JoshAllenHasBigHands

I would be happier about this, but Bosa did the same thing and still had a monster year. Its meh.

Sports media sucks. If he answers the question (based on information from his agent-the guy in the know), he is a loud mouth. If he doesn't answer, he is a robot and giving non-answers.

Keeping Edmunds at MLB reflects the change in the league. What we lose in run defense, we more than make up for in the way he affects the middle of the field in the passing game. For whatever reason the board freaks out about the run defense, but it reads as though those are the same fans that don't realize how defense is evolving to the passing league.

One point was wrong; another point was presented without context. That makes them misrepresentations. With respect to point two, you seem to be demonizing a common practice: coaches constantly "hand pick" their staff, just to find out after working with that person the relationship does not work. To cast it in this weird light is so odd. Besides that, I don't even think he was casting blame. He just described what happened. Here's what probably happened: that referral was a ***** coach, and probably hired ***** staff. So, when the coach referred McVay, he probably said that he isn't going down this path again. There is literally nothing wrong with it. Regarding that last part, all I can say is that winners make their own luck. I am an attorney at a good firm, and very much so could have used my relationships to get me the job. But, I didn't. Relying on someone else to get you a job or an interview just makes your look like a coward--like you were too afraid to apply for the job yourself. In some instances it makes sense, but I wholeheartedly advocate people taking their professional lives into their own hands.

This was a gross misrepresentation of the interview. 1) I suppose is fair. 2) His remark was that if a coach he thinks does not have a good eye for talent recommends a guy, he is not going take a closer look at the guy. He said it didn't work out with that coach, who was on his staff, and so he let him go. He literally did not blame the guy for anything. Head Coaches hire and fire guys every year. To imply this was a blame game fire is a gross misrepresentation. 3) This is accurate. But he was also saying it was a lesson he learned. I said up top, and I'll repeat it here, that Marrone has really grown and changed from a PR perspective. You talk to the Jags' beat reporters, and they describe that Marrone is nothing like the Bills' beat reporters describe. I think one even said he can't even imagine that Marrone is the same guys the Bills' guys were describing.

Did Littman have an equity interest in this deal? Or if the team sold? I am fairly certain the answer is no. That would mean his compensation did not depend on the outcome of these negotiations. The real truth: sometimes lawyers/representatives say things when advocating for their client, or as a result of the other parties conduct, that warrant that kind of reaction. Its the nature of representation.

This is wrong. Like, "the sky is purple" wrong. There just isn't even an element of truth to it. Littman represented his clients. He did NOTHING he was not instructed to do. He did not have the type of discretion you are describing here.

This is wild. According to this, it was the STATE, and NOT Ralph Wilson, that required the $400 Billion non-relocation buy-out. Ralph got alot of credit for that term. Turns out he should not have.

I can't even begin to express how different these two shows are. If you haven't listened to PMT, you should check it out. The idea is they are ironic representations of the average dumb sports fan. They get huge guests, despite having been ostracized by ESPN and the NFL. They are the equivalent of musicians becoming superstars without the benefit of a major record label. That said, Marrone has been on a couple times now. After Buffalo, Marrone got a tough dose of reality. He realized he needed to lighten up. Him coming on PMT is part of that. He is incredibly likable on the show.

Yeah. I was agreeing with you, and illustrating the point.

In May of this year, the KKK attempted to hold a rally in Dayton. 9 members showed up; they were confronted by 600 counter protesters. The event drew this headline: "KKK holds rally in Dayton, Ohio." Sounds pretty terrible, in isolation, but it ignores the reality on the ground: these are not serious groups, without serious support, and not worth our attention. These isolated groups shouldn't be allowed to co-opt our national symbols.

So we should let hate groups co-op traditionally wholesome and patriotic symbols? Not to mention that justification had nothing to do with the explanation for why he objected to the flag (used during the period of slavery). This is worse than kicking that guy out of Cubs stadium for using the OK sing.

He made some strong arguments for kneeling. I didn't agree with them, and reasonable minds could. But, this is too far. Just completely absurd.

This board is so toxic I find myself rooting for a horrendous season just to prove how ridiculous the claims no this thread are.

Isn't it king of strange that as fans we never think about these guys being injured? I mean, sure, we talk about injuries that keep guys off the field. But, for whatever reason, we never talk about how a nagging injury may be affecting the level of play. Why is that?