ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

If you don't like a curved handset, you can just skip the handset altogether and attach the phone to your neck: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57611950/google-tattoo-sticker-sized-voice-transmitter-thats-also-a-lie-detector/

I found this to be a pretty interesting read about Christensen: http://byucougars.com/m-football/todd-christensen-tribute

I wonder if Snowden leaked the technology to them - - supposedly he's a patriot. From the link in the OP: The Analytics Dept. could use your skills. How do you feel about the capes idea?

Let's think about this for a minute. An invisible uniform PLUS a cape? So we'd stick a visible cape on the back of an invisible uniform so the other team could see where Alonso and Spiller used to be as they moved around? I suppose we might have to do something like that to get the new unis approved by the league office. The NFL owners might be afraid that nobody would want to buy an invisible Alonso jersey to wear to the game - - you could just wear any old T-shirt and SAY that you were also wearing the invisible Alonso jersey on top of it. But if we added visible capes maybe Ralph and the other owners wouldn't feel like their merchandising revenue was threatened, 'cause if a fan wanted to show up in the uniform of their favorite player at least they'd still have to buy the cape.

You might be able to help the new Analytics Department - - are you available?

Would you rather have (1) better statistics, or (2) flat, skin-like uniforms that make Spiller and Alonso invisible? http://phys.org/news/2013-11-thin-invisibility-cloak.html#ajTabs OK, Spiller's already invisible most games, but you get my point. Eleftheriades could wind up on the Wall.

I certainly hope he is aiming his passes. Ready Throw Aim wouldn't work too well.

If this question was posed to our significant others rather than us, I bet "mental disease" would be at the top of the list.

Her name is Jamie Alexander. See the video clip embedded in this article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2487550/Jaimie-Alexander-attends-Thor-The-Dark-World-premiere-extremely-revealing-dress.html

For a guy who composed "The Stars And Stripes Forever," he's kind of shallow.

It gets worse. It wasn't mentioned in the body of the news article, but the copy of the attached complaint in the lawsuit adds this gem:

Turns out, the prototype flew (well, sort of), but a hangar roof collapsed on it later: http://www.gizmag.co...-testing/28970/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2clnsFvFOs http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0714386/ Igor Pasternak, however, still dreams big: http://www.aircargoworld.com/Air-Cargo-News/2013/11/aeroscraft-hopes-to-be-ready-for-market-in-2015

And apparently that can happen from seemingly minor head trauma at any age: http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0714386/

Is that easier than your current procedure - - probably yes Is it more secure - - seems pretty unlikely (although depending on what data you have, it might be secure enough for your purposes) So think about which is more important to you.

It's a lucrative specialty, in part because IP disputes sometimes have "bet-the-company" stakes: http://www1.salary.c...-II-Salary.html And it skews higher in SF: http://www1.salary.com/CA/San-Francisco/Intellectual-Property-Attorney-II-salary.html

Major attack launched: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/10/patent-war-goes-nuclear-microsoft-apple-owned-rockstar-sues-google/

You got that part right.

Multiply much?

Don't forget Roads Scholars - - if you're gonna make a living studying highways, you oughta pay a little more than the average Joe.

Basically, it was only decided that the injury wasn't received in the course of doing her job. I don't know anything about workers comp law in Australia, but in the US denial of a workers' comp claim would not prevent a separate suit against the hotel (assuming the statute of limitations hasn't expired yet).

I haven't gone back to watch the game again, so you might be right. My impression at the time was that Goodwin could have brought it out, probably wouldn't get very far because he was so deep, but should have tried given the tactical situation.

You know he has the same agent that Jason Peters did, right?

I get that Marrone was being conservative, and there are logical reasons for playing it that way to avoid a possible turnover deep in our own territory. The statistics are helpful, but don't tell the whole story here. At the time we had just gone down by 11 points (21-10), and the Saints were going to get the ball to start the second half. Marrone has gotta figure that with the Saints' fairly high-powered offense, we aren't gonna shut 'em out in the second half. And using those statistics assumes Goodwin's ability to score a TD (or get in or near FG range as Webster Guy noted) is the same as the average NFL returner, and that his likelihood for fumbling is also the same as the average NFL returner. I think that's a faulty assumption. We don't have a big sample size to look at, but didn't Goodwin return a kickoff for a TD in preseason? I haven't looked at his specific numbers, but if he already has a return TD (admittedly in preseason) and has never fumbled kickoff return, why aren't those stats more predictive than NFL-wide averages? Based on his speed, slim body type, and limited game action, I would expect him to have a much greater TD % than the average returner and about the same fumble % (slim body type offset by demonstrated toughness despite injury concerns). I just don't think that down 11 points to a high-powered offense that gets the ball to start the second half you should be that conservative. Per NFL.com Saints kicked the extra point with 30 seconds left in the half - - I don't recall how many timeouts we had left, but I don't think we were out of them (could be wrong). And if Marrone's main concern was fumbling, why did he call a running play to run out the clock instead of taking a kneel-down? I have to wonder if he really thought things through as opposed to "business as usual," despite the exact situation he faced.

^ Sununu l

There's a possible explanation for the first challenge nobody has brought up. Even if Marrone thought it was unlikely that he would win the first challenge, it might make sense to challenge that play. With no challenge, he had a hugely important 3rd and goal situation coming up and may have wanted to call time-out anyway to evaluate his options. If that was the case, then the unsuccessful challenge cost him (1) a time-out that he was going to call anyway, and (2) one of his allotment of two unsuccessful challenges. But at that point worst case was he still had one challenge left to use, while best case was that some camera angle might give him the TD on second down. It has also been my impression that even the quickest video replay reviews take longer than a standard time-out, so if you need a time-out anyway, you get more time to consider your options with an unsuccessful challenge than you get if you just call a regular time-out. I found the second challenge less defensible.