Offside Number 76

This is correct. Trying to find out who was OC. This is tough to find! EDIT: It appears that he was his own OC: http://www.knowyourdallascowboys.com/2008/...e-coordinators/

Certainly not by Kornheiser, who had some kind words about Ralph.

They're talking Frazier, and whether he would want the job.

Thanks. They're up any second now.

Schopp is hardly a guy who "swallows whatever crap Ralph feeds" him.

Dude, come on. There's already a ten-page thread about him at the top.

No, I actually prefer this to Haslett. I don't hate him, I just don't think he's a very good head coach. But I'm bummed that Frazier isn't coming to town. I suppose offense is a much bigger problem than defense right now, anyway, though. Maybe this won't be horrible.

First time I've laughed all day. Thanks.

Yeah, I would LOVE to know the source, but just out of an abundance of curiosity. I've got to think that the OP is talking to someone who knows something, based on the record. And that stinks, because I really don't want Chan Gailey to coach the Bills.

I really hope that on this occasion, he's wrong.

exactly.

I have no idea who laughed at you, but that game left me wondering how in hell each of those teams made the playoffs. I guess that the Jets are in the "final four," and possibly could win it all, but I suspect that you're laughing way too early. That was a sh*t game today.

Did you read the original post? He didn't say something negative; he said something downright stupid. Mularkey?

But it was. It was a very special comment from a very "special person."

Fontes made the playoffs half the time. Mariucci? No. He's a Kiffin (you know, a guy who never does the job right, but keeps getting jobs).

The numbers in the () have to do with payouts; that's right. When you're betting the money line, there is no point spread. You're betting straight out who wins and who loses. That's why the "swing" between amounts is so large; instead of adjusting by dictating a point spread, the bookmaker is adjusting by dictating payouts. It's like odds at a horserace. If I had $50, I'd go get a nice glass of wine and a good dinner or I'd take it to a poker room. I'm not a big sports bettor. But I knew plenty of bookies growing up and I'm still somewhat interested in the process. If you're doing this for entertainment purposes, and it seems like you are, consider spreading it across both games somehow. You'll get more entertainment that way. And beware of "teasers," which tie multiple events (games, over-unders, whatever) into a single bet, where you need more than one thing to happen in order to win. They're called "teasers" for a reason.

In the example the OP gave, the money line works a little differently than what you wrote (your numbers are wrong--you have the numbers from the spread in there). Bet NE: You're betting $190 to win $100. Bet Balto.: You're betting $100 to win $165.

The radio announcer just noted that Cincinnati know who they're getting next week (the Jets) and are not playing with a full effort.

Gotta consider the source. Both Collinsworth and NBC want viewers tonight.

You think he's going to fly to Toronto? Nah, he'll take a limo.

Ok, here's three, and here's your "why," but I'm not going to reargue if you argue it. I just don't want to be bothered with it. (And I don't think RW is that great, either): 1. Davis. Continually alienates fans, continually drafts thugs, and his first-round selection of a freaking kicker from what, ten years ago or something, finally paid off today with a 61-yarder in a blowout loss. If you remember his stupid "commitment to excellence" banners and his bragging about the best record in the four "major" sports from the early 90s, you're really laughing now. 2. Jerrah. Come on. Ego over talent, every time. He thinks Tony Romo is a franchise QB and Wade Phillips is a SB-caliber coach. 3. Snyder. Didn't he go through 6 coaches in 5 years at one point? The best QB under his watch has been Jason Campbell, right? He, and he alone, runs that team in Washington, and he has run it into the ground. Davis has moved his team twice. Jones had success with a team largely built before he bought it. Snyder is a joke. Wilson is better than those three, but maybe not by much.

Well, the Bills shouldn't cut him; they can keep him if there's not a solid deal around. And I'll bet there's a patsy out there that will pay up a 2d or 3d for Lynch. (Probably a 3d.) What did we see Chicago do this past offseason? As for those who think he's hampered by the line, well, Jackson runs behind the same line. Tries harder. Runs better. Has a running style that fits what this team can give him. Doesn't embarrass the team with his off-season sh*t. Lynch is hardly a zero, but in a two-back system like almost every team uses today, he's unnecessary for this team and has trade value--and this team has needs to fill. Move him out.

Agreed. Bait. They don't need someone with Lynch's pedigree to be a no. 2 back. Sell the pedigree; someone will buy. Get a 2d round or 3d round pick out of it and move on.

My tenants actually have one of these.

Seriously. With most teams, it's called "starting a new quarterback." With this team, it's called "jumping in a new quarterback."