The Red King

But do we have anything other then the victim's word that the attacked demanded those things? Any actual audio of him demanding them. She could be making this up. She knew he wanted those items.

Again, the victim's story is plausible. At the same time, it's equally plausible that this was all setup, or that she was legitimately attacked, but the attack wasn't related to Shady...and she lied to pin it on him. Any of those three scenarios are equally plausible right now. We only have her word that the attacker demanded those specific items. There is no concrete evidence currently. None.

Guilty until proven innocent, is it? Yes, he asked for specific items... ...or did he? There is no proof the attacker asked for those items, just her word he did. And this is why hard evidence trumps speculation in a court of law. Sadly, posts like this show it's far easier to sway the court of public opinion.

Again, no hard evidence. I'm not saying he didn't do it. I'm saying there is not enough hard evidence to say he did or didn't. The known facts as we have them make the accuser's story plausible. At the same time, it's equally plausible that she set this up...or was attacked for something completely unrelated, and seized the opportunity to frame McCoy. I refuse to come to any definate conclusion withoout some hard evidence.

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but at this point I think you're being actively trolled. They're seeing how far they can wind you up, and you're taking the bait.

If he did this, McCoy is a monster that deserves what he gets. That being said, this looks a lot like a setup. Too many inconsistancies, too many things don't make sense.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, which is why I never state mine as fact, like you did. You could be right, but we don't have crystal balls. It wasn't your opinions that ground me down, just the fact you presented them as absolutes.

Does that even matter if the targets aren't thrown at in the first place?

Alright, that makes a lot more sense.

Ugh. What's next? 15 yards for stepping in already existing footprints in the snow?

The signpost ahead..."Thread merge incoming"...

Hmm, from 0-16 to playoffs in one year, stated as absolute, this is 100% going to happen, fact instead of "I believe...". So...should your pred...wait, this isn't a prediction...should your guarantee fail to come true, will you still be here, apologizing for making such an outlandish claim? Browns will make the playoffs, Bills will be absolute worst in the league in both turnovers and points allowed. I have your guarantee correct, don't I? ...or, are you psychic and already saw this outcome? In which case, what are this weekend's winning lottery numbers? ...how long until training camp again? Posts like this, people posting their opinion as if it were fact is really wearing me down.

Can we see him in our scheme, with our personell for a season before deciding if we overpayed?

In the end, regardless of how TT does in Cleveland, the sad truth is...he would not have done well in Buffalo this season. Different people will place blame in different places, some on the Bills, some on Tyrod, some on both. Regardless, most all of us agree Tyrod wouldn't do well were he still here, so I don't think people will say we should have kept him, even if he somehow excells in Cleveland. Despite who you blame, Tyrod, the Bills and the Browns are better off from the trade. TT is a Brown, time to move on.

Keep in mind with TT under center opposing defenses stacked the box hard, limiting McCoy's opportunities. This season with a QB willing to throw deep, Shady should have a little manuevering room.

Buffalo recognizes character and culture as valuable assets. Kap would be the antithesis to that, a distraction. Buffalo has moved other players that don't display the character they want. Laugh if you will, but that blue-collar, band-of-brothers attitude is part of what helped propel them into a playoff birth.

Wow...that's wild then. A lucky coincidence for the Bills. Timing, huh?

I think the only reason Bills went with red in the Hoth game was maximum visibility in the blizzard.

Much higher chance at injury in the NFL. Players break easily, it's hard to even transition from college to pros. NFL owners don't want to wear down their players before they even take an NFL snap. Imagine if Rosen had to play AAA ball...just one solid shot to the head and he might not even ever suit up as a Card.

What double-standard? Tyrod didn't get 100 tries against the Jags. He got one. The Bills knew it would take a miracle for TT to win a playoff game, so they tried Peterman just in case. The difference here that renders your assertion irrelevant was...the Chargers game was not a playoff game. If Buffalo (and Peterman) lost badly (and they did), the Bills could still put Tyrod back in for the rest of the season. They do that, they still have a shot at the playoffs...and giving TT a shot in a playoff game...all of which still happened (with TT laying an egg and validating the staff's assessment of him). So no, there was absolutely no double-standard there. Regular Season vs. Playoffs, apples and oranges. If they just up and threw Peterman in against JAX ala Rob Johnson, then you could claim double-standard. And I would have considered that just as foolish a move as starting Rob was.

Even if it was a 1-in-a-100 chance, they figured it was worth taking. The team was in a death spiral, and say what you will, the team did pull out of it the following game. I'll still firmly hold to it being a two-fold benefit. Find out what you got going into the off-season, and taking the chance, because they knew TT wasn't going to win a playoff game (prophetic, give TT's performance in JAX) and figuring even a long shot was better then no shot. One game may not have been enough to fully evaluate Peterman, but I'd wager if he even played half-decently he'd have gotten the start at KC. It's just, they rolled the dice and got snake eyes. They then decided Peterman wasn't ready yet and at that point was not going to be an upgrade over TT...so they instead decided to just throw TT back in and take their chances.

There are a number of people who think Tyrod would have excelled here had Buffalo kept him and instead of Allen instead picked up some receivers...and those people insist Buffalo should have done just that. And you, yourself, note there are people here that claim he sucks. My post was simply frustration at getting blasted by both groups because I have a middle-ground view of him. Also, the Bills did not start Peterman because they thought he was better then TT. They started him because the team was in a tailspin and they thought Peterman might be better. They knew TT wasn't the long-term answer, and wanted to see what Peterman could do. They knew they had a decision to make in the offseason. And they wanted a good look at Peterman going into it. How many "Make Peterman the starter and don't draft a QB!" threads were there this offseason? Zero. How many would there have been had Peterman not gotten a start (aside from the Hoth game, which he looked good in)? They knew what TT could do, and knew it wouldn't be enough to win a playoff game. They didn't know what Peterman could do, and decided it was worth at least checking. At no point did they think Peterman was better. They simply didn't know, and I hate the mistaken assertion some make that think they did indeed believe that.

Problem with the media is...it's not about putting out the best quality, it's about getting the most reads/clicks. That's why there are always one or two outragious placements in Power Rankings...just to get people fired up so they get ten-twenty pages of replies. The media doesn't care if you like their content, they just care if you keep reading it. Sully's column may have become a bit dry, one note...but people kept reading, and that was what mattered. The fact that many read it just to rampage and critisize it is irrelevant...they read it, and that's what mattered. Or, to quote Captain Sparrow, "But you have heard of me!"