Long Suffering Fan

Come on, Mickey. With a wave of the hand are you going to just dismiss all of my experiences over the last several decades? I get that these are my experiences and not yours and, since you don't know me, you should not necessarily take my word as gospel, but that also means you should not dismiss them out of hand. I also realize that I have an unusual amount of experience in this area (although it is not much of stretch - all you have to do is know a couple of people with bad divorces and know someone starting a company). That is one of the reasons why I commented. I am not a prolific commenter. Far from it, but I have lived this. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are in earnest. I will give you one example. Someone I know is part of a start up company and I am a little more than tangentially involved. We have a product that is significantly better than our competitors and one of them filed a spurious lawsuit against us. It is ridiculous and unfounded. Interestingly they did not sue us in our state, but in the same state as one of their locations. We find out that, essentially, there is a friendly relationship between the judge and the execs of that company. We file to change the venue. Their CEO has a home address in a different state and so they argue that it is already on neutral ground. We finally win and get the venue moved. The process starts again there. Our competitor then withdraws the lawsuit before any judgment could be made against them. A month later they refile the lawsuit in federal court and the process starts up again. We are deep in the process there and we file for a dismissal. Despite all the evidence we present, the judge does not dismiss. The burden of proof is on us for a dismissal and that is hard to do because the competitor is purposely playing their cards close to the vest. It should have been dismissed, but wasn't. Well, you should counter sue. Yeah, maybe, but then the burden of proof that this was a malicious lawsuit once again falls on us and that is very hard to prove. Attempting it opens up an entirely different case and doubles your legal fees. In this case, through some of my bad experiences and through some of the contacts we have made we have developed some trustworthy contacts. We got what I believe is a really good business trial lawyer. Still, we have already had to pay out $75K and we haven't gone to trial yet. The process has dragged out over years and, as a start up, we don't have that money, but we have to find it somehow. They are trying to bleed us out. This is just one example I can give you about how our system is broken. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Again, I am going to assume that you are in earnest and that you have just never been exposed to the dark side of our legal system. I know there are good lawyers. I wish I lived in a world where I could trust the authority structures above me. I wish I could trust judges and lawyers and politicians, but our legal system has serious flaws. Exactly. It is a pay to play system. If you have lots of cash, it seriously works to your advantage....and delay is a go to tactic that money can pay for.

What are you guys all married to lawyers? People who defend lawyers tend to have very limited experience with bad ones. Without going into details, I or (mostly) my friends have had bad encounters with them in civil, criminal, custody, and divorce cases. They love to extend because they make more money. In some cases it is also beneficial to their client, but the motivation is always there. Oh, the billable hour argument...yes, they spend that time...well, maybe. They say they spent that amount of time, but you have no way to prove they did or didn't. I know of one case where someone I knew was being just ripped off. When he asked for a list of billable hours to prove, they sent back a list that included ridiculous things. There is no way to prove that they didn't work that time on your case...or someone else's. Well, they should just get another lawyer - yeah, you are 25 grand into a lawyer that wants 5K more to finish your case and if you move now, you have to start over. I have had lawyers tell me even worse stories. I have had lawyers tell me to avoid certain other lawyers because they will milk you for all your worth. Oh, and the people pay for that work because they are worth it line....ugh. It would be more accurate to say that they pay for that work because they have no freaking choice. Someone facing a problem that needs a lawyer - their life, or their kids, or their bank account is on the line. Listen, I know that there are good lawyers. I just hope that you don't find out the hard way that there are bad ones. This. Our legal system is messed up on many levels and having speedy trials would solve at least some of the problems.

It's ridiculous because there is no reason that it should take 18 months to get something like this to trial. A speedy trial should be the norm. - Delays are bad for a defendant if they happen to be innocent because it drags out the time that the sword of Damocles is hanging over their head. - It is bad for a plaintiff it they happen to be right because it drags it out and does not give them closure. But it all racks up billable hours for lawyers, so I guess it is good for them. Grrrrr....

Of course, the DB thought he would go for the 1st down. Going for the TD then would leave Patrick too much time. 😭

When I was a kid, saving my ticket stubs was a big deal. It was a good memory for me.

It is hard to know the motivations behind people and why they would leave that out (pre-determined conclusions, wanting a paper that had a newsworthy conclusion, funding, less nefarious things), but I refuse to believe that they didn't consider it. If a bunch of yahoos, including myself, immediately point that out on TSW, I can't imagine that a group of intelligent researchers publishing a paper didn't think of it. That is so true. Back in the day, you just had to live with it, which likely meant no more competitive sports. It was the old "Trick Knee". Without the ACL, you were just so much more likely to pop it out of joint momentarily. I found that out when I tore mine in my 40s. My knee swelled, but I had no idea that I had torn it. I was out of town so I just iced it and rested it. When I got back in town it was actually feeling pretty good. Three weeks after the injury I was running on it aggressively. Then I started playing sports again and I kept tweaking it. I thought I better get it checked and, when they told me it was a torn ACL, you could have knocked me over with a feather. I remember really liking Jeff Nixon - four takeaways against the Dolphins in 1980 to help break our 20 game losing streak against them. Then one year he gets a knee injury (in his mid to late 20s - his prime) and never plays again. I think that was ACL, but I don't remember for sure. It was a death sentence for his career.

Right, which was my view before I read the article. We signed a great player who was no longer in his prime and is probably only really good at this point. My point in posting was that the article has led me to start to believe that Miller is still great and has not lost it...at least not yet. That was what was brought out by the analysis of his plays last year. His sacks are not as dependent on his burst alone as I might have thought. Not having the time, inclination, or skill to analyze all of Miller's snaps last season, I guess that means I am taking Joe B at his word. I mean it is only one analysis and someone else might come to different conclusions, but I think it is a valid data point.

This is behind a pay wall. Joe B watched every snap from Miller last year. It is a very long article which goes so far as analyzing some reps frame by frame to point to Miller's ability. https://theathletic.com/3224175/2022/04/05/von-miller-buffalo-bills-film-review/?source=dailyemail&campaign=601983 Some conclusions from the article: There is much, much more...some interesting stuff about him rushing from the left and how he fits, etc. Miller will have an impact, not only on his rushes, but his presence will help all of his teammates through the extra attention that he receives, stunts, and forcing the QB up into the pocket. I think most of us were happy with the Von Miller signing, but we were all wary of his age and the length of his contract. As strange as this may sound, after reading the article, I went from being really excited about the signing to wondering if this is actually much better than I thought. Not to be blasphemous, but did we just add Bruce Smith? Obviously, no. No one was as good as Bruce, but did we just add something close? I have that weird, excited feeling that the Bills fan in me tamps down with thoughts like - don't be a homer, don't get carried away - but there is a chance this could be really good.

My guess would be that the Bills want to get better at the corner position as compared to last year. I base that on the fact that Wallace left for $4M/year. Despite any nice words coming out of OBD, I think that says that Wallace was merely okay at the position (in their opinion). The only other reason for letting him walk like that would be if they thought Dane Jackson was better, but Wallace was definitely ahead of Jackson on the depth chart. To me, that all screams they will draft a corner on day 1 or 2.

Arrrrgggghhhh.....I need a pain emoji...or a you shot me in the heart emoji. I thought I was getting over it and then I read that comment and I realized I wasn't. What's in the box?....................Pain.

Actually, I'm thinking that Josh Allen is a cross between Joe Montana and Jack Reacher (not the Cruise one, the Amazon Prime series). - He's a student of the game. - He is sold out and dedicated to constantly improve. - He is smarter than many realize (highest Wonderlick of his QB class by far - an imperfect measure I realize). - He has deceptive speed and can run away from LBs, which isn't supposed to happen. - He can stiff arm and throw people down. - He can jump over you if you go low on him. - He can absolutely break a DBs ankles like he did in NE. - He has a ridiculous arm. Seemingly once a game he makes a throw that few QBs could make. - He has incredible escape-ability within the pocket and almost never goes down to the first guy. There have been QBs that had some of these attributes, but never all of them. He really could end up as the greatest ever.

Not to be pedantic, but HE is Mr. Anderson and he is destroying all the Agent Smiths. Or maybe you are saying that he will destroy all the other QBs that are pretened Mr. Andersons. That's fine. As long as he doesn't destroy himself. I do agree with the premise, however. He could end up being the best QB of all time. In 15 years we could be talking that way. He cold be The One.

I'm good with zero Allen designed runs against the Jets, but have him run as much as you need to in the playoffs. It is not that I am worried about him in any particular game, but why not save some wear and tear, if possible. I do think Allen is very different than Cam Newton. I remember Cam getting absolutely SHELLACKED sometimes. That only rarely happens to Allen. Part of that is the rule changes. I remember Cam getting a lot of lowered helmet on helmet hits and that has been greatly reduced in the game. The other part is that Allen seems to have a way of turning what could have been devastating blows into normal hard tackles.

I was at that game in the upper deck, about 10 rows from the top. My family kind of made fun of me for going. That is too strong. It was more like - why? It turned out to be a good time...although I don't remember it being so crowded. We hated Dallas back then....I mean, I don't like them now, but it is nothing like I felt toward them in the 80s-90s. Perhaps my Patriots feelings have taken the edge off.

This. We are on the outside and will never know what really happened, but I really think you have to consider spygate when you talk about the NFL reaction to deflategate. Remember also that Goodell is often the personification of the owners. I'm sure there were a ton of owners who kept it quiet, but were furious at Kraft and the Patriots over spygate. They bit their tongues a little because, if it is bad for the shield, then it actually is bad for them. Proof that the Pats cheated in Superbowls would definitely hurt the shield. So, the tape evidence is destroyed on the spot and the owners go along....but they must have been seething. Especially the ones that felt that their team may have been robbed by the Pats cheating. Then, deflategate comes (more Pats cheating) and they are in no mood to be forgiving. I bet Goodell had no choice but to come down hard.

I'm having the DTs from lack of football, so I watched about half of it out of desperation. If you watched the above clip, you saw all that needed to see. Although.....I found the number of interceptions interesting. I think all six QBs had one (?) despite the fact that the defense was giving 50% effort most of the time. I'm not sure if that is common in Pro Bowls. Supposedly above average QBs throwing to the best WRs and there were a lot of picks. It's an illustration of how important being on the same page with your receivers and scheme have on the position.

While the Pro Bowl can be so tragically disappointing, there were a couple of moments with our favorite receiver that are worth sharing. The Diggs brothers went 1 on 1 a few times. It is a little over a minute long. Stef plays some D and covers his brother a couple of times and then Stef scores on his brother and points at him as he falls to the ground. Stef definitely came out on top.

It actually does work that way. Drafting at the top is an advantage. Of course, that does not make your team instantly good....or ever good. As you mention, see the Sabres. If you draft bad, you can fritter away your draft position, but there is a reason that teams trade up.

Aside from the fact that it is way too early to really tell the impact of this rookie class, this was the headline of the article: Bills 2021 rookie class does not fare well in ESPN ranking And they ranked them 27th. Considering the Bills picked 30th, wouldn't that make them slightly above average? That article is saying that the Bills outperformed their draft position, but then also says they did not fare well. 😕

This content is a week old, but I did the site search and couldn't find it. If this is buried in another thread, mods feel free to merge... I ran across this by accident. It is 15 minutes of Warner breaking down some Allen plays in the KC game. There are some really good details in it pointing out what they were trying to accomplish, why Gabe was open, what Beas was doing, Diggs probably not knowing the play call on the two point conversion he caught, how the Bills ended up attacking the absence of Mathieu on some key plays, etc.

Thanks for posting. I like that jumbo play that Thomas scored a few times on throughout the clip. They line up heavy, motion 2 guys out to the left, quick snap, those two run clear out routes, and Thomas catches an easy swing underneath. Davis was faster. Plus, Thomas had a patient running style - it would bug me when people would talk about the patience of Leveon Bell a few years back as if he was the only one in the history of the NFL to ever run that way - then he would decisively hit a hole, be able to make a guy miss in the hole. Sometimes that would allow a defense to rally to prevent a breakaway run. Thomas was the king of the 7-8 yard run (at least in my memory). Then Davis would come in when a defense was tired and kind of used to Thurm's running style and he would get up field fast and hit some big runs.

That was Rocketship 7 in the morning, right? That's what I remember. We had a small TV (well, small for its time) that sat on our kitchen table that I would turn on while eating rice krispies. Star Blazers was after school....although I'm pretty sure that was when I was older.

The NFL is the ultimate meritocracy (sports usually is). The best players get the jobs and no one cares about skin color. We don't love Josh because he is white or Diggs because he is black. We love Josh because HE IS FREAKING JOSH! BTW, this is great for the country as a whole because fans will identify with the players on their favorite team, regardless of color. And don't you feel the same way about coaches? I do. I can't believe for a moment that McD would pass over a qualified candidate because of skin color. He wants to win. The Rooney Rule is only needed for the odd idiot out there (which I am sure there are some). So, what accounts for the disparity in black coaches? Don't stone me, but I think there really isn't any. People point to the percentage of black players in the league, but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Some of the best coaches in the game were not good enough to play in the NFL - Bellichick, McVay, etc. The fact that they weren't good enough athletically gave them only one option if they wanted to stay with the game they love - coaching. Many took unpaid internships right out of college and worked their way up. So, when you compare that guy who has 10 years of coaching experience in their early 30s to the ex-player who had a good 10 year career, the one looks ahead of the other (as far as coaching goes). What gives the non-player the advantage? The very fact that they were not good enough to play at the NFL level, or college level for that matter. I think that reason more than any is why the percentage of coaches actually is more representative of the general population and not the NFL population.

Well done video. I am sooo happy that Beane and the scouts successfully defeated math, itself. Wow. That video improved my mood.

No. Maybe if it was to any other organization, but it being to Oishei has me leaning toward taking it not as a shot.