eSJayDee
-
Posts
1,763 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by eSJayDee
-
-
It's called a suicide onside for a reason.
If you catch the interior of the front line snoozing & running back to block - perfect, easy recovery by the kicker.
If they're actually doing what they're supposed to do, well, what happens to the kicker is why it gets its name.
-
I think the main question you have to ask yourself is, "Do you feel lucky punk?"
No, seriously the question is how long you intend to hold onto it. You're interested in minimizing your cost of driving it. Consider that you're essentially 'renting' or paying for how much you're gonna use it.
If you're going to hold onto it for many years (i.e. until it's essentially worthless), it's simple to compare it to a new 2005. What's the relative value of the warrantee/service; also the difference in equipment. This should be a relatively simple thing for you to evaluate.
Now, if you're only going to hold onto it for a year or 2, guess what, when you trade it in, you're going to be trading in a 5 yr old vehicle & it's value will be based accordingly. So it'll probably end up costing you more than driving a 2005.
Since the vehicle is 'new', I suspect that the dealer will be basing it's price accordingly, albeit w/ hopefully a steep discount. In which case, it will only make sense to buy it if you intend to hold onto it for several years.
Good luck.
-
Get a different job. Simple solution! Priorities, man.
-
I can only assume that the primary reason for drafting Anderson was to replace Fat Pat. This seems to be TDs MO in that he drafts a player a year b4 he needs to replace a soon to be expensive FA. Obviously SA & PW are top notch. Edwards seems to be able to contribute as well (I think he has like 4 sacks). Bannan is competent, so that's why Anderson is constantly inactive.
Sorta seems like TD subscribed to Levy's old adage that the only good rookie is last years.
-
He did fumble a few games ago -- I think against the Jests.
I don't know if that was a fumble or not. I meant to look it up in the stats after, but forgot. It's entirely possible that he had already been ruled down &/or forward progress stopped on that play, in which case there was no fumble.
-
MW is NOT LT material. LTs are typically more agile & quicker than RTs as the usually face the better pass rushers. I think most teams typically are right oriented w/ respect to running (usually the strong side). Those are 2 reasons why MW is better suited for the right side. As for Peters, if the guy was a TE & he covers KOs, one can only assume he can motor, which probably translates to being more agile & mobile. He is suited for LT, although I can only assume he'll be very raw & not likely desirable to start next year.
-
I disagree w/ you w/ respect to the 'we' pronoun. After 30 years of being an avid fan and the associated emotions and strong attachment to the team, I definitely feel that the Bills are 'my' team. (Okay, maybe some others feel that way, too.) Consequently, due to that close association, I often use 'we' and feel it's quite appropriate.
Just MHO.
-
One possible theory is that there's less of a collision if you're hit when you're in the air as opposed to anchored to the turf. This is contrary to the appearance, but it could a) cut down on the possibility of injury & B) allow him to recover from a solid hit & keep on running also possibly the less severe impact might provide a better opportunity to catch the ball.
-
What, no obligatory link to that PeterPan guy?
-
Sure, where were you last week when I had a bloody curtain, oops, I mean drape?
-
all I could think of was the WKRP In Cincy show and the Turkey episode.
...And there's a banner behind it. It says, "Happy {pause} Thanks {pause} Giving. From {pause} W {long pause} K {long pause} R {long pause} P."
-
I brought up a related topic a few days ago, & unfortunately, we don't know if our non-Moulds receivers suck or if they are decent, but not given the opportunity to contribute.
I'm inclined to think that Reed at least for the time being, doesn't have it (he certainly gave indications his rookie year that he could be decent). Beyond that, who knows. Watching on TV, you never see any others enough to tell even whether they're open or not, let alone if they can catch consistently.
-
I think your reasoning should lead to a different conclusion. Everyone gets hurt or has the chance to get hurt occasionally. And when they do, sometimes they miss multiple games. Take for example, Malloy - he just missed like 6-7 weeks of action through preseason, bye-week, etc. Does that make him injury prone? No, as a matter of fact, these were the 1st games he's missed in his career! IIRC, something like 130+ straight games. All players, heck even us 'weekend warriors', frequently have minor ailments, but your Milloys, Teagues & Henrys manage to play w/ them. For your RJs, Jennings, etc. these minor problems are sufficient to sideline them.
Is it their fault that they are prone to getting hurt more frequently &/or more severely than their counterparts w/ stronger constitutions? No, but just like you or I are inferior and unable to produce on the field to them due to our inferior size, strength & speed, so too are 'injury prone' players less productive (& valuable) than those that are healthy enough too contribute.
-
The only reason not to start him is if he is still injured.
I'd like to clarify/ point out, that beyond being healthy enough to play, it would also be of great benefit for him to have gotten in adequate practice time. All indications are that that is not yet the case. Hopefully, now that he's sufficiently healed to play in a game, he's getting about 50% of the 'real' snaps in practice.
-
Everybody Wants Some is still my all-time "turn it up to 11" song.
Everytime I hear that song, I picture a claymation hamburger playing an EVH style guitar.
-
As is their MO for many games, they improved in the 2nd 1/2. Granted, part of that is attributable to the fact that NE already knew that they had scored more than enough to offset the realistic chance of our offense getting a lucky TD. (The only chance we had was if they continued to score FGs and our KO team managed to return a few for TDs
) If you think about it, our defense only gave up 2 TDs, the 3rd down %age was avg. Considering the TOTAL lack of aide that our offense provided, their production really wasn't that bad.
I'm of the opinion that we have a top 10 Dee, not a top 3. (I think part of their statistical success is due to opponents playing 'close to the vest' as our offensive ineptitude doesn't require many points to be scored.) Yes, the Dee had a bad day, but probably only to the statistical level of slightly below avg. had they had a bit of help from the Oh.
-
Right now, we have a top ten defense, probably one of the more productive ST units and a bottom 5 offense. You can view these #s as either statistical ranking or objective quality. Assuming we're able to maintain our defensive & ST talent levels, elevating our offensive to the level of mediocrity should be sufficient to have us vie for playoffs. Remember, there's 12 playoff teams & 20 not. So depending on the relative value of each aspect (Dee, Off & ST) a rank in the middle offensively, puts us in the lower echelon of playoff caliber.
I realize that statistical (or subjective quality) ratings do not perfectly equate to playoff standing/ranking, but I think they're a pretty positive indicator.
-
Speaking as a dog owner (of a big ass dog that likes to chase bikes (& the occasional car)) I would suggest that since you know where the dog lives, stop by & talk to the owner. As you mention, the problem is w/ the owner, not the dog. I'm sure (well, relatively sure. Dog food is pretty expensive you know
) he doesn't want the dog catching you & causing harm. Hopefully, talking him will cause him to be more attentive to his dogs behavior. Might I also suggest carrying something like a whistle or put a horn on your bike so you can announce your pending arrival. If this doesn't work, I suggest you contact the local Animal Control. -
According to NFL.com (which coincides w/ my approximate recollection) 12 of Bledsoe's 19 passes were intended for Moulds.
Is this due to Bledsoe having poor field vision, play design or do our other receivers just suck that much?
I realize that Moulds is by far our best receiving threat but common man, how 'bout distributing the ball a bit.
-
Look at it this way -
Just see how much the home field means to us. When we're home, we're relatively competent & competitive.
Guess the 12th man is in competition w/ Moorman for our MVP.
-
I'd like to see him kept, but only at a reasonable cost (like that's a novel concept).
He's a good, not great tackle, so the concept of franchising him would be very imprudent . (I would guess it would require a 1 yr salary & cap figure in the range of $10m!) He certainly ain't worth that.
As everyone points out, he is injury prone which requires having a solid BU, which we have in Price. W/o him, Price starts (a downgrade IMO) & on top of that, you have no one solid & proven to come off the bench.
If we could sign him for multiple yrs, w/ a signing bonus $8-10m & avg $4-5m/yr, I'd be happy. Not much more than that.
-
Who'd you rather have on your team, Denney or Erik Flowers?
Think of it this way - what do you think the odds are of Denney making the team next year and if he doesn't, unable to sign anywhere else where he has much of a chance of seeing significant playing time. That will be his 4th year, correct? That means that his career lasted longer than average AND he saw significant playing time.
Certainly, he wasn't all that we had hoped for and further, if assuming we did indeed give up a 3rd & 4th to move up to take him (I'm too lazy to confirm this & don't remember), I'd say there's probably about even odds that you'd get at least as good of production out of at least one of the other choices.
So I would categorize it as a 'poor' use of draft choice(s), but would not consider him a bust.
Basically, for any given place a player is taken, there's a range of expected production. I'd say he's fallen at the lower end of average about a std. deviation or so below.
-
I don't look at it as belittling what our armed forced (& other military units) do in the least. In one respect, I suppose you can consider it a sort of tribute, i.e. these particular ST units are attemping to emulate certain characteristics or goals of military units.
Personally, after reading the article, I sorta consider it juvenile. In order to be motivated to do their jobs, the highly paid professionals have to resort to a form of hero worship.
-
Extended Version?
Does this mean that they're going to cover to the end of the book in the movie (i.e. their return to Hobbit land), too, or just extra scenes?
Probably just the latter.
The best thing about this game too me was..
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Actually, I was kind of nervous about what sort of 2nd half adjustments JG was going to make. They were so effective in the 1st half, I was afraid they were going to try & outsmart themselves.
I think that's about the 1st game where our Dee has been stymying (sp?, or is that a word) in the 1st half. (Maybe the dull-fins, but they don't count.) They played very well in the 2nd as well.