Mikie2times

Thank god they get paid for this

I caught him and the steak on ESPN in their typical feud. Salisbury said we will get the 3rd rounder; Clayton responded that TH may not guarantee us a 3rd. Salisbury then asked if he was worth a third, and Clayton said yes he was at least from a fantasy perspective. Per usual Clayton was his flustered uninformative self. Not that Salisbury is much better but I would love to see him pimp slap that skinny runt.

In my experiences I try and find a common ground when it comes to money and usually I'm successful in doing that. But I will agree that the "gotta be me attitude" is ridiculous. I dated a girl like that once, the whole relationship she expected the freedom of being single with the comfort of our relationship. NEWS FLASH, being in a relationship and being single are two different worlds. Lots of things change, you compromise, you find common ground, and you both change. If it's a good relationship you change together, but I find it hard to believe that two people could live the single lifestyle and still make it work.

These types of things usually involve just yards and not TD's. I would guess that the magic number ends up around 1,200 yards.

I never said it was rigged, I said I don’t believe it to be completely random. I don't think the poker sites have some conspiracy going against the players, people win all the time. I just think you have some factors involved that would make it beneficial to the house to keep players in hands. This is not a "losers" attitude; they make more on the rake by keeping players in, that’s a fact. It's also a fact that several internet gambling web sites have used fraudulent software in the past, many of which went on doing it for several years. So if the cards were not being dealt at random how would you or anybody else have any way of knowing that? Even if it is just about more hands being dealt I still don't like the fact that people could be teaming up at the tables. When it comes to gambling you have enough risk to deal with from the start, and just having these potential things exist makes it difficult for me to wager much on online poker.

I play from time to time but I don't like to play much for the reasons mentioned by the previous poster. For one teaming up is nearly impossible to catch, and it's not exactly like the people doing it would need much IQ. The other thing that really bothers me the incredible hands that appear. I have gotten 4 of a kind, a straight flush, and a royal online all in the past year. This happens at every site I have played at, and I'm not the only one getting these crazy hands. People also tend to make hands at a percentage way higher then usual, this could lead to people staying in more hands, which would give the house a larger cut. I'm not convinced yet that these companies are fraudulent, some of which are very respected such as Party Poker. However in my experiences online the percentages do not seem to match up with the those you would see playing in real life.

Well I can't disagree with your points, and in all honesty you probably know much more about Ypsilanti then me. My time in Ypsi has been mostly spent visiting friends that went to Eastern, and IMO the surrounding areas by Eastern Michigan are junk. Maybe other parts of Ypsilanti are much nicer, like I said you’re probably much more knowledgeable about that. As for the some of the cities I mentioned traffic down M-14 can be a bit tricky, especially during rush hour. I grew up in Livonia and from my house it was between 20-25 miles to the big house. A couple of those cities are closer to Ann Arbor then Livonia is, but I would have to agree that the drive would become very tedious after a couple months. In any event its just another option so good luck on the search JohnnyB

I still live in Michigan and lived 20 minutes from Ann Arbor for most my life. If you have any questions feel free to ask. That said I have to disagree with MichFan, maybe in the early 90's Ypsilanti was an ok place to live, but the way it is now it's hard to imagine it ever being nice. While some of the areas I'm about to list are a little pricier then others they're all within 20 minutes of Ann Arbor. Obviously you get what you pay for so Ypsilanti would be cheaper then these cities. But reasonably priced living options do exist in these areas and for the most part it would be much cheaper then Ann Arbor (notoriously expensive). Livonia Canton Plymouth Farmington Farmington Hills Novi All the places listed are very suburban type areas, you have some other options in the area if you don't mind being in the sticks. It would also help if you gave me a budget as I’ve been looking for places to move in those areas the past year and could give you some ideas.

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.