Max Fischer

Of course it is, if they don't believe in freedom of expression then why serve the USA?

First, you avoid the question, what do you believe in? I support anyone's right to prayer. I could care less if Tebow prays and will defend his right to do so. I don't recall anyone asking his team to fire him. I'm not going to engage your false premise ESPN fired "conservative" hosts.

Then why did they serve?

If you don't believe in freedom of expression and the Constitution, what do you believe in?

I know this doesn't matter to you, but doesn't the USA exist to allow citizens to express their displeasure over a social issue? You may not like the forum but should feel great about the freedom. The bonus would be to take a minute to think about why someone would protest at all.

Vetrerans did not serve for a flag but to defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights, which protects freedom of expression. Perhaps if you spent a minute contemplating how awesome a silent, nonviolent protest is you could honor those who fought and died. Otherwise, see ya.

Not sure why this is a shock to anyone. Tough schedule, lots of holes to fill, etc.

Sure, we could use Woods and Watkins, but: - Woods was not worth signing for the contract the Rams threw at hit. Yes, he had a good game, but overall, he's been an average WR this year. Or, about what he did in Buffalo. - Sammy Is a very good, sometimes great WR, when healthy, but up to last night, he was just OK. Would still like to have him n Bills but I agree with management that they were not going to sign him in 2018. Jury is still out that he stays healthy. - Goff is not yet a good QB, but he makes throws Tyron won't or can't make, thus, any WR is should do better under Goff; and - Rams spent a ton of money and picks on offense, which has paid off against three weak teams (losing to Redskins at home). Of course, their defense isn't all that great. - Bills can't fix everything in one year. Clearly, the defense is MUCH better, they did not have a good alternative at QB, the star LT is hurt, have not yet improved the right side of the line and have lack of depth at WR. Hopefully,over the season, they can improve at some of those positions, but chances are they'll need to addressed next season.

Looks like TT had too many choices.

I hate when fans lack maturity and whine about irrelevant things.

The only "narrative" that has changed is the common sense recognition that some injuries could be prevented by practicing and playing smart. It's not possible to prevent all injuries but there are many ways to curb the likelihood. There's a reason more football players have steered their kids away from the game and it makes sense to find ways to make it safer. It's attitudes like this that get players hurt.

DeShaun looks DeLost

Right. Water, how could I forget the dumbest of them all? That one never made any sense, it's not like it was "game conditions" where water would not be available. It just led to dehydration and subsequent injuries.

In re: to - LINE BREAKDOWNS: 7/36 or 19% In other words TT didn't really have a chance on 19% of his drop backs. Based on historical data the threshold for average O Line performance has been around a 20% breakdown rate.. so lets say the O Line was average against the Jets. SUFFICIENT PROTECTION: 29/36 or 81%. In other words TT had a relatively clean pocket 81% of the time. UNFORCED QB ERRORS: 4/36 or 11% . Based on my 2015/16 studies if the Bills' QBs commit 5 unforced QB errors or less during a game their odds of winning are solid. TT had 4 unforced errors by my count. Which is under the danger line. Do you have the completion % and yardage for each? Yards if TT took off?

If the players, management and league believe this is the right thing to do why wouldn't football fans support 100%? Seems like a smart move to me, the laughable faux-testosterone rants are empty arguments. I never understood the "manly" way to play: two-a-days, emphasis on the big hit instead of the smart tackle, playing hurt, and all the other things that don't make players and teams better. Hey, but at least you can say you're tough.

I like that. I'd watch Romo. When he gets comfortable I hope Romo finds other ways to improve color commentary. As discussed ad nauseum, nearly all are God awful, full of inane cliches.

Very sneaky. I wonder how this will affect the betting line . . .

I haven't see any report that suggests Bennett was told to get on the ground, he ran from the police, matched the description of an active shooter, etc. All those things MAY have happened but we'll see. There is no doubt police are put in very stressful situations but then again, there are more than a handful of incidents to suggest that Bennett could have a good case that he was unfairly targeted.

I'm on board the McBeane train and believe they have a plan to win; but it won't be this year. - I like Tyrod but he'll only get the team so far. - I like Z Jones and J Mathews, but they are very thin at WR - Rookie CB and thin at DB - OL has yet to prove they can pass block consistently and only have Groy as backup. - Thin at LB If they stay completely healthy and play well, then maybe 8-8 but 5-11 seems more realistic. My hope is they play well and grow over the course of the season.

Agree 100%

With no more evidence than Bennett's letter, you seem to be pretty certain that officers' actions were justified. I see no evidence support or discredit your assumptions. Personally, I'll wait and see; but it sure sounds like it could have been a very unpleasant experience for anyone.

A strong case has been made that each of these moves helps propel a larger/longer plan to win in the future. SG - Not worth the money and may have been replaced by a player who is cheaper and fits the defense. RW - A "fine" player but not worth the money; again, possibly replaced by player who is cheaper and fits the offense. Ragland - Sunk cost. Pre-injury he may have been worth holding but seems clear that he's not the player when drafted, no matter the cost at the time. Mathews - You may be write, but no different than the questions that surround Watkins and I believe they would not have signed him either way. Darby - He really is not all that good and did not fit new defense at all. If Gaines is healthy, he would be a very good replacement. That's a plan. We'll see if it works but there is logic behind each move. If they work out, Bills are on their way to a rebuild. On the other hand, the reverse decision on each sounds much more risky.

Why do so many fans rail against the moves by distorting basic facts? Gilmore - We've seen the good SG and the terrible; but certainly you can make a logical argument he was not worth the contract he signed. (Would you have signed him? I know I wouldn't at that price)) At the very least, SG might not fit in the current defense and we have yet to see TW play a single regular season down. A strong case could be made for "Let's see how it goes," but TW is hardly "very little." Watkins - Same for Watkins, this board and other places has debated ad nauseam about the deal, but Jordan Mathews is no doubt as productive, if not more productive than SW. Perhaps not as dynamic, but over his career, no doubt a much better asset. At worse, this one is a wash. Woods - Oh, please. A good, average player. Did you really want to sign him for what he got? We'll see, but I feel pretty confident that Zay Jones will more than fill Woods shoes. Ragland- Really? The guy may not see the field this year. Darby - Again we'll see, but Darby does not fit this defense and time will tell if his replacement is a bit more than you think. J. Williams - He's an average RB. Tolbert et al have already demonstrated they are as good. JW may not even play this year.

Rosen seems like a bit of a head case.

Perhaps, but then I don't get all the handwringing over the "dime for two dozen" back like JW.