billsfan89

Hughes is under contract for 2019, so I wouldn't worry about him not being here next season.

If I were advising the Dems on taxes I would push to eliminate many of the corporate tax deductions and raise the corporate rate to 25% while restoring the previous tax rates on the top 2 brackets. Keep the Trump rates on the lower, middle, and upper middle tax rates while upping the SALT cap to 50k so that actual middle and upper middle class people in Blue states see a tax cut. Then propose a desperately needed infrastructure plan with the money restored from the tax restructuring. Adding more tax cuts isn't addressing the issues of infrastructure and investment that is needed. Public debt is ***** confusing. For every dollar the US owes other nations the US is owed 80 cents from other nations. Also unfunded liability numbers are misleading as that uses standards implemented from the private sector which isn't the model Social Security operates in. That's not to say that public programs like SS won't be a problem but the way those numbers are framed is misleading.

4-2 would be a hell of a run but that's the best I could see them doing honestly. The Pats will need that game and I trust Tom Brady in a grind it out defensive struggle more than Allen at this stage of their careers so while I don't rule out the team winning its not very likely. I also think you underestimate the fluky nature of the NFL. In 6 games your team is likely to come out flat one game or run into a much better gameplan. Plus a rookie QB is likely to have a bad game or two which kills your chances of a 6 game winning streak. The Bills are simply in too big of a hole to make a serious run. Had they won the Texans game (Which would put them at 4-6) I would have given this team an outside shot to go 5-1 to finish the year 10-6 and possibly get into the playoffs. But 5-1 puts this team at 8-8 and even 6-0 puts them at 9-7. Looking at the AFC playoff picture the Chargers are likely going to finish 10-6 or better and take the first wildcard. The Titans and Bengals are both sitting at 5-4 and odds are one of them will get to 9-7. So 8-8 isn't likely to get you in. I am more so hoping for strong player development as the season ends. Give me the young defensive players and Teller, Zay, and Allen all playing well in 3-4 wins and I will be happy going into next season when the team can add some pieces to the offense maybe add a piece to complete the defense and go for a run in 2019.

His time to step back into coaching was maybe 7-8 years ago. Right now I think the game has probably passed him by. He hasn't coached in well over a decade so I don't see why he would be such a desired commodity. Then again Gruden was hired on a massive deal after 10 years out of the game so who the ***** knows what some crazy owner would do to poach a "Big Name" coach.

If you followed my logic and read my posts you would see that the defense wasn't of AOC but rather mocking people who think that because someone doesn't have the funds to make a rather expensive move to Washington DC that means they are unqualified. You can point to a lot of AOC's lack of experience and some of her more out there policy positions as evidence she is in over her head. I was just stating that attacking her on this one particular ground was unfounded. I agree with the above comment; nevertheless, the all-time purveyor of moronic comments has to be Maxine Waters, perennially elected Congressperson from CA. Rumor has it she actually watches CNN. I am not saying morons don't exist on the left but rather pointing out that saying the left elects idiots while true isn't something exclusive to the left as there are plenty of examples or right wing morons.

Big board at this stage is a bit useless. Not only is there still some college ball left but there is the pre-draft process which will shake up the board.

Its about player development. There isn't likely to be a playoff run, even if they run the table 9 wins might not get the team in. And the odds of running the table are low to begin with. So yes each win lowers draft positioning but if winning games means the young players like Teller, Zay, Allen, Edumonds, Milano, Phillips and the rest of the young blue chip guys play well then its a positive thing. Odds are the team wins somewhere in the range to 2-4 games the rest of the way which would put the team at 5-7 wins in a very Billsy form of mediocrity.

The Jets are actually a very attractive option in terms of a head coaching job. They have a young QB, some young pieces on defense, and they have a ton of cap space to go along with a high draft pick. Any coach could come in with somewhat low expectations year one and do well. Cleveland, Seattle, and Green Bay are all obviously good places for a coach to land. The Browns will still have a ton of cap space and they have a young QB with a good defense. While any coach in Seattle or Green Bay inherits dam good QB's.

I think we are just at an impasse as I think that its not a direct disqualifer as you think once again its context that I look for whereas you are dogmatic and I think that's just not going to go anywhere.

I don't think they are unqualified or at least not automatically unqualified. Money does not equal a qualification to have good judgement and a lack of money doesn't mean you have bad judgement. I kind of agree that I would put into question someone who doesn't have 5-6k to float themselves for 2 months but I am not going to immediately disqualify someone on that reason alone. I would look into that persons education, experience, circumstances, and political positions along with why they don't have that kind of money before I state that they are unqualified . In an economy where there are a lot of people struggling its not unreasonable to think smart and good people would not have a lot of money, it certainly is a reasonable possibility in my mind. I am not defended Alexandra OC because while I like some of what she stands for (Universal Healthcare, getting money out of politics, and ending our rampant military spending) I think she has a lot of bad or unrealistic ideas like a 15 dollar federal minimum wage and a Universal Basic Income. But my thinking that she is a bit in over her head is more so based off of how unrealistic or not fleshed out some of her ideas are and not that she isn't able to afford 5-6k right away.

Wage growth is barely keeping up with inflation, the economy for over 30 years has been hit by factors larger than tax and economic policy (Automation and Globalization the biggest culprits) so I don't blame lack of purchasing power wage growth on any recent administration. As far as the unemployment rate although it certainly has been trending lower for a long time under both Obama and Trump its not really reflective of the massive numbers of people who have stopped looking for work who are not counted in the total. I think Trump's tax cuts and deregulation have certainly juiced the economy but its not likely to have a long term impact in my opinion. The stock market will be juiced short term maybe for another 2 years or so but once corporate profits normalize and the sugar high fades there won't be nearly enough investment and value added to the economy to sustain longer term growth. Most of the tax cuts on the corporate side will go into stock buy backs which will mostly benefit the top income brackets who are already doing the best they have been since the 1920's. 83% of the tax cuts on the consumer side go to the top income earners who once again are sitting on record levels of income and capital. In 2-3 years I fear that the sugar high of deregulation and tax cuts are going to fade and the US will have financed huge deficits for very little long term gain. Basically I think the Trump policy is nothing more than a stimulus for Wall Street and the top 2-3% of earners while longer term issues like Infrastructure are ignored. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

I understand your point that having 5-6k in savings isn't the hardest thing to do and that it isn't that high of a standard to have. But given how bad the economy has been for working people I don't think its unfathomable for a person to not having that kind of level of savings but Have good policy ideas. I think someone close to the struggles of working people has a perspective and an understanding of what is impacting those populations and could bring ideas to the government people not directly impacted might not. No one elected to Congress is an expert on every issue. When you elect someone you trust that their perspective, you trust their judgement, and you trust their policy prescriptions that they have presented to you. I think that there are people who are struggling for various reasons that have those good qualities that one would want in a leader/rep. I am not dogmatic about someone struggling not being able to bring good representation to their constituents. Just to be clear I am not saying everyone in Congress of the Senate should be poor or working class but rather I am not going to lock out or mock people who are struggling to come up with 5-6k to float themselves from bringing good ideas to the table. I get that you might see that as an automatic disqualifying factor as its not the highest bar to set. But to me I am not going to be nearly as dogmatic as I think you lock a lot of good people out by doing that.

I think it is legit or at least not too far off. The defense is a top 5 unit in the league in my opinion. The defense boasts a top 5 safety tandem in the league, a top 5 corner in the league, a rookie anchoring the slot corner position, a pro-bowl caliber linebacker (Milano), a high end rookie linebacker (Edumonds), a pair of good pass rushers in Hughes and Lorax, Star is a good interior run defender and the front 7 rolls deep with guys like Kyle, Phillips, Shaq, Murphy (when healthy) and Cam. Outside of CB 2 I don't see much of a weakness on the defense. Can anyone name 5 defenses better than the Bills right now?

I think you can be a young person or someone making under 30k a year and bring good ideas to the government. If you had more actual working people in the government it would actually function for those people better. If you want to shut out half of Americans from Congress because they don't meet that standard fine but its out of touch for how hard a lot of people have it. Do you seriously think that there weren't religious fundamentalist morons who were elected from the tea party? Do you think Sarah Palin and George W Bush are smart people? There are so many former staff members who say Trump is a grade a moron who governs by watching Fox News (and his tweets aligning when Fox News puts out stories proves that) so I think there is plenty of evidence to support that. There are plenty of quotes that I could pull up on moronic things that people like Michelle Backman and other "right wing" candidates have said. The poster I was replying to was saying how the left always elects morons but I was pointing out there were plenty of morons on the right.

50% of American workers make less than 30k a year. A lot of young people under 30 fall into that category. If you want to shut a lot of people out from Congress fine that's your personal opinion. I just think you are out of touch with the working class.

They will lose to the Pats who will likely need that game to push for a bye week. Winning 5 NFL games out of 6 for a mediocre team with a rookie QB isn't an easy task even if you have a great defense and a soft schedule. I am not saying its not possible to finish 8-8 and go 5-1 to end the season but odds are they are more likely to go 3-3 and finish 6-10 maybe 4-2 and they go 7-9 if they can sweep the Fish. Even if Allen plays competent he likely will have one horrid game in those 5 games and that's enough to lose one game right there. Personally I see a loss to the Pats, a split against the Fish, a split against the Jags and Lions, and a win against the Jets.

A young person being able to afford 5-6k in expenses while having their ability to work be limited for 2 months isn't exactly easy for a lot of people under 30 to do. I agree with you if this is a matter of being able to scrounge together 500 dollars but it screams out of touch to think that its easy for everyone to have 5-6k to dump in a short period of time while having income be limited. I get that it is your personal preference and "competence" test but for me I think if you want more common people involved in government you are going to have some people who don't have 5-6k to spare on a big move. 50% of American workers make less than 30k a year, odds are a lot of those people fall under that category. So if your aim is to open up the government to less lawyers and affluent business people you are going to have to accept that this scenario could happen and it isn't a bad thing. The right has elected some pretty big morons. George W Bush and Trump (the past few years I actually think Trump back in the day was somewhat smart) aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Sarah Palin is another momo that ended up on a presidential ticket. A lot of the Tea Party and fundamental right wing candidates are also scary low on the intelligence level. I am not saying this is exclusive to either party but painting it as a partisan issue isn't wise.

Maybe I am taking lighthearted attacks a bit too seriously. But it just seems like an out of touch attack that is counter intuitive to what people actually want in government (less lawyers more common people.)

So you are OK with only well off elites being elected and expecting them to fight corruption, to me that seems like a contradictory idea? For me personally I only care about your ideas, where your funding comes from (In this legalized form of bribery call campaign contributions your conflict of interest is called into question by who funds your campaigns), and how you plan to represent your district. That doesn't mean that I want a bunch of idiots in Congress but rather that to be a smart person who understands the issues and cares about representing your people you don't need to rich or part of some "natural aristocracy." Give me more common people in government rather than demanding everyone financially successful.

IF the Bills winout then yeah maybe but at 3-7 and a highly unlikely chance of winning 6 in a row, that's probably not likely.

Chad has a lot of issues in his personal life he needs to sort out. If he can get that in order (which is going to take some time, at the earliest he isn't going to come back until 2019) I have no problem bringing him in to compete for a third string QB job.

I find it shocking how many people are shitting on her for this for really no other reason than they don't like her politics. It is possible to hate someones policy positions and empathize with them as a person. If this was some libertarian or conservative young person who came out of nowhere to upset Marco Rubio or some other establishment GOP congressmen would you honestly be hating on them? Is it really unfathomable that a young person can't pay for 3 months rent in Washington DC (November and December plus last months rent), a security deposit, moving expenses, and general living expenses for 2 months while not being able to fully work? So many people on this forum say corruption is the problem, lawyers and rich business people being the only ones involved in politics is the problem, and that more ordinary people need to run for office. Yet when someone who isn't rich and isn't a lawyer or business person can't afford 5-6k in moving costs everyone is shitting on them? Seriously do you think that only people with money should win elections?

Donohoe was a pretty bad drafter, great at free agency acquisitions but terrible at drafting, outside of 2001 he did not have one single good draft, I would give him a 3.5/10 for drafting. The Levy/Brandon Era was a little bit better, they seemed to miss on early picks but ***** or just do OK on higher picks. 2009 and 2007 were good or above average drafts but 2006 and 2008 were bad. I would give Levy/Brandon a 5.5/10 for drafting. Nix was better in his 3 drafts 2010 was one of the worst drafts this team has ever had but 2011 netted 3 defensive starters and 2012 netted 2 defensive starters and a big piece along the O-line. I would give Nix a 7/10 for drafting from 2010 to 2012. Had the 2010 draft not been so terrible he probably would have been one of the better drafters in the league at that time. Whaley was awful at drafting kind of similar to Donohoe as he was really good at free agent acquisitions. 2013 was subpar, Woods and Kiko were good players, Goodwin obviously a talent but hurt while he was here. 2014 was a mess, Watkins was a good player but the cost to trade up was too high, the only other player to emerge from that draft was P.Brown who was a decent starter. 2015 was his best draft as Darby was a good player and Miller had two good years to start his career. 2016 was pretty dam bad as Lawson is the only player remaining and the jury is still out on him. I would give Whaley a 2.5/10 for drafting. McBeane's two drafts have good early returns esp the 2017 draft which looks like it could have netted 3 key starters and possibly 4 if Zay pans out. 2018 is hard to tell some good talent but way too early to tell.

I agree that they can't spend all their money in 2019 as they have to be smart to roll over some money to extend players in 2020 and 2021. However they have to make a push to fill out the offense via free agency and possibly fill a major defensive need. Remember that after 2019 some big contracts expire, Shady, Clay, and Hughs all expire and Trent Murphy's deal is also easy to get out of. Outside of Star the team doesn't have any major 2020 commitments at the moment. The teams cap is very well managed for the future even if they add several big contracts in the 2019 off-season they will be able to add more space as big contracts fall off after 2019.

I like the move DT played well last year and he brings some speed to the WR position. It really isn't going to make that much of a difference this season but if it gives a small upgrade to the WR position then it is a good move.