The Big Cat

Exactly

I knew I'd get you at some point!

This morning I yelled at my coworker (again) for clipping his nails at his desk yesterday. We haven't made eye contact all day.

The fellas at NFL Network have been saying this for a while--that The Bills have 21 starters that are as good or better than the Patriots'* but the 22nd will make all the difference.

And if he gave a great PC, I'm sure folks around here would complain that all he's good for is a sound byte.

Yeah...it's 2014. It sucks. ESPN Writer Enrages Fan Base. What Happens Next Will Leave You Speechless

Anyone who insists on harping about how poor EJ played should really...REALLY listen to the interview.

Yeah, no. We were given hardly any information to run with, but one piece was that the exchange was loud enough for REPORTERS to hear.

Thirteen pages on a message board for an 'incident' that was covered by one reporter via two tweets. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but in the 15 hours since, there hasn't been a peep about this 'incident' aside from the hand/neck wringing here. Face it. We've all been had by the greatest Click Troll of them all: Mike Rodak.

I just can't imagine a universe where that conversation is taking place...on the practice field...in front of the players...in front of the press.

Missed your response the first time through. My apologies. 2 highly animated discussion in one week = speculation compounded by speculation. Fred Jackson's quote was hardly as inflammatory as the media made it out to be. To my knowledge, nobody else said anything. Correct me if I'm wrong. Who talked about? Hughes. That's a pretty aggressive spin. They wouldn't stop fighting. And the ring leader of the fights was an UDRFA who's not going to make the team. Putting a negative spin on each of these items hardly permits the platitudes.

Rather than fomenting unrest about this altercation, why don't you please explain to us all what it was about? Please?

I'm still waiting to hear what they were arguing about from everyone (anyone, really) convinced of the conversation's gloom,

And we know how Rodak's wild speculation is ALWAYS shaded.

May be there's a leak in the pipes that run through his new office following the renovation? May be there's issues with the field. May be there's a rat infestation. May be they forgot to reserve the coach a parking space. May be they only have three footballs for practice. May be the training staff wasn't told there was practice today. May be all the sideline gear the ordered for Marrone is two-sizes too big. May be they put the player with the peanut allergy at the locker adjacent to the player who ritually eats a pb&j before every practice/game. May be Marrone wanted Carson Palmer and Whaley misheard him.

Why am I proving to you what the conversation wasn't about? Why don't you provide what evidence you have to prove what the conversation was about?

That it wasn't that important. Because if it was: THEY WOULDN'T BE HAVING THE !@#$ING CONVERSATION ON THE PRACTICE FIELD IN FRONT OF PLAYERS AND PRESS! Rodak has more than adequately shown himself to have proclivities for mountainizing anything which even resembles a negative-leaning molehill.

And as evident by the OP: virtually no mental acuity to assume otherwise.

And it's much easier to standby your comment because we're talking about Kiko here. If it was Ty Powell, would you feel the same way? Plus: if the team can't mandate what you're doing in the offseason, how can players have any expectation for compensation if/when something runs afoul, good intentions or otherwise?

I agree. We should have traded Mankins before New England had a chance.

It was referred to as a potentially 'Richard' move. Not by you. But I remember when he was first injured and the prospect of Buffalo taking this route was treated thusly, too.

I guess I don't understand the fans' belief that the Bills would have been right to do Kiko a solid in this instance. What precedent does it set when the same thing happens next year to a far less important player?

I have to believe a lot of this boils down the legalese that dictates the processes. So, what you might call a 'Richard' move might in fact be what every team is legally compelled to do. I also completely agree with this. Since the teams have so little control over their players' off-season activities, where is the line drawn for what constitutes a happenstance that would keep them on the hook?