Magox

I've tried saying this, you cannot have a discussion with a quasi conspiracy theorist vs someone who uses sourced news. The discussion takes place on two separate planes.

You are asking me my opinion? Ok, I think Trump is running because since wealth is something that he has conquered there is one last thing that he wants, and that is power. Clinton wants the presidency because now that Bill was elected and in her own mind she's even more qualified than Bill that she deserves the presidency and is entitled to it.

Faults is an understatement, he is the epitome of a flawed individual. And to this day, I do not understand how anyone in their right mind actually believes that Trump cares about anything other than his own narrow self-interest.

Ok, so according to the constitution so is Hillary, right?

Wow! But not surprising. He is the most unqualified presidential nominee in our entire life time. He is the worst of the worst.

I find both to be horrible candidates, and I would never on my own free will vote for either of the two. However, if someone put a gun to my head and said vote for one, I'd vote for the entitled, lying corrupt crook over the egotistical, lying, corrupt, narcissistic know-nothing. He is absolutely a disgusting piece of dog ****.

You see, this is what drives me up the wall with these dumbass progressive/socialists. They get 80% of what they wanted, it begins to unravel right before our very eyes and then they say "you see, we needed the public option" to make this work. That is complete and utter bull ****. A Public option would have done absolutely ZERO. NADA. ZILCH. The reason why premiums are going as high as they are has very little to do with lack of competition but rather the medical claims that are being filed are coming from a sicker risk pool than what they originally thought they'd see. Here is one simple solution, anyone who wants to enroll in a health plan outside of Open enrollment should have to go through Medical underwriting. Of course what they should have done which I proposed years ago was create a separate subsidized risk pool for sicker individuals. Taking out a lot of the sicker people from the risk pools would have dramatically dropped rates for all the healthier people.

So we can all see the big fat liar that he is.

He's right though. They aren't all a part of ISIS or Al Qaeda as you wrongly suggested, If I understood you correctly. Did you not suggest that? Anyone who has a strong grasp of what is going on in the middle east understands that Assad is part of the problem. What is the resolution? I don't know but I do know that Assad staying in power does nothing to deescalate the tensions in Syria.

Do you think Trump is fit to be Commander in Chief?

Ok, but that's not what I said.

As a Tarheel fan, I've always loved what Zach Brown brought to the table. I had hoped we would pick him in the 2nd or 3rd round because I always thought his game would translate well to the NFL. Having said all that, I think Ragland is going to be an absolute stud in this league and will eventually be a perennial pro bowl player.

Like in most cases, the truth is somewhere closer to the middle.

He's certainly a way above average DB, but he shouldn't be the highest paid DB in the league. Hopefully we can sign him to a top 5 sort of contract (even though that is higher than what I believe he deserves) and if he continues to hold out for being the elite DB in the league, franchise him and hopefully we find a DB through the draft that can replace him the year after.

So, It's still possible the Bills can be Stanley cup champions? Oh ok...

If I had said Buffalo rather than Bills, your joke would have been funnier.

That made no sense.

Isn't the way the Clay contract was designed to give us some relief from what we had been paying starting next year?

If Luck was on the Bills we are easily a playoff team and possibly much more.

You are making an argument partially based on semantics and the other based off of essentially letting him off the hook for a poor first round selection. Semantics in that I used the word gamble, and you have issues with that term. Sorry, but virtually every talent evaluator didn't see Manuel as a first round talent and we gambled in selecting him anyway essentially out of pure need. I don't believe that, I've had this discussion with my father a bazillion times, drafting need vs drafting the board. So yes, it was a gamble. And no, it's not a matter of "EJ didn't work out, Move on." If we were a team that has made the playoffs, then I'd agree with you. But we haven't. So, simply just Moving on is not how you judge GM's. You judge them at the end of the day with results. I made it clear in my post that I think he is a good talent evaluator and that he has made some really good decisions that have helped the team, but the fact remains that two of our first round selections have not panned out as of yet. We can make all the excuses we want for Watkins, but at the end of the day, he has not been worth the gamble. Maybe that will change, but that's the bottom line. Again, I think he deserves to remain in the role because from my perspective he seems to have a good eye for talent but his leash is getting shorter.

When I see the Wildcat, I think to myself, this looks very easy to stop. Everyone knows they are going to run it, there really is not much of a threat at all that there will be a throw (so I think), and they should be able to stack it and stop it. Yet, we seem to be pretty damn effective at getting good yardage out of it, rather consistently.

Whaley seems to have a knack for finding talent in Free Agency and drafting some good players specially the mid to later rounds who end up being ballers. On the other hand, he has made some pretty big high profile gambles that haven't paid off. Clearly EJ was a huge whiff. Watkins, is a great talent but we did give up too much to get him, even if he hadn't have been injured there were some good wide receivers that year that would are nearly as talented and have been more productive than he has where we wouldn't have had to give up the farm to get them. Just imagine, we could have had another WR just as good and have had another first round and fourth round talent to add to the team. I know I know, hindsight is 20/20 but in professional sports that is a way you judge these guys. Blaming Whaley for Ragland is ludicrous but there is some validity to the criticism he's received on Shaq, it was reported he had issues with his shoulder. If Shaq turns out to be a pro bowl or near pro bowl consistent player, then he'll be justified with his selection, but if Shaq turns out to be another run-of-the-mill sort of player, it will be yet another disappointing first round selection. My personal view is that he has done enough to remain in his role but the time is ticking.

I believe I remember that play, was that a play towards the end of the game and Blount seemed to come in with some sort of jumping kick of some sort? And wasn't he pretty much going out of bounds? I'm just trying to piece this together with from what I remember of the play.

Zach Brown for being all over the field not just making tackles but making game altering plays A. lynn for having a fantastic game plan in anticipating what N.E would try to take away and then going after what they didn't expect we'd do. Tryod for throwing the ball often and efficient while doing so Hughes for being the disruptive force we've come to expect from him Woods For stepping up to the plate and finding a way to beat his man consistently and making various key third down catches A. Williams For having excellent coverage and making key pass defenses throughout the game. Rex Ryan For finally having a game where he can say he out coached B.B