Buftex

Unfortunately, the age of internet journalism...be the first to get the story out, even if all the details are incorrect...you can go back and edit later! Can't tell you how many times I have clicked on a link for a story, and the content of the story is in direct odds with what the headline says.

I get what you mean, and the OP (though I think it is a little over-stated in this particular case), but the ironic thing is, so many of us express this opinion, but then loathe other players and teams that exhibit the qualities we want in our own guys. Guys who will do whatever it takes to win, and don't take losing easily... we don't respect that in our foes... but are disgusted by our own guys lack of the same... sports are very complex these days!

I found that funny too! Wow...if you have been watching all the games for the last 4 or 5 seasons, I am not sure how you could feel that way... the defense is a lot better than any we have had in a long time (with room for improvement no doubt), they have had, probably, their best draft in 20 years (unless you are one who has already come to the conclusion that Manuel is a bust...I am not), and they appear to be getting a lot more out of some of these guys that have been around for a while, in some time. Toady's loss sucked...but it wasn't the young guys making the big mistakes...

I work, part-time, at a record store, that meets those criteteria..the boss man is a little odd, but treats us well (we have a total of 63 employees, about 20 of them full-time, the rest pt'ers like me!)...no holdays, closes early for things like St Patricks Day and Halloween (adult holidays), random un-announced bounus when business is good, holiday party with a plus one and open bar...the wages aren't fantastic, but could be worse...lots of perks beyond that....but I have to tell you, attracting a "more skilled and happier workforce" isn't what he needs...he needs customers...plain and simple.

I'll be selling some of those tonight...if there are any left!

I can buy that it wasn't intentional, but I can't buy not throwing a flag...we have seen benches flagged for a player of coach with part of their foot on the field of play, far from the action...that is crazy he wasn't flagged at all..

Actually, football games at UT are mandatory for us...when you are hired, they make that very clear to you upon accepting the job. They have lost numerous employees over the years, on this issue...they did try something a little different this year...if your birthday is on an odd day, you work this year, even day next year...or, if you wanted, you could work and get the extra money...as it turned out, not many voulunteered, and an unusually high number of people have even number birthdays They were super short-handed yesterday! At one time, they required everybody to work three of the games, but everyone would sign up for the same three games....whichever were scheduled as early kick-offs, or most likely to be early kick-offs, would get twice as many as the 6:30 kickoffs. I have worked every game the last 3 years, required or not, just for the money..but some really hate doing it.... Honestly, I don't think it made a bit of differnce...usually too many people on hand. My birthday is on an even day, but I am a (middle) manager, so I had to work the day...upper management had no such requirement. What a farce!

And, if enough consumers agree with you, and profits suck, you won't see as many of them doing it in coming years. There are a lot of ****ty families out there too!

It is the American way... people buy **** they don't need every day of the year...retailers are just trying to get their foot in the door on a season that, for many, could make or break them. In some cases, brick and mortar stores depend on Christmas to determine if they will be around for next Christmas. I go on Facebook, and see people patting themselves on the back for not succumbing to the mania, but then bragging about how they managed to get a great deal for somthing on-line, without having to pay tax, deal with lines or rude employees, etc etc....all on Thanksgiving day! Personally, I would never set foot in a store one of these holidays, but I just think the sanctimonious attitude that some take toward it is kind of hypocritical...I spent 15 hours yesterday working at a football game...there were lots of people there...so, there were lots of people who had to work, to service them. The handful of resteraunts that were open yesterday were packed...nobody was mad at them for being open...I just think, in this day and age, when nothing is sacred, that this is so sacred... I will agree with you, it should be optional...

I am in no way a Wal-mart fan (haven't shopped there in well over 15-20 years), and I am not a fan of stores being open on Thanksgiving...but, as someone who managed record stores for years, I understand it. When I worked for Tower records, we were open "366 days a year"...every day...people thought it was "awesome"...for a while, the store was even open to 4am, just like the bars in NY. There was no outrage, people didn't boycott us, and, to be perfectly honest, as someone who worked pretty much every Christmas and Thanksgiving, for pretty substandard wages, it was actually kind of fun...not saying alchohol wasn't consumed behind cash registes, disguised as coffee, or that hommade cigs weren't shared in the parking lot on "lunch break".... Truth is, small retailers, forever, have been opening up on holidays to find some niche to keep them competitive (and make people aware that they even exist in some cases) with "box stores"...now, bricks and mortar retail stores compete with the internet..they are trying to survive, and in some ways, creating this whoel "black Friday' mania is pretty ingenious...make people feel like they need something they don't really need...I was always (and still) have been at retail outlets that battled stores like Best-Buy, Wal-Mart and Target for their small piece of the pie, so I am not sympathetic to them in some regards, but I don't begrudge them trying to stay alive. I get that!

I disagree there. Kicking is part of the game, and you have been kicking the ball all through regulation time, so why would you eliminate in from OT? The team with the better kicker/special teams would have an advantage, just like the team with a the better QB has an advantage. That might, then, interfere with the natural course of the game...more teams playing for tie, becasue they know they are getting the ball to start OT. Which, I suppose, proves the notion that is confusing! How about modeling it after hockey...if the game ends in a tie after one OT, each field goal kicker has to go out and match field goals with the other! Make those guys earn their pay-check! :lol:

I like the new OT rules...a lot. Not a horrible idea, but as long as the kicking game is still part of the NFL, they really shouldn't eliminate it in overtime...but, there are those who feel the NFL is trying to phase the kicking game out...once that happens....

Not the case...this week! Go back and look at some of the garbage posted about EJ Manuel, after the Steelers game....this board, in general, is as reactionary as it could be...everything and everybody sucks, and has for years, when they win a game...get a nice win, and fight to a 4-7 record, and it is a Bills utopia, all over....we really are a manic bunch!

Jim Kelly,Golisano and Bon Jovi are all interested in buying the Bills, is there anybody else we should add to this list? It's kind of ironic that this story popped up this very same week the Bills are playing in Toronto The Bills aren't going anywhere, as long as George Seifert has some say....

As much as any show ever...don't like a character too much, cuz they are not going to make it...great episode, yes....boy I never saw that end coming, but I guess I should have...

That's nothing...some were ready to run him out of town after the "comeback" game by Reich!

As long as an owner has to be approved by the other owners, than nobody, not even a living Mr Wilson, has "full control" over who the team is sold to, when that times comes. What is best for the NFL, may not be best for WNY Bills fans...

This may or may not be true....we don't know if Mr Wilson has some plan of succession in place...from what he has indecated in the past, he does not. The NFL will utlimately approve, or disapprove of any potential future owners. So, unless Mr Wilson sells the team before he passes, he will have little say in who owns it in the future.

Is it all possible that Jim Kelly is involved with the Bon Jovi ownership group? I know JBJ is "buddies" with numerous NFL QB's, Elway and Marino come to mind...could JBJ be the investor that Jim has been talking about for the last 5 years or so? From the sounds of it, Bon Jovi has had his eye on the Bills ownership situation for a while now. Awful music aside (and the idea of somebody buying, then moving the team notwithstanding), Bon Jovi might not be our worst option. I think the NFL itself is going to have as much to say about the Bills future in WNY as a new owner will...in other words, if the NFL wants the team out of our town, they will approve ownership by somebody who is wanting, and willing, to follow that plan...if the NFL recognizes the importance of keeping the team in WNY, than an owner in tune with that line of thinking will be welcomed. Assuming Bon Jovi had a desire to keep the team where they are (who knows?) would having a rock icon (albeit a terrible one) be the worst thing for the Buffalo Bills name-brand. As long as the team isn't playing in acid-wash zubaz every week (third uniform perhaps?), there could be worse opitons.

I have tried, but I don't think I could watch Red Zone, exclusively, for three hours...would much prefer to watch a single game, flipping to Red Zone during down time in that game. My early game choices here are Carolina/Miami or Houston/Jacksonville.... love watching Cam, and love watching the Dolphins lose...so I am content with that game!

Yeah....that was my point! Thanks for the save Dibs!

Hmm....maybe I have to look again...you are right, it was 21...Reich started a game at the end of the 1990 season, where Marv was protecting the starters for the playoffs...Bills were 13-1 at the time...can you imagine that? All corrections made in the OP.

Ah...so that is where it came from....I didn't see the game Thursday night. I had no idea...

I didn't know there was a difference..a BW3 opened up close to my place a little over a year ago...I have yet to venture in.

So, earlier today, at work, we had on sports-talk radio...I was only kind of half listening. They were talking about the upcoming game between the Broncos and Patriots...and the "rivalry" between Manning and Brady. It will be the 14th time their respective teams have faces one another....I believe Brady teams have a 9-4 edge over Manning teams. They want on to say, I thought, that Dan Marino and Jim Kelly teams faced each-other more times than any other rival QB's. I was thinking that couldn't be right...but am not sure how to research it and get any definitive answer. Anyone? The more I thought about it, it makes sense...two HOF QB's in the same division, for the entirety of their dual careers. Now, I do know, if Kelly/Marino is the most frequent QB match-up in NFL history, it is nice to know, Kelly's Bills holds a 16-6 15-6 edge over Marino's Dolphins. The regular season, Kelly's Bills were 13-6 12-6 over the Dolphins, and 3-0 in playoffs. Kelly missed one two starts against the Dolphins (a Frank Reich led victory for the good guys in '89, and another in a "protecting the starters for playoffs" start in 1990), while Marino missed two games (Bills walloped Dolpins in Scott Mithcell start in '93, but then beat the Bills, in Kellys' final game against the fish, led by Craig Ericson in '96) Lot of great games in that rivalry...