ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

Wait just a minute. When exactly did Buddy say that? If it was less than 30 days before the draft, and he was telling the truth, then he might have lied about it.

Too bad his name isn't Nassip.

So essentially what you want is a slanted system where the schedule allows teams that suck to make the playoffs at the expense of teams that are indisputably better. Sorry, but I'm a fan of the NFL, and what you propose is even worse than giving out participation trophies. Let me throw this one at you - - how about if we improve enough so that we deserve to be in the playoffs?

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Which one?

Sorry. I was going for a twofer on the spur of the foment.

This thread is a real henway

So tell me Luke Skywalker, why would a team that drafts higher than # 8 even waste any time wondering about which player the Bills want to take at # 8? That would matter to a team drafting in slots 1-7 only if that team was planning to trade down below # 8, but would make absolutely no difference whatsoever to a team that was planning to use picks 1-7 to actually take a player without a trade. If you think any NFL GM is going to evaluate a player drafted in slots 1-7 based on public comments of some OTHER NFL team's GM, you haven't been paying attention. Disinformation about what Nix plans to do with pick # 8 might affect the plans of teams that (1) already have a later pick (because they might be induced to believe that they need to trade up to get the player they want), or (2) are thinking that they can trade down from slots 1-7 to below # 8 and still get the player they want because he won't be picked sooner (by the Bills or anyone else). The only teams that could NOT be influenced by disinformation about who the Bills plan to take with pick # 8 are exactly those teams that you mistakenly think are being targeted by the disinformation.

History has a wastebin?

More importantly, how thick is his superior temporal sulcus? http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/155421-mckelvin-may-have-a-thin-superior-temporal-sulcus/page__hl__sulcus

In something akin to the original spirit of this thread (now I've offended family) :

According to an NBC News website, there were some homes in the area when the fertilizer distribution center/plant was built, but a subdivision, the nursing home and schools were built LATER. It's easier to blame corporations than the people who "came to the nuisance." Would you force the fertilizer company to move because others chose to build a subdivision, a nursing home and schools near their existing site? http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/19/17818046-texas-fertilizer-plant-also-stored-explosive-chemical-used-in-oklahoma-city-bomb?lite

Thought this was interesting: http://hypervocal.com/news/2013/marathon-waco-survivor-japan-bombs/

Saw one I liked yesterday on a pickup truck: "Driver Carries No Cash He's MARRIED." Better yet, the word "married" had a thin blue diagonal line through it using what looked like painter's trim tape.

How do you say "uh-oh" in Chinese? http://news.yahoo.com/china-says-investigating-human-human-spread-bird-flu-044438853.html

I should have called it "predatory pricing" (when you sell a product below cost to drive a smaller competitor out of business) rather than "price-fixing" (which is something different). http://www.cleveland...titors_que.html Not sure if the net effect of a "ridiculously" large rebate would be selling below cost, but it seems possible. In any event, it sounds like one of Flying J's competitors is speculating that the investigation may involve anti-competitive business practices by Flying J. Maybe that's just wishful thinking by the competitor - - we'll see.

http://www.latimes.c...,0,753185.story Am I the only one who wants to know what the guy's hat actually said?

Just a wild-a$$ guess, but since you're inviting them . . . (a) Some sort of price-fixing or antitrust investigation? Do they have enough locations and market power to (1) price diesel fuel for big rigs below cost to force smaller competitors out of business, and then (2) charge monopoly prices after they "own" the market? Not saying they've done that, but any business that controls a large percentage of a given market (for any product) has the potential to illegally monopolize their market. Not sure why that would involve IRS agents, though, unless they were keeping 2 sets of books to somehow try to hide their true pricing practices. (b) for gasoline, part of the cost we all pay at the pump is state and federal taxes - - my guess (it's just a guess) is that it's the same for diesel fuel. So maybe they falsely reported the amount of federal fuel tax that they are required to pay the government, and kept some for themselves? Both are just wild guesses.

You may already know this, but I believe (not 100% certain) that if you ever roll over funds from one tax-deferred account to another, the exact amount of the rollover must be reported to the IRS by your financial institution, and you are required to report the amount of the rollover on your own tax return. Not the same thing as continuous tracking of your accounts, but something to be aware of if government intrusion in your financial affairs concerns you.

Quite true. Out of all the jabs at my screen name that have been posted, my oldest brother Darryl liked this one the best.

Sorry to hear about Oscar, but what happened to the cat?

I thought this thread was going to be about throwing over the middle to T.J. Graham on consecutive plays during a thunderstorm.

Is there anything in the NFL Rules that explicitly prevents the Bills from suiting up a robot? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22141438 What if the robot was an atomically correct one? Get your mind out of the gutter - - I'm talking about body parts that are mentioned in the existing rulebook, like a runner being down when his knee touches the ground or a receiver catching a ball with both feet in bounds. Might end the concussion problem for all intensive purposes, and would encourage the brainy kids to study robotics so they could help their school's athletic departments and actually get laid once in a while. NCAA national championship football game in 2026 - - MIT vs. Cal Tech. Heck, they let Arnold Schwartzenagger "act" in movies and be a governor - - so why can't the Bills turn the tables and suit up a robot to play football? Give me one good reason.

Typically less than 1/16. From the article you posted: From Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/02/04/congratulations-to-the-baltimore-ravens-now-pay-your-louisiana-tax-bill/ When the Bills play a regular season game in CA, they typically don't spend six days in the state like they might for a CA Super Bowl game. And from the LA Times: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/12/sports/sp-jock-tax12 NFL players who establish permanent residency in a no-income tax state like Texas or Florida can arrange their affairs so that the up-front bonus in their contracts (a significant part of their pay that is not included in each game day check) doesn't get hit by any state income taxes. As a practical matter the little guys you mention don't have that option, although if they are year-round employees maybe the percentage hit is less for them because they might have a higher number of total "duty days" than the athletes.

Or the Costco new car buying program? Any insights appreciated.