birdog1960

this. while the player himself isn't a high risk pick the price paid made him a longshot to result in value.. hitting a longshot requires luck and the bills apparently haven't had much of that. i'm wondering what others critical of the trade would find an acceptable draft pick. i would say a second was still a reach, regardless of where we finish this year.

to you and many here it does. many others disagree.

yes, in response to one of those manipulative, mostly fictional biopics that are so successful at evoking such a response. when i think of movies and nfl owners, i'm reminded of the original "rollerball" or the promoter in "gladiator". not a lot of slow claps after those ones.

i'm basing it on 2 years experience. plenty of teams go from bad to good or vice versa in that time. the laws of probability demand that luck even out over time, at least to a degree. granted, two years isn't long for luck to run it's course but i don't see where their luck has been all that bad. they've taken big chances (ej and watkins the biggest) and it doesn't look to me that dividends are coming soon. if you bet long shots, you more often lose than win. denver, sf and seattle don't have analogous stars to those you mentioned. seems to me that much of their luck is by design. i sincerely hope i'm wrong about the bills and you can ridicule me over it.

this. are they clueless? no. are they among the best fo's? no way. in the bottom half? yes. among the worst? possibly.

wow. are you so egocentric to believe it possible that no one else has ever published? rhetorical question. i know the answer. yes, einstein changed the way we all looked at life. he did it through the framework of academia. perhaps we need to start by defining academia. "answer his own questions" is a start. it really is, very often, about the quest for knowledge itself. and through this thread that idea seems to be regarded as wasteful idealism when in fact it's proven time and again to be practically necessary for progress to occur.

a second question doesn't answer the first. bills apologists. focus.

this film speaks to einstein's status as an academic, the important, real world differences that sometimes separate pure and applied science and war. all appropriate to this thread. besides that it's simply an excellent piece well worth your time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG2sDVjL1wg

it would be another instance of "we're smarter than the rest of the league" (when we are repeatedly proven to be way more stupid). but why not? even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes.

marrone for pete carroll?

it would be interesting to see if a correlation exists between bills apologists and political affiliation. i still can't begin to understand the poll that showed overwhelming support for the current management triumvirate.. i'm thinking 7:3 is roughly the ratio of conservatives to liberals here on ppp.

hypothesis is the starting point for discovery in pure research. hypothesis is theory. without it there is no pure research innovation. and without basic, pure research, there is no applied research. today, almost all pure research is done at universities (by academics). why? cuz there's little money in it in our economic system. therefore, to trivialize or disregard academics on the basis of perceived lack of value to society is ridiclous but is frequently done here.

because edison didn't invent the electric light. the first one was produced by volta, a professor. edison built on the basic science knowledge gained by academics.

you remove the academics and you're playing checkers under kerosene lights rather than posting about communism at college.

i wasn't claiming to be an expert on grammar...strunk and white are my friends when i need them..but they're academics. oh, and btw, see "effect as a verb" in the second instance here. http://web.ku.edu/~edit/affect.html

i'm thinking watson and crick's first molecular biology class (before they discovered the field) was just as funny...rodney could have taught them a thing or 2! and the film class during which this producer learned about feeding everyman popular myths, that was hysterical, too.

you might want to check the spelling of his first name on that wiki page. jt6p - any reference to any academic as an appeal to authority is wasted here. the cons here have no idea that pure (as opposed to applied) science, effects much of their everyday 'modern" lives. schrodinger and einstein were just some egghead professors with no connection to real life

convoluted yes, but pretty cool: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=326959136&m=327199182&live=1

http://www.npr.org/music/ (check out "shovels and rope" and "pokey lafarge" songs on this current page), i like "later with Jules holland" on palladia network (bbc show with some well known and often obscure acts), pandora and apple radio (making new stations of bands i've never heard of but like a single song and all settings for all stations set at "discover") mountain stage on npr, austin city limits on pbs, music festivals. the festivals are the best. long live live performance!

same coast. otherwise, no.

no worries. it's a decent sized city and likely a good distance from your farm. i would likely be cancelling out your votes, however.

is that your thresahold for concern? mass coverups and hidden epidemics. we don't have reliable numbers on police associated killings. that should be the threshold.

i know we have lots of transplants to NC on the board. Anybody live in or have familiarity with Wilmington? is it old south, new south or somewhere in between? any comments on housing, cost of living, traffic, culture/ restaurants/live music scene, beaches, crime, friendliness of people, overall vibe?

makes no difference. the point is the data is not accurate. that's important. there's no technical reason that it shouldn't be. that leaves willful misreporting as the most likely explanation. i can fathom a likely cause for that as did the author interviewed on npr about it.

a small sample size would make it more likely to get the data right. how many unaccounted for police involved killings are ok? it's not a subjective measurement. that's just stupid.