section122

That's awesome! I'm going to have to try that one haha. Good luck out there today!

Yea they can and I'll be rooting for it!

I'm excited to see more of moore. I think he has shown some flashes as well as passion. Any news on who new England's inactives are?

sarcasm meter might be broken gug

It actually seemed like he and scoop had a good relationship. One that was relied on from time to time to help with Waiters. Please don't mistake my post (not sure if you even are) I think he is an amazing coach I just didn't realize what a no-nonsense hard ass he was until I saw them play live. Paul Harris on the other hand... didn't seem like such a warm relationship.

This is turning into the MDP dating thread except now it is find hindsight a job!

Good for him. This was sham from the start. Now I hope ESPN spends as much time apologizing for dragging his name through the mud as they did trying to get everyone to move off of the Penn St scandal. This was a blatant lie from the beginning much like the Duke lacrosse rape case. I wish he could get his job back to really make amends and start the healing for him but that isn't anything more than a pipe dream.

Boy Coleman looks good. I do worry that he lets people by so he can get a block but it's preseason and he has some maturing so I'm not to concerned yet. As for the Noel story, I was amazed about 5-6 years ago I finally started having enough money to not sit in the 300s and to see Boeheim's interactions with his players, he's kind of a dick lol. He is non stop yelling sometimes to the point of stomping his feet. Seems that some players end up in the dog house and have a very hard time working out of it. That said he is a great coach I just was taken aback from his mannerisms as I never had noticed. My perspective really changed when I could see what I wanted and not what the cameras showed. Now I attend at least 10 games a year bc it is so much better than tv!

I hadn't even thought of that! Actually I am in the class of a great QB can mask many deficiencies of a d. So yeah I think he would help out more than a little bit. The D would still be a mess but the O would control the ball and clock allowing less opportunities. Also don't discount the D being more hyped when they are hopeful that the O won't just go 3 and out. Teams need to feel like the other side of the ball has a chance of success to thrive.

No but they have grabbed Hoyer, Mallet, and Cassel in recent years (one more guy who I can't remember right now too). Point being Buddy took Levi Brown and mentioned how they should be trying every year to take a flier and then just stopped. I don't mind a 6th/7th on a qb every year. Most of those picks get cut anyway so there is not much risk involved and the reward could be either a trade piece or a center piece both nice rewards.

Not cheap shots but aggressiveness on both sides of the ball. I think all of these character guys are too nice. Wilfork is not a nice guy. Mayo is not a nice guy. Ray Lewis is not a nice guy. Ndamakon Suh is not a nice guy. I want someone that wants to dominate the guy across from them and "put the wood on them." It's why the Jets dominate the Bills and a big part of the Bills struggles. They aren't aggressive enough. Late hits with in reason I'm okay with (extra step). Cheap shots I'm not. I don't honestly care about football enough to want to see someone get permanently hurt (although I could console Giselle if need be). I think the op's (misguided) point is that we need toughness. Toughness and dirtiness are 2 different things though.

Actually they got all 3. Elway just refused to come to them. Maybe there is something to be said about that horseshoe on their helmet...

Which to me is even more reason to start trying while they still have a competent player. Brady covers a lot of weaknesses so they can afford to do what they have been - taking a qb every year or so and hoping he turns out to be their heir apparent. It's what good franchises do.... (not get caught with their pants down when their superstar retires)

Or the roughing the qb on his int. I hate when it's clear like this but golden boy vs lowly scrub team it's to be expected. (sound familiar?)

Or you just believe that the fact that many people believe changes its true nature. Just because it is popular doesn't mean it isn't hate based. At one point in time segregation was acceptable and probably the popular idea does that mean its basis is not hate? Read my original post again. To many their policies comes off as anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-poor, and anti-minority. You don't have to like it or even agree with it but it was demonstrated in the election that the Republicans need to do some restrategizing if they hope to be successful in the future. Maybe Rob puts it more eloquently than me

I have asked this question multiple times in this thread and once in the shout box. I'm still waiting for my answer. Well as long as you know that Seriously though, I think everyone is in agreement (or should be) that Obama inherited an absolute mess of a country. To think he could solve all of the issues facing our nation in one term is ludicrous. Now he has an opportunity to really do work as he doesn't have to worry about re-election. I am excited to think of the possibilities of what he can accomplish. Meanwhile Republicans are running around saying the world will end because he has 4 more years. If we can survive 8 years of Bush we certainly can survive 8 years of Obama.

Whether they mirror public opinion or not it doesn't change the fact that the basis is hate. As for your second thought he hasn't increased there importance as much as he is the candidate where they thought they had a chance to be heard. Romney in public opinion caters to rich white guys. True or not perception is reality and minorities won't vote for someone who doesn't care about them.

This is the classic logic vs emotion discussion. The same way Men (logic) and Women (emotional) have difficulty in communication rooting for our favorite team is the same thing. On the one hand logic dictates higher pick, better player, quickest way to turn it around. Emotion dictates I want them to try hard and win because I want to feel good. Several times across several sports has "tanking" been a good thing for the team. Colts - last year NBA - the entire reason for their lottery but an article also the sport where getting 1 high impact player makes more of a difference than any other This year Shanahan and Gailey have both admitted this a strategy that is employed. Gailey's you play and try to win the first 13 weeks then evaluate where you are quote and Shanahan's start the evaluation process quote are not good indicator's that winning is number one. In my honest opinion maybe it shouldn't be. Only if and when the team has been eliminated from the playoffs. If there is still a chance to sneak in then that chance must be taken, but if eliminated? You're playing for the best draft pick possible (or should be imo). However getting the player to tank is a horrible idea. Anytime you ask them to go out and lose it sends a terrible message as well as setting them up for injury. What needs to be done (and is) is put players on ir unnecessarily (sound familiar?), start underwhelming players (Brian Brohm in the season finale perhaps), or "vanilla" play calling.

Happy birthday you optimistic robot!

I thought that was odd myself and was half hoping for a zombie baby (way back machine but Nightmare on Elm Street 5 anybody?) but I hadn't noticed the titles before. Have I been missing this all along or is the an occurrence from time to time? Anyways is a baby slightly impractical in this world. A good point was raised by my wife - who will nurse this baby? How is this baby supposed to survive in this world?

And that is the mindset that is costing the Republicans. Sure it may be more likely that a black man gets more black votes but with a proper policy and TOLERANCE don't you think it is possible to lower that number. 40% of white people voted for a black guy why can't 40% of black people vote for a white guy? THEIR PLATFORM IS OUTDATED! If the republicans want the minority vote they have to start catering to it instead of the far right. Moderation will be the saving grace of the Republican party or stubbornness will be it's demise. edit: btw although we are nowhere near agreeing, this is a great discussion void of name calling - props to you

You are implying that you know why people voted for who and what they did which isn't true. Also you are scared that Race played a part in how people voted, and well Alpha had a very good rebuttal to that I will say race didn't play a part in the midwest voting for the white guy? I've already said this but do you think the Republican party should be asking themselves why this is? Is it purely because Obama is black or because the Republican policies/belief systems are anti black?

I prefer p**sy!!! No dog for me too much responsibility. My cat thinks she is a dog thoug, to the point of "barking" from time to time as well as waiting for me at the door when I get home.

Sorry to do that . I didn't take it that way but it makes much more sense. I just thought holy crap my wife or newborn? not even close, and she said f*ck that I'm choosing me lol.

so the part that scares you is what? That America is changing and no longer a white dominated society? Or that black people and hispanics now care enough to vote? Or that the Republican party is so out of touch with the majority of America that they no longer can win just based on hate/scare tactics? Romney's stance on immigration doesn't scare all hispanics btw you do understand that all illegals are not hispanic and vice versa right? You also understand that illegals can't vote right?