Jump to content

CodeMonkey

Community Member
  • Posts

    10,854
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CodeMonkey

  1. For alcohol its like cigs, cant have any onsite. Plus you can't drink offsite then go back to work (like at lunch).
  2. While generally correct, they actually will in extreme circumstances. Google "Brompton Cocktail". But people generally do not know this unless they are unfortunate enough to know someone who needed it. Pharmacies (at least some) keep some extraordinary pure cocaine on hand for such things.
  3. Each employer has the right to set the standards for their employees. My employer (in NY but not anything government) has a zero tolerance for any drugs including alcohol with the exception of cigs (in designated outdoor areas). I imagine employers in Colorado can still forbid weed even though it is legal there just like mine forbids alcohol even though it is legal. The NFL is their employer so they can determine what they will and will not allow. And also, Colorado has a NFL team and weed is legal even for recreation there. So for the Broncos at least it isn't a question of being above the law.
  4. And besides, he isn't a Bill so suspend away!
  5. It's about time, not just for the NFL but for the US as well.
  6. Ha! Right you are. Corrected, thanks
  7. With so much draft talk, time to get back to an oldie but a goodie. This one also mentions a Rochester doctor that is doing considerable research in this area. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/13/us-brain-health-football-idUSKBN0DT24720140513
  8. I'll go you one better than that. There is no "see if Manuel is the guy". They gave up next years first to acquire Manuel as close to a sure-thing star weapon as there was in this draft. There is no "see". Whaley is all in on Manuel.
  9. How it affects people DOES speak to what's best for the Bills franchise. Making it easier for more people to get there in a shorter period of time, for example, would typically mean the potential for ticket sales to go up.
  10. In terms of distance yes. In terms of time, probably even more than that!
  11. The Bills didn't trade up for Spiller did they? All I remember the pundits questioning is taking a player like Spiller at #9 (situational, would be there later, luxury pick etc.).
  12. Well I guess you could call 15 hundred million "several" This can't be serious, can it?
  13. No matter how you want to say it, the Bills used two #1 picks, or they gave up an additional #1. Really a non-issue. So much paranoia
  14. WR was a need (in my opinion a big one) and it was clearly addressed, yes. And yes downgraded by some because like I said, it was seen as a [unnecessary] risk. In their opinion the risk/reward was not there for a WR. YMMV of course.
  15. Yikes how many posts for the same thing. Yes they gave up next years #1 so they gave up one additional #1 pick, correct. But in addition to next years #1, they used this years #1 as well. 1+1=2. That's their basis for saying 2 picks. Simple semantics people.
  16. I think we actually see it the same way. Watkins is about a low risk as they come in my opinion. But they gave up the first round pick next year so the Bills are gambling heavily that Manuel will be a viable QB going forward. So yes, EJ is the risk. But they took that risk for a WR (Watkins).
  17. It should reflect on this years grade because this is the year they mortgaged next year's pick. And you hit on one reason why giving up next years first caused a downgrade, if the Bills do decide they need a QB, they have no first round pick next year to try and get one. The Bills really did go all in with Manuel just like they said they were. Bills fans may like that, but more neutral observers are likely to see it as taking a big risk for a WR.
  18. I love getting the player (who wouldn't?) but using two #1's (this years and next years) is a bit too much for a WR in my opinion no matter how good he is. But it is consistent with Whaley/Marrone getting Manuel all the tools he needs to either sink or swim this year. Basically I do not hate the move but I do not love it either. I also think too many Bills fans whine about media bias. Just because a pundit disagrees with what the Bills FO does, doesn't necessarily mean it's bias. It generally means that they just disagree with the decision. And lets face it, given the Bills performance the past 14 years disagreeing with what the Bills do makes you right a whole lot more than wrong. If these pundits really knew anything they wouldn't be pundits, they would be making boatloads of cash from a NFL team so don't worry about what they say.
  19. Yeah. Apparently everyone there thought it was funny except for his Mom
  20. Or even younger. i remember my boys when they were 3 or 4 and outside would just drop trou and pee in the yard rather than waste time going inside. Couldn't fault their logic. My wife LOVED it when one did it once at her work picnic in front of probably 20 co-workers. Suddenly it was MY fault!
  21. If the Bills are smart they will make sure they are and market them heavily. I fully expect the tailgates at the Ralph to be littered with them this year.
  22. I'm not surprised or disappointed. They obviously think that Manuel will turn it around this season, or at the very least like him more than any QB they could get in this draft. I will probably make it to camp a couple times this year. But camp is basically no pressure so I would expect Manuel to look fine. The bad mechanics/footwork, if it is still there, won't come out until he is under pressure so we really won't know anything until the season actually starts. Stay tuned Bills fans.
  23. I've seen people with Sabres jerseys on like that as well and it makes me shudder. Only if its part of a fantasy role playing thing where you are the Bills star player and she is a Jill or something
  24. Agreed. Plus as a rookie HC, if your rookie first round QB is !@#$ing off you had better get involved and make sure your OC is all over it. And I suspect he will be. JF will not get a pass for that bull **** any more. Being hands off to that degree does not strike me as being in Pettines DNA.
  25. I can't imagine first year HC Pettine will be tolerating any of that behavior from his rook QB. JF probably could not have asked for a better team to be drafted by. Hopefully for his sake he will sack up now that he is in the NFL.
×
×
  • Create New...