pkwwjd

Thus the phrase under my avatar, never, ever forget 1983-1985.

CBS stats trax had roscoe with a rush after one of the dulfins ran the ball -- obvious mistake.

I was going on the idea that if a new person came every 540 days, and it was a two person job, that would mean that each person's shift was 1080 days (108x10) or just under 3 years. Desmond said that he had been there about 3 years. Sorry, I said 3 1/2 earlier. It is just under 3 years for 1080 days.

My guess had been that she died in an accident that took Locke's use of his legs -- by happenstance But now I'm wondering if Locke's paralysis was psychologically induced rather than by physical injury

Can anyone confirm my memory that the guy in the psych unit with Hurley was a former scientist -- it may just be my suspiscion that has warped into memory. The possibility of this being a giant psych experiment would fit with making someone psycho ...

Desmond said he had been there for more than 3 years. If a new person comes every 540 days, that would make someone's stay about 3 1/2 years. Just a thought I didn't find it odd that Desmond asked about the girl. He was slowly putting the pieces together about that encounter. To ask about the girl seemed natural as that was the bulk of their meeting that night in the stadium.

It would make the recovery of use of his leg's much easier to explain, not so mystical ...

What about the possibility (thinking of the whole psychology aspect) that Locke didn't lose use of his legs because of injury, but rather some lingering psychological/anger issue? Just thinking back to my earlier post on operant conditioning.

Don't leave Clutch. We need your LOST BLOG

operant conditioning n. Psychology A process of behavior modification in which the likelihood of a specific behavior is increased or decreased through positive or negative reinforcement each time the behavior is exhibited, so that the subject comes to associate the pleasure or displeasure of the reinforcement with the behavior. This is the behavioral psychology associated with BF Skinner, who was mentioned in the DHARMA Institute Film. This is different from classical conditioning in that classical you just associate responses (Pavlov's dog food & bell). In operant conditioning, you don't learn by trial & error -- there is no error. Check out B F Skinner page on Operant Conditioning. It mentions something that eventually the operant (test subject) "can come under the control of the stimulus". Just passing on info ...

Mr. Clutch ... don't leave if they come out in Black-Red tonight. We need your blog on LOST ...

Ricky was suspended for 4 games, Miami had their bye last week, so this is Miami's 4th game -- no Ricky

Junior can always get the early bird special if he flashes his AARP card ...

I don't know about you, but I broke even this week!!! Yeah, I know, I didn't make money, but after the week I had with the Bills losing and most of my fantasy teams losing, I figure breaking even with the dividends is pretty good.

I'll get the joke out, yeah, we knew you were 0-3 by looking at what you had ... I would take the trade in a heartbeat. Carr is a horrible fantasy QB, even worse in leagues that count sacks against the QB. Williamson will be a stud WR, next year. He may do great down the stretch, but you need more now than later. If there's any chance for Moulds/Evans to do well, it'll be later in the season. Do it!

the only problem with Fox is they were so focused on Vick's hammy they never had time to replay Spikes' injury. I had to back up the TIVO and see him on the top edge of the screen like I was in the upper deck to see any view of TS going down. They never played a replay. Spikes going down is the equivelant of Vick going down for the falcons. It's like there's no news on Brady so let's get 5000 replays of Vick's thigh.

just saying that it seemed he filled in much better as an OLB when Spikes went down. I'd much rather have Spikes in there, but I think the dropoff would have been greater if Fletcher couldn't go instead.

Crowell is an OLB not ILB

I think Crowell showed that he plays OLB better than ILB, he filled space OK against ATL. He blew chunks filling in for Fletch.

the "end all and be all" of statistics, the QB rating has Carson's first 3 games at 60.88 JP's first three 59.99 actually their stats are comparable other things not taken into account in QB rating: sacks yielded -- JP 7 for 57, CP 10 for 68 rushing yards -- JP 15 for 64, CP 3 for 12 fumbles lost -- each 1 sounding better and better all the time ... take into account, CP's one win was against a Miami squad that won how many games last year? ...

1

17 back

less than 30 behind

He would have had well over 200 yards if we didn't run the 4 WR sets to take advantage of the DB situation in the ATL secondary. RUN THE BALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought the first one was not late. IMO if you see the guy lining the QB up and hitting him before the camera follows the ball downfield, it is generally not late. It used to be you could take up to a step or two and still unload on the QB, now it's just a judgment call be the ref. The second was a hit to the facemask, but it looked a lot worse than it was because Vick's helmet was not strapped on. He was falling away from Crowell and the hit by an open hand was a glancing blow. There was not enough contact to knock a helmet off in any normal condition. Was it a penalty? Probably, by default contact to the head on a QB is a penalty. Was it a bad play by Crowell? Definitely not. He had his hands up to try to disrupt the pass and he didn't deliver a "blow" to the head. EDIT: I didn't see the helmet to helmet on TV's hit (first one). Although I would contend that it would have been h2h cuz Vick was falling back on that one too.