Logic

I just wanted to chime in and say, apropos of nothing, that I really like the NXT product as of late. Specifically, the Takeover: New York event was excellent. The Gargano vs Cole match was OUTSTANDING. Ditto the tag title match and the UK Title match. I'm an old school wrestling fan. I spend an inordinate amount of time watching old WCW and WWF on the WWE Network. I also spend an inordinate amount of time watching shoot interviews, reading books about wrestling, and reading wrestlecrap.com rants and the like. So to an extent, I'm still kind of wrestling obsessed...I just happen to be obsessed with the wrestling I watched when I grew up. I only VERY CASUALLY follow today's WWE product. I know most of the names and profiles, and I tune into the "Big 3" PPVs ever year. Aside from that, I fade in and out. I just don't care the way I used to. I will say this, though: The period between, say, 2002 and 2012 was a lost decade for me, as far as WWE goes. That whole Cena/Orton/Batista era is just a snooze-fest for me. Triple H taking over and instituting NXT was the best thing that could've possibly happened to WWE. He basically saved it completely and now has it to where it's about as good a product as it's ever been. He FINALLY talked McMahon out of avoiding indie and ROH and NJPW guys like the plague. They also rightly recognized that there's a huge market for actual quality work rate wrestling. Now they poach anyone worth poaching, and they have the deep, awesome roster to show for it. Raw, Smackdown, NXT, NXT UK, 205 Live, etc, etc....They're in a very strong place going forward. Getting back to my original comment, I find the NXT matches and characters to be VASTLY more entertaining than the current main roster product. My current favorites (from all rosters) are probably Adam Cole (Bay Bay!), Aleister Black, Shinsuke Nakamura, Daniel Bryan, Sami Zayn, Ricochet, and Johnny Gargano. I'm a big work rate guy.

I will agree with this. While it is not physically addictive, it absolutely can be mentally/emotionally addictive. To be fair, though, so can television and social media. Everything in moderation.

Packers are my top choice. Texans second. Chiefs or Colts if neither of those is available.

Fair enough. I'm of the opinion that Edmunds shouldn't be moved from his current spot, but if White WERE to be drafted, then what you say would definitely be the way to go.

1.) Feel free to provide proof of your claim at any time. 2.) I suppose you believe alcohol should be illegal, too? Alcohol, of course, is VASTLY more likely to cause psychosis than cannabis. The fact that you're doubling down on your claim that a person 10 days removed from consuming cannabis is still so impaired that they can't discuss a topic on an internet message board illustrates my previous point: You're out of your depth on this issue.

And then what happens to the guy who DOESN'T win? He languishes on the bench.

I believe all of this discussion to be moot, because I believe White will be off the board before the Bills pick. If he IS still on the board, the Bills ought to trade down with a team that wants White. The Bills, with Edmunds and Milano, simply don't have room to give White the amount of snaps he deserves. And to those citing 'Zo's usage: White is not 'Zo. they have different body types, play different positions, and there is no evidence to be found in White's history to show that he's capable of playing a part-time edge-rushing role. I'm not denying he's a great player and that the Bills should be in the business of acquiring great players. I'm just saying that finding snaps for a middle linebacker when you already HAVE a starting middle linebacker can be difficult, and the Bills probably shouldn't use such a premium pick on a player who will be on the bench so often.

However, the study doesn't prove causality, cautions Dr. Diana Martinez, a psychiatrist and addiction researcher at Columbia University. "You can't say that cannabis causes psychosis," she says. "It's simply not supported by the data," she says. The above is from the article you posted.

From the very article you posted: However, the study doesn't prove causality, cautions Dr. Diana Martinez, a psychiatrist and addiction researcher at Columbia University. "You can't say that cannabis causes psychosis," she says. "It's simply not supported by the data," she says.

The fact that you are stating that a person is still so impaired 5-14 days after consumption that he can't carry on a reasonable conversation shows your lack of understanding of the effects of cannabis. < Insert snarky Tom joke here. > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/23/marijuana-may-be-even-safer-than-previously-thought-researchers-say/?utm_term=.66ac3d01a6df Cannabis is roughly 114 times less deadly than alcohol. Alcohol, of course, is perfectly legal. A review study comparing the acute lethal toxicity of commonly abused drugs shows that the lethal dose for marijuana (around 15 grams or above) is at least 1,000 times greater than the effective dose (15 milligrams), or the dose required to achieve a noticeable effect. In contrast, alcohol can become lethal at only 10 times the effective dose. And don't even get me STARTED on the country's out-of-control addiction to completely legal pharmaceutically produced opioids. Additionally, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration drug sheet for marijuana reports that no deaths from marijuana overdose have ever been recorded. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/16/gary-johnson/gary-johnson-claims-marijuana-cant-kill-and-prescr/

I'm at work right now, sober as a judge. I won't hold my breath for any worthwhile contributions on your part, though. I challenge you or any of the other "pot is dangerous" folks to provide some credible, peer reviewed evidence that this is the case. I suppose I'll be waiting a while, though, because no such research exists. If you don't like cannabis, fine. But don't pretend that there is any scientific or evidentiary support for your stance.

I'm more than happy to have an adult discussion about this topic with anyone who's interested in doing so. I'd venture to guess that most will just make snarky or sarcastic comments and tired jokes and refuse to engage in any meaningful debate, though.

The usual DC Tom response when he's caught talking out of his ass: arrogance and an assumed stance of intellectual superiority. You're like a parody of yourself.

As usual, your only interest is in providing a snarky comment and not in providing any substance to back up your opinion. Par for the course with you.

lol. Good one. The belief that pot is harmful is erroneous and based on the scientifically inaccurate propaganda I just laid out. Feel free to keep your head buried in the sand, though, and enjoy your next cocktail while you're at it!

I don't even know what this means.

The best draft coverage going right now is probably the internet-based channel with Chris Simms, Matt Miller, et al. On TV, though? Gotta go with NFL network.

Looking over the top 30 visits for Buffalo and taking into account the factors laid out in the OP, the following seems most likely: 1st round: Best defensive lineman still available (met with Williams, Oliver, Sweat, Gary). If no defensive lineman they like still available, take best available OT (me with Jawaan Taylor, Jonah Williams). 2nd round: Best WR left on the board (met with AJ Brown, Deebo Samuel, N'Keal Harry, etc...all 2nd round prospects). 3rd/4th Rounds: Best TE, RB, or D-lineman other than what they took in round 1 (so if round 1 is tackle, they take an edge here, and vice versa). (Met with Dawson Knox, Drew Sample, and Trevon Wesco at tight end, multiple mid round running backs, Maxx Crosby, Jaylon Ferguson at edge). I know everyone says "Nope, they're just gonna go straight BPA, stupid!". I'm just telling you that this front office is big on actually MEETING with guys they spend high picks on. Based on all the factors I mentioned, I'd bet decent money on things playing out pretty close to the way I've listed above.

In honor of today's date, let's take a moment to discuss the two guys below: Harry J Anslinger on the left and William Randolph Hearst on the right. I promise it'll be interesting and informative, and maybe give you something to do while you poop or avoid your loved ones. Just look at these guys. First, Anslinger: Harry Anslinger was the head of the Federal Bureau of Drugs and Narcotics in the U.S. during the years of alcohol prohibition. After years of claiming that cannabis was completely harmless, a funny thing happened -- alcohol prohibition ended, leaving Anslinger's department largely without purpose. Deciding they needed a NEW money-making venture and way of keeping their department staffed, they endeavored to demonize and illegalize the cannabis plant. They began creating propaganda calling cannabis "the devil's drug!" and stating "It kills sons and steals daughters!". They even created a new, racist term for the plant: Marijuana. This term allowed the propagandists to play into America's xenophobia by tying the plant to alleged crime committed by Mexican-American and African-American populations. A popular claim of the day was that "black Jazz Musicians" would smoke cannabis, become violent, and then storm from house to house, stealing and raping white women. Really. This is what they claimed. The result of years of this damaging and absurd propaganda? The passage of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, which effectively illegalized cannabis federally for the first time. Fast forward just a tad bit to William Randolph Hearst. Hearst developed the largest newspaper publisher in the country in the early 1900s, called Hearst Communications. When a 1938 Popular Mechanics article touted hemp as the next great miracle crop for the United States, touting its industrial uses as a highly efficient means of producing paper and textiles, Hearst panicked. Owing so much of his wealth to publishing, he was highly invested in the traditional pulp paper industry. As such, hemp presented a MAJOR threat to his business interests. His response? To use his own vast stores of wealth to contribute to the propaganda efforts and to influence government officials to ensure that even the industrially useful, non-intoxicating male cannabis plants become illegal. The end result of these two men's selfishly motivated, dishonest, and corrupt meddling in the subject of cannabis? A complete federal prohibition that lasts to this day. They effectively deprived millions of American citizens of a highly safe and effective medicine, while ALSO depriving American industry of a more efficient means of paper and textile production, thus propagating the environmentally damaging practices of mass deforestation and exploitation of third world labor and resources. If that weren't enough, they also directly contributed to the ruination of millions of American lives due to excessively long incarcerations or death at the hands of the disastrous War On Drugs. If you've read this far, thank you! I'm just about done. All I really want to say is ***** these guys! ***** them both. They're the absolute worst. It's hard to imagine doing SO MUCH damage to your country in one lifetime and negatively affecting literally MILLIONS of lives. But these guys pulled it off. So in honor of 4/20, let's just all reflect for a moment on these two banner entrants into and lifetime members of the Unfathomably Terrible Jerk Hall of Fame. They really deserved their enshrinement!

I just want to say one more time: Just because most reporters/analysts DON'T have legitimate sources, it doesn't mean that NONE have legitimate sources. Plenty of "I'm hearing" type rumors about the Bills have come out in recent years that proved true. Yes, Beane keeps a much tighter ship and yes, the leaks are few and far between these days, but it doesn't mean they don't happen. If you followed Ben Albright last year on Twitter, he was adamant all offseason that Allen was #1 on the Bills big board. He never wavered from that view point. Even in the face of constant harassment and mockery from Bills fans who didn't want it to be true, he stuck to his guns. People DO know things sometimes.

Thanks for another great post, Montoya. You consistently post thought-provoking and interesting content, and you're one of the best posters around. Kudos.

I think he's more likely to HAVE a bust in Canton one day than to BE a bust, but time will tell...

I just tweeted this to Sal, but... First we hear from Matt Miller that the Bills love Ed Oliver. Then we hear that the Jets "badly" want to trade down. Then we hear that the Jets are taking Oliver. I know trades with division rivals are rare, but is it crazy to think the Jets are trying to lure the Bills into trading up for Oliver?

The correct answer to what he should do is "Burn the house down and never look back".

I'd take Green Bay, Houston, or Indy if we're calling dibs!