Logic

Dark Star, of course.

I'll leave this one to Ken Kesey, who wrote a letter after Jerry died that started this way: Hey, Jerry-- what's happening? I caught your funeral. Weird. Big Steve was good. And Grissman. Sweet sounds. But what really stood out -- stands out -- is the thundering silence, the lack, the absence of that golden Garcia lead line, of that familiar slick lick with the uptwist at the end, that merry snake twining through the woodpile, flickering in and out of the loosely stacked chords...a wriggling mystery, bright and slick as fire... suddenly gone. And the silence left in its wake was-- is-- positively ear-splitting. I'll just go with that. The silence...the space...is absolutely ear-splitting. Nothing...absolutely NOTHING since Jerry died can hold a candle to the music WITH Jerry. Nothing. I've been to dozens of shows, from The Dead to Furthur to Dead and Co to Wolf Bros to Phil and Friends to Ratdog to Dark Star Orchestra, and NOTHING holds a candle. Jerry was the sun around which the other planets (players) orbited, and his absence is ear-splitting. So why do I still go to the shows? Because it's still church. It's still chasing transcendence. It's still going and seeing some of my favorite musicians chasing the muse while I still can. It's still the same community, and joy, and pursuit of IT, and love and magic. That's why I still go. It still FEELS mostly the same, out in audience land. It's still church. But the silence...the gap where that magical Garcia solo should be...it's ear splitting.

So you’re just gonna totally ignore the fact that Ford played a different position and that players improve from year 1 to year 2? Cool. Great talk.

How could you possibly know that? For one thing, players usually progress from year 1 to year 2, so you can't just assume Cody Ford has topped out. That's silly. For another, Ford hasn't gotten to concentrate solely on playing RG instead of RT so far in his NFL career. How do we know he's not an All-Pro caliber guard? That's what most analysts feel his best position in the pros is. So again, I'm just not sure how you can make that statement.

@Virgil, this may have already been said in the thread somewhere, but when are you tentatively planning to start the next mock draft? Wanna make sure I don't miss out.

http://setlist.com/ On the lefthand side of the above website is a "song search" function. Make sure "Grateful Dead" is chosen in the band field. Should be set to that by default. Anyway, punch in "New Speedway Boogie", or whatever song you want to find out about, and it will list every show they ever played that song in. http://headyversion.com/song/193/grateful-dead/new-speedway-boogie/ This is a website I like a lot where fans vote for their favorite live versions of songs. As to my favorite live show ever? Boy, I don't think I could choose such a thing. My favorite current live ERA is winter '73. Liquid electric jazz bliss. Thanks! I get asked this question a lot. The "why do you like the Dead?" question. I could write a doctoral dissertation on the subject. What I typed up was the most shortened and succinct version I could reasonably post to a football message board. ?

I disagree with all of this. Entirely. Jerry Garcia an average guitarist? I don't even know what to say to that. I'll just not bother. Bob Weir was a completely unique rhythm guitarist. As I mentioned in my post above, he had the unenviable task of trying to fit into a musical soundscape that featured two dominant lead players -- Jerry and Phil -- and left little room for assertive rhythm guitar. So instead of even trying that, he affected a style that is best compared to a jazz pianist like McCoy Tyner. Odd, unique, percussive, rhyhtmic jabs that no other rhythm guitarist really ever even tried. Phil Lesh only a DECENT bass player? Again, I couldn't disagree more. A completely unique player. No bassist in rock music sounds like Phil Lesh. He is also a highly trained classical musician with a deep knowledge of the form. The way he completely eschews traditional bass playing and instead basically plays it like a lead instrument is awe-inspiring. The degree to which he uses the high register of an instrument whose high register is rarely so well used, again...hard to put words to. Just amazing, really. To each their own. As I stated above, music is highly subjective. Neither of us is "right". I do, however, COMPLETELY disagree with everything you said. I also completely disagree that Umphrey's friggin McGee has more musical prowess than the Grateful Dead. But again, to each their own.

I am an obsessive Deadhead. With each year that goes by, I just get more and more into the Dead. It never gets old to me. One key thing to know, by the way, is that listening to their live shows is absolutely, positively the way to understand and enjoy them best. The Dead themselves agree. They were just never really able to match the greatness of their live shows in a studio setting. More on that below. First, in short: music is highly subjective. Each band puts off a certain "frequency" that either resonates with you or it doesn't. If the Dead don't resonate with you, that's perfectly fine. There are PLENTY of popular artists who I just don't "get". I'm not a big Bruce Springsteen, Rolling Stones, or Led Zeppelin guy. I can appreciate why people like their music, and I can admit that they're objectively "good", whatever that means. It's just not for me. As Ram Dass would say: "I just have no business with them". Now, let me tell you why I love the Grateful Dead. If you don't want to really find out what the Dead is all about, just click away now, because this is it: 1.) The musicians - Each musician in the Dead comes from a different background. Jerry Garcia was brought up on bluegrass and folk music. He is also highly influenced by Django Reinhart. His style is melodically unique and no one else sounds like him. The second you hear Jerry Garcia, you know it's Jerry Garcia. He's unique largely because the scales and themes that he predominantly uses are NOT based in blues and R&B. This alone sets him apart from just about every popular rock guitarist ever. His choice of notes...what can I say? His guitar SOUNDS like a sunny day in California. It SOUNDS like happiness. Then you have Phil Lesh, the bassist, who is a classical and avante garde musician who plays the bass in a highly irregular fashion. He is as much a "lead player" as Jerry Garcia. In order to provide back balance to these two "lead players" (Phil and Jerry), the rhythm guitarist, Bob Weir, plays in a highly unique, "percussive" sort of style that can best be likened to the way pianist McCoy Tyner played behind John Coltrane. He fills in the empty spaces and keeps things grounded. Along with him are the two drummers. Bill Kretuzman comes from a marching band background, whereas Mickey Hart is versed in world rhythms, poly-rhythms, and odd percussion instruments. The two of them together combine to create a one-of-a-kind, drummer-with-four-arms sound that offsets the wild musical adventurousness of Jerry Garcia and Phil Lesh. Lastly, the keyboardists. The first was Pigpen, who was a blues guy through and through. After him came Keith Godchaux, who was a classical pianist. After him came Brent Mydland, who played a B3 organ and had a raspy, soulful voice that added new color to the band. Going back over what I've just elucidated, you have players from bluegrass, folk, country, blues, classical, world music, and R&B backgrounds, which combine into a strange and completely unique amalgam of Americana. The band has songs in each of these styles, too. To listen to the Grateful Dead is to listen to the entire history of American music. Oh, and the singing? You're right, they don't have "good" singing voices. I'll defer to Sam Cooke here, who once said "the degree to which you should be considered a good singer ought to be based not on how 'beautiful' your voice is, but by how effectively you can convince us that you're telling the truth". When Jerry Garcia or Bob Weir sang, I always believed them. 2.) The Songbook - None of the above would matter much if the songs sucked. I'm not a fan of Phish, or Widespread Panic, or any other "jam music", for instance, because the songs are no good and the jams/solo sections are aimless, masturbatory silliness. In the Dead's case, the lyrics are provided by Robert Hunter, who is an EXTREMELY underrated lyricist. His writing is heavily steeped in literary history. He uses strange, Joycean word combinations. He writes about "the old, strange, weird America". About gamblers, thieves, cowboys, murderers, love, poker games, travelers, and death. He's such a strong lyricist that Bob Dylan actually asked Hunter to write some songs for him. How many people has Bob Dylan asked to write songs for HIM? Not many. Aside from the lyrics, the musical compositions themselves are often bizarre and/or brilliant. They often play in strange time signatures. They also often string songs together end-to-end during live shows, or begin with a song, move through a few others, then back to the original. They have some highly musically complex compositions that bely the "silly hippie band" stereotype that most apply to them. Many a "serious musician" has been talked into listening to the Grateful Dead, nearly against their will, only to be blown away by the musical dexterity and originality of the band. Their songs are catchy. They evoke true and honest feeling. They're often deeply sad. They seem to have an ethereal ability to change meaning over time and to mean completely different things to different people. They have an absolutely amazing, dense, beautiful songbook. 3.) The improvisation/the recorded history - The Grateful Dead had nearly every show they ever played over the course of a 30-year-career recorded. They usually toured 7-9 months out of the year. But what kind of nut would want to LISTEN to 30 years of the same band? Well, here's the thing: They never played the same show twice. Not just the setlist of songs they chose, but the WAY they played each song...was never the same twice. Each song and each show were completely unique, like snowflakes. So I can sit down with 30 versions of a song, and each one will be different. This provides for the listener what essentially amounts to a vast, nearly inexhaustible treasure hunt. The ability to find which shows were good and for what reasons. Which particular versions of songs were transcendent and why. The REASON the shows and songs were so different is that the band essentially used the songs as jumping off points for improvisation -- much like you find in jazz music. The muse might catch them in a certain way on a certain night and take them to new heights. Or it might not, and they might lay down a stinker. The fans came along for the ride and gave them permission to search for the muse each night. This meant that, when things WEREN'T going well, the show wasn't going to bowl anyone ever. If they DID catch that unspeakable SOMETHING, though, it meant vastly higher highs than bands who DIDN'T take the same type of risks were capable of achieving. This night-to-night search is what the Dead's musical journey was all about. In addition, as you might imagine, over the course of 30 years, the band changed a lot. The instruments they played, the effects they used, the songs that came and went from their repertoire. In short, they changed and evolved countless times over the course of their history. The one common thread that snaked through their entire career, though? That would be... 4.) Psychedelic group mind/the live show experience - From their first days as a band, the Grateful Dead were taking psychedelics together. Coming up in San Francisco in 1965, they would all drop acid and go to one of Ken Kesey's Acid Tests (all night, acid-fueled, multi-media drenched bacchanalias where anything goes), where they were the house band and could play anything they wanted. These constant psychedelic sessions and the frequency with which the Dead played together fused them together into a sort of group mind that is hard to understand or empathize with unless you've had psychedelic experience yourself. The players learned to listen to each other deeply, to leave space for each other, to anticipate where the others were going and beat them to the punch. When the Dead were "on", they were six men playing as one organism -- as the band would say, "the music played the band". Not only that, but the audience, too, became a part of the show. The wild, wooly, traveling circus of lunatics that followed the Grateful Dead and filed into the shows each night helped dictate the outcome of the music. A really hot and involved crowd often meant a great set from the band. There weren't big light shows or pyrotechnics, just a pure exchange between audience and band, such that the boundaries between the two dissolved. The old saying "there is NOTHING like a Grateful Dead show" is absolutely true. It was like an ancient, tribal ritual brought back from from..well...from the dead, I guess. Human beings have been getting together for centuries, taking different mind-altering substances, and dancing around fires to music in order to transcend common reality and reach the Heavens. Dead shows called to mind exactly that type of ritual. There was no judgement at these shows, no cynical laughter at someone for dancing too funny. To be at a Grateful Dead show was to be completely free. No matter how weird you were, you were never the weirdest guy there. There was a palpable feeling of love, community, comraderie, compassion, and shared joy at these shows. Everyone took care of each other. Everyone was there for the same thing -- transcendence. Again, this is hard to describe in words and I'm sure sounds trite and silly to someone who never experienced it. What can I say? Some things are beyond words, and Grateful Dead shows are definitely one of those things. So...if you're with me this far....the combination of the musicians, the lyrics, the musical compositions, the vast array of musical styles which ultimately comprise the entire history of American music, the improvisation, the impact of psychedelics, the atmosphere at live shows, the community of fans...it all combined to make a completely unique, unmatched, unrivaled, and absolutely magical experience. In all likelihood, the Deadheads probably detract from the band, because people see all the hippie-dippie fans and just assume it must all be hippie-dippie throwaway music. But it's not. It's deep, dense, rich, beautiful stuff, and there is nothing on earth quite like it. If you don't like it, if you "have no business with it", if it doesn't resonate with you, that's fine. But to those for whom it DOES resonate...it is a great blessing. It is grace. It is magic. Click any one of the links below and pull it up on your phone and go for a drive on a sunny day with the windows down and blast it. If that doesn't "do it" for you, nothing of theirs likely ever will. And that's okay. The following three shows are from three of the best years of their touring career. The first is the most popularly traded Dead show of all time, which some consider to be their best, from 5-8-77 at Cornell University. The second is from 11-11-73 at Winterland Arena, and the third is from their famed Europe '72 tour, taking place on 04-17-72. https://archive.org/details/gd77-05-08.sbd.hicks.4982.sbeok.shnf. https://archive.org/details/gd73-11-11.sbd.schlissel.14105.sbeok.shnf https://archive.org/details/gd1972-04-17.sbd.sirmick.34038.sbeok.flacf Hope this helps.

People like the 90s and 60s throwbacks because, subconsciously, they bring up feelings of glory days gone by. in my opinion, in terms of merely aesthetic value, the current Bills jerseys are the best ever. If the Bills start winning consistently, maybe people will stop wanting to change jerseys so much, because they’ll associate THESE jerseys with glory days. Hell, the Bills have already made the playoffs TWICE in them!

Yep, and it lost them a first round bye in the playoffs. loved it.

Incorrect. His last REGULAR SEASON loss was to Fitz. His last loss in a Pats jersey was to Tannehill.

Not just a loss, but one that happened in Foxborough, against a Ryan Tanehill QBed team, via a pick-6 thrown to former Patriot Logan Ryan. Bliss.

Bucs unis...look the same to me as the pre-digital numbers unis. So basically they just admitted that they ***** up and went back in time. The Falcons unis are NOT good. Should go back to the Neon Deion look full time.

Even 2 hours (As opposed to four) would be better.

Just go to YouTube and type in “Bills 1990 full game”, or whatever year you want. There are multiple regular season full game broadcasts available.

You kind find just about the entire Bills 90, 91, 92, and 93 seasons plus playoff games on YouTube these days, so those are fun. Specifically, watching Thurman just dominate has been wild for me. I was too young to really remember the glory years, so watching them has been a revelation.

With the 72nd pick in the 2020 NFL draft, the Arizona Cardinals select Curtis Weaver, Edge rusher, Boise State Having already added a premium wide receiver and a day-one starting right tackle, we turned our attention to the defense. We felt that strengthening our front seven would pay the most immediate dividends. We already have some talent we like in our secondary, but they'll benefit from not having to hold up in coverage for so long. With All-Pro Chandler Jones on one side and new addition Jordan Phillips strengthening the interior, we felt we were one piece away from a significantly improved pass rash. As such, we took the top remaining edge rusher on our board. We were pleased to see Curtis Weaver still available at this point in the draft. He is the all time Mountain West record-holder for career sacks with 34 in three seasons, and we feel he will fit in perfectly in Vance Joseph's aggressive 3-4 defense. Josh Uche was a consideration here, but a playing weight of 238 lbs was a bit of a concern for us. Instead, we took a player with excellent size and proven production as a standup rush linebacker. @wppete and his Jacksonville Jaguars are now on the clock.

Gus Johnson is criminally underrated and underused as a broadcaster.

WRs Tyler Johnson and Isaiah Hodgins may not be true "sleepers". Most people know their names and they'll likely be drafted in the middle rounds. What makes them "sleeper picks" for me is that I think both guys will turn out to be among the best in the entire class. It's not just "hey, these guys will turn heads". It's "hey, I think these two are being highly underrated, and they're going to make serious noise in the NFL." Hodgins, in particular, is a guy I hope winds up a Buffalo Bill.

Lol it’s all good. All is fair in love and quarantined draft talk! I haven’t seen Claypool listed as anything other than a WR just about anywhere. In my mind, I picture an (obviously athletically superior) David Nelson. A classic Big Slot. If there is reason to believe that he can play in-line, too, or that he can complete a full-on Darren Waller style transition to TE, that certainly changes things. Furthermore, if we want a big, tall, strong red zone weapon, I maintain that one can be found later than the second round. I like Isaiah Hodgins a lot, for instance. In any case, I’m not gonna lose sleep if they pick a WR in round two, I would just prefer they wait until the third or later to start drafting WRs, given the depth of the position in the draft this year.

I hear you....to an extent. With the amount of 11 and 21 personnel the Bills are likely to run, using their most premium pick on a WR4 that’s unlikely to see the field much just seems unwise. I’m all for the Bills drafting one or two WRs this year, but it’s such a deep WR class that using their HIGHEST pick on the position — after just spending their 1st on a WR, no less — seems unwise. In the context of this mock and who was available, it’s hard not to think a RB2 or a Cole Khmet Would have more impact on the offense. Anyway...pick a WR or 2? YES! Use their most premium pick on that position? No way.

I disagree with it making sense to spend 5 picks on 2 WRs, with one of them unlikely to see much playing time. Also, since it IS a passing league, offensive tackles and corners seem important too, no?

Great article at the link below. The reasoning makes absolute sense to me. While Beane spent premium capitol on the WR position and acquired a 26-year-old stud, he only put short term band-aids on the CB2 position (Norman, Gaines), the LE position (Addison), and the RT (Williams) and LB (Klein) positions. As such, and given Beane’s penchant for “doubling down” on need positions in FA and the draft, it’s logical to expect early picks to be spent on EDGE, CB, RT, or LB, with a WR and RB only being taken in the later rounds. https://www.cover1.net/buffalo-bills-brandon-beane-nfl-draft-tendencies/ Since arriving in Buffalo, Brandon Beane has preached his desire to address needs in free agency to allow him the freedom to draft the best player available. Over his two offseasons in Buffalo, Beane has acquired 36 players between the conclusion of the regular season and the NFL Draft, and he’s drafted 16 players. Of these 16 players, only four of them were at a position that Beane did not address via free agency or a trade prior to the draft. Seventy-five percent of the drafted players are at a position that Beane had already acquired a player at earlier in the offseason..... ...After processing all of the information that’s been laid out above, it seems that Brandon Beane may be looking to address cornerback, right tackle, edge rusher, and/or linebacker in the draft. With the way that Beane has drafted in the past, I would say it’s highly unlikely to see a receiver drafted high, and the chances of a running back being drafted high aren’t favorable. However, it’s important to note that this is all speculation with no strict rule.

For those keeping track at home, this means the Bills have now spent this year’s 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 6th round picks and next year’s 4th on WRs. Yeesh.

Still a yuck for me. For the reasons you mentioned, I’m all for the Bills taking a WR (or 2!) in this draft. But because of the deep crop of WRs, they can do it in the 3rd-6th rounds. No need to spend such a premium pick on a WR when it’s the deepest position in the draft. Besides, let’s suppose the Bills hadn’t traded for Diggs and had instead used pick 22 to take a rookie WR. In that scenario, would people still want the Bills to then turn around and spend their 2nd round pick on a WR, too? It’s nuts. Bills fans just have hard-ons for height/weight/speed WR candidates, which was exacerbated by the success of DK Metcalf last year. It’s silly.