The Dean

Well of that I'm positive.

Perhaps I'm the idiot here. Wouldn't be the first time.

You say that as if it was a bad thing.

Life's big questions. Certainly something to ponder.

I'd be surprised if the Bills can offer France a position that can top owning his own agency. But I've been surprised before.

Yes, that seems like what he is doing, I guess. I wish he'd explain his methodology a bit more. But as I said, I believe his grades are, for the most part, pretty decent. And, I;d like to believe, once he catches up, Kujo will be a significant upgrade if he can possibly play guard. By now, I'm a little surprised they don't try Hairsotn at guard. I understand he's the swing tackle (and TE occasionally). And I guess as long as it isn't terribly broken there isn't a need to change it right now.

Personally I can't stand fruit (orange, lime, lemon) in my beer. If a beer needs a piece of fruit in it, it wasn't made correctly in the first place. That's just IMO and I realize others disagree.

For what it's worth, I don't mean the guy makes up stats, or invents quotes. I don't believe he is blatantly dishonest. And perhaps he has corrected a factual error, though I personally have never read a retraction from him. But if you guys have seen it, then I will take that as confirmation. Has Sully simply corrected factual errors, or admitted to drawing the wrong conclusions? That's an important distinction. And, of course, on occasion Sully writes an article that isn't negative. But I ask you, during the years the Bills won four straight AFC championships, were his articles overwhelmingly positive? You;d think they would be, right? I mean that was a GREAT team. Check it out.

I haven't received anything.

Maximus Super was a cheap malt liquor made by Utica Club (I think) or maybe Matts. Back then they didn't label beer with the precise alcohol content. I'd guess is was somewhere between 7%-8%. Seemed like more back then. The closes thing I can think of to compare it to is Steel Reserve. Needless to say, it was not a high end product.

I'm guessing the grade is based on the 4.0. And, if that's the case, for the most part, I can live with his grades. What I don't get is the +/- on plays. Just for an example, let's use EJ as it's a bit easier to focus on the QB without watching further tape. His grade of 2.7 seems about right. But is he actually saying EJ made as many negative plays as he did positive plays? Doesn't every good pass count as a positive play? If you don't want to use EJ, then pick an offensive lineman. Wouldn't you count every time the OL kept EJ free from pressure on a pass play, or open a home for an RB a positive play? I'm guessing a bad pass, or a missed blocking assignment counts as a negative play, which seems right. But I can't figure out why there are so few positive plays. I mean just about every player makes far more positive plays than negative plays. So does he every really explain what it takes for him to count a play as "positive"? Are the plays he is discussing the only positive plays he sees? And, again for example, does he count the unsuccessful pass to Watkins as a positive (great throw) or a negative (not a TV)? I admit it's hard for me to focus tonight, but perhaps somebody can explain in terms I can understand. Don't use big words, OK?

We used to "shoot" cans of it.

I have to disagree, His best days are a few years behind him now. He's just a good CB now. Nothing more. IMO,. As QBs start to throw more in his directions that will become clear. He'll still get a few picks, but good WRs will have some success against him.

Remember Maximus Super?

Well I'm thinking they will load on the run to a degree. But if they are counting on "Revis Island" they may be making a big mistake. First of all Revis is one guy and the Bills have several dangerous receivers. And let us not forget Revis isn't much of an island anymore. He's a good CB, no doubt. But is he even in the top echelon any more?

Actually, NO., Being objective is most definately NOT his job. It is Mark Gaughan's job and Tim Graham's job. They are reporters. Sully is a columnist. His job is to be aggressively subjective. He writes his OPINION. As for being correct, well I suppose in the most general of ways, Sully says the Bills stink and the Bills have stunk, so he has been correct much of the time. But if you look more closely at what he writes, his reasoning is often flawed. Clearly he is wrong sometime, right? I mean nobody is right all the time. Does Sully ever write retractions? Does he mea cupla for his mistakes? I haven't read one. Because being correct isn't his job, either. Well, at least you got part of this right. He is an opinion columnist. In fact, pretty much by definition reporters are paid to be objective--quite the opposite of what columnists are paid to do. The exception might be "reporters" who work directly for teams/organizations, but then again, they really aren't reporters in the true sense. Of course, nobody can be totally objective, but unless they are really bad at their job, they should make an attempt to be objective. Reporters who act as "cheerleaders" aren't respected in the industry. But I've mislead you just a bit. In truth, Sully isn't paid for his opinion. The Buffalo Snooze couldn't give a damn about Sully's opinion. Sully's real job is to attract readers who the paper, in turn, sells to advertisers. The more readers he attracts, the more the newspaper likes him. Objectivity and truth/facts are completely irrelevant to his position. Of course, being negative isn't the only way for a columnist to share his opinion. A columnist CAN be a cheerleader or, God forbid, be thoughtful and clear headed----promote reasonable, level-headed and intelligent discussion. But if your job is to attract readership, what's the easiest path? Go negative! Promote controversy, even if there isn't any. That's become the way of sports talk--starting with radio and now a big part of what ESPN does as well (especially in the morning). And, unfortunately, that's become the mentality of so many posters on Internet sports forums. Guys get labeled "Busts", sometimes before they have even played one game. Players who aren't fully developed SUCK. People think they are expert GMs and know exactly where a guy should have been drafted, because, well every GM has the same take on things. I mean, having reasonable and intelligent discussions? C'mon that would take actual thought--considering the opinions of others--taking a measured stance when evaluation players and coaches. Who wants to do that? BORING! So you can see why a guy like Sully can attract some readership, and why some love him. It's easy to read and be entertained by that level of "journalism". Of course, some read him because he writes a column in the sports section and they read everything about the Bills. Maybe they really are entertained to some degree--some people enjoy professional wrestling and Judge Judy, too. Me? I stopped reading Sully in the paper years ago when I lived in WNY, unless I had already finished the other articles and was still sitting on the toilet. Gotta read something, right? Now I only read him if I click on a link without realizing it's Sully. I don't actively seek him out, but if I'm already there, and I have nothing to do, what the hell, right? So I don't read him too much these days, but enough to know he hasn't gotten any better.

Once again, 26, an outstanding job bringing so many disparate links to one thread. Thank you for continuing to take the time to do this. Well they say revenge is a dish best served cold---and old, apparently. Last week I was very confident the Bills would not have a letdown week. There were just too many good, and exciting, things happening for the players to get complacent for their home opener against Miami. While I don't expect them to have a letdown week this Sunday, I'm not nearly as certain it can't happen. OTOH, San Diego having upset Seattle, and on the road--all the way across the country---is also ripe for an off week. This should be a good one.

My favorite this week is, for the CBS late game, Tampa and Panama City are getting the Denver/Seattle game. That is a much better game than the game the rest of Florida is getting: KC and Miami. You'e expect that market to get the Miami game, no? Perhaps they have someone at the local station willing to go head to head with the network to get the game they know will be better. It's not easy to do, but I used to do it all the time in San Francisco. NBC would assign us a game and I'd spend half a day negotiating to get the game we thought would be better (this was in the early 90's and we ended up taking a LOT of Bills games ). I hear they've tightened that up a bit since those days. But I'm guessing that's what happened here. Another possibility is the network had to make a few adjustments to increase coverage on the Denver/Seattle game to cover the guarantees made to advertisers.

Can't think of a reason, Kirby. Maybe someone has a personal grudge we don't know about. But at this level, knowing their negative vote would have no impact, I can't see any purpose in that empty exercise.

I believe there are still a few on this board who believe JBJ (with the backing of the NFL) still has a very good chance to get the Bills and move them directly to Toronto. After all, if the NFL wants that outcome (which they obviously do---haven't you people been paying attention), that will be the outcome. Just wait for the Big Surprise, when the owners unanimously reject Pegula and instate JBJ in an NFL coup for the ages.

I don't think it would have been inappropriate for the Pegulas to simply attend the game. I mean, they have at least as much of a right to go to a Bills game as anyone right now. But I agree it may have been inappropriate for it to have been a publicized thing or made into an event. I suppose, given the fact that just attending the game may have turned into a "thing", Pegula made the call to stay away.

Thanks. A bit surprised actually. But maybe with everything going on, it was better for him to keep a low profile. Save it for another day when the Bills (and the crowd) need a bit of a boost.

Poppycock GG, (And I typically agree with most of what you have to say.) By ANY NFL standard it was a great throw, In stride, in his hands. Should have been caught, actually, as Watkins had both hands on the ball. The defensive back made a great play. The QB isn't expected to be psychic. While the ball is in the air, DBs can and do make adjustments. Sometimes "perfect" throws get successfully defended. Sometimes a poor throw has a better chance of being successful, because of the position, and the adjustment, of the DB. In order for that throw to be totally undefendable by the DB it might have had to be a throw where the WR has to make a difficult catch. And then we'd hear how the WR balled out EJ,. Established QBs have WRs make great catches all the time. And they get the credit for throwing behind the WR (to keep it away from the DB), or laying it out where only the WR can get it. EJ doesn't get that credit yet, and I understand that. It is earned over time. But we wouldn't be having the discussion over whether that was a great throw if Manning, or Brady, threw it. It would be understood. EJ made a nice completion, slightly behind Watkins (I think), Not to the point where he had to reach back, but not leading him either. A guy at the bar complained it was a bad throw because it didn't hit him in stride. On the replay I pointed out, a throw that would have hit him in stride, may have also been successfully defended by the DB who was closing in quickly. My point is, this micro analysis of every EJ pass is getting ridiculous. Perfect pass? What the hell does that really mean? Clearly it was a terrific throw, and a great defensive play. I actually think the more we see Bills WRs make great plays, the better it suggest EJ is playing.

Were the Pegulas at the Bills game Sunday?

Hard to say. But I am very fond of Old Rasputin Russian Imperial Stout. http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/112/412/ Samuel Smith's Imperial Stout is also excellent. And Rouge Brewery's Shakespeare Stout isn't too bad, either. For industrial beer I tend to like Molson Stock Ale (not available in the USA). Newcastle Brown Ale is pretty good for a 4% alcohol beer. Great beer. But I find the Unibroue beers a bit on the sweet side for me. Once in a while though....