billsfan89

You are inferring a lot of things that I have supposedly said but none of those things you are accusing me of saying are things that I have actually said. I have not dismissed election results (Not sure what that means but Trump won and that's a fact I will not dispute), I have not ever stated that Trump does not have a first amendment right to say things (Criticizing someones words and what actions those words might lead to does not equate to thinking someone does not have the right to say them.) I honestly try to be consistent in my words and my principles, I don't endorse the Democrats who are mostly centrist puppets of corporations nor do I find myself parroting what is fed to me by corporate media. You can shout you memes at me but that just proves that you sit in an echo chamber parroting memes and other cliches. Call me an NPC or whatever other nonsense you want but it doesn't change the truth that you are getting hustled by Trump and this conspiracy theory. As far as the "Deep State" I don't doubt there are factions within the government and outside of the government that want to enact control over various aspects of society both public and private. The Military industrial complex is a very good example of a faction that has consistently influenced the government. There are a lot of corporations that pour millions into influencing politicians. If you want to talk about the corrupting influence money has on our political process then we have common ground. But to think that these factions are organized into a "Deep State" is just connecting dots that aren't there. You would also have to think that there is an all powerful "Deep State" that somehow was competent enough to control major aspects of the world but got beat by the guy from the Apprentice? This "Deep State" has all this power to ***** with Trump but couldn't be bothered to rig voting machines? They have to be both all powerful and incompetent which if you use your critical thinking skills just doesn't make sense. Another thing that doesn't make sense about this "Deep State" conspiracy theory is Trump is not really doing anything all that different from what Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio would have done as president. 90% of what Trump is doing from a policy perspective is what a stock Republican would be doing. What is Trump doing that is really that against the grain? Trump passed tax cuts whose benefits primarily go to corporations and the top 1% of earners, sounds like something Bush II would have done. Trump has done a lot of scaling back of environmental protections and deregulation a play right out of the GOP playbook. The military industrial complex is in love with Trump as he has continued the wars and given the military tens of billions of dollars more money each year. Even Trumps merit based immigration bill was pretty much a copy of Bush II's merit based immigration bill. Even on trade (One of the few things Trump has been against the grain on) Trumps new NAFTA Deal is 90% the old NAFTA (Don't get me wrong some of the new stuff is good but its still mostly the old trade deal with a few new provisions added.) Trump's actual policies aren't going against the grain all that much. North Korea and trade with China are the only places where you can say Trump is actually doing something that a stock GOP president wouldn't be doing. If there is a "Deep State" they probably love what Trump is doing. Face it NPC you are the one getting played and scared of Shadows. Tell me how much different a Trump presidency is from a Ted Cruz presidency based on policy and facts and not emotions.

It's a shocking misnomer that a lot of people have that the period from post WWII to the early 80's was what news and journalism always was. I kind of knew but I didn't know to what degree that was an extreme outlier until I read up on it. After WWII there was just a huge impact and change in culture given the shocking nature of the war. I do think that there was a societal impact to not repeat the conditions that led to two brutal wars. My personal opinion is that journalism and news was impacted by that post war mentality. There probably was a lot of study done into how the news helped the Nazi's rise to power and there probably was a big impact that state influenced/run propaganda had a hand in allowing the Nazi's to dehumanize the Jewish people and rise to power in general. I think colleges and universities started to implement the standards of teaching better journalism and professionals already working in the field held to that standard. But flash forward 35 years later and as news becomes more of a business due to the massive ad dollars that come in from it and there is a greater thirst for ratings. That thirst leads to a lot of sensationalism and that erodes ethics. I think the money infusing the product Then you have 24 hour news channels and 24 hour conservative talk radio and given that most of the time unless a 9/11 style event happens there really isn't a need for 24 hours worth of news it leads to punditry which once again leads to sensationalism and gets farther away from journalistic integrity. Then you get to the age of the internet and you have even more information out on the market and there becomes an incentive for people to pander to a specific type of audience in order to craft out a niche as you said. I still think there is good journalism out there, I would recommend to anyone to subscribe to your local newspaper (You can do so digitally if you don't want a physical copy) as they will actually try and break local stories and give you a decent perspective on the national news. A lot of good journalism gets done by local papers. The people I see on Facebook that really believe in the "Deep State" are serious about it, I don't know anyone I interact with in person that buys into it but while they are a small minority it still is a lot of people. It only will take a few wackos and some careless words from Trump to have some ***** possibly go off. I don't think Trumps ego would allow him to calm down a situation in a preventative manner. If Trump loses in 2020 and he insinuates there was possibly voter fraud or something else going on (A careless come I could see him making) then that could really set a few people off to take arms against the government.

I also think if you are going to spend on a pass rusher there are shorter term options out on the market (Brandon Graham from the Eagles is a bit older and probably could be had for much less and a shorter commitment) if you feel like the combo of Shaq, Hughes, and Murphy maybe didn't finish the season all that strong. The free agent market is flushed with 28-30 year old pass rusher who you could probably get for more modest deals. I actually think if the Texans don't tag Clowney he will either end up on the Jets or Colts, both teams have a huge need for a pass rusher and they have the cap space. Barr would put the defense over the top and at 27 he could fit the timetable of the team. I don't know what AAV it would take to add him but I certainly wouldn't hate the move. There is plenty of cap space to add one or two defensive free agents and still splurge to find 4 offensive starters. I honestly would like to see EJ Gaines back if the price was right, there is a need at corner and I feel like Gaines was a big reason for the defensive secondary being good last year. I would really love to see the Bills grab 2 interior O-Line players and Golden Tate. Guys like Saffold, Paradis, and Tate would instantly make the offense at least a respectable NFL offense. Paradis is playing lights out this year and Saffold is a big reason for Gurley's success in LA. Both guys combined with Dawkins would make 3 out of 5 O-Line positions good. Tate wouldn't fix all the issues at receiver but its a nice place to start to get a high end consistent NFL receiver. You probably would need at least one or two other adds on offense but those 3 (Tate, Saffold, Paradis) even at a cost of 40 million of the teams cap (Which is a high end estimate probably would be closer to 35) would be worth it.

Tight ends get massively over paid in free agency. Trey Burton a backup tight end with limited playing time and results got 8 million a year (and is playing well to be fair, it is more so reflective of the market.) From 2015 to 2017 Clay was good for 50 and 500 yards a season on offenses that weren't exactly dynamic. He has been productive and at 4.5 million I am not sure there is a better deal on the market for the Bills. If the Bills cut Clay and signed another tightend I wouldn't hate the move but considering the limited cap savings on Clay and his decent level of production I think he might just stay on the team and they draft a player to stick behind him for a season. Overall I don't think the signing was a bust but it certainly didn't have the level of impact it should have. Clay has been average to slightly above average at his position. Which isn't bad but he currently is the 9th highest paid tight end in the league, and it is made even worse to consider that when he signed in 2015 he was the 4th highest paid tight end in the league. In 2016 he was the 7th highest paid tight end in the league and in 2017 he was the 6th. I think for his level of production he just didn't deliver on his salary.

I thought he had an injury in there somewhere, that's a pretty impressive resume he has put up. But overall I think he isn't a number one WR but he would represent a great place to start a rebuild given what is available on the market (Unless there are better players that open up via trade which is possible) he would be a reliable veteran player who can make the job of Josh Allen way easier and take pressure off of high picks at WR or TE. Even if the Texans don't want to commit to Clowney that much Clowney will command at least 20 million out on the open market. I wouldn't be opposed to adding a pass rusher (Unless Murphy and Shaq take off the rest of the way) but I think spending 20 million on the open market for a top pass rusher isn't allocating resources properly. That 20 million could be spent on getting 2 high end players along the interior OL where high impact players are needed and available.

What I worry about is that a few wackos try and beat back the deep state by taking extreme actions. If you have people convinced that there is a New World Order type shadow government rigging everything then why wouldn't you think they would rig an election? And if you feel like Trump is some sort of Super Hero fighting against the deep state then you would be willing to do something extreme in order to fight for what is "right."

I hope you are right in that Trump supporters will accept the results. Trump himself before the 2016 election did not commit to accepting the results (he danced around it not communicating his point clearly but implying the possibility of voter fraud) and he has constantly railed against voter fraud which intentional or unintentional has implanted that idea to his voters as to why he could lose. I know most supporters will support an election result but the hardest of the hardcore "Deep State" Trump supporters will not accept the results instead blaming any result that goes against what they want as a rigged election. That's my concern is that an election loss will be framed as a conspiracy as a lot of stuff is with Trumps more ardent supporters.

I knew that stat about 90% of media was owned by 6 corps. A lot of deregulation in the 1990's led to an increase in the concentration of media (Which was already pretty concentrated by the top 6 companies but not to the degree it is now.) My issue with alternative media is that some people (not you just people who tout alt media blindly) don't understand that alt media has its own trappings and failings. I think people also don't realize that Alt Media doesn't do a whole lot of actual reporting. Most alt media just reports on stories reported on by the journalists from ABC, Reuters, Fox, CNN etc. Most alt media doesn't have reporters in the field doing the hard work to break stories. That's not to say that I don't like there being alternative outlets for media. I really like that there are other voices in the debate but I just apply the same level of skepticism as I would to CNN or Fox. I think a blind faith in alt media being inherently better than mainstream media leads to Alex Jones being able to sell supplements at an insane markup and advertise gold at insane markups (And I am not implying you are a big Alex Jones guy but rather that you can't have any less skepticism about alt media.)

The cap savings on cutting him are 4.5 million. So the question is, is Charles Clay worth keeping at 4.5 million? I think so, I don't think the free agent class at TE is strong unless you want to overpay for a backup which is risky. I think it would be worth holding onto Clay for just one more year and draft a tight end behind him.

This is where we will find a lot of common ground. The media has a billion things they can go after Trump for yet they sensationalize trivial things (The only relevant part of the Stormy Daniels story was possible violations of campaign finance laws which was hardly covered) or they go after things no one cares about. The Democrats are also insanely stupid for not hammering home his horrendous policies and his fake populism. Instead they act outraged over him saying rude things. If the Democrats appealed to their own populism they would crush Trump in the mid-terms and run an actual populist candidate who could beat him. If I were advising the Democrats I would make it a consistent talking point that under Trumps first year in office 93,000 jobs were outsourced while the previous 5 years under Obama the average rate of outsourcing was 87,000. There are a ton of facts like that which should be coming out of the mouth of Democrats yet they obsess over rude comments and Russia. It is astonishing how much the Democrats suck and the media which is supposed to be in their pocket doesn't do a good job either. But while this might not be you specifically I think there are some hardcore Trump supporters that will bend over backwards to defend everything Trump says as the truth and paint anything negative as not true or part of conspiracy against him (some going even as far as to go to a deep state that is both all powerful yet incompetent.) Its one thing to think that the media will sensationalize and not source things properly to go after Trump but some Trump supporters live in a different reality where Trump is perfect and everything negative is out to get him. As a sidenote I would take issue with the "Well it worked" defense. Just because something is effective doesn't make it any less dishonest or dangerous. It also will leave his base more likely to not believe reality if reality happens to be negative towards Trump. That's my biggest fear with Trump that his base will not accept a 2020 result unless Trump wins.

I never recognized the inconstancy of one as noble, where the ***** are you coming up with this? You are projecting something that I never said. Obama and Clinton were phony for holding their anti-gay position until it became politically convenient to switch. Trump is allowed to change his mind and positions but he has given me no evidence that he has. The issue is not that he can't change his mind but rather that there isn't anything to indicate that he has. I was actually reading about how the news has always been radically slanted to fit the needs and purpose of those who owned it. Newspapers for as far back as they have been in print have always been questionable in their reporting. The Spanish American war was started by Newspapers for example. It was only for a brief period of time after World War II until the early 1980's that journalism and reporting was thought of as a public service and good that should be held to an objective series of standards so that the public can be informed as best as possible. I try to get as much of my information from varied sources myself. But I wouldn't hold alternative media as being inherently more noble than mainstream media. Their flaws and traps are different but they still have an agenda and a message they want to deliver.

I never said there wasn't inaccurate information about Trump that many news media outlets have published. My criticism of Trump is that he cites everything that is negative about him as "Fake News" even accurate stories get lumped in as "Fake News" if it is negative. This has created with his base an us vs. them attitude where anything negative even if its accurate must be out to get him and thus not true. Trump is a pathological and shockingly lazy liar. Yes there is a general eagerness to go after Trump by a lot of the media and they will often run with stories that are intentionally misleading or sourced poorly. But there are many other examples of legitimate news stories published about Trump that were accurate and in a fair context that he labeled as "Fake News." As I said before he isn't just calling out the media for general misinformation he is slapping that label on anything that is negative. Do you feel it is an unfair point to bring up comments he made just over two years ago on his campaign to point to a history of endorsing his base to go after people who are against him?

What the ***** does Obama have to do with this? A critique of Trump does not mean I endorse Obama and the Democrats. Stop with that binary thinking. Its lazy to defer criticism of Trump by saying that well the Dems suck more haha. ***** off with that. You make these assumptions that people who think Trump is a fake right wing populist who is mostly doing 80% of what a standard Republican is doing must then be sucking off the Democrats. There has been nothing from Trump in his nearly 2 years in office to think that he has been working hard to temper political violence. Trump hasn't backed off his us vs. the world mentality. He goes after the media all the time not just for inaccurate reporting but just for reporting negatively on him.

If Clay was a free agent would you sign him on a one year 4.5 million dollar deal? Considering the free agent class at TE is not strong I would rather hold onto Clay for one more year and draft a rookie who will have a decent (but overpaid) vet in front of him. Draft a WR round 1 and draft a tight end round 2 keep Clay so that you don't have to force a rookie in or at worst if a rookie shines you can move Clay around and have a weapon that can add versatility to the offense.

The guy who ran for president named Donald Trump and the president Donald Trump are the same person. These aren't obscure quotes from before he ran for office that a lot of people will trot out these are his words as a person in politics not that long ago. To act as though what you do on the campaign isn't reflective of the person in office is a bit of cognitive dissonance. I will concede from the letter of the law your point might be right (I can't recall as president him advocating for violence) but it is not irrelevant to bring up those quotes as to point to the atmosphere that he has built up for his base to rabidly defend him using violence that atmosphere carries over as 2016 is not that long ago. Also I didn't characterize the "Enemy of the People" quote in any specific context. I pointed to it as a microcosm of the atmosphere he has built around the media. The problem with the "Enemy of the People" comments and consistent vitriol attacking the media is that Trumps critique of the media is not limited to inaccurate reporting. He pretty much attacks anything that reports factual information about him that is negative. The New York Times who did an amazingly well laid out piece about how him and a lot of his family have avoided paying taxes and Trump kept attacking the New York Times as "Fake News" and out to get him. When in reality the whole story was well sourced and accurate. He didn't even provide any reason as to why it wasn't accurate. Trump has conditioned his base to attack anything that attacks him because everything that is against him is a vast conspiracy of fake news. It's not surprising to see extremists of his base doing these types of things and its not shocking to see conspiracy theories popping up making Trump the victim. Its the atmosphere of my guy good and everything bad about him must not be true.

Haha I right-click media links but it took me a few seconds to find the video. ***** off with this blind defense of Trump, you can still like the guy or his policies and not be a blind supporters of his.Did you not say and underline NEVER in that post? You were instantly proven wrong by the mans own words from just over 2 years ago when he was running for president and your best defense was that these quotes from 2016 and thus 2016=Never? Come on just be honest you were wrong. Now if you want to say as president he never has advocated for violence you might have a case to stand on but that's not what you said. I also would say that while not advocating for direct violence Trump in calling the media the enemy of the people and going hard after any media that dares to criticize him is creating an atmosphere of hostility towards those entities. Now I won't go as far to say as that has caused these actions but I don't think that Trump has helped the current landscape of political violence imposed by both sides.

Play the video he says knock the crap out of them and that "I will pay your legal fees." Dam you posted that quick. There was also the time that he said back in the day a protester would get carried out on a stretcher and that he would like to punch a protester in the face. There was also a 78 year old man who sucker punched a protester who was taunting but not physically imposing. When questioned on wither or not he would pay the mans legal fees he said he would look into it. I think he ended up not paying the legal fees but that still points to the fact that he has condoned or straddled the line on condoning violence before.

Didn't Trump tell people that if they beat up protesters that he would pay for their legal bills?

I understand that, but its not like the other backup OL players are that great, if there is an injury or garbage time I would like to see what Teller has. Then again this is just as a fan commenting on a message board. I have to trust that the coaches who see him every day probably know he isn't ready for prime time. It is just odd since Teller at least looked like a player capable of being active on game day during pre-season and from training camp reports. I at least hope they play him and the other young guard on the roster towards the end of the season assuming the last 2-4 games are completely meaningless.

I wouldn't be shocked to Shady traded, I think at this point if the Bills got a 3rd round pick offered they would take it and stack the middle of the draft and free up some more cap space for 2019. But I also would not be surprised if the team held onto him and kept him for 2019 hoping to maybe draft a RB in the mid rounds and have Shady/Ivory keep the seat warm for a rookie for one more season.

I kind of am shocked they didn't try and have Teller be active on game day by now. Maybe he isn't ready to start but I thought if there were garbage time snaps to be had they would want him active on game day to kick the tires and see what he has if the situation called for it. I hope the Bills by the end of the season toss him out there the last 3-4 games of the season. We know what Vlad and Miller are by now, it would be good to see the younger players get a shot to showcase themselves a little and get some experience.

You have to keep in mind the concussion protocol doctors are independent of the team, they don't give a ***** how badly a player is needed if his tests aren't good they yank them. Shady took a bad hit to the head and likely was pulled by the independent doctors.

Golden Tate would greatly help out the WR core and he would make a great role model. I also like the fact that he won a SB in Seattle, I think he would fit the culture the team is going for. Depending on how Zay finishes the season (Is he a viable WR3) I would also bring in John Brown or another speed oriented WR. The team can only draft so many pass catchers as they need both a future at tight end and a lot of help at WR so if Zay can't be relied on he should fight for a WR3 spot with a proven vet. I too like Saffold but I think the team can afford 2 big interior OL contracts and the free agent crop is stacked with high end interior OL. I would love to see Matt Paradis and Saffold be brought in even if it costs 25 million in cap space to do so both players would instantly stabilize the O-line. The team would still have plenty of space to take care of Lorax and Kyle/Phillips while still being able to maybe add one or two other players. Defensively I wouldn't mind them re-signing EJ Gaines if he hits the market and could be had. I know we want the team to spend big on the offense but if there was one position where the team could plug a hole on defense it is CB and Gaines played really well in the system. I wouldn't go crazy on Gaines but if he could be had for 7 million AAV or less I think that would be a good signing and keep the defense strong for a modest investment. My wish list would be resign Lorax and Kyle if he wants to come back if Kyle doesn't come back resign Phillips or both if Phillips has reasonable demands. Then after taking care of those players Matt Paradis (Big Spend), Roger Saffold (Big Spend), Daryl Willams (at the right price), Golden Tate (Modest to big spend), EJ Gaines (At the right price), John Brown (If Zay isn't someone you feel can handle the WR3 position, not sure yet have to let it play out.) and I would consider a RB like Tevin Coleman but I think the wish list is already crazy as is so RB probably will be addressed in the draft in the mid rounds if Shady is or isn't on the roster.

The WR crop is weak but they have to at least sign one decent veteran. Golden Tate would be a good place to start, he is a mid-level WR2, I also think John Brown would be a good second tier signing. But don't rule out the trade market either. The Bills have extra mid round picks they could maybe package for a vet WR out on the market. As far as resigning players go Lorax and Kyle should both be brought back if they want to play one more year. Jordan Phillips I would play by ear as I like what he brought so far but if he finishes the season strong the Bills might get priced out of the market for him (If Kyle comes back they have 3 solid DT's, how much do you pay for a 4th DT on the roster when you have 3 good ones?)The only offensive free agent worth possibly resigning is Mills but that will depend on how he does the rest of the year KB is as good as gone if he doesn't get traded. The rest of the defensive players are mostly depth guys somewhat worth resigning but no major losses. But where the Bills can really improve and get a good value for their cap space is along the interior OL even with Marpet resigning in Tampa there will be several quality guards and centers out on the free agent market. The Bills should sign at least 2 of the top interior OL players out on the market. Rodger Saffold although a bit older would make for a great signing. The Rams are up against the cap and Saffold is a top guard in the league, he would instantly stabilize the guard position for 2-3 seasons at least. I also like Jamon Brown from the Rams too, he isn't an elite center but he is good, he is also 25 so he could be a 4-6 year plug and play type player. Another great option at center is Matt Paradis from Denver who would have competed with Marpet as the top Center available in the draft. Paradis would give the team one of the best centers in the league. Another interesting option at RT is Daryl Williams coming off a huge injury but had two elite seasons in Carolina in 2016 and 2017. Personally I would target Paradis and Saffold at top AAV for their positions, adding both of them would instantly stabilize the O-line from LT-LG-C. I would see what Williams would command and if it isn't too crazy of an overpay and bonus commitment I would certainly add him and greatly help out the right side of the line. I honestly would have no problem committing 50 million in cap space to resigning Lorax and either Kyle or Phillips, and signing Saffold, Paradis, Golden Tate, and Daryl Williams. Spend your first and second round picks on pass catchers and draft a guard in the third round to help out the right side. 2019 is make or break for McBeane and they better act like it. There is no excuse to be conservative with this cap space and the ability to easily create 10-15 million more in cap space by cutting bums like Dimarco.

Gruden has a method to his madness. He knew the core of Carr, Mack, and Cooper while good was not going to win anything longer term esp given their cap situation wasn't so great and they were going to be locked into 3 massive contracts had they decided to pay Mack and Cooper. Carr is the last man standing and he will likely get shipped out for a package of picks too. It is possible Carr could net 2 first round picks and more. Assuming Carr goes for a flat 2 first round picks he will have turned the trio of Mack, Cooper, and Carr into 5 first round picks over 2 drafts. That's the type of draft capital that a guy with a 10 year contract could use to build a sustained contender. Combine that with the fact that the Raiders will be able to clear cap space and rid themselves of any remaining bad contracts in 2019 and you can see the Raiders plan to get super competitive quickly in Oakland. He can probably get 2 more firsts for Carr and have 7 first round picks in 2 years. If he hits on a rookie QB and finds 3-4 elite pieces with those picks look out because they will have the cap space sooner rather than later to add a lot of talent just in time for their Vegas move.