PlayoffsPlease

Math

Its possible. But there would be about 12 games non-Bills that would have to go a specific way for this to happen. Including Jets beating Cleveland in Cleveland. Roughly 1 in 2^12 = 1/4096 . If you add in the the 3 Bills games as having to go our way, that makes in 1 in 2^15 = 1/32768. Even if you assume the likely outcome of all 15 games is 80% likely they way we need them to go ,which is not remotely close to the truth, but for fun we will pretend it is, then the Bills chances of getting this alignment on 15 games is .8^15 = 3.5% chance. Putting it in rolling the dice terms, it is likely that on any one role, I will not roll a 5 or 6. But the odds of me rolling a die 15 times in a row with never hitting a 5 or 6 is 0.2% Hopefully, the Bills win out, and we don't need lottery odds. I suspect if we lose to both of the Chiefs and Cowboys, that during those two weeks, some other results would already have not gone our way, and we would be mathematically eliminated.

Another way of interpretating Graham's comments is that this is now an embarrassement for the entire organization, who apparently was ok with all of that.

Pickens. Watt

Maybe Dunne simply asked people "tell me your craziest Sean McDermott story" and someone told him this one.

I am talking about the facts of how the current salary cap works, based on negotations with the players union and the owners, and codified in their agreement. You certainly can have an opinion of how it should be changed. But I think the facts of how it applies in Von Millers contract situation currently are what they are.

I am pretty sure the individual contracts follow a form. The salary cap works the same for all of them. If the contract needs to be paid, the salary cap needs to be respected. You rolls the dice on a guaranteed contract, and you you pays the bank if you crap out. Do you think he is being fairly considered to fill punter roles at this point? Or do you think there is some collusion against him? If not why has he not gotten a second chance?

are you judging me?

I think people who see their wedding as the first day of a life long marriage will seek out someone like you. People who see a wedding as a singular celebration of their current romantic love centered around a reception likely care less about who officiates.

Tough for most people to unhear things. You turn on the radio to listen to a football show, and instantly get hit with a bull **** political rant. Its not like he tuned into MSNBC.

My favorite thing is that I can use the words vague, savage and salvage on this two bills drive without being censored.

Chaos Theory: Doug Whaley was hired by the Buffalo Bill. Chaos ensues and it ultimately affects Shady.

Much more than most Bills fans thought. He was actually pretty viable as a possible owner. Still like Terry. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/exclusive-trump-will-declare-9-billion-net-worth-as-he-reveals-2016-plans/2015/06/15/a00e74c0-137c-11e5-9ddc-e3353542100c_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-politics

The NFL's mistake is getting involved as a league in responding to players non-football actions. The drug rules are not in place to add an extra level of law enforcement. First PEDs are banned to make sure no competitive advantage is gained, a core sports management philosophy. Secondly its about asset protection, the teams have huge investments in the players, and drugs can and will damage that asset. The gambling rules are in place because it can effect the competition. If an individual team wants to fire a player because of image or PR for conduct unbecoming, they should have the same authority as every other employer. But the NFL shouldn't get involved as a league. I also don't understand why no one discusses than Rice's wife is being made a victim a second time. Her families loss of income effects her life style as much as it effects Rice. I am not sure why the NFL feels as though it is good to punish her as well. Seems to me this is an issue that is between Rice, his wife and law enforcement. Since the NFL chooses to be involved they have created their own secondary issues about their honesty regarding having previously seen the video or not. Clearly if they had and took their original action and only changed it to bend to public opinion, the person who made the original judgement clearly screwed that up, and should not be a position to make future similar decisions.

Why isn't EJ Manuel a choice in the poll? It is usually his fault.