Bmwolf21

If the running game is the only consistent performer on either side of the ball, then yes, the debate over which of the two very good RB's we have should get more touches is not nearly a problem as: O-line QB Coaching Run defense wide receivers Injuries. Sorry if I came across as harsh or a dick in my previous reply. I just see a lot of debate about the RBs lately on a piss-poor team where there is a helluva lot more to debate or complain about.

Of all the problems with this team, this Jackson versus Lynch "debate" ranks so far toward the bottom of the pile that I cannot believe it continues to be discussed.

Week 14 of 2007 (Dec 9, '07). Beat Miami 38-17 that day.

And maybe try to throw it to the outside - i.e., lead him - rather than behind Evans.

Nice play, Trent.

Nice to see confusion on the Bills sideline over who is supposed to be on the field. Boy, the coaching staff is really just a well-oiled machine.

True, but he also survived one failed extortion attempt a few years back when that painter plotted to kidnap his kid and nanny and hold them for $5M. You would think the CBS producer would have thought "nah, there's no way this works out well for me." Then again, maybe he thought that by lowering his extortion demand, DL would have just said "what the heck, it's only $2M."

"It's hard to win a Vermont Division II high school football game."

Who is the bigger dumbass here - this guy for trying to sell the EA video to TMZ, or the CBS producer who tried to blackmail Letterman?

BWW wings are hit or miss, depending on the individual franchise, and in my experience, whether you order them for dine in or takeout. Someone at BWW needs to figure out that takeout wings should not be packaged in Styrofoam. I've had very good wings at BWW, and I've had pigeon wings. But given the alternative - the crap in and around the Cleveland/Parma area - I'd chose the local BWW every time.

This part of his column caught my attention: This strategy serves two purposes: It allows the Bills to introduce their brand to an enormous group of new fans. And it serves notice to the old fan base to either start buying tickets or their team could move elsewhere. Can someone verify how many season tickets we've sold the last few years, and how many local blackouts Buffalo has had? Excited about the Jags or not, Mike Bianchi is a d-bag.

This article was written last fall, and it doesn't take into account rankings, but it's still relevant to the OOC debate, IMO: While a number of programs from BCS conferences seem unwilling to pick on someone their own size, others are indeed willing to schedule stiff competition year in and year out. These are the schools that are willing to go toe-to-toe with programs of equal stature on a regular basis. They're willing to take risks as well as reap rewards. -------- Here are the BCS schools that chose to play the highest percentage of their nonconference games against BCS opposition from the time the BCS was formed in 1998 through last season. Obviously, teams don't get to select their opponents in bowl games, so bowls are not factored into this study. The following data represent regular-season, nonconference games for the period of 1998-2007. 1. Florida State 70.3% No. of nonconf. gms. 37 Rec. vs. BCS 16-10 (.615) Rec. vs. I-A non-BCS 9-1 (.900) Rec. vs. I-AA 1-0 (1.000) Pct. of gms. vs. BCS .703 The Seminoles have begun playing softer nonconference schedules in recent seasons, including -- gasp! -- Division I-AA Citadel in 2005. Nevertheless, over the past decade, no other program has been willing to play the big boys more often out of conference. Of course, Florida State's annual matchup against Miami became conference fare when the Hurricanes joined the ACC in 2004. Notably, FSU is 5-5 in its past 10 meetings with rival Florida, but 0-4 since 2004. We wonder whether Bobby Bowden's crew, coming off back-to-back 7-6 seasons, will continue to scale back schedule difficulty in the coming years. The Seminoles will play more I-AA teams (two) in 2008 than they did in the previous 12 years combined (one). LINK

^^^What he said.

I know you're being facetious, but outside of Adrian Peterson, who has averaged 5+ YPC the last two years?

I don't think it has to be a case where once Lynch comes back, he's playing and Jackson, you're getting 3-5 touches and spending most of the game on the bench. Hopefully the offensive staff is smart enough to realize they have two good to very good backs on the roster and can constantly create mismatches with fresh legs and a variety of looks. If it were my team I'd rotate them both in and out throughout the game, and even find ways to get them both on the field at the same time. Keep the defenses guessing and keep from being predictable.

4.0 YPC in 2007 4.1 YPC in 2008 4.1 YPC for his career

Same here. Watched the last couple minutes with a co-worker, who couldn't believe how calm I was when McKelvin fumbled, and when the P*ts scored, and when the Bills couldn't move the ball on the 2-minute drive. I just looked at him and said "I'm a Bills fan. It ain't like I haven't seen this show before."

Could be. This was well before the advent on the intrawebs or Center Ice, so I only saw him a couple nights a year. He may have not been as much of a perimeter player as I saw in a couple games in Buffalo. I'll have to defer to some of our older posters who have seen more of him to confirm or deny whether the other areas of his game well more well-rounded than 99's.

I don't know, Dean. I saw him play at the Aud a couple times, and I remember after the first game walking out of there shaking my head at how much of a perimeter game he and Jagr played. They were fantastic scorers and playmakers, and played great together. But neither one wanted anything to do with any contact. This was probably 15 years ago, so my recollection could be a little hazy, but I don't remember Mario ever being in the thick of it or banging around the net.

Not that I recall. He was big enough to, but I seem to remember him being a similar finesse scorer. Plus his ailments - cancer twice, a herniated disc, hip problems, and back issues so bad that he had to have people tie his skates and help him get his leg up over the boards to get on the ice, so I don't think he was banging bodies too much. IIRC one of the reasons he retired the first time was the physical pounding he was taking in the clutch-and-grab era.

Good post, Lori.

I don't think anyone is saying that his speech diminishes his career, but rather that the majority of his speech was unnecessarily confrontational (a lot of I told you so's) and pretty petty for the greatest basketball player ever. The witer even acknowledged that MJ's attitude was nothing new, but that a lot of people were surprised and disappointed that he went the route he did, and how MJ's speech was in stark contrast to the other inductees'. And it's not just one sportswriter's opinion. There were a lot of articles written about it, and they seem to be split down the middle - some think he gave a great speech and struck the right tones, and a lot of others thought he was petty and vindictive on a night he should have been gracious and humbled. I tend to lean toward the latter, but reading this article by Wilbon I can understand a little better why MJ's speech was so edgy. I would just hope that his retirement would have taken the edge off that raw, burning competitive desire and for one night, be a little more gracious about his career and the people who helped him along the way (not just the negative motivators).

Pretty good reaction to his speech here: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Aoly...o&type=lgns

This was how we did it when we drove our 55-lb boxer home with us at the holidays. We did the trip from Orlando to Niagara Falls in one straight shot, usually about 20-21 hours or so (counting extended rest stops and food) and never had any problems with the dog.