eSJayDee

It had to be said - Randy Cross=RJ

That was good for a laugh.

To clarify what I was getting at - I realize the money isn't excessive & therefore isn't the issue. Also, draining & replacing coolant is REALLY simple, so I assume you really want to flush it. (I'd recommend doing it BTW, I had a radiator clog up after < 20k miles likely 'cuz I didn't flush it. Granted it was more than 10 years.) The main reason why I'd suggest having it done is that although here in NYS any place that does radiator work is required to take your old coolant (for free AFAIK), as I mentioned, is it really worth toting maybe 15 gals of stuff to a garage. Whaddaya going to put it in?

The problem w/ flushing the system yourself is what to do w/ the waste fluid. To fully flush the system, figure you're going to be outputing at least 3x your coolant capacity; for some cars, that's > 15 gals. You can't just pour it down the drain. If it's only $40, I'd suggest having it done.

Don't know if it's a real movie, but "Mr. Holland groped us"?

Yes, in the scrubs when the other doc met them.

Heck, the Colts probably score more TDs from outside the 20 than we do total.

Hey, since it's almost Thanksgiving time, what about Alice's Restaurant ? Does that count, 'cuz I think it was a movie made based on the song. As an aside, do we know of any other movies made from songs?

Speaking of Elton John, the song he did w/ KiKi Dee, I thought he/she/they were saying "I've got you hiding my socks", rather than "I've got your heart in my sights"

Pilsner? Something like that. It's hard to recall, cuz they didn't mention him very much.

Poor quality video, but looks like the king took Favre's lower arm w/ him, too.

Unless he can play defense, having him around this year wouldn't fix our primary problem.

1st, kudos to Wire for an excellent open field tackle, which I believe was his 1st of the year. It looked like he was beaten around the corner for what would've been a game icing long gain. Besides being his customary 4th man in the pile on ST, he apparently got an assist somewhere during the game according to the state sheet. As for Milloy, unless he uses his broken hand to hold the jockstrap that he's being faked out of w/ increasing frequency, that's not his only problem. So whadda we do at SS?

I was thinking the same thing b4 the play (BTW, I think you're right about Bishop. He had an arm that made Bledsoe look weak.) I figured that JP could throw farther & also elude the rush better. Little did I know that the play call was a 5 yard pass then hopefully about 10 laterals. JP would've been better suited for this as well.

Looking at the stats, we pretty well beat them across the board. We even held them 1-7 on 3rd downs and converted 7-14 ourselves. Watching the game, I felt we dominated until the end. One wonders how you only lead 3-0 at the half after that performance. Anbyway, back to my point - the one stat that is indicative of why we lost. Red Zone efficiency. Bills 0-3, Patsies 2-2.

I remember way back when I saw Halloween at the theater when it came out on Halloween. Good movie, but didn't do a thing for/to me. Went to a friends house & saw Phantasm on cable; scared the excrement outta me. Running home & kept looking over my shoulder afraid some weird tall lanky guy would be chasing me yelling, "Boy".

You've got a point that we really shouldn't be alarmed that we haven't had a 300 yard passes in years. To some extent, it's a good thing. Also, since there's usually only 2 or 3 a week, it probably isn't that much of a statistical aberration. What is VERY disturbing, however is that we haven't had a 200 yard passer in like 11 games. That's gotta be indicative of a bad passing offense, especially since we've lost roughly 1/2 those games.

I believe typically the 'film' that opposing players see of their opponents is only of the actual play (this was why teams way back when were taken by the pace of our no-huddle) not any pre-play. Granted, for example, to some extent a DL who is going to drop back in coverage might be prone to leaning backwards rather than forward (much like OL can tip off run or pass) but I don't think opponents are going to get much of an opportunity to see these things. You might well have a valid point that we've exhausted our playbook (guess LeBeau only left Gray so much) and they've seen all that we can or might throw at them. I tend to think that the problem lies in 2 areas. 1) our defensive plan yields excellent results against poor offenses (we played quite a few last year) but is merely mediocre at best against better teams and 2) several of our key contributors are at a point in their careers where their play is far more likely to decline rather than improve.

I think the theory is that since there's no safety help (they're blitzing &/or covering LBs spots) that if they connect on a pass & the CB is beaten & is playing too close, it's a TD. I surmise that the theory/hope is that the blitz is successful & even if they attempt a short pass, the QB won't have anytime & is therefore likely to be off target. Of course, if the blitz isn't successful...

I don't think I've seen this yet, but what about... Jerry's kids

I think our worse defensive production can be explained largely by 2 things: 1) The design of our overly aggressive defense is such that it can really beat up on poor teams but is susceptable to better offenses. Last years #s were greatly padded by the fact that we played some pretty poor offenses w/ downright lame QBs. 2) I mentioned this in the pre-season as a possible concern & unfortunately, I'm beginning to think it might be true - our dee is in decline due to many contributors being on the wrong side of the career hill. Our 3 starting LBs (meaning Spikes), Fat Sam & our 2 safeties could all be in decline. Not much, but it doesn't take much to make the difference between being successful & failing on a play.

Unfortunately, there's several terms in football that aren't accurate. A reverse is usually an end around; I don't ever recall seeing an actual double reverse (unless what you consider what McGee does on KO returns ) A couple of weeks ago, the announcer referred to a pump-fake followed by a delayed handoff as a Statue of Liberty. For that matter, when did 'defense' ever become a verb? I could probably think of more, this is just what's off the top of my head.

Free kicks after a safety are from the 20, so it's only a gain of about 10 yards. But you do have the advantage that he doesn't need to rush the punt. Also, as I mentioned w/ respect to killing more time, I assume Free kicks are like KOs in that w/ less than 2 minutes left, the clock won't start until after thew receiver has touched the ball, so the question is can Moorman waste more than the 5 or so seconds that he'll lose in hangtime. (I wish my dog hadn't eaten most of my rule book.) I think it (taking the safety) was the prudent move, but not doing so is not what I would consider a blunder, merely an imprudent choice.

Yes. At least once the week after the game & sometimes once during the off-season. I think a lot of people on this board do the same.

Just finished rEWATCHING THE GAME, & I recall wondering this at the time. There was 30 seconds left, Moorman was going to be punting from about his 10 & we were up by 6. Why not take the intentional safety? We'd gain about 10 yards, allow Moorman to not rush his kick & eliminate any chance of a block or other mess up. Additionally, we could have burned a few extra seconds off the clock. (I assume on the ensuing free kick, the clock wouldn't start until Mia fielded the kick so the extra time expended would be minimal as you'd lose the ~5 seconds of hangtime.)