Taro T

Here is the schedule for you to copy/paste. W - Sept. 7 Seattle Seahawks 1 p.m. L - Sept. 14 at Jacksonville Jaguars 1 p.m. W - Sept. 21 Oakland Raiders 1 p.m. W - Sept. 28 at St. Louis Rams 4:05 p.m. L - Oct. 5 at Arizona Cardinals 4:15 p.m. Oct. 12 Bye L - Oct. 19 San Diego Chargers 1 p.m. W - Oct. 26 at Miami Dolphins 1 p.m. W - Nov. 2 New York Jets 1 p.m. L - Nov. 9 at New England Patriots* 1 p.m. L - Nov. 17 (Mon.) Cleveland Browns 8:30 p.m. W - Nov. 23 at Kansas City Chiefs 1 p.m. W - Nov. 30 San Francisco 49ers 1 p.m. W - Dec. 7 Miami Dolphins (at Toronto) 4:05 p.m. L - Dec. 14 at New York Jets 1 p.m. L - Dec. 21 at Denver Broncos 4:05 p.m. L - Dec. 28 New England Patriots* 1 p.m. 8-8. I hope I've underestimated them.

Reminds me of being at an Environmental Conference when the Title V Air Permitting Regs came out in the early 90's. I was eating lunch at a table with some mid-level EPA guys and a chick that worked for one of the Environmental Industry Newspapers. She was explaining to them how much harder her job was now that she didn't do political reporting for the Cleveland Plain Dealer because she couldn't just call the Mayor up and have him answer all her questions for a story anymore.

So basically it's a performance art of a performance art? This chick is a serious #$%^!(* %$(~. She apparently wants to get rich and famous by pissing people off ala Maplethorpe (sp?) but doesn't have the guts to actually do what she's purporting to do. (That part of it, is actually a good thing.) What a worthless example of what is supposed to be an intelligent person. Yale grads all around must be very proud.

Better question: have you ever had a Guinness in Ireland? I can't say I was ever impressed with it after it made the journey across the pond, but for the 27 hours I was there, it was pretty d*mn good.

You think the Pats would stand for not having their bye week until the 14th week of the regular season? Or would they change the rule that the Bills have to play them when they are coming off a bye?

Very sorry to read about your loss. Looks like your boy fought quite a battle. Thank you for sharing the story.

Wait a second. When did you start talking about Dom?

"Always look on the bright side of life." (whistle, whistle, whistle) "Always look on the bright side of life." (whistle, whistle, whistle) But, hey, there is a bright side, the smiley's back. Thanks for all the effort Scott.

For "everyday" drinking, usually Blue/Blue Light. For "special occassions", Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. Whole bunch of other ones that I like, but those seem to be the standards I keep coming back to.

Where's Meazza? We need a ruling on this one.

HBD.

Exactly.

Eastern Conference: (1) Buffalo vs (8) NY Islanders: 4-1 (2) New Jersey vs (7) Tampa Bay: 4-3 (3) Atlanta vs (6) NY Rangers: 2-4 (4) Ottawa vs (5) Pittsburgh: 3-4 Western Conference: (1) Detroit vs (8) Calgary: 4-3 (2) Anaheim vs (7) Minnesota: 4-2 (3) Vancouver vs (6) Dallas: 3-4 (4) Nashville vs (5) San Jose: 2-4 Eastern Conference: (1) Buffalo vs (6) NY Rangers: 4-2 (2) New Jersey vs (5) Pittsburgh: 4-3 Western Conference: (1) Detroit vs (6) Dallas: 3-4 (2) Anaheim vs (5) San Jose: 4-2 Eastern Conference: (1) Buffalo vs (2) New Jersey: 4-2 Western Conference: (2) Anaheim vs (6) Dallas: 4-3 Finals: (1) Buffalo vs (2) Anaheim: 4-2

With that being the case, I'd have concerns that your system would allow many criminals to go free (unprosecuted) because of reluctance of prosecutors to prosecute any non "open and shut" case. Heck, even some of those, if the defendant has enough resources like OJ did, probably won't get prosecuted because there is too much risk to the municipality to try the suspect. I definitely don't want prosecutors trying to railroad people like in this case, but I would like to believe cases like this one are the exception and not the rule. I am also hopeful that the DA is going to find out that there are worse things in this world than not getting reelected. I think there already are wrongful prosecution statutes on the books in most municipalities. (I could be mistaken about that though.) I'd be interested in seeing how this all finally ends up before wanting to add new laws that bring some significant unintended consequences.

I'd have no problem with the players' legal fees after the 1st week or 2, when it appears the DA had enough evidence to know he'd never get a conviction, being paid for. I have a feeling that their legal fees and much more will end up getting paid for after their wrongful prosecution and other suits work through the system. Question. Would you allow OJ to have his legal fees paid for as his was a not guilty verdict?

I don't believe the final result of this "situation" will be Imus being fired, but who knows (and more importantly, who cares). The reason these two clowns keep getting put in front of the cameras is it's easy to do, I'm sure all the media outlets have their cell phone #'s and vica versa, and the media knows these 2 (especially Al) will say something outrageous and boost their ratings. Has ANY of this whole affair not been something used to boost ratings of an aging radio shock jock and the self-importance of 2 self appointed "civl rights leaders"? I don't think it's so much a case of the community choosing to be represented by him, I think it's simply a case of those that he doesn't represent realizing that it's not worth the effort to point out that he doesn't represent them. Heck, even the few that might think he represents them don't seem to solicit his involvement. The guy just shows up without anyone asking him to be there and is a media whore. If someone did step up and say Sharpton doesn't represent them, they will likely either give Sharpton more of the publicity he desperately craves or get ignored by the "main stream media" because they don't want their easy ratings boost taken away. Either way, it seems that it would be an awful lot of effort to make someone that isn't actually important be identified as not being important, and probably has about as much a chance of succeeding as trying to get Paris Hilton to go away.

Can't say I disagree with anything you posted. I'm hoping that the refs actually call penalties in the playoffs, Frasier being gone and McCreary and Devorski still reffing means it's possible. Marouelli and Koharski still reffing is not a good sign. If the refs DO call the game with the "new" interpretations, the Sabres will be extremely hard to beat if they stay healthy; it won't hurt your boys any either. Last year, it seemed the league would bump the refs that let the most stuff go in each round from the rest of the tourney. Obviously, I am hoping that is what they do again this year. With a couple of fortuitous upsets in the early rounds, the Sabres could have very good matchups through the 1st 2-3 rounds. The West will be a dogfight and whoever comes out of the East should be healthier.

Should it happen they will have earned it. No doubt about it. The only problem with that scenario is it almost has to assume Joe Thornton doesn't play like the playoff Joe Thornton; which until it actually happens makes me expect to see SJ win somewhere between 2-6 games this Spring.

I could see calling him liberal if you were comparing him to a fascist, but ... Oh, nevermind.

That is interesting and not how things worked during last year's post-season nor this year's regular season. Games 1 & 4 of the Otter series were on OLN and not shown on MSG. Assuming Pergament is correct, I wonder if the RJ and JL broadcast will only be available in WNY. It doesn't make any sense for Versus to show 5 Sabres games if they know the bulk of their audience will be watching the games on another network. EDIT: Thanks to Sullim for the correction. OLN and MSG did both show Games 1 & 4 of the Filly series last year. Those in WNY got the RJ/JL feed, those elsewhere got OLN. But, last year, MSG did not broadcast 2nd round games that OLN covered. I will assume the Pergament article is correct and MSG will show Versus games in the 2nd round this year for those of us in WNY and not cut off our RJ fix after the 1st round.

All that comment does is prove you didn't watch those games either. But I am impressed with your ability to ignore a direct question.

Duuude, you still haven't explained how you expect your beloved swamp beasts to beat the Sabres when Furlatt ISN'T reffing. Heck, even Marouelli couldn't get you guys a W. It isn't an anti-Buffalo bias I'm worried about, it's an anti-head up one's butt bias that you should be worried about. Which isn't terribly surprising that you don't know the difference between. AND, you STILL haven't answered the question. Your boys got spanked twice. You don't seem to have an answer for how that happened, nor more importantly what Lou "Rules Committee" Lamiorello is going to do about it.

Nice deflection. Too bad the puck is on Vanek's stick. Claire, answer the question. It's a simple question. ...

Wow, so much for hearing Rick and Jim. IF the series goes 6 or 7 games, FIVE Vs. games.

Again, Mr Bandwagon, which of those 2 defeats should Sabre fans worry about? The one where the Sabres were outplaying them until the 3rd and your team was awarded a goal by the refs and then immediately followed it up with a fluke goal, or the one where they were running out of gas with the AHL team up on the roster? Might you want to worry about either of the 2 where the Sabres dominated play, or the one the Sabres were dominating prior to the fluke goal? Be afraid. Be very afraid.