blade

First off unless you're a teacher of European history (which I'm sure that your not) I know that you didn't just happen to know that date of 1801 and that other useless information. Am I supposed to be impressed by the fact that you can use google? The fact that you took the time to google that makes you an even bigger loser than your views alone would have you be. Yes there were other European countries besides England (which happens to be part of what is now known as the U.K. or Great Britain) that staked claims in parts of what is now known as the U.S.. The point is the U.S. as we know it now sprouted from those 13 original colonies which were controlled by people from England which is now part of Great Britain. I was specific about the country of origin of the people in those 13 colonies, but if you want to be general yes they were people of European ancestry. The things that you felt needed to be mentioned did nothing to invalidate my points. As for the minimum wage being the fault of the Haitian government, well don't you think some of the big name companies in the U.S. and some other countries that exploit Haiti as a source of cheap labor are part of that problem? Yes there are other issues such as corruption and an overall bad economy which is due to many factors, but they are not the only country with those problems are they? The companies from outside Haiti that setup there often do so because they could not get away with paying people in their respective countries what they pay desperate Haitians who take what they can get. Also are you aware that Haiti had to pay reporations to the French (Europeans) because they no longer wanted to be slaves. The same Haitians who were taught basically nothing but growing things ( like sugar cane) because that's what Haiti was used for by the French, to have plantations. When the French were there they weren't educating people and setting up Haitians for success. The French exploited Haitians while they were there and even after they left. Do you think that had anything to do with their bad situation? As for your last question, by your logic why does China continue to prop up the U.S. with the many loans it makes to us and by continually buying treasury bonds from the U.S.. Without China's help do you have any idea where our economy would be? There's a really good saying in the bible and it goes roughly to he that much is given much is expected. If a person doesn't want to donate then don't but don't speak poorly of those who do. I think if a person has the means to help in some way then they should.

Um what are you trying to get across with that website (which is not funny if that was your intention)?

First let me say I'm American and I love this country but let's not forget or rewrite history. Much of the money used to set up some of the biggest companies and industries in the U.S. came off of the back of slaves not from their lazy slave master owners who were to lazy to pick cotton or do what ever other hard work there was to do themselves. Just because someone is poor doesn't make them lazy. Do you know how huch minimum wage in Haiti is 3 dollars a day. Not an hour but per day and many gladly work those jobs because it is all they have. Would you do well on that? I suppose the colonists fron Great Britain who took the U.S. from the Native Americans were to lazy to take over one of the other European countries which had weapons comparable to theirs to fight back with, unlike the Native Americans.

Are you serious? Who helps us? Not to many, but let me educate you. For years the U.S. has had to have China purchasing our treasury bonds to keep this government running. Yes because we're trillions of dollars in debt because of overspending, mismanagement of money, and yes corruption. Yes, we have that in the U.S. as well. The fact that you would compare the level of poverty of a person in the U.S. to someone in Haiti is beyond idiotic. If a homeless person in the U.S. is really in a desperate situation there are many fastfood places where a person could go if they had to and see if anything edible which was thrown out. That isn't an option for most Haitians. In most cities in the U.S. there are several soup kitchens or food pantries for those down on their luck. That's not the case in Haiti. I think you would have to search ridiculaslly hard for someone if anyone who is literally starving to death. The U.S. is one of the most obese countries in the world. Many in Haiti are literally starving to death.A lot of people there actually eat mudpies to try to stop their hunger. The poorest people in the U.S. would probably be viewed as upper middle class at worse in Haiti. Sure there is corruption in the Haitian government as there is in the U.S. government or any other country the only difference is that the U.S. and those other countries have enough resources to maintain their standard of living despite the corruption going on. As far as the Dominican Republic, you are wrong on that too. My pastor is Dominican and he talks about it all the time. Although they are not as poor as Haiti they are very poor as well. You should keep in mind that Haiti has had had it's independence since 1804 from brutal enslavement by France. Since then besides some monetery aid no country has helped Haiti in becoming more developed. When the French were there it's not like they were there building schools, building infrastructure, and setting up different industries. For the most part the only thing happening when France was there was the harvesting of sugar on plantations by slaves. When those slaves revolted and took the island the French left without teaching those people anything about higher education or trades where they could make money. Since 1804 Haitians have for the most part been left to fend for themselves and they did what they could with the meager resources that they had and still have. Yes in Haiti's time the people heve been victims of corrupt government, but they are not alone in that. Either way it's not the fault of the people of Haiti that people in the government took advantage of bad situations during their time (remember Mao in China or Castro in Cuba). Although you might not think of them as such the Haitians are people too, some of which helped Americans in our Revolutionary War. Yes they did look it up. The Haitian people are desperate and are reaching out for help. Just because you are so myopic and can't see that no one in the U.S. can compare his/her condition to that of those in Haiti doesn't mean you should speak poorly of those who do have the means and a concious to help others in a terrible situation.

I'll probably get a lot of heat for this. If Ralph would be offering around 10 mil. per for Cowher like a lot of people are talking about I'm sure I wouldn't want him. There is no coach worth 10 mil. per year. I don't care if you could bring Lombardi back to life to coach the Bills he wouldn't be worth it either. I can't think of any coach making 6.5 mil. or more currently so I would offer 500 grand over whatever the highest paid coach is currently making per year. Take it or leave it. I wouldn't want any coach that had to be dragged up here because he was offered an obscene amount of money to coach. If someone thinks that he is too good for the Bills let that person stay where he is. In a way I would prefer a person with perhaps a little less of a resume but who really appreciates the opportunity Buffalo would be affording him. May I also add although I was very much a fan of the Steelers' defenses during Cowher's tenure up there I was not a fan of his offenses. I don't remember his offenses being very explosive and that is what this Bills team needs even more than tinkering with the defense. Before someone says it I know thats what offensive coordinators can be used for but I'm not sure Cowher will want to totally submit to the will of any offensive coordinator. Another question to ponder is if the type of o. linemen we have would mesh with Cowher's preferred type of offense (smashmouth straight foward running of the ball). I remember Cowher having some big o. lines. Except maybe for Incognito who might not be here next year we have guys that fit more in a zone blocking scheme. I know that there have to be changes on the o. line anyway but there isn't going to be a change at every position. There will be at least two (Wood assuming he comes back from that horrible leg fracture and Levitre) and possibly three if you include Butler. I want it to be known I'm not against Cowher coming here but I only want him if he really wants to be here. There are still some former head coaches and coordinators like Martz (although I know that some of you don't like him) who would love the opportunity. If he needs ridiculous incentives to come here he can stay where he is because there are negatives with him too. I mean if they're going to beg a former coach to come up here (which I don't like) you might as well do it with someone who was more successful than Cowher like say a Jimmy Johnson. Yea he beat the hell out of us twice in those two Superbowls but he won twice while having both an explosive offense and awesome defense which Cowher can't claim. All I'm saying is I would like the Cowher pick too but I keep it in perspective. He is not the Messiah and there would be potential negatives with that pick just like anyone else.

Let me start this off by saying that I think what Vick did was very wrong but I am not ignorant to the fact that the society I grew up in had a big influence on how I see what he did. First off let's be real altough admitedly I am no dog expert I think that there is a reason why lets say big old fat st. bernards or perhaps basset hounds are not the dog of choice generally in dog fighting. Generally the dog of choice is the pit bull and there is a reason besides there musculature, they tend to be more aggressive by nature than other dogs and can be trained to fight easier than a lot of other breeds. So the implication by some of the previous posters that Vick changed some generally passive animals which had no predisposition to be agressive into monsters is a bit unfair. From what I understood some of Vick's dogs were probably killed for underperforming but I would imagine that perhaps some of them were killed because they sustained grave injuries (in those cases the dogs wouldn't be taken to vets because it would be reported to authorities). If some of those dogs were killed because of grave injuries there are similarities to forcing poor race horses (which are not agressive) to run harder than they normally would, consequencely having said horse(s) sustain leg injuries, and having to be put down because of injuries they sustained while doing something they wouldn't normally do. Although it's not done in this country as far as I know bull fighting is still done in Mexico and that ends with a bull being stabbed to death with swords and for some reason their society accepts it for the most part. Again I think what Vick's dogs went through was horrible but unfortunately there are segments of the U.S. population (particularly in the south) that see dog fighting as normal. I would imagine because they see animals more as property than living beings. Being that I'm the child off parents from the Carribean I can also tell every one that doesn't know rooster or rooster fighting is done openly still in many if not most countries of the Carribean and Latin America; it is part of their culture and it is not wrong to many if not most people in those societies. If I'm not mistaken rooster fighting also occurs quite commonly in the south as well. My point is I feel although what Vick did was wrong I know that there are segments of the population in the U.S. (parts of the south which happens to be where Vick is from) where people don't see what Vick did like people from other parts of the country. My feeling on what he did is influenced by the segment of the population I spent my formative years in although I am the child of people from the Carribean (where animal fighting is openly done). I must also add that those who are saying that in certain ways what Vick did was worse than some who have killed people by D.U.I. are fools. I understand dogs are living creatures but I never have and will never equate a human's life to a dog. With that being said regardless of what Vick did being premeditated it is nowhere in the league of taking someone's life through drinking. Even though a person doesn't set out to kill someone on purpose in vehicular homicide, the driver does make the decision to drink knowing beforehand what it can do to their driving. So in essence when a person is D.U.I. that person has no regards to the consequences of their actions (which can be the death of a person) and no I have never driven drunk. It might not be a premeditated killing of a person but that is why there are diffent degrees of manslaughter which is what a person who has killed another human in a D.U.I. has committed and yes once again I believe a human's life is worth more than an animal's.

The chiefs also could play Dorsey at d. end in the 3-4. He's about the same weight (about 300 lbs.) as Ty Warren on the Patriots who plays d. end. Dorsey is quick for his size. That might also be an option they take. They might be planning on having their new draft pick Jackson at one d. end spot and Dorsey on the other.

I was on the fence about this subject originally but you challenged every rebutal to your ideas with stats Mr. Weo (the stats don't lie). I think you won this one. Well. hopefully Turk will loosen up his playcalling because he won't be leaving until Jauron does. Jauron isn't the type to ever fire a coordinator even if that aforementioned coordinator is not up to par.

Walker is 6'8 and Butler is 6'6 so Walker doesn't exactly tower over Butler. I think both of them are to tall to play guard, but since this team doesn't mind having tall guards I don't think replacing a more athletic Butler with a massive guy in Walker on the inside is a bad idea. Butler could move to r. t. (Walker's previous position); he played tackle in college anyway. Walker would move to r.g. . Lastly we would have to replace the center and left guard position through free agency and/or the draft. I must also say that I wouldn't as a secondary plan to start Chambers at r.t. , kicking in Walker to right guard, putting Butler at l.g. and drafting a new center or getting one in free agency, Preston should be signed again as a backup. If either of those scenarios happened the bigger more massive guys would be on the inside (to hopefully help us pound the ball) while the more athletic guys would be on the outside to help protect against the speedy edge pass rushers.

Lewis walked into a bad situation with the Bengals. Although I wouldn't say Lewis is as mild-mannered as Jauron he does have a reserved personality. Having a reserved personality doesn't go well with coaching a team of huge egos and thugs. In addition the Bengals' problems during Lewis' time their hasn't been putting up points, they have. The problem is the defense. If I'm not mistaken Lewis also coached one of the most dominant defenses in history with the Ravens. The biggest difference between Lewis' time with the Ravens as def. coord. and his time as head coach of the Bengals is that in Baltimore defensively he had the talent to work with along with his good scheme. With the right defensive talent and an unloading of the egos and thugs I think Lewis can be very sucessful. As far as Lewis' parallel to Spagnuolo I think Spagnuolo would be coming into a much better situation here than Lewis walked into. There aren't egos in Buffalo and definitely no thugs. Spagnuolo would have a team that is more receptive to him than what Lewis has with the Bengals. As I eluded before talent level is important and if Spagnuolo came here to Buffalo he would be getting a team with more defensive talent than Lewis got and still has with the Bengals. With all that said I would love to have Spagnuolo come here but I'm sure it won't happen according to ESPN the Jets are considering him and surely they'll act quicker than us if they think he might be their man. My theory is that Ralph would be fine with staying with Jauron but I think Ralph knows that the uproar would be to great if he dis that. To pacify the suffering fans of the Bills he probably will fire Jauron to show that there was a change but Wilson will also purposely wait just long enough so that all the good pricey canidates like Spagnuolo are taken up by other teams. Ralph will then be able to bring in another bargain basement, second tier, mediocrecoach and have us fans suffer for a few more years.

While I wouldn't say stopping the run is our biggest issue, stats don't always tell the true story of a game or a team's performance. You listed our rank against the run and the Patriots' ypc today but when it was clutch time during the game like around 9 minutes left in the 4th when we needed a stop (there was plenty enough time for a comeback) to get the ball back the Patriots ran it down our throats eating up almost all the clock and they scored as well running the ball on that same drive to add insult to injury. When it really matters, no we can't stop the run despite what the stats say.

VJ91 you mentioned that the Bills in the past have rarely taken o. lineman in the first round or on the first day. As far as the first round the Bills and many other teams rarely pick o. lineman in that round because rarely are there any that have that much value. You never see more than 3 or 4 o. lineman go in the first and when you do see an o. lineman picked in the first it's usually late in the first round. Unfortunately our records the past few years have been so bad that we have been near the top third of the draft.

I agree with you. Preston is by no means a great center, but he is serviceable (although I still think that we need to get a center early in the draft) and Fowler was not. Most of the problems (particularly yesterday) come from Butler being out. Whittle is pathetic; he gets tossed all over the field whenever he plays. He is already a smaller o. lineman at 295 pounds, but he doesn't seem very stong either. A lot of the problems with Jenkins yesterday occured with Jenkins opting to take on Whittle, tossing him aside, and proceeding to go through the newly created space between Whittle and Preston (although Preston has to learn to be more aware of what's going on beside him). Preston has to get better but what I'm saying is Jenkins did a lot more "blowing up" of Whittle than he did destroying Preston when faced him head up. Preston's because fault yesterday was not picking up enough of the slack for Whittle when he was routinely getting abused by Jenkins yesterday.

One think to keep in mind as far as those enamored by Jenkins' play against us yesterday remember his size. Although Stroud is a huge man, Jenkins easily ways at least 30 pounds more than Stroud does. It's also important to keep in mind that Jenkins was facing the weakest part (the interior) of our apparently inferior o. line. Meanwhile Stroud was facing the strongest part (the interior) of the Jets o.line. Mangold and Fanecca make a good o.line interior, Whittle and Preston (although he is improving) not so much. I think Stroud has been doing a good job overall. He can't take on all 5 o. lineman by himself. Stroud constantly gets doubled team and for the most part still holds his own against it. The rest of the d. line generally gets crushed and pushed several yards backwards. I like Kyle Williams because he does give a lot of effort and every once in a while he'll make a play (despite the fact that he doesn't have dominant talent), but he is very inconsistant. Besides an inconsistant Williams on the d. line Stroud has no sidekicks on the line to help him with the run. We need a huge space occupying d. tackle to put in alongside Stroud to help him in obvious short yardage situations. Even if that said d. tackle is not a starter but just a situational runstuffer we need that guy. Ofcoarse as usual when we have the opportunity to make a move we rarely do. I just saw on ESPN that the Saints just re-signed Hollis Thomas (a big runstuffer). He was released earlier by the Saints while he was recovering from an arm injury;it was said all along that the Saints had the intention to bring him back after he recovered (that's why they didn't put him on the IR because then he would have to stay out for the year). We could have made an offer to get him just as the Saints made an offer to get him back, he was a free agent.

NFL network will be rplaying the Bills/Chargers game tonight at 9:30.