billsfan1959
-
Posts
6,352 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by billsfan1959
-
-
29 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:
no joke, I have heard some people I have faith in begin praising Ford.
Kromer elevated this dude.
Bringing Kromer back was one of the best offseason moves this team made. After Juan Castillo and Bobby Johnson, it will be interesting to watch the line play this year under a coach that actually knows what he is doing...
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Azucho98 said:
Never disliked him. One bad half in pre-season doesn't define a player. He's a solid backup and has been his entire career.
That was kinda my point....
-
So, do we like Keenum again?
-
3
-
-
Just now, StHustle said:
No but it’s definitely foolish and naive to think an actual Bills player breaking down scheme wouldn’t be used by the opposition. Thad Brown suggested cover 1s coverage that didn’t even include players was giving away too much. It clearly is a thing.Similar to how people on here don’t think players read these boards. I know for a FACT a number of them do!
I get what you are saying, and I agree that there are lines that shouldn't be crossed. I watched the video and I just don't believe this rises to that level.
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, StHustle said:
For those saying teams wouldn’t use a podcast interview of a player breaking down his own tendencies…you’re a fool!
So, essentially, you are looking for people to support and join you in your hand wringing, and, if they don't, or if they disagree with you in some way, you will dismiss them as fools...
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, NewEra said:
You link stats…one has 20% more games played….. and equal passing yards and 33% less TD passes….. while having 80% less rushing yards. But they’re EXTREMELY similar. Oh man.
You are arguing with a poster who tried to convince this entire board that Matt Breida was the key to unleashing this offense....
-
4 minutes ago, galept said:
If only.
Amen...
-
4 minutes ago, Doc said:
And Tre White wouldn't have made a difference. Do you have a brain?
The sum of the square roots of any two sides of an isosceles triangle is equal to Beane and McDermott suck....
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
I don't take any losses bad anymore
I was literally over Kansas City the next day.. I understand the nature of the beast
Went to my first game in 1968 and I have been a loyal fan since then. I learned long ago to not hang on to the negative energy of a loss. Love this team and what they are building. Good time to be a fan...
Go Bills!
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
Howard has gotten fairly poor reviews all of OTAs unfortunately
I have seen that; however, McDermott distinctly said in his news conference today that Howard has looked good this spring and looking better every day...
-
Thoughts and prayers 🙏🏽
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, tomur67 said:
Jalen Wydermeyer may surprise us and become TE3 or better.This TEXAS A&M SUPERHUMAN Could Be THE STEAL OF THE DRAFT... (Jalen Wydermeyer) - YouTube_files
I like your enthusiasm and I hope he does surprise us -
30 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Why do we need to know? So long as there has been accountability in the building and the mistakes have been learned from what does hanging people out to dry in public achieve? McDermott said right after the game - contrary to what most people seem to think - that it starts with him. That is all we need to know.
This. McDermott is accountable to his players, his coaches, and his organization. He stated it starts with him a number of times. Anyone who has paid any attention to his behavior during the time he has been here knows he doesn't expect anything from anyone in that organization that he doesn't, first, expect from himself. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that what transpired at the end of that game has been discussed in excruciating detail and everyone who had a role in what happened has held himself accountable.
That is the type of culture they have built.
-
2
-
-
Just now, ChiGoose said:
Stronger controls around straw purchases. Our background check and gun tracing programs leave a lot to be desired and have loopholes that facilitate interstate gun trafficking.
If we had a system where we had close to a 100% success rate in taking a gun used in a crime in Chicago and tracing it all the way back to the specific individual who purchased it and where they purchased it, that would allow us to prosecute the straw purchaser and potentially the store (if it did not comply with regulations). These actions would reduce the availability of guns to criminals through straw purchasers.
We already have systems in place to register and trace serial numbers of firearms. I'm all in favor of providing the resources neccessary to ensure 100% accountability. However, most guns illegally owned are not purchased through straw purchasers. They are stolen or acquired via other criminal means. We need to find ways to deal with actual criminals possessing and using guns. That means targeting the areas with the highest gun violence and the highest possession / use of illegal firearms - which tend to be areas of lower socioeconomic conditions and high minority populations. The majority of residents in these areas are decent people who are literally terrorized and placed at risk of being a victim of violence on a daily basis. Yet, we stand by as a society as they are victimized every single day by gun violence.
-
10 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
I don't think there is a panacea, nor do I think you can prevent all gun violence. But generally, I would start by treating firearms like we do cars. We used to have far more automobile deaths in this country, but with stricter controls on how people can be licensed to drive and regulations around vehicle safety, we have dramatically reduced the number of people being killed by cars.
Red flag laws are a good place to start, too. If someone presents a threat to the community, there should be a process from temporarily removing their firearms.
We also should repeal PLCAA, which prevents gun manufacturers from being sued. If you remember the Ford Pinto, it had a design flaw that resulted in a higher risk of fire in a rear-end collision. Through lawsuits and public advocacy, the issue was identified and Ford issued a recall. Since gun manufacturers are immune to lawsuits due to PLCAA, they are less inclined to have a focus on safety in their designs. Colt was in the process of creating the iColt handgun in the 1990's, which was a smart gun that could only be fired by its owner. This plan was scrapped and the gun was never rolled out. Manufacturers would have an incentive to explore safer approaches to firearms if they could be liable for excessively lethal weapons.
I think we should also have safe gun storage laws to prevent kids or other people from getting an otherwise legally obtained gun. Gun safes with the ammunition stored separately would be a good approach, especially in houses where minors live.
I am skeptical of outright bans of guns, like the AR-15. "Assault Weapon" is a political term that is often defined around a gun's cosmetic features than its lethality. If there is a case to be made to ban certain types of firearms because they are so high power as to not have a real justifiable civilian use, I'm open to hearing it. But I don't think we should ban guns because they look scary or are popular.
Something we need to do but I have no idea how to do is to change the culture around guns. It was not that long ago that guns, especially rifles, were more considered tools than anything else. Going to a range to safely use your firearm, having a gun in a rural area to protect from certain wildlife, etc. I took some NRA classes way back when and the number one thing was safety and respect for the deadly weapon in your hands. Today, it's all about 2A and tyranny and the ads for guns invoke images of violence and being manly. I think that changes the way some people look at guns and it's not good.
Good post. We also need to devise strategies for dealing with the possession and use of illegal firearms. Much like the possession of legal firearms, we are dealing with that gray area of indivdual rights vs public safety.
-
1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:
I'd have to disagree here. Living here in Chicago, around 60% of the guns used for crimes here were obtained outside of the state. Illinois and Chicago can put in whatever stringent gun laws they want but people can drive a couple miles out of the city to Gary, Indiana, load up on guns and bring them into Chicago. Despite this, Indiana is not acting to reduce the gun trafficking nor enacting stricter controls on gun sales.
If we don't take a comprehensive approach across the country, we will continue to have problems with people obtaining guns in less restrictive states and bringing them into more restrictive states to circumvent the laws.
The overwhelming majority of guns used in gun crimes in the Chicago area aren't purchased or owned legally by the individuals using them. How will restricting the legal sale of guns in the surrounding areas solve that particular problem?
-
21 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:
Love Brady giving everyone crap for not knowing what the Zapruder film reference means.
I will say, That was actually a pretty quick response to Josh's question about the film of Clements' hit being black and white and grainy: "Yeah, it's like the Zapruder film."
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Spiderweb said:
Maybe, but Johnson clearly had the edge..
That's like saying your prom date wasn't the ugliest girl in the class...
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Big Turk said:
That was way too much time...even 13 seconds was way too much time.
That may very well be; however, that was not on Johnson.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, Big Turk said:
Not to mention RJ got sacked at one of the highest rates in NFL history. Dude could not read a defense to save his life.
I'd say it was...he didn't do much with the drives he had all game long, so the fact we needed a last second FG to take a lead when Flutie would have likely had us ahead comfortably is on him.
You have no idea waht Flutie "might" have done. We can only deal with what we know. Rob Johnson was awful. But, when you lead your team to the go ahead FG with 20 seconds left in the game, it should be a win - especially the way the game was played in the 1998-99 season.
-
4 minutes ago, Gugny said:
The fact remains that the Bills had that TEN game won and RJ was the QB who played. Was he good? NO. But he did enough to have the Bills on top when the offense left the field for the last time.
Right. That loss was not on Johnson. He led them to a field goal that should have won the game. It was poor clock management and special teams play...
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
The Bills were 21-7 with Flutie and went to back to back playoffs. In 1998, RJ was 3-3, got injured. Flutie came in and went 7-3.
RJ went 9-17 with the (same) Bills. Flutie maximized his game despite obvious physical limitations because he was smart and could take a beating.
RJ was a dumb, soft, injury prone jock who squandered his physical gifts. Why would any Bills fan pine for that guy even back then? He was awful.
I don't know why anyone woyuld want either one of them.
I would certainly agree that Flutie utilized his skill set better than Johnson did; however, much of the 21-7 record under Flutie was due to the Bills having one of the best defenses (particularly the 1998-1999 team) and best running games in the NFL. For every 2 decent games Flutie had, he had one abysmal game.
-
1 hour ago, Gugny said:
Flutie never "led" the Bills to any wins, let alone ten. He sucked and he's a little prick.
6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:RJ was the worst Bills starter in the past 40 years.
They both sucked...
-
35 minutes ago, muppy said:
This was reposted to me by teachers in public schools. 2 ex principals in fact. #Roxanne Corona Edmunds
QUOTE" As educators, we have done our part.
We have fenced in school playgrounds and locked all doors except one single point of entry. We have added a a double entry to the front door and added bulletproof glass. We have led our students through active shooter drills and watched the scared looks in our student’s eyes as they cowered in the darkened classroom. Research tells us that drills are not good for students emotional well-being, but we want to keep them safe. We have added door stops to classroom doors and covered any classroom door windows. We have partnered with law enforcement to add metal detectors and school safety support officers. Teachers and administrators have completed hours of active shooter trainings and collaborated with county and state law enforcement officers to hold active shooter simulations. Every teacher continues to place her life on the line for her students with the understanding that she may be the next teacher who dies protecting her students.
We have done our part.
Now, it’s time for our legislative representatives to do theirs.
1. Ban military-style assault weapons.
2. Require universal background checks for all gun sales.
3. Close gun sale loopholes and require background checks on all commercial gun sales.
4. Remove the prohibition on gun violence research by the CDC.
5. Ban bump stocks and limit the size of ammunition clips.
6. Pass an Extreme Risk Protection Order Act, a “red flag” bill, to allow relatives and law enforcement to temporarily remove firearms from an individual in crisis -END QUOTE
what do you think?
1. I am not sure about a complete ban on semiautomatic "assault style" rifles (such as the AR-15 style rifle used in Uvalde); however, I am absolutely in favor of restricting accessibility and increasing requirements for ownership. As a start.
2-3. I am in favor of increasing requirements and eliminating loopholes for the sale of any firearms (as well nationally uniform requirements). I am also in favor of increasing whatever resources are necessary to help those tasked with enforcing the laws that are in place now. Remember, between 80-90 percent of crimes involving guns are comitted with guns that are not legally owned. If we want to truly address this problem, let's start with the people who are actually using guns in criminal activity.
4. I am a research guy and in favor of as much legitimate research on gun violence and violence in general as we can do. However, I don't want the CDC anywhere near it. I would prefer the creation of a more extensive research arm of the DOJ. They already have access to all of the national data on all aspects of crime and can work with researchers from universities around the country.
5. No problem with it.
6. We need an overhaul with how we deal with people who are mentally ill or exist in that gray area between legally sane and clearly exhibiting distorted cognitive functioning. There are a lot of individuals who exhibit behavior putting them on a trajectory for violence and don't actually do anything for which law enforcement or the medical profession can take real action. We need to figure out a better balance between individual rights and the right of peole to be safe.
-
1
-
Will we see any starters vs Panthers this week?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I would be surprised if we did.