GaryPinC
-
Posts
2,419 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by GaryPinC
-
-
My biggest pet peeve is when bikers ride on the road as if they are cars, but then buzz through red lights, etc., as if the rules didn't apply to them. They can't have it both ways. If you ride your bike on the road, then you need to follow all of the rules.
As long as they slow down, stop as needed to respect pedestrians/cross traffic I'm ok with it. You ever been in rush hour traffic intersection behind a stopped cyclist with no bike lane, 10 cars behind you, ten more in the lane next to you and everybody clamoring to get through the intersection? I'd rather the bicyclist sneak safely through, get up to speed and put some distance between us. And if he's turning off even better.
My motto is "I have the bigger vehicle, I have the right of way." That's not to say I don't give cyclists a wide berth whenever I can, or that I ignore traffic rules when it comes to them. But when you're in the smaller vehicle, it behooves you to follow the traffic laws to a "T" and to expect danger at every turn.
This is the reality of the road, IMO, and the cyclists who refuse to acknowledge this will end up lying in a ditch eventually. I would like to see more roads with bike lanes. Roads around me would only require a couple of feet added to the shoulder and that would reduce traffic tie-ups and concentrate the bicyclists. While that could create new traffic problems, if it helps reduce bicyclists on other roads and as a motorist I know I'll run into them on the bike-lane road I think it would be a better situation.
Bikes have the right to use the roads but in doing so are creating a hazardous situation. As the far slower and vulnerable vehicle it's on them to ride in as safe a manner as possible. I also hate the bike clubs who ride in groups of 15 or more and tie up 50-200 yds of road. They should cluster in small groups (2-4) so cars can safely get around them.
-
I'll preserve judgement on this debate.
Ok, just make sure it doesn't change at all!
-
Not sure if anyone posted this yet but I just heard Charlie Casserly on wgr. A few things that he said that works for us or against us however you look at it. Just some good insight out of a former GM who is very insightful.
-Stevie would fo better here than any other team in his opinion.
-Stevie is more of a #2 than a #1.
-Stevie is worth between the $4-8million range (IMO that's a huge difference but I suppose it's who thinks he is worth it, it's all about need)
-Stevie is not worth the franchise tag.
-Stevie is hurt if teams think he is immature and won't get better.
-Stevie is obviously wanted by Buffalo or they wouldn't have talks at this point but how much he is worth to Buffalo is the question.
-Bowe, Colston, Welker are not true #1s either and not worth the $8+million mark.
-Jackson is the best FA WR available and is the only one worth the high price tag of a true #1 by most teams.
-Nix has a history with Jackson and should know him best if Jackson has become more mature and if he is less likely to lash out, hold out, or have any off the field issues.
Just what I heard and the way I understood it. It's good to hear another GM/Former GM thinks Stevie isn't worth more than $8million. Maybe after all we will retain him even after FA has begun and he is humbled by his offers. It's also refreshing to hear from someone in the know that Nix is rhe best candidate to know Jackson and that may help regardless if we do or don't resign Stevie. It's also nice to hear that he thinks Stevie would do beat here under our system than anywhere else.
Enjoy.
Thanks for posting this, good info. The way this negotiation has dragged out I wasn't all too optimistic for Stevie staying but certainly there's room for optimism now and I've got my fingers crossed. It'd be great to see our primary receiver back in the fold for next year.
-
I gotta agree with those suggesting it can't be right. 10 of the 12 can be answered in 1-2 minutes with minimal brain strain. If you got a calculator the other two aren't that tough. A little more time with pencil and paper. As nobody knows who I am.....I aint braggin'.
I think the focus of this test is to test mental acuity more so than absolute intelligence. As others have said, time is the most important factor here not the difficulty of the questions. I think any high schooler should be able to answer these questions given enough time to work through them.
-
even the common usage verb definitions really arent similar in meaning at all.substitute one word for the other in a sentence and it distinctly changes the meaning.
Ok, I understand, for example, that reserving strawberries and preserving strawberries has different meaning but it's a similar act (setting something aside for later use). For both words the verb refers to an action taken on a commodity and the noun refers to the act that was done to the commodity. "Preserving strawberries" and "making strawberry preserves" refers to the same commodities so in this case even the noun and the verb are very similar in meaning which is why I was questioning DC Tom's assertion that they are very dissimilar.
I'm certainly not saying the words have the same meaning. Additional steps can be needed to properly "preserve" a commodity although if a particular commodity does not require additional steps and will not change over time "preserve" and "reserve" can be used interchangeably.
After considering all this I agree with the test answer, these words are more similar than dissimilar. Seems like an exception to the rule but I was curious why you feel these 2 words are so dissimilar (does a distinct difference=dissimilar)?
-
Well, I've been to a game preserve, and my mother used to make strawberry preserves when I was a kid. And I reserved a table at a restaurant this weekend...
Last I checked, nouns and verbs are very dissimilar in meaning.
All your examples involve commodities that were either set aside or someone acted to set aside. Preserves differs in that it applies to something in it's original or unchanged state. How are the definitions of preserve and reserve so dissimilar? Certainly they can refer to very different commodities.
re·serve/riˈzərv/Verb: Refrain from using or disposing of (something); retain for future use.
Noun: A supply of a commodity not needed for immediate use but available if required.
Synonyms: verb. book - keep - retain - save
noun. reservation - stock - store - restraint
pre·serve/priˈzərv/Verb: Maintain (something) in its original or existing state.
Noun: Food made with fruit preserved in sugar, such as jam or marmalade.
Synonyms: verb. keep - maintain - conserve - protect - save - retain
noun. jam - reserve - reservation
-
They just signed Fitzpatrick to a 6 year deal...he is only 29, which is about prime age for many QB's. Unless you presume that Fitz just sucks, or is not the answer (and maybe that is how you feel, but the Bills obviously don't), I am not sure that finding his replacement, when you just spent a decent penny to sign his backup last year, is a super high priority. In case you missed it, the Bills don't spend lavishly. Thigpen it is!
I certainly don't think Fitzpatrick sucks but IMO he also hasn't proven he's the 6 year answer for us either. Bills FO is doing the right thing supporting him, but they were also willing to draft Cam Newton last year while singing praises for Fitzpatrick. I certainly hope he has better numbers next year but what if he doesn't?
You make good points about the current situation, but getting a young backup who's been in the league a few years doesn't have to break the bank. It's just my opinion I'd rather be developing a young guy (just in case) instead of paying Thigpen.
-
I am not saying your wrong, but I would have to see more of him, in Buffalo, to make that call. If I recall, when he had his good season in KC, a lot of it was predicated on his mobility, maybe a more than his accuracy. Kind of a "big play" QB, who, yeah, throws a lot of incomplete passes. But, that is why he is a backup. He may just be one of those guys who needs to get into the groove. I really don't think you gain a whole lot by dumping him, for Brady Quinn.
I can only speak for myself in saying I don't think he's "remarkably awful" but he wasn't too impressive last year for many of the reasons turbosrrgood covered.
But, I'm not sure that Thigpen can get it done anymore, not saying for sure, just saying he's done little to prove he can. Certainly I will change my opinion when/if he proves otherwise so I'm not condemning him.
My other bias in opinion is that at this point I'd rather see a backup quarterback with more upside than Thigpen. I would rather see Fitz in a mentoring role because: 1. I don't think Fitz needs Thigpen to be a mentor 2. We need to start grooming Fitz's replacement.
Brady Quinn has only played in 14 NFL games, started 12 of them, all with the Browns. In his last few games there, Quinn started making quick decisions with his passes, really dealing the ball. To me, he looked like he was rushing his throws and that was affecting his accuracy. Obviously he's done nothing in Denver but with all the FO instability it's hard to say what the reality is there.
Up until his Tebow comments, I felt Quinn still had some decent upside. After seeing his snarky, petulant comments about Tebow forget him. I don't disagree with the gist of his comments, but as a pro teammate and backup you just don't say things like that unless you're a bona fide a-hole. Hopefully Quinn learns from this and grows up.
-
This is exactly what we need. That way every time Fitz throws an incomplete pass some smacktard can start a thread about how Quinn should be starting.
To be honest I'd rather deal with those threads rather than worry your backup QB can't get it done if Fitz goes down.
Having watched Quinn play in Cleveland, I do think he still has some upside in this league. After what he did to Tebow, there's no way I want him on our team. It'll be interesting to see how much longer Quinn is even in the NFL.
-
Interesting take on the SF fans. Down here in florida, buccs fans are already pre-ordering Colston jerseys. Also, it seems the general consensus from the fans seems that they consider Stevie on par with both Bowe and Colston as "top-tier" WR FA targets.
Cleveland Browns really need receivers also. Here's a PD article on FA receivers and they listed Stevie 4th with a good write-up
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/02/deep_pool_of_free-agent_receiv.html
-
Besides pointing out that you sign over performing 7th rounders the season before they become Free Agents before they get a chance to test the market.
But yeah. When the 7+ Mil Dollar deal from Buffalo is compared to the 7+ Mil Dollar deal from San Francisco, we will definitely know if SJ will be a be a Bill and like usual the Bills FO will be wondering how to fill a new whole they created through mismanagement.
Not to mention that they've previously discussed terms so Stevie's put forth his perceived market value and the Bills theirs. When he does test the market and if he gets offers that meet or exceed his own estimates, even if the Bills decide to match an outside offer, would Stevie really come back here after being significantly undervalued by the franchise that knows him best? The franchise that's dragged its feet trying to resign him?
This is all a business game but these are human beings involved and sometimes a little respect goes a long way.
I still hope to see Stevie back here but don't expect to. Only thing working in our favor is that there appear to be a lot of FA WR this year.
-
First of all thanks to a thoroughly entertaining thread. I was watching a bit from the sidelines and seeing you and PDaddy go at each other with great delight.
Anyway, more seriously, IMHO the failure of the offense is neither of the extremes you two are fighting about. My opinion:
- Fitz is no more than a caretaker, a short gap solution till we get a QB worthy of winning us the big one. So, yes, I dont think Fitz is good enough to win it all but I don't think he is an incompetent moron either (none of you said that)
- I think the edges of our OL are weak. Hairston may be a solution but probably at the RT spot and not LT where some athleticism is required. Bell played well in his limited time and that is his basic problem - his inability to finish 16 games has played out far too frequently and we need a replacement. Bell can be good depth
- We badly need receiving threats. Fitz's performance tanked when most of our already limited WR corps went down. Even when he had some time to throw, there were few options. And the lack of deep passes is a function of both Fitz's inaccuracy (which ggoes down the farther he has to throw) and lack of somebody who can get downfield in the 3-4 seconds that Fitz had to throw). Should sign Stevie and give him a solid #2. I do like David Nelson but only as a #3 or to convert 3rd downs. So we need 2 WRs - one as a #2 and one as a #4. I don't like Donald Jones.
As to the other side of the ball, the switch to the 4-3 is good. We need:
- at least 1 LB.
- Pass rushing DE
- One CB probably two as I don't think McGee will come back and McKelvin will be here no more than the length of his contract
In short, I think Fitz is good enough to be a middle of the pack QB. He needs things to be above average around him and he cannot seriously transcend the skill set around him. But, he is good enough to support a rebuilding team. We should acquire a potentially great QB, whenever he is available.
Agree with you 100% about the edges of the O-line with Hairston and Pears vs a pass rush. I think Fitz is better than you give him credit for but excellent post otherwise IMO.
-
Well, thats great and all, but Vincent Jackson plays for SD.
Whoops, my bad. Apologies for wrong Jackson.
-
Sounds like Philly keeps him for at least 1 more year:
-
Don't worry. Nix (or Whaley if/when Nix retires) and Chan are here until Ralph passes away. They won't rebuild again. This is who we're left with until there's new ownership.
I think you're probably right on tgregg but that doesn't mean I can stop worrying because my overall assessment of Buddy and Chad will be determined after 2012 season is over. In all honesty Buddy's made some decent moves at times and other times I'm not so sure. That only increases the worry for now!
my bad about timing. I mean this upcoming off season and FA, draft and season. Sorry for that. and thanks for helping me clarify Gary. This season is defining for us. Are we finally moving forward with purpose? i hope so friend. As for now i am still on board with the current-ish regime.
go bills!
Thanks for clarifying, I'm with you then! I try and be a realistic optimist about things. Nobody's perfect but I do feel we're actually making forward progress.
-
I agree that we are still undiscovered as to our capabilities when all headed in the same direction with all the horses pulling.
a rookie (this group together as players and coaches) team we still are. But this is the year to call bull **** on the group as a whole. Did Fitz and company hit the wall half way through the season after bad things started to happen and i think the defense was starting to wonder wtf is going on here!?
Fitz has a new qb coach that i have read some of his quotes and think this guy can help. And i also feel the coaches we did pick up were guys we had been looking at for awhile.
Can the big plan start to shape up? So much of it will depend on Ryan this season. The players consider him the leader on offense for sure. Him and Fred.
If he had busted ribs after washington Fletcher and such, he should be in tip top condition this season and no excuses. But if he has spent his off season eating 4.5 pound steaks in record time we might have a problem! He needs to develop his conditioning for a full NFL season as The starter. he looked tired out last season to me.
I generally agree with your points but for me next year would be the year to call bull ****. No off-season lockout, another year of maturity for this team for 2012. FO has a three year plan to be in the playoffs and year 3 is here. I feel we have been building some player stability/talent and this year will be critical both in whom they jettison (Bell, Stevie) and what they choose to do in FA. I don't like to assume drafted players will have an immediate impact as starters, though some depth should be provided.
In all honesty even if they didn't make the playoffs I might cut FO slack if the on-field talent is more evident than 2011. Kind of like the 87 bills.
What's really killed this franchise is the lack of stability and direction both in FO and players. I know that blowing up the FO and players only guarantees us at least 3 more lousy years and Buffalo probably isn't a preferred destination for top coaches and GMs.
-
If all of that is a given, let me ask you this ... why was he on the field?
So that leaves us with either two options:
1. The coaching staff has so little faith in Thigpen that they felt a lame Fitz, unable to throw the ball without pain, gave the team its best shot to win.
or
2. Fitz wasn't hurt as bad as some on here are saying.
Either answer leaves me feeling very uneasy about the capability of this front office.
I was as surprised as anyone during the 5-2 streak to start the year. They looked great. They played well. But everyone, even the most blinded homer knew that continued success was dependent upon the starters remaining healthy because there was absolutely ZERO depth. That's not Fitz's fault -- he doesn't build the roster. But it's certainly Nix, Little-man's, Overdork and Ralph's fault. They have failed to address the severe lack of talent on this roster, there's no depth, and outside of Fred, Dareus, Williams, Levitre, Barnett, Wood, Johnson and maaaaaaaaaaybe Spiller -- not a single Bills starter would start on another NFL roster. That's a problem.
That's not true. Plenty of people on this board are saying Fitz is not only a playoff QB but an elite, franchise QB with Super Bowl potential. You might not be saying it ... but plenty of folks on here are.
I still root and cheer for the team. I don't say much during the regular season because "any given Sunday" and all that. I never miss a game, I am like an abused spouse. But during the off season, the blinders come off. They have to. For me anyway. And isn't that the point of this board? To discuss differing opinions about the team we all love?
For Fitz being on the field with his injury:
both options were probably true to some degree. We do need better depth at the QB position IMO.
In regards to your "severe" lack of talent comment:
People (including respected posters on this board) said the same thing about our O-line in 2010 when we were 0-8. Few paid any heed to the fact that this was a young offensive line that hadn't learned to play together and were also trying to adjust to a brand new offensive scheme. That's a real double whammy and a significant factor why 2010 started so poorly. People also thought the front office was nuts to not go after a bunch of O-line FA before 2011.
Our O-line did just fine this year. Could it have been better? Definitely. Will it get better? Definitely.
Young talent can take time to develop (ex. Spiller). That doesn't mean it isn't there. I do believe with Wanny simplifying the defense we will get a better idea for our talent level on defense next year.
As far as you referring to Fitz as "elite":
Buddy and Chan are on record as thinking they could win a superbowl with Fitz. I haven't heard any of them refer to Fitz as an elite quarterback and he is not payed like it. I may have missed something but I don't think any of Fitz's supporters on this site refer to him as "elite". To me, he is an average to very good quarterback and the reality of that still remains to be determined.
My respectful opinion is that during the offseason your blinders come off long enough only to put a different set on.
-
Certainly a lack of talent is another reason but OBD indirectly confirms:
http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2012/01/30/wannstedts-defense-keeps-it-simple/
I do believe Perry Fewell had the same problem when he was here (though lack of talent was magnified). I think the Giants were ready to run him out of town until he simplified things:
http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2011/12/back_to_the_basics_giants_defe.html
Hopefully Wannstedt's leadership will give us a huge turnaround on defense next year.
-
Please name the wasted picks.
Who did we draft/sign who is simply not built for a 4-3 base?
Yes, I'm challenging your reaction, but I'm also genuinely curious. So please enlighten.
I think he's saying the opposite, that we didn't draft enough guys built for a base 3-4 the last 2 years.
I kind of wonder if Buddy Nix simply has much more expertise drafting 4-3 players.
-
Have a BA and currently work in logistics. My wife works and have kids. I'm close to my parents but its possible depending where I move they would consider moving as well.
After thinking about it more I'm coming up with a better idea of what I'm looking for.
Ideally no more than a 10-12 hour drive to buffalo
LOW taxes. Low or no state income tax. Low property tax. Lower cost of living
Interested in the mid south states NC. TN. KY VA or maybe even OH .
looking for a small town feel to medium sized city
Interested in areas where you can have a neighborhood type feel in more country area while not being too far of commute to a city
looking for a "red" state with accessible pistol permits more individual freedoms lower taxes etc...
So far everyone has great feedback and comments and its appreciated
Mead107 had the best advice for you. You can find what you're looking for in a lot of places in the US. Just need to know what you want and go find it. When you've got a house to buy make sure you talk to your future neighbors before buying.
I live on the east side of Cleveland on the edge of rural and still about 30 min from downtown. Plenty of things to do, good parks, concealed carry, taxes are ok, not great but ok. Columbus is an ok town too, but not to my liking (lot of yuppies still).
But it comes down to what place fits you and your wife and has jobs to offer.
-
Who said it's unacceptable?
Are you suggesting it's unacceptable they haven't signed UFA's prior to the start of the FA period? While the 2011 is still going on to boot?
I don't think it's unacceptable but I know someone who works with the Cleveland Browns and was told there's an unwritten rule that most players consider it at least a minor insult to have to play out the last year on your contract.
The fact that there's no news on Stevie's contract probably means he's going to hit free agency and is most likely gone, though that's not a surprise.
People are always griping about the Bills retaining their talent, well it starts by taking some chances and signing your guys before they're at the end of contract. Obviously they've done it at times in the past, but they need to do a better job of it. I understand them not signing D. Bell because of injuries and am hoping it won't be a mistake.
-
As Simon said, who here knows what Paterno knew and when he knew it...........If you read his last interview with Sally Jenkins, he said he had no inkling of the '98 investigation at a high school regarding the 2nd Mile kid. And, the '99 retirement of Sandusky was because Paterno told him that he's spending too much time with 2nd Mile and not recruiting, etc. and therefore will never get the head coaching job (and then Sandusky took advantage of a 30 year employee state buyout that was being offered.
That is the key to this whole thing. Is Paterno telling the truth. Since the beginning, I've been saying WTF would Sandusky retire at age 55 out of the blue (and shortly after the investigation).
If Paterno is telling the truth about this, then it comes down to '02. He admits he should have done more. But, in the interview he says that he didn't know about this type of thing and got the word to his superiors.
Everybody on the internet seems to know exactly what they would have done if they were the grad asst who surreally finds them in the shower, if they were the 75 year old head coach who was told non detailed info, and if they were on the planes on 9/11 (Mark Walhberg). Real life is a little different.
Anyway, here is today's article by Rick Reilly that is worth a read:
Reilly is really proving lately that he still has skills, esp. people skills.
Love the line at the end of the article:
If we're so able to vividly remember the worst a man did, can't we also remember the best?
-
I use Toradol every day on patients. Many have already hilighted the salient points.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned which I think is the most interesting aspect of using it in football is its effects on microvascular bleeding. What that means is it slows down the body's ability to heal small injuries to blood vessels so patients who have surgery can "ooze" (they don't hemorrhage to death)
All NSAIDS but especially Toradol inhibit platelets to some degree so they can increase this type of bleeding risk.
Now you go shoot up a bunch of players who are at increased risk of bleeding and then ask them to go bonk heads for a few hours. I'd be very interested to look at the brains of these players who received Toradol regularly and see if they show signs of small bleeds (which can lead to much badness long term). It would be better to compare them to the brains of football players who didn't receive Toradol.
We need the brains.
RTB
Great point, that will be interesting to see. My understanding is that during the season, toradol was a must before the game and at various times during the week until last year when the NFL started realizing the potential long term side effects and potential liability.
-
as a doctor (ok pediatric dentist) who actually prescribes toradol, it's no more than an injection type of NSAID of which are meds like Ibuprofen and Aspirin. Toradol works in much the same manner, known as a 'non-selective COX inhibitor.' other types of COX inhibitors have been taken off the market like Vioxx but these are not related to Toradol as they are known as "selective COX II inhibitors."
the big issue with Toradol is addiction long term, which could cause unwarranted side effects, but it's not an OTC medication, so I'm curious what angle Kramer is going to take with this.
Why do you think the big issue with Toradol is addiction? It's an NSAID. Has any stand-alone NSAID ever been shown to be addictive or have withdrawl symptoms? My understanding was Toradol is a short-term drug because of the cardiac, stroke, GI, and kidney risks. Here's a newer version (nasal) that provided some info about low addiction potential:
http://www.sprix.com/Meet-SPRIX/Ketorolac-History.aspx
As an NSAID, ketorolac does not bind to opiate receptors. A study to evaluate the sedative and addictive potential of ketorolac showed no withdrawal symptoms upon cessation of dosing with ketorolac 30 mg IM four times daily for 5 days. Ketorolac IM also has no significant adverse effects on psychomotor measurements, including reaction time, computerized driving skills, ataxia, and sedation.
I work with a couple ER docs who see quite a few addicts come in "in pain" hoping to get an opiod for relief. Docs told me they give toradol to treat the pain not the addiction.
Vioxx is related to toradol but extra selectivity for COX II heightens cardiac/stroke/high blood pressure side effects over GI/kidney.
Back on topic, Kramer's article will probably focus on the fact that toradol was the widespread analgesia of choice for a lot of the NFL players until recently. NFL Docs were all too willing to give it but did they do long-term harm to player's kidneys, heart, GI?
School Shooting in Cleveland
in Off the Wall Archives
Posted
I live about 20 min from Chardon. Good community, nice small town. Sad, shocking and it only takes one misguided individual anywhere in this country for this to happen. My good friend lives there but luckily his oldest daughter is only 1st year of middle school (she's safe at home now). Sounds like the shooter went all goth and have to wonder if it's again about a bullied kid going too far.