Chilly

The similar reasons are true if you're looking at the draft in a bubble, that they could have whoever they wanted at #9. But, IMO, that's not an accurate way to view the draft. It's been widely spread around that the Bills would have taken one of two offensive linemen they thought worthy of the #9 pick, but they were taken. Whether that ends up being true is another question, but that doesn't mean that OL wasn't their top choice in the 1st round. The problem is that you need a Pro Bowl player and difference-maker at #9. Look at the Whitner pick - where Whitner was drafted, we needed him to have the impact of a Troy Polamalu. He obviously hasn't, and that means the Bills didn't get the value they needed from the pick. That doesn't mean the pick hasn't provided some value, it just hasn't had the impact a #8 player should. I'm not sure there was a player at one of the team need positions - QB, LT, NT Line that could have provided that value. The Bills didn't think so, from the press conferences and rumors I've heard. There was only one Tackle taken anywhere close to the Bills slot - #11 with Anthony Davis - and feelings were extremely mixed on him. Instead of reaching for someone who may not be a starter, the Bills went for Best Player Available. I'm okay with that. It's actually a huge improvement from the past, when the Bills took players like Leodis McKelvin over Ryan Clady, Jeff Otah, and Brandon Albert - players that they apparently had highly rated, but passed up anyway. There's a big difference between passing up highly rated need players to draft a luxury pick, and passing up poorly rated need players to make sure you get full value from the draft slot you have. It's this reason that I think the drafts aren't comparable. Look at Miami's pick with Teddy Ginn. Back in 2007, Miami's needs were LT, QB, WR, LB. They picked #9 Overall, and needed a real difference maker at one of those positions. A player that was rated highly on pretty much everyone's draft boards with few question marks was available: Patrick Willis. Passing up Willis to take Ginn is similar to the Bills passing up on that O-linemen crop to pick Whitner - they're passing up highly rated players at need positions to pick a luxury pick.

good luck!

Take a look at Terrell Davis running behind that scheme. What's the best thing that he had? Field of vision. Terrell Davis could see the field better than most of the league. His 40-yard time wasn't that fast, but it didn't matter - he had great vision and lateral movement, so he could make a cut and burst through a hole. Once he did that, he had blocking in the 2nd level from the zone scheme, so the slower top-end speed didn't matter as much. I think Spiller has the best field of vision in this draft, and he's obviously fast and athletic. I think given the opportunity to see the field and make cuts to react to it, he's going to be extremely successful. I, too, see Freddy as much better at this than Marshawn. I feel like eventually this year, Marshawn is just going to be relegated to the short yardage back. And let's face it, sticking his head down and driving his legs is the thing he's best at. He was always exciting dragging defenders, but he never really made long plays.

http://static.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/davie/1440703.html

The club at Bills is Drai. I just got back from Vegas last weekend. If you want a great show, I'd highly recommend Ka!

I think it was an interesting draft. I like that Buddy realizes you have to get real difference makers at the #9 spot, and didn't reach for someone far down his draft board. I also like the fact that we got some size, and teams like Buddy Nix's San Diego Chargers made a living off of getting good, solid offensive linemen in the later rounds. I don't have a problem with the strategy, I just hope he picked the right players. That's really the key - if all of these picks pan out, they'll be a much improved football team.

We play the 3-4?

STAN POKE YOUR GRANDMA

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?showtopic=111587

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/04/a-ten-foo...x-has-caus.html

To anyone wanting more email storage, get your IT department to outsource here: http://www.rackspace.com/apps/email_hosting/rackspace_email/ (Does that help the stock, Fez?)

Take a big piece of construction paper, tape it to the top of your keyboard, put your hands under it. You won't be able to see your hands, and you'll get used to typing real quick.

10GB. Of course, our company sells email, so it's a little different.

Was Big Ben involved?

From TFA: Manion specifically referred to an incident from 2009, also in Nevada.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...erger-incident/

That's funny, because the "No"s on this board have been valid criticisms. No ****, sherlock. Thanks for the info. Glad to see this means I can't criticize their products. I'm NOT talking about open-source software in my point. Whether Apple made the software open-source or closed-source is irrelevant. I'm talking about the software distribution model for their hardware device. What you typed above doesn't apply at all to what I was saying.

You didn't watch much of Colt's career, did you? For all of his faults, he's not injury prone.

Agreed. Dane Cook is one of the worst "comedians" I've ever seen.

Not true. It's become "cool" to hate Apple because as they've grown, they've made some very anti-consumer decisions, the latest being creating an OS platform for mobile devices that's extremely locked-down and controlled with an iron fist. Have you ever seen the developer agreement that you have to sign to publish an App on the App Store? You're not even allowed to talk about it if you sign it, which is one reason why you haven't seen it discussed much. Here's an article that talks about it: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/iphon...e-agreement-all Here's Apple rejecting an eBook reader for books in the public domain, because they don't like the content of some of those books: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/05/apple-says-public-do Here's Apple deleting tons of apps for "Overtly Sexual Content": http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10457460-37.html Yet Apple arbitrarily left apps that broke it's own rules (like the Playboy app and SI Swimsuit Edition app). Just what I want - a device locked down to the whims of the software OS maker. I just can't respect a company that is locking down their platforms like this. The worst part is, almost everyone will have no idea this is actually happening, so Apple can get away with it. Devices like the iPhone and iPad, as well as software rules from Microsoft, are taking us ever-so-slowly to the dream where everything is owned by software manufacturers and is "leased" or "rented" to the person who bought it. If I buy a mobile device, I am going to want access to all of the cool things people legitimately write for the platform. If I buy software, I want to have full control over that software. Unfortunately, Apple sees the world differently. As a result, I will not be buying their products, although I am heavily considering an eventual Android device as a replacement for my Blackberry.

That's not true. According to Sirius NFL Radio the week we signed him, Brohm received offers from several teams but chose Buffalo because he'd have the best shot at playing time there.

Hmm, I'm not sure how far along the Mac version is, but it rocks on linux!

Is anything that is on local news major news? That argument comes down to what you define as "major", which means it's a silly argument over semantics. If I'm running a story on the construction, I would want to publish the seats that it's affecting. Given that the Saints apparently have known for a while which sections and rows would be affected, it shouldn't be hard to let the news know so they could publish it.

Except that if you go look at Saints forums, not all of those season ticket holders actually got called or got the message. There are some openly complaining about it.

You'd loathe iTunes if you tried software like amaroK.