Mikie2times

I agree with LA, besides these chemistry things when a woman is involved with somebody else can be a little tricky. Lots of times women in relationships start seeking out quality’s that their spouse is missing. If they find that in somebody else the apparent chemistry can be very strong at first but will fizzle out in time. Even if that’s not the case listen to what LA said, look at the way you met this girl. She has a boyfriend; no matter what the circumstances she should put an end to her current relationship before she starts testing the market. If none of this stuff matters to you just keep in touch with this chick but don't get to close. The last thing you want to become is her emotional blanket. If she wants you bad enough her and her boyfriend will have a fall out soon and you will be able to come to the rescue.

Damn those things would make Ron Jeremy self concious. I would be willing to live with it though.

I thought Willis was signed to an incentive laden deal that had him paid top dollar if he performed well. If that’s not the case then I really have to question why we even took a shot at him. We did him a favor drafting him so high, and he should be paid according to wear he was selected. He might have been top 5 talent before the injury, but the injury happened, and the risk a team would assume by drafting him lowered his draft position and should lower his salary. It's not like its common practice to demand more money before your first contract expires, and it shouldn't be any different because Willis looks recovered. By the way I think Willis will have a huge year, I'm not knocking him. I just think it would be wrong to hold out after just a couple seasons given his situation. Then again it's all about the money so I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if this happens.

The opinion of any commentator or magazine means absolutely nothing to me, especially when they have so little to base it off of. I just don't take the opinion of anybody outside the NFL that seriously. If these prognosticators were that good they would be part of an NFL organization and not on the the NFL network. 90% of the people on this board know more about the players of this team then anybody in the media. How many "football experts" watched every snap the Bills had from last season? Or feverishly read the profiles of every player we drafted the past 10 years? The fact is most Bills fans are obsessed, we follow every minuscule aspect of this team and we do it religiously. Sure many commentators have played at the professional level, but that doesn’t make them experts in talent evaluation. These guys ask a couple questions, do a few hours of research, and then form an opinion. I take the knowledge of some on this board more seriously then that.

CB's have made out in free agency ever since its inception. The Bills trend is similar to plenty of other teams who decided to draft top CB's every couple years rather then drastically overpay the position. Besides I think it's a strategy that has worked out rather well for the Bills since the early 90's. Odoms, Smith, and Burris all played well below their past levels, and certainly below their contract levels. Winfield is still playing well but with a Bills defense seeking more INT's and an inflated contract we decided to not resign him. As for Nate I really think the Bills get him locked up before the season starts. The Bills under the TD era don't have a history of paying out enormous FA contracts. TKO is the only player that got a huge payday, Milloy got payed well but even including those two guys we have yet to see a Daniel Snyder like FA contract. When you combine that with the fact that we did not draft a corner very high up this year we really don't have a ton of options if Clements walks. This lack of planning would lead me to believe we get Nate locked up before he hits the market.

I agree that were trying that approach right now, and past Sam Adams the numbers have yet to prove much. Out of the DT group Edwards has the best chance at stepping up this year, but even with him playing well were still one injury away from getting ran on like we did in 2000. I also agree that that the defense was a little bit overrated last year. It's a very good defense, but we relied so much on the blitz that we got beat in the secondary against good offensive lines. Throw in a whole slew of timely turnovers last year, an extra year on the veterans, and the loss of Pat Williams. I just think it would be a mistake to assume the defense we will continue at its prior pace. This season is going to be about much more then the OL and JP Losman, it will also be about whether or not the defense can continue to perform at high levels.

I remember that thread Lori, and if I recall right I also listed Moulds as the key player. Just remembering a couple years back to how the offense performed with Reed as the go to guy made me cringe. While Moulds is still very important to this team the emergence of Evans has made it possible to have success if he goes down. But without Williams or Adams this will look like a completely different defense, a far cry from what we have grown to love the last two years. We can continue to be solid if Adams stays healthy, but scratch him out at things will get ugly quick.

Enter BF in 5-4-3-2-1

Which would easily be enough to start a riot

Of course the performance of JP and the OL will have a great effect on the coming season. Since we really have no way of knowing how those situations will play out I don't view them as question marks. If those two things don't play out well we won't be having that great of a season anyway so the rest of the concerns become irrelevant. But what if the offensive line does gel and JP is having a solid enough year to get us to the playoffs? The one thing I can see derailing the train is losing Sam Adams. The combination of Sam Adams and Ron Edwards will be strong enough to play the run well, pressure the QB, and keep offensive lineman off our LB's. But if you take Adams out of that equation the interior line becomes well below average. We have guys that can give you some reps but could anybody on this team be capable of filling in for Sam for more then a couple games? Maybe Tim Anderson comes along, but it's not exactly like he has much experience at the pro level. Bannon could also fill in but how would he look without Pat or Adams drawing the majority of attention next to him. I have hope for this season but I hate to have such large amount of this teams success hinge on one guy. Maybe we can deal Henry for a DT, or pick up some veteran depth; I just know our current situation leaves us very thin at the position.

It would be difficult to know what was or wasn't normal before I was born, but I just don't agree that this behavior is the "norm" nowadays. It's all over the media, the media is everywhere, it just makes things look worse then they really are. 30 years ago you wouldn't have known this event happened, now you have video cameras in every possible location and the second something like this goes down it's everywhere. I'm sure things are different then they used to be, but I just believe the media has altered people’s perceptions and made this into a bigger problem then it really is. As for the banning comments I was under the impression that it was being suggested in this thread, it was not directed towards you and if nobody mentioned that then forget I even said it.

I'm sorry to hear that, and I didn't mean to advocate driving when high. I mentioned further down in a post that driving a car when high would certainly lead to an increased likelihood of an accident. As for your price question it varies a lot depending on the area. Generally the farther west you go the cheaper it gets, in Michigan anything worth a crap is about 50$ an 8th, not very cheap anymore.

It's so ridiculous when people make a sweeping generalization of the way kids are raised today. I'm sure the parenting of baby boomers was so exceptional that the 50 year old ass hole doesn't exist in today’s society. Bad parenting has existed since people started humping and the only reason it looks so rampant today is the expansion of the media. When people suggest banning certain age groups from activities it even gets more laughable. I wonder if these people exited the womb at 35, do they forget that they were once that 6 year old causing ruckus? But it all makes sense, let’s ban old people from driving, young people from eating in restaurants; hell lets just make life perfect for a specific age group and hell for everybody else.

Slightly worse? Come on VA, seeing somebody on Heroin is like watching somebody die in slow motion. Your other points are valid, but neither alcohol or cigarettes serve medicinal purposes. That’s where the major distinction with marijuana lies, the medical community has even confirmed this fact. If you ever smoked you would know that marijuana relives stomach aches and nausea, and relives pressure on the eyes. It is also excellent for stress when compared to other medicines or recreational drugs. Your case for not legalizing marijuana has some points, and without a way to detect if somebody’s high it will continue to be a major question mark for those in favor of legalization. But drop the comparisons to other designer drugs, you have no first hand experience to speak about and that in itself flaws your logic.

It's kind of funny; your current argument is helping prove your original argument wrong. If smoking pot is so horrible why would the government have such loose laws for marijuana convictions? Try comparing the laws regarding Heroin with Marijuana, you’ll find a much harsher set of penalties. AD - As for your conspiracy theory I really don't think that’s what started the governments views on marijuana, however it certainly could be affecting their current views on the subject.

No, I just smoke because after a stressful week it helps me relax. I tend to get overstressed and when I smoke it completely takes my mind off the daily grind. Just that hour of mental release has such a positive effect on my well being. For that reason I don't consider growing, even if it was legal. Obviously their are probably better ways to handful stress, but if that’s my way of doing things. I just get so frustrated when people classify Marijuana with alcohol, then to say it's the same as Heroin or LSD, it blows my mind. My godmother died from Heroin, that drug destroyed her, eventually it took her life. I smoke a couple times a week, work, and consider myself to be a morally oriented person. To me Marijuana has incredible medicinal qualities, of course theirs negatives, but those negatives are still far ahead of alcohol or cigarettes.

My favorite commercial is the one when they smoke and start playing with guns. You couldn't pay me to be within 100 yards of a gun after I smoked.

Obviously Marijuana isn't good for you, it causes cancer, but compared to cigarettes it's really not even close in terms of number of deaths. It's probably causes cancer at higher levels but their hasn't been enough long term data to prove that. In terms of driving, people would be more likely to get in accident while high, but much less likely when compared to alcohol. Their has never been a documented case of somebody overdosing on Marijuana. I wrote a 25 page paper on the possible repercussions of marijuana legalization when I was in college, combine that with the fact that I still smoke Marijuana and I think I'm fairly qualified to debate the subject. Read a book? Ask me a question and look it up, I promise my answer will be in unison with the medical community and research done on the subject.

Holy sh-- you can't be serious. Has their been ONE documented case in which somebody has overdosed on Marijuana? Have you ever smoked a joint and went threw withdrawal because you needed to be high again? Have you ever smoked a joint and picked a fight? Have you ever smoked a joint and drove into oncoming traffic? Have you ever seen somebody go into convulsions because they needed to smoke a joint so bad? Annually how many people need to check themselves into rehab because the Marijuana addiction is destroying their life, and how's that compare to alcohol, LSD, and Heroin. Annually how many people die from smoking related deaths compared to Marijuana? The reason the government classifies Marijuana in the same group as those drugs is because Marijuana isn't a socially accepted drug. It really is that simple, and just because alcohol and cigarettes are socially acceptable doesn't make them any more safe. All drugs have consequences including pot, but to think the governmental classification is purely based on the danger of the drug is a joke. I'm sure you get my point by now but preaching to the moral police is usually an effort in futility.

The Pistons will take this series and will win game one just as they did last year in LA. It's pretty obvious how this team responds to being looked at as the underdog. With the National Media Spurs love fest they know once again that nobody is giving them a chance. The Spurs are a truly great team, but when Detroit is getting trashed we have seen them unite game after game the past two years. It's going to be a physical series with Detroit getting all the must have games just as they have in the past. Pistons in 6.

I couldn't agree more, I couldn't be happier with my decision to get a Shepard last year. We have a long haired Shepard; he really is an incredible animal. Every night he sleeps in the doorway of the bedroom getting up to peak in the bed every hour or so to check on us. If trained properly, given their intelligence, it's not that hard to teach them when it is ok to be protective. Like you said, they are extremely loyal animals and make great family pets. Ever since COPS blew up their has been plenty of misinformation surrounding the breed. If you want them to be attack dogs they certainly are capable of that, but that’s basically because they have the smarts to do almost anything that is trainable to a dog.

I'm really surprised anybody could look at this thing and not determine that it was justifiable. When it comes to the police looking out for their well being it doesn't matter that this was a overweight chick, or a fully loaded gang banger, in this situation they must be treated the same to ensure the officers safety. In a car their are tons of blind spots, and when a person refuses to exit their vehicle it puts the officer in jeopardy. This chick was defensive from the start, in hindsight it was probably because she knew she was driving with a suspended license. But in the moment the officer just as easily could have assumed her behavior was a result of her hiding something in the car. Even once he knew the license was suspended her actions were still inconsistent with a person driving on a suspended license. I mean seriously, how many people would act like that in the same situation? Bottom line is if you get pulled over put your hands on the wheel so they can see your not reaching for anything. Follow what the officer asks of you, and odds are you will either get your ticket reduced or they might even let you go.

Scary protective yes, but turning on their owners? Having a Shepard I have read plenty on them and this type of behavior has never been mentioned. Maybe you experienced something like this, but for a properly trained Shepard this type of behavior is not common. Like you said though it's completely an issue of establishing dominance and properly training the animal. If you decide to go with a large breed dog, or a breed that has aggressive tendencies, you better be on the spot with its training or you’re putting other people and your family at risk.

Heroine? Jesus what is wrong with this guy. While equally dense it’s easier to compare alcohol and heroine then it is to compare marijuana and heroine. But their will always be those people, most completely lacking in life experiences and common sense, that classify all drugs as the same.

They need to smoke a bowl and chill out... But in all seriousness Marijuana can be used for a variety of illnesses and to not recognize its medicinal value is ridiculous. After I broke my wrist last year they gave me Tylenol 3 with codeine. After writhing in pain for 2 straight nights, and being denied by my doctor for a stronger pain reliever I decided to visit the local street pharmacist. The relief was enough to get threw those first few days of intense pain and that was that. No addiction, no immediate side effects, and no long term consequences. The only legit beef you could make is the negatives of smoke inhalation. But nowadays they make vaporizers so that doesn't even have to be an issue anymore. But I suppose it would be in the people’s best interests to prescribe more powerful unnatural drugs with very little information about their long term consequences. For once can't it be about the people and not the money?