Joe Miner

See, over here you can call the post idiotic, and the premise idiotic, but you can't call the OP an idiot.

Bench him for Tuel.

I always had a feeling Hillary didn't like Weiner

Which field? The Field of Dreams?

If they want to vote, wouldn't they have need for a voter ID?

That's an awful big takeaway from the first preseason game. If Bills fans came to the board saying similar stuff, they would be told to calm down it's the first preseason game preseason game. I realize the owner has a bigger interest in the team than the fans, but temper your emotions and have the conversations you feel are necessary offline. Who is he? Donte Whitner?

That's what people said in 2010, and 2012, and will say in 2014, and again in 2016. Debt ceiling increase - check Obamacare passing - check Obama reelected - check Odds of Hillary being president in 2016 - currently better than any Republican's People have been seeing the ineptitude of the gov't since the beginning. The only result has been to give the gov't increasingly more control of their lives. Don't fool yourself into believing it'll be different the next time.

Seems a bit ridiculous for the owner to feel the need to publicly apologize and B word at the coaches over game 1 of the preseason.

Senator Palpatine?

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not touting the Single Payer system, just speaking of the ineptitude of our gov't to fix any problem. Especially in fixing a problem by removing gov't from the equation. There is only 1 route this healthcare fiasco will take. System gets worse and worse, gov't tries to do more and more, eventually you will have a single payer system. Look at the gov't throughout history and figure out which is more likely: 1) US Gov't comes up with and implements a solution that involves less gov't intervention 2) US Gov't comes up with and implements changes that don't fix a damn thing, exacerbates a lot of existing problems, and requires more gov't intervention It may take another 20 years, but single payer is coming. Repeal is never coming.

Did you see Landry Jones take a safety? Edit* Missed that this was already pointed out. Best two rookie QB performances from week 1 were both on the Bills.

Missed Woods and Hogan on two third down throws. Should have made both. And either EJ, the OL, or Fred screwed up that 3rd down screen play. Outside of those 3 plays, EJ looked pretty good to me, and had a much better presence than I've seen from a Bills QB in a long time.

Everyone talks about our new and improved WR's, but I think some of the hardest cuts will come from the DL/LB pool. I don't know but I would expect us to keep 10-12 guys between the two groups. 8 I'm pretty sure about: K Williams M Williams Dareus Carrington Lawson Alonzo Bradham Hughes Who gets the last few spots? Dowtin Scott Troup Blatnick Gilbert Ross Branch Moats White

We hold a weekly vote as to which kids we're keeping. Kids get a 1/2 vote each. Behave or I'm voting your ass off my island.

I hate to break it to you, but Single Payer is coming. It'll be a cluster!@#$ of a process to get there, but eventually it will get there. It may be called a different name, or have some kind of worthless restrictions on it, but for all 'intensive porpoises' America will be a single payer system one day.

I liked the 2 minute drive as much as the next guy, but the BIlls did get helped quite a bit from some stupid Indy penalties if I recall.

How many NFL games can you pull stats or video from two series (or hell even a whole quarter) and determine who won the game? How many NFL games does a team win on the stat sheet but still lose the game? Why would I judge who "won" a preseason game from 2 series or even 1 quarter? I have several concerns from what I saw from the Bills starters. I don't think they played great. I think they did some things well, and need to work on some other things. Hopefully by the third preseason game where we are seeing almost a half of football by the starters I will see a lot of these things corrected. I would expect the Bills to lose the time of possession stat in most of their games this year due to the semi-hurry up they seem to want to play. I didn't like the number of penalties either. The screen play to Jackson that ended the drive looked like a total cluster !@#$. But there were some good things out there as well.

Out of the two series or whatever he was in, I thought we got a decent amount of pressure on Luck. Had they played a whole game, the Colts would have likely have had to make some adjustments to keep Luck from getting hurt. And on the two series he was in KW was a monster.

The problem is chalking up a "loss" for the starters in the first quarter when it's been pointed out that the starters didn't play the whole first quarter. I'm not arguing that the starters looked great. His opinion that the starters didn't look awesome isn't wrong. His statement that they lost the first quarter is.

If people have to explain the term starter to you, perhaps you shouldn't be declaring things about said starters and then defending them until you learn what the term means. You were wrong, plain and simple. I know it's tough on the internet to admit, so your best move is just to withdraw quietly and resurface in another thread.

It's your insistence on starters vs starters. It's been pointed out to you many times that pure starters (among those players that were dressed for the game) only played 2 series.

Only 1 person trolling here.

Wait...this hasn't already happened?

That wouldn't shock me.

What honest discussion? One where you sarcastically suggest it's "shocking" that a documentary series on HIllary is made? No one has ever suggested it was shocking. Or One where you claim that people are suggesting that political motives are the driving these shows RATHER than financial motives? That's not a suggestion anyone is making. You are trying to read some kind of subtext into posts where it doesn't belong. Nothing that you quoted says anything of the sort that these shows are political RATHER than financial. If you want an honest discussion, discuss what's been said, not what you believe some subtext suggests.