Dan

Interesting read. The article certainly paints the owners in a bad light. I agree with Fez. The $33million profit is undoubtedly skewed by a few clubs. So, if you assume the Packers are closer to the actual average, that's not a lot of money and I could easily see an owner wanting more money. A billion dollar business only making 10million profit almost seems impossible. Is that 1%? (I hate math). So, If you had a $1million dollar business, but at the end of the year you only made $10 grand; would it be worth it to run that business? Who knows where this goes...

So, if I tell people that we all need to work together to find the best solution; I'm a communist? Crap. I use words like "together" and "community" all the time. I suppose I've been converted and didn't even know it. Who's covering what up? I don't get it. The organizers of the memorial went a little over the top with shirts and letting students attend on a first come first serve basis. Disrespectful, perhaps; but you seem to be suggesting some nefarious plot to make us all communists. So what's there really to cover up? You think it was more of a political pep rally and hate Obama for it. I get it. But, how is that any different than any other event, speech, or action he's ever done?

So correct. How could I forget!

By all means... let's have a Congressional investigation and spend countless dollars and hours of time getting to the bottom of this deep seated conspiracy to distribute t-shirts with a positive message on them. Exactly what Marxist ideas were promoted on this unknown guy's blog? The idea that we should all work together to make this country a better place?

First of all, I doubt any of them went to an Ivy League school.

I suppose you're smart enough to find a link to a 2008 website, but University organizers aren't that swift? I guess I am stupid, because I never saw that website or heard that slogan until all this. Have you heard the President or the WH make a connection between the shooting and partisan political rhetoric? I haven't. All I've heard from the WH in response is just the opposite. In fact, when the President specifically states we should be engage in civil discourse and not look to blame anyone, you want to blame him or the WH for doing something bad? Like it or not, this event has gotten tied to the vitriol espoused in the political climate. Yes, initially by the Ds; but now by the Rs as well. So, should the President just ignore it all and pretend it doesn't exist? Or should he address it and say it doesn't belong and is inappropriate? I think he did more the later and I think it's right and justified. So, again, what could Obama have done that you would have felt was right? Ignore the issue all together? Give a short 3 minute speech that says I'm sorry for the whole world? What? IMO, HE handled the situation extremely well. Have other pundits? Did the University staff and students? Has the press? Those are all separate questions and entities outside of his control. Pretty well sums it up for me, as well. The only solace I can have is that maybe people in AZ celebrate at memorials. Hell, in Louisiana they have bands and drinks at funerals, so who am I to judge how people want to memorialize. I don't really think that's the case here; but I don't really know either. Similarly, I've read some people were upset about the native american prayer. Again, out west that stuff is quite common. I have no idea the motives behind why they went with a native american prayer and not a a christian prayer; but it's not the first time I've seen it. So, to each their own i guess.

This thread is a perfect example of how polarized we are. Nothing the President can do will ever be right for some. Let me pose this thought: Let's assume you're right and Obama has never asked for civil discourse between both parties or tried to incorporate R ideas into his policies; but now he is. Seems like he's trying.. and yet you still complain about it. Would you prefer he become even more partisan and continue to polarize every issue? Should he ever be allowed to ask us all to just get along? What could he have possibly said or done after this event that would have made you (or any of the detractors) happy? I'm genuinely curious. We can criticize the crowd at the memorial service all we want. But, the fact is, the University as readily admitted they were the people in charge of it. It was their students in attendance. It was their event to organize. The White House and certainly the President, by all accounts, had very little to do with the event. Was it a cheerful crowd - that's an understatement. But, how can you blame an individual for the type of crowd that shows up? Nothing, nothing in his speech was politically oriented or inappropriate. He did nothing to solicit the cheers. Yet he's blamed for them. Again, what could he have done? Fire his entire staff afterwards? Not shown up at all? Admonished the crowd with each cheer?

Maybe not

The university said it did the planning with minimal input from the White House. The school paid for the event, including $60,000 for 20,000 T-shirts bearing the words "Together We Thrive," which were handed out for free. The money will not come student tuition, fees or tax dollars. My link

The first place I saw her was some kinda HBO/cable/TV special quite a while ago (10 years?). Quite honestly, I can't really remember. But, back in the Napster free music days I haphazardly found a little of her music and have been listening off and on ever since. Great voice and great stage presence. Look at some more of those related vids and feel the joy.

Thanks

Beth Hart http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHWYW6Tw67A

Facts suck. You've completely ruined a perfectly good conspiracy that the league has it out to keep the Bills down. Now, what? You expect us to face the fact that the Bills need to get better players and coaches? Thanks for nothin.

Really? Marv Levy took us to four consecutive Super Bowls. Have you seen some of the comments about him on this board? Seriously, I wouldn't be surprised to visit this board if and when the Bills win the Super Bowl, only to find someone complaining that so and so didn't do enough and we barely won.

I disagree. You can be guaranteed that no matter what a Bills player says, some fan is going to have a problem with it. Case in point... a young player tries to display a certain will to succeed and a confidence to achieve that success and posters want to tell him to STFU. God forbid any of our players exhibit confidence or emotion.

No way I'm looking at that pic... in a thread like this!

Looks like I stand corrected, Edwards is a good coach and Schobel is over rated.

We can all rest easy now. It seems the lyrical content of heavy metal rock and roll can be blamed now. Linky do. We can all continue our bitter partisan rhetoric and hate mongering vitriol with a clear conscience. Thank God for Rock 'N Roll!

Making mistakes isn't nearly as bad as failing to correct them.

Last comment ... a little over the top.. yeah?

That's exactly what I was thinking. Fairley seems to be "the" defensive lineman of this draft. (Maybe I'm wrong) So, if he's taken 1or 2, you can probably trade back to #9 and get the same player you would have taken at #3; plus get a couple of extra mid round picks. Seems like a no brainer to me. See... this drafting stuff ain't so hard. We got it all figured out. :beer:to us. Of course, refer to my disclaimer from me earlier post.

There's taking a step back and then there's looking completely inept. I would describe our defense as the second of those two options. Yes, we could use more talent on defense. But, what little talent we had was completely out of position, slow to the ball, and looked uninspired most all season. If Mr. "Skoobel" is so over rated as you implied, why did his departure have such a drastic effect on our defensive performance? You can't have it both ways. Either Schobel was a very good defensive player that was an important player in our defense. Or he was over rated and the defense shouldn't suffer much from his departure.

A matter that could be easily cleared up with.... yep, you guessed it... links!

Gotcha. I got confused. But, totally just my brain not functioning. Given that Luck was perhaps the only "sure thing" QB, and there may only be one "sure thing" DE/DT that's selected at 1or 2, I think this would be a great year to trade down a few slots and still get a top notch player and a few extra picks. So, I'd be all for it. Of course, I must qualify my opinion by stating that I have almost no understanding of who exactly is considered the best players in this draft, other than what I read here.

For clarification, you want to trade down and then select a CB?