Brandon

As a Hog fan, I don't expect much. Wingo was never higher than 3rd on the depth chart that I can recall. Oh, they tried on numerous occasions to work him in for a few plays to see if he could make something of his potential, but he never was able to work his way into the RB rotation consistently. The only time he received significant playing time was when Knile Davis got hurt back in 2011, but even then, he was 2nd off the bench behind Dennis Johnson. In 2012, as Davis fell out of favor in the 2nd half of the year, the coaching staff turned to true freshman Jonathan Williams to back up Dennis Johnson, not Wingo. As it turns out, Wingo is big, he's fast, and he even catches the ball well...problem is, he doesn't run with authority and gets caught running east-west looking for the big play far too often. Even if the Bills could break him of that, I don't know that he'd ever be a physical runner. They'd have been better off signing Johnson, who was also released in the latest round of cuts. Despite being about the same size as CJ Spiller, he's a much tougher inside runner and has quite a bit of experience and success as a kick returner as well.

I wasn't trying to trip you up. You did a good job of that yourself. You were comparing two shotguns that Remington intends for completely different markets, but ignoring the fact you can turn it right around and post a hunting variant of the 1100 and a tactical variant of the 870. All major manufacturers do this. You decided to compare the tamest 870 to a tactical variant of the 1100. Its not an apples to apples comparison. And yes, two can play that game: http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/shotguns/model-1100/model-1100-sporting-series.aspx http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/tactical/shotguns/model-870-express-tactical-blackhawk.aspx The only major differences between the two I just posted and the ones you posted are that Remington has changed the buttstock and added or removed a magazine extension...something ANYONE can do to either model. I've never said that a hunter does need a semi-auto (although need is a non-issue, IMO). What I'm telling you, however, is that the 1100 is used extensively in that regard and is one of the most popular sporting shotguns ever made. They've sold over four million of them. The point is, if you're going to say that a semi-auto has no sporting purpose, you'd better not cite as your example a model that's widely used for exactly that.

Remington markets home defense and hunting variants of BOTH the 1100 and 870...as do most shotgun manufacturers who build on both actions. I think its laughable that you chose the 1100 as your example of semiauto shotguns being vile, evil weapons of mass destruction. Right. In reality, the 1100 is one of the most popular hunting and competitive shooting shotguns that has ever been made. Remington has been marketing them to hunters since they were first built in the 60s...long before the tacticool mall-ninja fad took hold. And that wasn't their first semi-auto shotgun by any means. They've been building and marketing them to hunters since the old model 11 back in 1905. And they're certainly not the only manufacturer who has long since offered a semi-auto marketed to hunters. Far from it.

I don't think some of these 'experts' even watch these guys play. Manuel may have the athletic ability to be a running threat at QB, but he was primarily a passer at FSU.

I don't think I would bother. Kolb should serve well enough as a backup and stopgap starter, plus they've already burned a pick on Tarvaris Jackson. Not only that, but I wouldn't even want to open the door for the possibility of a QB controversy. Nah, the best bet is to help the QBs we already have by adding a G/C and possibly a TE.

I like the idea behind it. Whether it works or not is another story. On paper, its going to be tough as hell to defend against their 3 and 4 WR sets with Spiller in the backfield and with a QB who can kill you as a scrambler if you try to drop everyone into coverage.

I agree completely and I wouldn't at all be surprised if the Bills pick one of them at some point, either. They may not be getting first round recognition, but I think they're both solid 2nd/3rd round prospects with a lot of talent and it wouldn't shock me to see one of the two as the best QB from this class a few years down the road.

I don't think there's much chance that either Barkley or Manuel will last that long. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see Manuel go in the top 20. Nassib might still be on the board, but honestly, I think he should go a round or two later. My preference would be for them to draft Tyler Wilson at 41, with WR and OL in some combination in R1 and R3.

I can't say I've been following this draft all that closely, but in the times I've seen Nassib play, including watching him against USC this morning, I guess I just don't get it. I'm not particularly impressed. I don't see anything there that suggests he's anything more than a run-of-the-mill mid round prospect.

Next year's draft class is always better than this year's draft class. We hear it every year, so it must be true.

I couldn't agree more. It would just be more of the same from this franchise. Rather than try to develop their own QB, this team seems obsessed with going for the quick fix, as you say, settling for someone that couldn't start somewhere else for whatever reason, and it never works. You'd think they'd learn eventually. Nope.

I agree with this guy.

I totally understand that. I'm not saying that my solution is necessarily the correct one. I'm just saying that its becoming apparent that the security measures we have in place haven't been that effective.

Oh, you got really got me there! Good work, skippy!

Well, I suppose we could always try the tried and true tactic of calling the essentially the same armed government employees on the phone and waiting 20 minutes for them to arrive.

Its inefficient, but ask the parents of the incident yesterday what they think of that. Maybe it wouldn't have changed anything this time, maybe next time it would. I fully understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong. I just think that if we can pay a small army of coaches for the junior high and high school sports teams, we can surely find the money to provide adequate on-campus security and give ourselves at least an opportunity if not to outright prevent these incidents, maybe we can mitigate the damage.

Well, if you were to put even 4 or 5 armed security personnel in each school, would that reduce the number of incidents and/or the number of fatalities. I strongly suspect it would. Is that worth it? You tell me. How much is the safety of our kids worth? One thing I'm fairly certain of is that our gun-free schools zones aren't working.

Most likely, yes. It reminds me of people touting the UK's statistics on gun crime since their ban. Sure, its low. But the question no one ever asks is what that their homicide rates were *prior* to the ban. And, of course, they were almost identical. The point simply being, the UK never really had a problem to begin with and I suspect that's true in a lot of these cases with foreign nations.

I agree that there's always the possibility of a lunatic in the security positions. You'll never be able to completely eliminate that as a possibility, but I think one way to reduce the risk is to subject them to quarterly or semi-annual psychological evaluations for as long as they're employed in that position. Not only that, but we need to have fairly high standards for qualifications and also ensure that they're relatively well-paid and don't have added financial stresses in their lives.

Its just my two cents, but I think one immediate solution is actually rather simple. The government needs to mandate armed security at our schools. If it takes raising a tax in order to pay for it, this conservative says: so be it. Two at each entrance and a few walking the halls. Its sad that its come to this, but I think it would be even worse to start stripping away the rights of everyone when the problem lies at the feet of a handful of lunatics.

The pass was pretty high, anyway. The NE DB had to jump for it, so even if Graham had undercut that DB, I'm not sure he could've gotten to it.

Forget it. Ralph won't spend on a coach. If they fire Chan, you'll get another third rate has-been or some mediocre coordinator to be HC.

Who needs a QB? Everyone knows the forward pass is just a gimmick and never catch on. We're gonna run and play defense all the way to the Super Bowl! Sigh...

That's pretty much how I feel about it as well. That would be the quickest way to end my interest in this team.

I started reading the books a couple of months ago and am currently about halfway through #4. You should definitely read them. There's far more depth there than they get into with the series, not to mention that they're better.