MDH

No, but I'd hope they'd be able to tell the difference between an "A" and a "C" - and I'm not talking cup size.

It is a classy move - if he'd just have donated the money and let it go at that. The fact that his publicist is announcing that he donated the money takes much of the classiness away from it. Mr. Show (one of the all time great sketch comedy shows) had a great quote that fits here: "Charity is when you do something for people while other people are watching."

You're right, all these athletes that do strength training are just wasting their time. Obviously they are oblivious to the fact that its not helpful to their chosen professions.

I went to the game logs and did a search for interceptions then looked at when Fitz's came in each game. As I said, I looked at 6 games and he had 11 when they were behind by more than one score. The stats you looked at are incorrect.

I looked up a total of four games - the 2nd NE game, the 1st Miami game, the Dalas game the San Diego game. In those four games alone (the only four I bothered looking at) I found 9 Fitz INTs which came when they were behind by more than 1 score. 3 in the NE game, 2 in the Miami game, 3 in the Dalas game and 1 in the SD game. If you want to talk about factually inaccurate you should start with your post. No clue where you got your stats but I knew they were off given what I remember of last season. I'm sure if I looked into more games I'd find more. EDIT: I just found 2 more in the other Miami game. SO IN THOSE 5 GAMES ALONE FITZ HAD 11 INTS WHEN THE TEAM TRAILED BY MORE THAN 1 SCORE. That's nearly half of his total for the season. I think I can safely say my point was a valid one.

I keep hearing this but I really don't think it's as big of a problem as people make it out to be. A large percentage of Fitz's INTs last year came with the Bills down by double digits with him trying to make something happen. Fans always criticize QBs who "play it safe" when their team is down big when they should really be pushing the ball trying to make things happen (think Holcomb.) But when a guy does just that he gets ripped for too many turnovers. If the Bills D can do their job - and they should - I see no reason why Fitz won't play it closer to the vest and be fine with just punting the ball instead of pressing to make plays.

1999 was great thought I'd take off Lock Stock, Blair witch and Any Given Sunday and add The Iron Giant, South Park: Bigger Longer and Uncut, Princess Mononoke, The Limey, Run Lola Run, Election, Eyes Wide Shut, Felicia's Journey and The Straight Story. A great year for movies particularly for animation.

If you take into account international cinema I might have to go with 1962. Lawrence of Arabia The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance Jules and Jim Manchurin Candidate To Kill a Mockingbird Vivre Se Vie L'Eclisse Knife in the Water The MIracle Worker Lolita The Exterminating Angel Ride the High Country Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner Winter Light Carnival of Souls Sanjuro La Jetee That's a pretty hefty lineup from some of the great filmmakers of the first 100 years of film.

Just about every team in the league is toast if their starter goes down.

NS, those snakes do a lot of good in keeping the real vermin in check. Personally, I would have done the same thing I do with my wife when she asks me to kill a spider - I capture the spider and take it elsewhere (usually outside or in the garage) but I'm not killing it as they do a hell of a job keeping the other insects in check.

This is another pet peeve of mine. It happens in NYC all the time. A very narrow one way street or a pretty narrow 2 way with cars parked on both sides and somebody will open a parked driver side door and take their time (un)loading kids, packages, whatever, while there is no room for oncoming cars to get by. You just have to sit there and wait for the center-of-the-universe to finish lolly-gagging his way through whatever it is they are doing. All the while I'm sitting there asking myself - why can't he load packages, kids, whatever from the passenger side? And yeah, I agree, if someone opens a door and a cyclist is coming its the guy opening the doors obligation to always check in rearview mirror.

I cycle on 9W too and realize there is debris on the very right hand part of the shoulder. However, DON'T RIDE 4-5 wide! If you ride 1 or even 2 wide there is plenty of space to stay in the shoulder without coming into the road. Also, I didn't ride past the cyclist at the light, I was at the light first (and came to a complete stop, like you're supposed to at a red light) and the cyclist came up FROM BEHIND ME AND PASSED AS I WAS MAKING MY TURN. The guy was totally in the wrong then told me to F off when questioned about it. Any other things you want to defend the douche cyclists about?

I live in northern jersey and just about every biker in NYC comes over the GW Bridge and rides up 9W which runs parallel to the Hudson River. This road has a massive shoulder. Does that keep them from riding 3, 4, even 5 wide and taking over a significant portion of the road? Nope, they just don't give a damn. At one point a few years ago I was taking a right on red (a legal turn) and right as I start making the turn a bike passes me on the ride shoulder, takes the turn wide and floats over right in front of me and I almost smash into him. As I pull around I roll the window down and say, "you're going to get killed doing that" at which point the guy tells me (with my then 5 year old in the backseat) "F-off, watch where you're going!" At the end of the day I realize it's just like anything else in life - there are 15-20% A-holes who do whatever they want with no consideration of others and the the other 80% take the bad rap. Given that, I won't go so far as to "hate" bicyclists, but I'd like to run over the 20%...

He forfeited guaranteed money. So what if he was cut, he'd still get his money he got from signing with a new team as a FA. I don't think I've ever heard of a player giving up guaranteed money before, most would rather test FA and keep their cash.

Hell, the way she's buckled the gas can in is almost useless. In any type of frontal collision the can is coming out of the car seat.

That's good, because I wasn't selling that idea. I even stated that he might be a very good RB. However, he's sitting on the bench for the majority of the snaps which doesn't give the Bills much of a return on their investment. When Jackson was playing Spiller averaged 2.1 carries per game last year. He didn't split time, he barely got on the field when Jackson was healthy. And while Spiller did have an impressive YPC stat and was capable of busting out a big play every now and then he still averaged less than 15 carries per game after he started and except for the Miami game he wasn't much of a receiving threat either. He's not exactly a guy who can shoulder the load when a team needs it. The main issue Spiller has is that he is a prototypical 3rd down back but can't get on the field as such because he's nowhere near as good on 3rd downs as Fred Jackson - who might just be the best blitz pickup back in the league. In addition to blitz pickups Jackson has a sense of when to stay and block and when to go out into the flat as a receiver. Not Spiller's fault that Jackson is so good but why draft a guy in the top 10 when you already have a complete back as your starter? So yeah, Spiller is a quality complimentary back, good for a handfull of touches a game as a change of pace and will definitely help the offense this year - but are his contributions worthy of where he was drafted? You can get a backup who carries the ball 2 times a game in the 7th round or as an undrafted FA. And I'm not blasting Spiller at all, the guy seems like a quality individual and does the best he can on the field, it's not his fault he was drafted 9th overall and sits behind one of the best backs in the league. But the bottom line is that if you can't get on the field when you're drafted in the top 10 then the selection hasn't panned out. I'd rather have an above average LB, DT, OL, etc. who plays the majority of snaps each and every week than a guy who might be very good but who sits on the bench.

With RBs you need to get everything you can out of them in their first contract. Spiller is already 2 years in and the Bills have gotten virtually nothing from a position that is the easiest to transition to in the NFL. In addition, he's sitting behind one of the best RBs in the league - how much do you really think they're going to get out of him? As of right now, 2 years after he got drafted in the top 10, he's a good backup RB. He might be a very good RB, but when you can't get on the field without an injury you are considered a luxury pick. And I hope to hell I'm not pleasantly surprised with Spiller this year because for that to happen Jackson has to go down with another injury - and that's the last thing I want.

Even if he's "fully healed" it takes a long time to get the explosiveness back after an achilles injury. Even if he somehow avoids going down to injury I don't think we'll see an explosive, sideline to sideline guy, at least not this year. It's wishful thinking to believe that Merriman is going to have a significant impact on the team this year. As others have said, I'll believe it when I see it.

I think you've got this backwards, people get bent out of of shape about him because he's not the second coming of Bruce Smith. He's a very solid player, the kind of guy teams need lots of. He's not a star and never will be but people love to say he "sucks" because he's not a game changer.

- Doing manual labor of any kind then taking a few minutes after you're done to admire your hard work. - Getting home after a long trip - Having my year old son parrot my opinion no matter what I say then having my wife roll her eyes at me after it happens. Actually, I'm not sure this a small pleasure, it's pretty significant. - Having my wife run her nails through my hair.

I don't think either, though I do think the back has to be special, not just good, to justify it. My mouth dropped open when they picked Spiller for the exact reason I stated above. I felt that the ONLY position the Bills didn't need to address early was RB - and that's what they did. Jackson was fantastic the year before the Spiller pick and while they certainly needed a #2 back Jackson had clearly done enough to justify being the starter and there was no need to draft a RB at 10. Jackson, while splitting time, put up over 1k yards and averaged 4.5ypc behind a subpar OL. He also snatched 46 receptions for almost another 400 yards. That's all in 11 starts. All the talk of BPA is a bit much, you pick BPA at a position that the player can get on the field. I'm not a football genius and even I knew that Spiller wasn't going to get on the field the moment the pick was made and - at least in this one thing - I've been proven correct. All that being said, I'm not ragging on Nix. I like the job he's done very much, but that pick was nonsensical at least from my perspective.

Spiller was a horrible pick. Fred Jackson was the best player on the roster the year before Spiller was drafted. There was absolutely no need to use a top 10 pick on a running back when the best player on your team is a running back. Sure the Bills needed another back but you don't spend a top 10 pick to shore up depth. Nix has done a good job since then but that was not a shining moment for him.

Yes, the number of picks at RB and DB have been excessive but to say there are no success stories simply isn't true. Winfield and Clements both performed at a 1st round level (and Burris and a few others on your list were solid.) The failure with both had nothing to do with the drafting and everything to do with the re-signing. Letting guys play out their rookie deals and walking has been a bigger problem than drafting from these positions and has contributed to the need to continuously re-draft from them. When you hit on a 1st round pick you can't simply let them play their contracts out and let them sign elsewhere only to have to draft that position again. That is a recipe for walking on a treadmill and never improving - which is exactly what the Bills have done.

It's tough to have a rival after a decade of futility. To have a rivalry it has to be a two way street where both teams dislike the other and look forward to an important matchup. Nobody even thinks twice about the Bills so it's tough to have an actual rivalry. I'll agree with the poster above that the Bills current obstacle is the Pats. Personally, if I were you I wouldn't buy any memorabilia from an opposing team - F them!

I love how the article makes it sound like Bell is a comparable player to Peters - with the potential to be better. On what planet do these people live?