UConn James

Dude, this is being discussed 15 posts down under the title "Rick Gosselin gives Bills an A+." It's not like it's hidden. Why do people here have to actively create work for the moderators? Come on!

"MADE IN CHINA" Still have the receipt for the Blu-Ray player?

Nice to see Joe-the-6-pack write in the Shoutbox that Logan loves the PR attention she's gotten and that she "would do it again." !@#$ YOU, JOE. Seriously. !@#$ YOU!!!

Possible. Have you tried it on the HDMI-1 or -2 input ports? Have you tried using a different HDMI cable? (Is it the same cable you used for the PS3?)

For those following it, Ms. Logan is speaking about the attack for the first time tonight on "60 Minutes."

I would've certainly felt better about this draft if they'd drafted Stocker instead of Searcy.... That said, it seems pretty good otherwise. And if the intention is to sign a decent TE like Boss in UFA --- and more than intention, they need to actually DO it --- then I can dig this draft. But, as Mr. Wolf said in "Pulp Fiction," Bills fans probably shouldn't go sucking each other's richards just yet. Because while something might look good inside shiny packaging at the store, it's another thing entirely when you open that package. And it's yet another thing when you give that tool to your co-worker who may --- or may not --- know how to use it.

Hmm. Could be b/c she's not a supercilious, smarmy, elitist !@#$. I mean, that could play into it. Just a thought. Also, that over the next year-plus, any pol that Obama touches outside of traditional blue states is going to turn to **** in Nov. 2012 as more people come to see the worsening effect his policies have had on hiring, the price of gas, the national debt, etc. B/c there's that too.

At the time, I thought Mike Mularky was a chickenshit quitter. But as more time passed, it reveals just how smart and lucky was his move to get the !@#$ away from this backward franchise and its aimless owner.

I think he just made a grammar mistake with a misleading/unspecific subordinate clause. Would have been much clearer to write, "Also not to be overlooked: Chargers, Bills and Browns. The Browns now have two first-round picks in 2012." This would be like: "Waiting in the doctor's office were Tim, Bob, and Tina, who was suffering from a vaginal yeast infection." The clause does not apply to the first two subjects. It's complicated a bit by sports team names being a plural case in American English, so "have" is used, which in sentences like this, is ambiguous as to whether the verb is plural case b/c it's being applied to all three subjects, or b/c it's being applied to one of the subjects (Chargers, Bills and Browns) that happens to be a plural case.

I do believe that this is what pisses me off the most about how the so-called BPA strategy played out this year. Kelsay was so astonishingly bad and has such an outrageously stupid salary that you have to wonder whether Kelsay is like the Silence on "Doctor Who" --- an entity that controls many human actions and operates right out in the open because people forget all about them the moment they can't see this particular alien anymore.

I just finished the third to last of season 2, where [yellow-fonted for spoilers] the girl drowns in her own vomit, and Walt just watches. Holy ****! I mean... Holy ****!!!" Been up all night b/c I just couldn't stop watching. I now don't feel quite so bad that BB/Bryan Cranston won for best drama over LOST/Matthew Fox. This show is so gritty, so real. So much better than all the fabricated Hollywood crap where people talk in perfect sentences and everything always ties up... life isn't like that. And it's such an amazing dynamic of almost... rooting for Walter to be successful in his drug production. Up to this point, that's largely because of his family, his situation, and the rationalization similar to what Walter makes --- that someone's going to supply meth and make a lot of $, so it might as well be him so he can provide for his family when he's gone. I just wonder how much longer this dynamic of rooting/sympathy for Walter can last. Here toward the close of S2, I don't see how this show can end well for Walter. All of the things he's done cannot/ought not be rewarded on-screen.

You just hit the nail on the head. I would only add that, no matter the regime, the Bills' penchant for drafting DBs and then replacing them is even more stupid when one factors in how much the NFL rules are slanted in favor of offense. OF course DBs are going to "get burned" and "suck" and have PI penalties. That's the nature of the beast when they make breathing on WRs illegal, and the Front 7 can generate NOTHING for a pass rush. But, guys get scapegoated for not being able to cover perfectly, run out of town, and then the team goes and spends more draft picks in a rinse and repeat. When the rules are this skewed, it matters less who you draft to cover WRs. A much better strategy is to invest in DL/LBs and pressure the QB into making hurried mistakes on passing downs, while simultaneously having guys up front who can also stop the run. We're putting up the shutters before we build the roof.

I forsee an OTA / training camp "injury" so they can hide him on IR to get to what they want physically and learn, and see what comes out of the oven next year.

At that pick, Luke Stocker. Provide some immediate relief to the OTs with his size, and whatever he would bring as a receiver would be gravy. For time out of mind, TE has been the red-headed stepchild of this franchise. They ought to go after a guy in UFA who can help the OL and provide Fitz an outlet option. At LB, I just get a very real sense that this is going to be a total disaster. They're really depending on Poz and Merriman to come through and go uninjured. Other than that, we've got castoffs and a 2nd-year DE convert who's coming off a knee injury. In the 3-4 which depends on LBs as your core, if one or two of these guys don't come through, your D is !@#$ed. It's just !@#$ed. I dunno. Read the NFL.com profile on him and it simultaneously says that Searcy is weak on run support, and that he's strong against the run. So, which is it? Regardless, I guess they were satisfied that Searcy could work in their D, but I have to fundamentally disagree with Nix's BPA here. We've got Wilson or Byrd at SS (Byrd's been used at both spots). There is depth there. Let's face it, we've got jack **** at TE. Stocker instantly would've been the best TE we've had since Metzalaars, and no, I'm not forgetting about Reimersma. You know, I don't want to come across as the guy who's got the red ass b/c my favored player wasn't picked. I'm almost always ready to give leeway. Searcy may end up being a great pick or he may only see time on STs for four years. Who knows? I'm just disappointed that obvious need spots are ignored in favor of spots where there are already decent players. There is zero guarantee that any decent UFA TE will consider Buffalo. Allow me to quote Steve Buschemi's character in "Fargo": "WHO THE !@#$ ARE YOU? WHO THE !@#$ ARE YOU?!?!!" Go pound sand, *. I won't dispute that....

Yeah, in one sentence, it says he'll be tough against the run. And then right below that, it says he shies away from the run and won't contribute to run D. So, fuggin'.... which is it?

We'll get a marginal boost from Dareus. But to think he's going to magically cure the DL in place of Stroud is foolish. Our LBs are questionable at best, and there is **** for depth at this most-frequently-injured position. Searcy will improve our run D? That's funny, considering that outlooks say he 'shies away from run support.' Depending on DBs to stop the run, as this team has done, and from the looks of it, will continue to do for the near future, is a recipe to continue being 32nd D because you're getting your ass handed to you by the other teams' RBs / "mobile" QBs.

Need to run and stop the run. I don't see how they've appreciably improved the "stop the run" part --- our biggest weakness --- in this draft.

The point, tho, is that you draft Front 7 to a) stop the run and b) hurry the passer into making poor decisions, which helps your DBs. Not generating pressure means you cede teams 7-8 seconds to throw. And that puts whatever DBs you do have on an island where they need to have near perfect coverage skills for all that time. I'm sorry, but coverage sacks are few and far between, and when we even got them at more than 1-2-3 per game, it took a Winfield & Clements. And then, when our ****ty Front 7 still wasn't even good enough to get a coverage sack (think, Schoebel lying on the ground reaching for Brady's ankles 3 yards away), the play went too long, and we got toasted. I don't know how people expect that getting rid of Stroud and plugging in Dareus is going to be some kind of magic bullet. We've had 3 GMs, 4 HCs (not counting interims) trying the same losing strategy of ignoring the lines with our highest picks combined with an inability to scout them (especially DL) well. The common denominator --- Tom Modrak. I've never been a tar and pitchfork kind of person myself, but I think it's time for him to be shown the door.

Per ESPN draft coverage, Adam Schefter just said that a St. Louis court has ruled that the lockout IS re-instated pending appeal.

Plus, iirc Youboty is a free agent, and it looks like they want some insurance on McKelvin. I would've preferred one of the LBs that dropped --- Houston or Ayers. There's no denying that CB is a need; I just don't think it was as big a need as LB. And not for someone who'll probably project to nickel or dime. But, as has been said, they go with the BPA rather than need. I agree to a degree, but we need !@#$ing LBs. The 3-4 goes through LBs really fast --- am I the only one who remembers in the latter years before the switch to the 4-3, when we had only 3 guys left at LB in one game b/c of injuries? They were dropping like flies.

Another thing, the Redemption Island clustering also has effects on jury communication. They are not sequestered at Ponderosa (and, as an aside, in the latest video from the ranch, man-face Julie takes a little too much joy in brushing her teeth) so there is ample time to discuss and form jury alliances, critique what they see and hear at tribal council, and they may be thinking more clearly with full bellies and a comfortable bed --> good sleep that really does affect the decision-making process. It can change you. Sure, they have nothing to win other than possible revenge/spite, but they will determine the outcome based on who they liked, who did them favors or backstabbed, (or, in Rob's lingo --- frontstabbed ) them, who they think played the game best, etc. By this time w/o Redemption, there would be what, six people on the jury? Right now, there's two. Now, they can still talk on Redemption, but they're still playing the game there. I actually would be in favor of sequestering b/c it's kind of unfair for the jury to have that pre-vote interaction, but barring that, keeping more people on Redemption isn't a bad alternative. I really hope they keep this game-twist in the future.

I see Fitz as kind of similar to Jay Fiedler. I think he can at least be a stopgap while this team builds up (especially on D) back to where it needs to be. No real point in bringing in a so-called "franchise QB" when most of the parts around him aren't adequate. It's like buying a new battery for a car whose alternator isn't functioning well enough to keep charge on the battery.

That is sexist, but it's also generally been the truth over 22 series. Men and women have very different social behavior patterns. But over all that time, you would think there'd be more like Parvati, given the feminine proclivity for passive-aggressiveness and the masculine inability to decode much beyond than the obvious when it comes to women.

1) Then again, Carolina took 3 QBs last year, and took Newton this year. 2) Any QB can go from a sure-thing to a bum faster than you can say Brian Brohm. Injury, personal performance decline, team decline, etc. 3) Teams won't be shy about drafting a guy who could overtake their current starter, or who might just be a backup. Everyone knows that it just takes one hit to end a season/career. Teams don't act in a rookie's best interest and bring him to a situation that's most convenient to the betterment of his career. They don't mind all that much if a QB's golden arm rusts from disuse over a few seasons --- they can get another QB next year and show this guy out. Don't tell me you've never seen this before. 4) Whenever a new CBA is reached, first-round rookie pay is likely to take a major hit, which would make trading up much more palatable than it is currently. Unless you're ready to sacrifice prime picks, it only takes two or three teams to start a bidding war the Bills probably can't win/won't engage in.

OK. I'll cover my eyes and admit... I watched it. Total Anglophile and monarch history buff. Plus, there's just something about the ladies' accents....