TakeYouToTasker

One thing you really have to give to Nate Peterman: it was always going to be hard to play poorly enough that it would make everyone forget Tyord's 9/18 for 56 yards and an INT, with a 33.6 QB Rating, and five 3-and-outs on 8 drives, at home in a must win game the week prior. Well done, Nate. Well done.

Any truth to the rumor that she's going to pull through this OK?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason This clearly needed to be posted here.

A valid opinion, though my only purpose was to point out the forfeiture of those rights isn't unConstitutional. My personal preference would be a permanent forfeiture of the franchise, which is a restricted privilege rather than a right; and permanent forfeiture of 2nd Amendment protections for all violent offenders, specifically those who used a gun in the commission of a crime.

Wether I agree with permanent forfeiture of the franchise and 2nd Amendment protections, and the importance I place on them as rights (I have very divergent personal opinions about them), has nothing to do with the Constitutionality of their forfeiture.

Not necessarilly true. There is a very reasonable argument to be made that the forfeiture of the franchise and 2nd Amendment protections are seperate yet accompanying punishments from incarceration and post detention behavior monitoring, and since those rights are not suspended without due process, it's perfectly Constitutional.

At this point you just feel bad for Peterman. Have him him finish the half, have Tyrod finish the game. Peterman gets the start next week.

I'm now assuming this will be one of the most epic threads in all iterations of the board's history. And it was pre-pinned!!!

Oh God...

Ugh

Preston and Hoyer both made nice plays there.

They didn't tank a playoff run. They didn't believe Taylor could lead them there. They're giving Prterman a chance to see if he can.

The clamoring for Peterson is, with a few exceptions, nothing more than an acknowedgement that Tyrod Taylor was not going to be the answer, and a desire to see if Peterman possibly could be the answer in a long enough string of games for the front to make a reasonable determination if they wanted to go all in on a Quarterback at the top of the draft, or if they could use a large amount of picks to create a supporting cast for Peterman laying a foundation for the future.

Absolutely huge stand by the D.

Meet the new Jeff Tuel, just like the old Jeff Tuel

Oh no...

Two ovens, a turkey fryer, and a 6 range burner, and lots and lots of chafing dishes. Thanks. I host for a large group. The bigger trick is getting everyone to carry food out with them so I'm not stuck with all the leftovers. I stock up on to go containers and make everyone fill at least 2 of them before they are allowed to leave.

There are far more poor whites in the country than poor blacks. Try again.

I agree with you. My point was to illustrate the absurdity and hypocrisy of the "racism at quarterback" argument.

Sehorn was the last white starter at the position, Edleman was the last white player I can remember taking snaps at the position. That was in 2011. So, since then, 32 teams each rostering what I will conservatively call 4 cornerbacks over the course of 6 NFL seasons... not one of them white. That works out to 768 non-white players and zero white players. This must be systemic racism, right?

Why is the league comprised of "something like 70-80% blacks"? Why are 100% of all starting cornerbacks black (all cornerbacks period? the last white player I remember taking any snaps at the position was Julian Edleman)? Systemic racism?

Give that this is a conversation about income taxes, I assumed the reader would know I was talking about income taxes.

This post is evidence that you don't care an iota for the problem, but rather care about how you can use the problem as a political tool.

This is precisely my view.