Mark80

Heck yeah. They are our meanest uni's IMO.

You should see the kitchen area, or that of any style buffet place. Used to do deliveries to them way back when. Raw meat sitting out in containers on the floor with no refrigeration, maggots in their used bar towels, you get the picture. Will never eat at a buffet place ever again, unless it's a high class vegas style one.

Seriously? Have you even seen this guy? He is not obese at all. Or are just making an assumption because he plays DT? Guy is mostly muscle.

It's getting rave reviews which is rare these days for triple-A titles. My download just completed (about 2.5 hours). I'm jumping in now for a couple hours.

Mine is installing right now. 87 GB so taking a long time. Wish I would have done it at midnight so I could have woken up to it being installed already. Sometimes working from home has it's advantages and today is one of those days!

Been doing the red top on blue bottoms on Madden since the color rush came out. They look amazing.

Yeah, that is the rule. But seriously, how stupid is that rule? Are you telling me teams cannot afford to pay for and have 2 different helmets properly fitted? So dumb.

Loved me some Hillbilly Jim. The midget match at was an all-time classic.

Some alt-country:

Dude, you are wrong. Sorry. I cannot explain it another time. The event starts at the first extra point attempt. There are two choices to start with. One has a 50% chance of giving you the win if you can score again (kick the PAT, option A) the other has a 62.5% chance of giving you the win if you can score again (go for 2pt conversion, option B). All the scenarios that follow that one choice are already accounted for in those two percentages. Comparing outcomes at different starting points (first TD and second TD) are not the same thing as you seem to be thinking. The choice has to start from the common event (the first TD scored).

You are comparing two different events as if they are the same, they are not. Let's agree the win % to go PAT on both and then go to OT is 50%. We know it's not, as you agree, but its close enough. Option A Going for a PAT on TD1 yields the following: Go for PAT on TD2 go to OT, 50% chance to win. OR go for 2PT conversion and the win now, again roughly 50% for arguments sake. Either way, you have a 50/50 shot at winning give or take if you to for PAT on TD1. Only possible outcome with 2TDs, no other points by other team, and 100% PAT conversion rate (even though we know that isn't the case). Also, discounting a potential tie. Option B Now, going for 2PT on TD1 still gives you that 50% chance that you got above to win. But it ALSO (not "or" as in above, but also) gives you the bonus opportunity to win when you miss that initial 2pt conversion that is not present in the previous scenario, option A. Here, on TD2 you can go for it again and have a 50% chance of sending it to overtime where you will have another 50% chance to win. By going for the 2pt only on TD2, you are not giving yourself that "second chance" that you could get if you missed it in this current scenario. This ends up yielding a 62.5% chance to win with our assumed numbers, not the 50% outlined above in A. I don't think I could explain it any further my man, you either get it or you don't.

The difference is that you have no recourse if you are not successful getting it down 1. You just lose the game. If you go for it down 8 and are not successful, then you have another opportunity to try again after the next score to tie it up and send it into overtime. First example: Team is down 24-23, miss the 2 point attempt at end of game, game is over. Second example: Team is down 24-16, they go for 2 and are not successful. They score again and are now down 24-22 and can now try another 2-pt conversion to tie it up.

Not true at all. Someone matching his description was. That could be as vague as a 5'10" - 6'2" 180-220 lbs white male wearing jeans and a black t-shirt or something like that.

I have no idea, and no one else does yet either, that's the point. I know it is completely unheard of for police to make a mistake or for someone to sleep on it and then change their mind on pressing charges after reflection. Never happens, ever.

Love how people don't need one shred of evidence or any piece of the story to prosecute and convict this kid. Guilty until proven innocent in the US these days and the social media legal system we seem to now employ as the standard.

You can definitely bend flat brims. They aren't made of titanium or anything. I just hate the side 34 patch on it. It's too big and ruins the hat IMO. I have taken it upon myself to measure the size of "flat" brims and "curved" brims from New Era within the last year. They are the exact same size regardless of which style you chose. The pre-curved ones just give you a head start on bending it the way you want, that is the only difference.

No talk of Marquise Brown of Oklahoma on here? He's been the most impressive WR I've watched this season. Granted, I haven't watched them all by any means, but this kid has something.

Here is the logic regarding going for 2 at that stage in the game....yes, it was the right move! If you go for two there and get it you are basically setting yourself up to win the game in regulation if you stop them and score another touchdown with PAT. A tough task, sure, but achievable for sure. This increases your odds of winning dramatically over going for 1 twice and then having a 50/50 split chance (basically) of winning in OT. If you go for it and miss it at that point in the game, you still have the opportunity to score another touchdown and tie the game up with a successful 2 Point conversion, forcing overtime. If you don't go for it down 8 and decide to, instead, go for it at the end of the game down 1 point, well, then you only have one shot to get it and you lose the safety net of being able to go for it twice in case you miss it once since you already kicked the PAT on the previous score. Assuming a 50% success rate (Shumer probably felt his was better actually) on two point conversions and a 50% chance to win in overtime here is the math if they were able to score 2 TDs and stop the Falcons from scoring again. Going for 2 down 8 - 50% chance to hit and win PLUS the 50% chance to get it on attempt #2 where you would then have an additional 50% chance to win in OT. This equates to 50% + (50% chance to miss first one x 50% chance to make second one x 50% chance to win in OT = 12.5%) - so the chances of winning are now 62.5% in this case. Kicking PATs and going to OT - 50% chance to win (which also assumes a 100% success rate on PATs which we know are not true). See above fellas, it was definitely the mathematically correct call to make.

All that time writing a huge post that no one is going to read more than the headline of. Such a shame.

Because the impact of the defensive player over the current state player is minimized as compared to the impact of offensive players. Look at it this way. If you have a WR that you rate a 60 on a 1-100 scale and you can add a WR you have rated as a 90, that's a 30 point jump. If you already have defensive linemen that you rate 85 and you are drafting a guy that you rate a 98, that's only a 13 point jump. You get the most "bang for the buck" by upgrading your worst positions typically. When you have so many roster positions that are in rough shape, you can't afford to take that elite player who only gives you a little bump over what you have. That is a luxury reserved for teams that already have a decent roster IMO.

If this team takes a defensive player with the #1 or #2 overall pick in the draft, well, then it is time to bring out the pitch forks. The ONLY sensible options are offense or trading down. Oliver and Bosa are not a luxury we can afford with the current state of affairs of the roster, unfortunately.

Or, maybe every single young player knows that they are playing for their next contract and that a majority of them never even get that 2nd contract, so they are playing as hard as they possibly can in order to keep playing in the league. Maybe, just maybe, they just aren't that good.

So funny how 1/2 the posters seem to think that McD is both the GM and HC. Or, basically, that Beane and McD are the exact same person or something.

Well, when you consider the number of people whose lives aren't ruined because of stupid criminal charges because of it (as well as their innocent family members); the exorbitant public dollars spent on policing, prosecuting, and incarcerating people for these crimes; the reduction (not elimination, but reduction) in the illegal black market selling of these and all the crimes that go along with it (including violent ones with innocent bystanders impacted at times); the insane costs of prescription medications and how you could potentially substitute a lot of them with something you could grow on your own; I think your perspective may change a bit.

I'm defending logic, reason, and freedom against antiquated views and misconceptions. To not see how the benefits drastically outweigh the risks is baffling to me.