The Dean

You asked if he played today. It was an ignorant comment.

I saw the same thing. Blew by the tackle, but was way too deep to make any impact.

Trent also threw another deep pass to him in the 2nd Q (incomplete) and he was the target when Trent overthrew him for the INT. I guess if you think a WR only has value when he catches TD passes, then, yes I guess he was expensive today. But the TD pass and the two other attempts to Lee down the field is what the Bills need to do to loosen up the D. Did you notice Owens had single coverage (no Safety help, either) on the TD? Does that happen without Lee on the other side?

Details

I think that was meant for me. I rarely use either of those words on this forum. The horrible thought of Rosie nude must have affected my sense of dignity. EDIT: No avatar, Hazed?

I don't recall ever seeing Rosie's breasts in that movie, thank God.

Remember The VW Thing?

Check out Exit to Eden sometime. Lousy movie, but Dana looks great in it.

I dig the looks of most of those cars (Cube, Element, VehiCross Smart Car). I don't like the paint job on the Smart Car, but I like the car.

You make my point. I owe you a call. Tomorrow. -b

"Laura Bush killed a guy" -Peter Griffin

Jauron isn't a bad coach because of what he says to the press. He's a bad coach because of how he coaches on gameday. Who gives a rat's ass what he says if the team wins? And who cares what he says if the team loses? You miss the point when you point out meaningless crap like this.

Lono is very good, IMO. If you like politics you can't go wrong with F&L on the Campaign Trail. I really enjoyed his collection of articles/short stories: Generation of Swine: Tales of Shame and Degradation in the '80s and Songs of the Doomed : More Notes on the Death of the American Dream. They are great bathroom books, that can be read when you don't have much time. EDIT: But if you are looking for more tales of degradation, from a different perspective, I'd recommend a little Bukowski. Try Factotum or Post Office, for starters.

Liability in pass coverage? Winfield is one of the league's premier cover CBs. He is a better cover CB than Nate, IMO. His size can be problematic, but that is true of most CBs in the NFL when going against the taller WRs in the league. Antoine is left on an island more than most NFL CBs. Do you see him regularly getting burned, or even exploited? Nate is a more opportunistic CB to be sure, but that's really the only area where he is better than Winfield (and the 3 extra inches help him. too).

Skip the class.

Awesome avatar, Woody.

Collinsworth was REALLY stretching it on that last INT. Maybe if the WR didn't fall down he might have broken the INT up, but Cutler threw the ball to the CB. He also regularly threw the ball into multi-coverage. Sometimes you have to trust your eyes, and not the announcers. Tonight they were covering for Jay.

I watched the Pens quite a bit, back then. Our recollections differ, I guess.

I hear ya. I'm laughing for every INT, or near INT, he throws. So I'm laughing a LOT tonight. Of course, I admire the beautiful long passes he completes, too.

Fletch was terrific, as always (or as usual, anyway). To tell the truth, I don't remember Orakpo doing anything. But I missed some plays.

Agreed. I'm no Cutler fan, and I think he is way overrated. But this isn't the time to make any real observation of his play. Time will tell if he can overcome his bad decision making.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting Mario was a banger. But he did throw the occasional check and I can't remember him hiding along the boards while the action was taking place at the other end of the ice. EDIT: And Mario did take his share of abuse, as you noted. Wayne was usually left alone by the checkers...and of course, he was hard to hit.

Are you suggesting College football isn't a sideshow for Toyota Tundra ads? I watched plenty of exciting NFL football today. Of course, I can appreciate solid defensive football as much as I do sloppy high scoring games.

You should know by now, my observations are usually far more nuanced and complex than that. It has nothing to do with what is right or wrong about having fun. (Your interpretation of my statement.) I think people should have fun any way they like, as long as it doesn't infringe on the fun of others. I think I made it clear that I liked it, so I think it is fun. But the increased focus on watching the "hot action" comes at a price. Just as the plethora of "highlights" has affected the way many understand football, it seems likely this hot-pockets version of watching football will further diminish the understanding of, and appreciation for, the more mundane (but vitally important) aspects of the game. Does the way we view the game eventually have an impact on the game itself? I don't have enough evidence to make a sound conclusion, but my gut tells me it does.

Didn't Mario also engage in other aspects of the game, like checking for example? Wayne was simply outstanding, but he was allowed to hide and stay away from much physical action. I think Mario was a more complete hockey player, but Gretzky had the better career, to be sure.