KRC

He just hasn't hit his growth spurt yet.

How about JP playing an entire season before we put his bust next to Kelly's in Canton.

Let's not forget the infamous Sean Penn incident.

This whole "One Year Later" thingy is more about he media's own self-importance than it is about the event itself. It is to the point of being nauseating. It is one thing to see whether there is progress in rebuilding, but I am seeing more and more stories about how the media covered the event, the impact of the media on the event, how great the media was during the event, personal diaries of the reporters who covered the event, etc. The event itself is secondary.

People expect the media to wear the same rose-colored glasses that they wear. If the media does not come across as Bills homers, then "they are idiots," "they don't know what they are talking about," blah...blah...blah. The same thing happens here when someone posts a comment that does not have the Bills in the Superbowl every year.

NO BLOOD FOR TREES!!! WHEN CLINTON LIED, NO TREES DIED!! WE ONLY INVADED IRAQ TO GET TREES!!!

It is much easier to have people hand you your opinion on issues than it is to actually find the truth yourself. Until this attitude changes (and the unconstitutional election laws change), you will continue to get election choices like Bush vs. Kerry.

Great. Now SilverNRed is going to go postal on Fez.

The main issue people B word about is having paper trails (that and security of the machines from tampering). My county spent a crap-load of money to get new electronic voting machines. Now, everyone is happy. Of course, the main reason why they bitched (no paper trail) still has not been solved because the new machines do not provide a paper trail, but it allows the politicians the ability to continue to B word about something when they lose. It is obviously not their fault that they lost. It has to be a conspiracy.

Good thought, but that would cut into his political aspirations. Ain't gonna happen. No problem with this. He would get stopped real quick on this. There is no way anyone, even within his party, would put a stop to this. There is too much at stake. People may actually vote with their hearts. Stuff like that needs to be stopped. ...but, that would go against the "whiney little B word" persona he has worked so hard to attain. Yup.

Stop. Both of you. Next person to post about this crap gets a vacation. M'kay?

Ladies...Let's not bring the Dresden thread here. M'kay?

It is hard to tell if this is against the rules, because nobody can figure out what the fvck you are talking about.

It is well beyond ridiculous at this point. He needs someone around him who will just slap the ever-loving sh-- out of him whenever he wants to make comments like this and still thinks he has a chance at the Presidential nomination. The only way he gets the nod is if the Dems toss out people even more retarded than Kerry, which is not out of the realm of possibility.

What is the evidence of the alleged abuse of power by the Secretary of State? The fact that he lost? Fvcking whiner.

We have now passed the point of no return. It is obvious that no reasonable discussion will happen after this, so the thread will close.

So, to apply this to the topic at hand, the defenses cancel each other out, the QB's cancel each other out, injuries cancel each other out, etc? Sorry. Not buying it.

Let me see if I get this straight...Anything that ruins your hypothesis can be ignored for the simple fact that it ruins your hypothesis? You make assumptions like "well, it probably wouldn't make an impact. I have nothing to support this claim, but since it goes against what I am proving, I am just going to ignore it and make up what I want to be the truth." That explains why I could never be a statistician. You can just make crap up and just ignore things that do not support your theories.

Remember what Paul went through when he posted long diatribes on subjects. Some people already have their mind made up.

I would agree with your assessment. They are getting decent numbers out of Davis. There was no reason to get Bush when they had other more pressing needs. That is why you cannot focus on just one thing when evaluating winning percentages (thus making this statistical analysis useless). As Bill_from_NYC mentioned, you need balance. If you have a great OL, you can still lose. None of this was addressed in the analysis.

Where in PA?

There are too many variables to make this statistical analysis meaningful. What is the relative strength of the rest of your offensive unit? How is your defensive unit? You might be able to put a lot of points on the board, but if your defense cannot stop the opposition, it does not matter when it comes to winning. What about the strength of the other teams in your division/conference? How do injuries to your skill players affect the outcome of games? While your premise of "a team needs a good offensive line if it's going to win games" may be good, the proof is not conclusive as it does not take into account other factors towards the success of a team (in fact, it just ignores them).

I really do not have a favorite from the current team. All-Time would be Tom Day. One of the nicest players I have ever met. Booker Edgerson and Ernie Warlick are honorable mentions.

Damn, he is older than I thought. HFB!!

The archives only go back so far due to a database issue. What you found is all you are going to get, unfortunately.