Offside Number 76

I think you just channelled Faulkner.

[Homer] Mmmm....Barbecued Marino...mmmm. [/Homer]

It's Emtman and Desmond Howard--each with an 'm'--and each certainly was a much bigger bust.

Thankfully the Patriots organization is sanitizing McGahee's pottymouth: "Last year the offense (stunk)," said Willis McGahee. "It (stunk)." What, he said "sucked?" Somehow I think Boston has heard--or read, if they're not continually drunk--worse.

Brace for 2007, when AJ Hawk's future bro-in-law (Brady Quinn) enters the draft. Thought you heard too much BS before? You ain't heard nothin' yet.

Let's not get the Why Guy involved in football. His presence during Sabre games sux enough.

1. Easterbrook is a Bills fan (from Kenmore) and a huge fan of tradition, but he should recognize that money being left on the table is not a good thing for this team. And although the Ralph is the only stadium currently named after a team's owner, it certainly is not the only stadium forgoing revenue. The nation's largest media market--you know, the one with the two teams in New Jersey--is the best example. 2. More importantly, Papa John's is now screwing up wings as well as pizza? Good Lord. Can the FDA get involved or something?

1. The rule might suck, but it's the rule. Actually, I'm not sure the rule sucks. It hurt on Thursday, but I don't hate that rule. Consistent application of the rules is something we've wanted for a long, long time. If the rule--which sucked--about skate-in-crease was applied properly in 1999, we might have seen a different result. Rules, however dumb, should be applied with consistency. This was no exception. Good call, sux for us. 2. Gimme healthy Carolina against healthy Buffalo any day. 3. Canes? Heart? Look, they have talent, but heart? Let's not get out of control, here. They're a bunch of terrific technicians in a depleted division. Other posters have mentioned the inequities between the teams because of injuries (Cole and Connolly plus 1/4 of a single defenseman might be equal), and they're correct. In terms of heart, think of it this way: The Sabres are the Stones. The 'Canes, well, Peter, Paul & Mary. Or the Monkees. 4. Go Oilers. Warren Moon will be kickass. --11

Never mind F. Lee. Let me know when Gibson is spotted wearing a flowered muumuu, a fabric-softened, white "fat guy hat," and being denied entry to a movie theater.

" Was injured in the Rose Bowl and could not play in the Senior Bowl, in part because he could not fit into the MRI machine to be checked out and cleared to play in the game" http://archive.profootballweekly.com/conte.../offlinemen.asp

I gave him a psycho discharge.

The words in that paragraph are the reasons why Marv wanted this guy: (1) Academic All-American. (2) Avid student of the game. (3) Trying to make up for lost time (=will work hard; see no. 5). (4) Understands that flashier players get more attention, but doesn't care. (5) A "hard working tackle who has made himself into a player." If Levy saw the same qualities that the author saw, those are the reasons for the pick.

Yes but he had not been replaced...until a few minutes ago.

Looks like Tennessee found a way to replace McNair and George on the first day.

My lack of this information is exactly why I'm not critical of the decision, but if you're right that there weren't a lot of teams targeting him, then you're also right that it was a poor decision. And dead-on about not targeting one player (unless the team has a #1-3 overall pick or something).

No. Maybe I need to clarify. I don't really care one way or the other. The Bills spent a 3rd-round pick to use their 2nd-round pick roughly 14 spots earler. Not a big deal. Some ARE complaining; I'm just explaining the complaints.

To answer your question, no. I'm just explaining the argument; I'm not rendering judgment.

Not if McCargo was available for "trade value" 500.

It's not a question of who the Bills picked but rather what they spent. The folks complaining about the McCargo pick aren't stating that he's a bad player or a bad fit, but that maybe the Bills didn't need to trade the 3rd-round pick to move up to take him. If New England had spent a No. 1 pick on Brady, knowing then what we knew THEN, they would have overpaid because Brady would have been available in later rounds.

In terms of when he was selected as opposed to when he was predicted to be selected? They probably did. That's the only issue here.

No. They dealt their 3rd to use their 2nd earlier.

That definitely would have been more apt, but you can't expect much out of espn.com these days.

I'm not going to say that ESPN is the last word on football, but they used the same metaphor to describe each Bills pick: 8(8) Buffalo Donte Whitner S OHIO STATE With Lawyer Milloy in Atlanta and Troy Vincent clearly on the downside of his career, Buffalo has qeustions at safety. However, it has far grater needs at offensive tackle and defensive tackle. Taking Whitner is a one of the biggest reaches we have seen. 26(26) Buffalo (from Chicago) John McCargo DT NORTH CAROLINA ST Some picks are more difficult to explain than others. It's true that defensive tackle is one of the Bills' needs, but taking McCargo here is one of the biggest reaches we've seen in years. Here's the link.

Someone want to explain this move to me?

Plummer plus their 1st, 2d and a later pick?