proof. They do? When did they stumble upon this revelation? After Upshaw died? Because he was too formidable an opponent and they now see their opportunity? Did they predict 3 years ago that his death would occur soon after they opted-out of the CBA (then again, maybe opting-out set in motion the series of events that caused his death!)? Wow! And it only took 3 years over sorely overpaying the players, amid "labor peace," and a looming lockout. What a joke you are. But a funny joke that is worth retelling.

Yep, we all know that Flutie undermined RJ. That's because RJ sucked. And SJBF said that McMahon allegedly undermined Flutie, because...

Look, I already debunked the "not...throwing him enough passes" caca by telling you that he led his team in receiving during his last 4 years in SF and 2 years in Philly (even being in the top-3 in every receiving category in 2005, before getting suspended), and that he wasn't the leading receiver in Dallas for the last 2 years, yet he didn't "destroy the team" until the final month of the season, when the Cowboys' playoffs hopes were fading faster than Jessica Simpson's career, as Romo continued to toss the rock to his best bud Witten. Then you changed your argument to "specifically TD passes," and I proceeded to inform you that over that same time span, he's led his team in receiving TD's every year. Now you've come full circle, again claiming "not...throwing him enough passes," with the dumb "TO blew up the Eagles because they didn't celebrate his 100th TD" thrown in for good measure. Loos like you no lissen so good. I already told you that TO saw that Garcia was a fraud and the 49'ers were going nowhere (both of which have been proven in spades) and more importantly that he left THEM, while his dispute with the Eagles primarily came down to his contract (and Rosenhaus got him blockbuster deals with the Cowboys) and revealing that McNabb choked in the SB. The team doing everything they could to dis him at every turn just added fuel to the already-bightly-burning fire. And as for his last season in Dallas and that infamous meeting to complain about Romo throwing the ball too much to Witten, 2 other receivers (Roy Williams and Patrick Crayton) joined him in complaining about it. But most never heard about that. And now we hear the Joneses say that Romo wasn't a leader and that they had to release TO for Romo to become one, and for Roy Williams to justify the 1st, 3rd, and 6th round picks. Like it's that simple. And TO, when asked about the Jones' comments, was able to ascertain that the Joneses were talking about Romo not being a leader while he was around, so apparently the only one who didn't understand that is you. But I'll ask the question I've asked you before: what could TO possibly do to the Bills to "destroy" them? Outside of the Bills moving to Toronto as a direct result of TO, there is NOTHING that TO can do to make things any worse than they've been for the past 9 seasons. Jauron, Schonert, and yes Trent, are on their last gasps as higher-position coaches or starting QB's. Because you see, it won't be because of TO that the Bills stumble, although he'll be the convenient scapegoat should he show his frustration at losing, which would kill his chances at a new contract, much less the blockbusters he got from the Cowboys.

I'm betting on Ashlee Palmer getting the starting nod.

Hallelujah, three3 has seen the light. Now I can sleep at night. Alright. And with that, I'm outta sight.

McMahon had been the starting QB for the Bears since his rookie season of 1982. Anyone claiming he "undermined" Flutie seems specious at best, without being qualified as "after Flutie attempted to undermine him." Obviously there was animosity, for McMahon to refer to Flutie as "America's Midget," and McMahon did go onto win a SB.