HardyBoy

They have cap space next year and will get more after June 1st for this year, I would imagine they could make something work with a back loaded deal in terms of salary and void years and then restructure next year so it's not so back loaded... maybe, I'm not sure how it works

I didn't see the national anthem, but small pox blankets

Why is it relevant that it's owned by the NYT?

I'm not sure it's appropriate to have gambling conversations here. I was for the legalization of gambling, but the daily fantasy apps are highly predatory and designed to create dopamine addiction. The apps are exploitative and targeting young men specifically.

Absolutely given that context, woof. Is it possible that the Whitner pick was similar to the Preston Brown pick, where the game changed and had he been picked 5-10 years earlier he would have been much better (I think Preston Brown is the brusing MLB that was on the Bills while Kuechly and others were changing the position)

That's cool they're letting the 3rd qb be on the practice squad, thought it was silly to require them to be elevated last year

Wasn't a big reason for that that you could only bring up two players per game from the practice squad and they had injuries at other positions? I'd argue your punter playing against a top three defense in the cold is extremely important, but I also trust they understood the give and take with that decision and made it properly based on their calculations... that said, Martin, like Davis in the AFC champ game a bit back, was a huge liability.

They could account for the bonus this year though or a lot of it, no?

ESPN+ has basically all the sabres games for like $12 a month...living in North Carolina, it's an amazing deal...I've watched at least 80% of the games (talk about a confusing team, I think they're so young and are figuring out how to manage their bodies and energy over the course of a season)

Haha, this is such a ridiculous post and I freaking love it, well done (I'm being serious)!

I think it's analogous enough honestly

And putting film out there of him sandbagging it and making an awful decision? Say someone works on high tension electrical wires. They have a supervisor who is responsible for the safety of the worker in terms of ensuring the proper systems and protocols are in place and followed to make that very dangerous job as safe as possible. Now let's say that supervisor has time and time again made it obvious to the technician they cannot be trusted to do that...if the technician refuses to go up, are they being a petulant child?

I don't know, I mean yeah it is, but at the same time would you do what is arguably the riskiest thing in the sport for someone you don't trust? Also, I know they get paid millions of dollars, but at the same time, their contracts aren't guarenteed and even if they were, these are still independent contractors arguably getting exploited by corporations (yes the players make millions, the owners make billions). I see it as him looking out for himself. Like, I think Beane, McD and the Pegullas are quite possibly at the top of the entire league, or close to it, in terms of being honest and genuinely caring about their players. Look at what is likely about to happen to Tre White, and remember he definitely signed what at the time seemed like a team friendly deal...now, you could say it was a super smart move for Tre, because he ended up getting a good chunk of guarenteed money as early as he could, but he could have made a lot more if he had waited a bit to sign. I'm not sure he took a team friendly deal as much as he looked to get generational money guarenteed as early as possible, even if the total amount wasn't as high as he could have gotten had he played an extra season...regardless if it was a wise choice or not, he is probably about to get released in a few months. I don't know if that makes Hardman have a bad attitude, I'm sure the vast majority of players in the league feel the same way...he probably has an honesty problem...but in a lot of ways, that makes him a great teammate and asset to an organization...Diggs is similar...yes men and women and group think is very bad in business and sports, even if it bothers management...management in a lot of cases are over promoted idea thieves...it's why everyone hating on McD is so annoying...he's actually building something by brining together ideas and synergizing them...he's not a Saleh or the dude in Atlanta just doing things you're supposed to do without actually understanding the purpose...he should get slack while he figures it out imo, but my Adderall has worn out and that's how we got this lovely gem of a post!

There are still some floating around on places like the athletic and the ringer, but I would agree that that is largely gone in the mid form (the sites I referenced are typically long form)...King wrote some longer stuff, but most of that was medium length stuff combined with other medium length sections to build out a large form like article.

He played hurt for a few games too... also, I'm sure the injury limited this ability to do certain things after he came back

He was hurt for most of last year and he was productive before he got hurt.

May I ask how old you are (I'm not really seriously asking) that you are willing to trade 50 years of what I am envisioning that you are envisioning as 50 years of drought era football, lol I'm wondering if you asked a 35-40 year old 49ers fan how they've enjoyed those early championships and they might feel a certain way about whoever wag back said they would mortgage the next 50 years if they could just win a few right now!

I'd argue this year with throwing into tight windows was a top 3 defense at the top of its game vs AJ Klein, a severely hampered Douglass and a bunch of other injuries. What AJ Klein level mismatch did the Chiefs have on their defense that the Bills could have exploited to get those wide open windows?

Wait, I'm allowed to gamble on the WWE?

Hmm, what is it that you started doing around age 12 that no longer brings you as much joy exactly...

Lol, post meets handle!

You mean England where they have huge issues with soccer fans singing racist songs against soccer players? Can you tell me about how that same culture exists in South Africa next please. You're just kinda strengthening my argument... and wait, you don't think England had segregation and redlining? Do you not remember the hoopla about Meghan whatever her last name is being half black and the pure royal bloodline?! They are probably more racist in large parts of Europe than in America. Also, like I said always happens, your argument is shallow (I'm not saying you are shallow at all, I don't know you and I am only refering to this specific arguement), just like everyone else I've had this debate with when trying to get past the initial ban guns not ban guns fighting and actually trying to get into the nuance...the person says there is a lot of nuance and it's more than just guns (which I agree with, plus pragmatically, that toothpaste is out of the tube anyway)...so then I get excited for a nuanced debate and then it just stops at culture of criminality where there is not ackwoledgment that even if I were to conceded that point reluctantly, that anythiny actually might have led to that potential culture forming other than I guess genes is not even open for debate...so is that the argument ultimately, genes? It's really hard to distinguish between if it's just a shallow argument either because it's repeating talking points, because it's lack of knowledge on the topic or if it's all just a dog whistle for the great replacement theory. It's annoying because I think there is actually going to be middle ground every time and nope. Also, I'm not saying I am definitely right on everything, I'm open to learning and growing and all that...just not through logical fallacies and shallow concpets that don't actually do a good job of explaining a situation, or like on this case, basically proving systemic oppression leads to systemic problems in the group being oppressed by raising examples of other systemically oppressed communities and then saying see, it's all the same.

How does west Virginia have anything to do with what we're talking about? Also, West Virginia hasn't been subjected to hundreds of years of systemic roadblocks. You could say things like company stores and lacking education to keep the population reliant on jobs working in dangerous coal mine conditions for sure, but those are very very different social and behavioral and opportunity constraints compared to what happened in black neighborhoods. Nixon literally had retaliatory laws passed against black people because they voted against him. Black people were lynched. When they fled places like Tulsa after there was basically a pogrom done on them when it was known as Black Wallstreet, they fled to places like Rochester and Boston and faced arguably even worse oppression through segregation and red lining and all that...Rochester, the home of Fredrick Douglass and a key stop on the Underground Railroad less than 100 years later treated essentially political refugees and asylum seekers, their own county's citizens absolutely terribly. When they finally had enough of the literal ghettos they were forced into and the absolute atrocious treatment by the police, they rioted (seriously, read about the rochester race riots, it's a very nuanced moral issue) white flight happened and they built highways through black neighborhoods on purpose to destroy those places so white people get out of the cities, because it was now illegal to segregate. Let's fast forward to 2008, when predatory loan practices and shredding of government oversight driven by the mortgage lobby, led to an insane amount of wealth being transfered out of the black community and to banks that got bailed out, and those neighborhoods that used to be largely black owned suddenly got foreclosed and gentrified. That West Virginia stat is interesting for sure, but it's on its face not analogous...like using it as an example here is a logical fallacy...I don't know them well enough to name the one it is off the top of my head, but I certainly know it is one. Also, I'm not here to debate the right way to handle generational poverty and lack of opportunity and generational hopelessness...the only culture I want to talk about is how we have a culture of forcing huge swaths of people in this country into never ending poverty... I'm not interested in condemning how people who are living in situations where they have literally no possible way of escaping the level of poverty they are stuck in, just because of the zip code they are in...I have no experience with that life, I have no idea how I would personally handle being in that situation and my guess is you have no idea about it either, yet you cast aspertions. Warren Buffet has said that his vision of society is that it's a random draw, and that people in charge should be governing in a way that they assume that they could be born into any position in life and to do public policy accordingly. How do you think your life would be if you were born into poverty in the inner city? If your school had lead in the water and moldy ceilings and burnt out teachers? If you didn't have access to a grocery store with fresh fruits and vegetables and had to eat processed food for every meal and didn't have access to dental care and your teeth had significant issues by the time you were 5 because of all the sugar drinks you had no choice but to drink because even if you had the money, you would be stuck with sugar drinks because again, no real grocery store and you can't even drink the water because it's contaminated...like empathy dude...even if you're right and I conceded your argument as to it being a "cultural" thing, which I don't, but let's pretend I did for a moment...why did that culture you say exists develop? What were the conditions economically, socially, and politically that fostered that culture to form? Also, maybe you can help define exactly what you mean by "cultural" and what basis you have and what experience you have to adequately and properly label a culture my guess is you have very little actual understanding of or familiarity with other than what is portrayed by the media. And again, the only culture I am really interested in discussing in terms of coming up with solutions here is the culture of building generational poverty through corporate and political and societal policy...corporations are people, cigarette lobbies pushed the government to make policy for years saying cigarettes were safe, highways destroying cities so they could sell cars, etc...you're taking your eye off the real problems because you're letting them trick you into debating cultural formation in systemically oppressed populations...stop doing that, how about instead we work together to see past their bs and work to actually bring about positive change.

Right! And that right there is where the conversation typically falls apart and it's really weird. Like I don't know if it's because people are conditioned to say there are systemic issues outside of just guns that are causing this (which I agree with and think there is a ton of sensible common ground). And then it's like ok, let's talk about some of the specific systemic things that are causing these issues and the response is no, none of that is true. "Father's aren't present!" Well yeah, we have a private prison system that has literal contracts guanteeing them a certain number of inmates annually, and non violent drug laws that are either applied to minorities more (whites and blacks smoke pot at the same rate, but are arrested for it at an insanely higher rate) or sentencing guidelines are just absolutely insane (cocaine and crack are the same drug, but you used to get 5x more jail time for the same weight of crack as coke and those laws were written that way intentionally to go after black people). Or how a lot of the prior convictions that people are talking about up thread are due to people plea bargening because they are not able to afford bail and have no choice, but to plea out either because of a completely broken and underfunded public defender system or because they will lose their job if they have to spend time in jail for pre-trail lockup. Now you're on parole, which costs money and if you get in trouble at that point they don't even have to prove you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You want to talk about systemic issues? Years 0-3 are probably the most important years in terms of development. Yet you have food deserts, high risk of lead contaminated water, lack of adequate child care options and the thing I find the absolutely most crazy...diaper poverty...snap doesn't pay for diapers, so you have moms that aren't able to take their kids to daycare so they can work or go to school because the kid has no diapers, it's so screwed up. There's countless other systemic things impacting people in inner cities, which are predominantly minority. This narrative that it's cultural for black people and a choice is so dumb, especially when you look at poverty in rural places and suddenly you're seeing the same "culture" MLK wasn't killed because he was trying to end segregation, he was killed because he shifted his focus to bringing all poor people together to end institutional poverty. Unfortunately basically everytime I try and engage with people in good faith on the gun violence conversation, they say the right things about wanting to shift it away from guns and look at it systemically and holistically (which of course guns are a part of that whole)...but then it turns out that it's invariably an act to get the conversation to shift away from guns and then suddenly there aren't any systemic things impacting people, it's all "culture"