microscopes

You do realize that one of the first signs of CTE is pain and weakness in the muscles and is often misdiagnosed. Right? That is not what I said.

Did you read the article you linked? Jason is famous for admitting that his pain is largely due to him playing through injuries he shouldn't have. Injuries that doctors advised him not to. That's on him.

At any one time there are nearly 1700 players in the NFL. Over a decade , there will be over 25,000 NFL players. And you link 5 articles. A couple of them repeated themselves. Point being, you hear about the major cases. You don't hear about the 99% of players who have little or no issues. I'm not sure how this is even a discussion. Factory workers have more inherent risk at present and lifetime than NFL players and are not paid what athletes are. Conclusion, just because you have a job with a greater risk of injury does not mean you deserve anything.

This is the second time you've accused me of not having th knowledge necessary for the opinions I express. The last time, in the Google thread, you didn't reply to my response. I'm not playing your cat and mouse game. I like you too.

Unless Dareus has an amazing season, he has to be considered a "bust" considering the pick he was taken at.

I'm sorry, but it's not "likely" either. No, because he would get another year of one of the best safeties in the league. I actually agreed with your assessment that they wouldn't do that until a few weeks ago where a few members pointed out the likelihood and the more I looked into it, the more I believed they were correct. They deserve to, without ridicule? That is beyond silly in my opinion.

I understand your point of view. I even respect it from a psychological standpoint. But I believe the same can be said for the opposing viewpoint.

I ask that everyone who responds to a post of mine, please read what I am writing before responding. It's a small request but it would be very beneficial in the long run. I said "concussions are the main reason". Meaning, most of the studies I have seen related to lasting pain after careers is due to chronic traumatic encephalopathy, which is a result of repeated concussions. It is not the only reason. But it is more often than not. The assertion that every player lives with pain the rest of their life seems baseless as far as I can tell. The reason we know of Earl Campbell's story is because it is rare, and not the "norm". Unfortunately for Earl, he got addicted to painkillers and was mixing them with alcohol and that can really mess with a person. I believe if that happens Whaley will simply franchise him again.

This is actually a bit of an interesting mini case study going on here. To some, the athlete making millions of dollars is the unreachable peek that they will never obtain and there is a bit of resentment in that. But to others, specifically those so far responding in this thread, they look deeper. Their disdain is towards the NFL and the Teams who make much more money than the player ever will. So in essense, the athlete is the "little guy" and therefore it is much easier to relate to the athlete, being the "little guy", than it is to relate to the NFL or Team. Very interesting discussion so far.

Everything is guaranteed for the season when he signs the tender. And history has shown that players who sit out are more likely, albeit not guaranteed, to get injured. Therefore if his logic is not mitigate risk, then showing up on time would have been beneficial. Back up your claim that he will "be followed by pain that will last the rest of his life". As far as I know, he hasn't received any concussions. Although my memory can be foggy at times. And concussions are the main reason for why football players end up in pain later on in life. That's not what I said.

#1) You must have skipped over the part where I wrote "I know he has to look out for himself." #2) There was no maximizing his earning potential after July 15th. He was going to make $6.9 mill no matter what. #3) Careers lasting as long as they want blah blah blah. It's all bullcrap. Listen, the guy will make $6.9 mill this season. You and I, average folk, making $100k per year, it would take us 69 years to make that. He's already made $4.2 mil in his career. Add that onto the $6.9 mil he is GUARANTEED, and he has made $11.1 million in his career. Or what it would take someone 111 years who was earning $100k per year. I feel no sympathy. He could tear his ACL, MCL, PoopCL and everything else and never be able to play again and he would be financially set. So please, spare me the mitigating risk and financial future talk. It's nonsense. It's greed. That being said, it's a free country and he is welcome to do whatever he wants. He is welcome to be greedy. That's his right. It's also my right to be pissed about it. It's also my right to think that he can look out for himself while thinking about his team as well. Listen, I get it. You're top dog here. You are macho. You can stop now. Sarcasm, at its core, is a quest for acceptance and ego. Youre separating yourself to make yourself seem superior and not naive. The word "sarcasm" comes from the Greek Sarkazen. Which if I recall correctly, means to rip apart one's flesh. Mainly to show dominance. So I get it. You're dominant. You're top dog. Cool?

He' a calculating SOB. Well, I was wrong. Due to the roster exemption being only two weeks, it's clear that the Bills did not make this move due to believing he would not be ready. "In granting the Buffalo Bills' request to have newly re-signed safety Jairus Byrd not count on their roster, the NFL limited the exemption only through the team's final two preseason games." The news that Byrd showed up now simply not to lose game checks kinda pisses me off. I know he has to look out for himself. I get that. But do you not care about the team at all? If it didnt punish the Bills chances of winning, I would let him sit the year. Just playing nickel or spot duty. That'll drastically decrease his chances for a huge contract.

No, it says to me that they are leaving their options open. Which is exactly what they are doing. No matter how much people want to believe and hope and pray that he will fully learn this new defense and be able to efficiently execute it in two weeks time, doesn't make it true. A quick Google search of a few players who arrived late and I haven't found a single one so far where the team filed for the exemption. I'm sure I will be able to find plenty if I keep going but to say it is filed 100% of the time is ludicrous. And the times that it is filed it's most often filed because they don't know whether that player will be ready to play and they want to keep an extra player on the roster in case. All the snide comments about manufacturing stories won't save you from the fact that what I am saying is absolutely true. They're leaving their options open because they don't know if he will be ready. If they did, then the exemption would be of no purpose.

I'm really hoping Google gets it as well. But not as the sole provider.

Sounds like they know he won't be ready by Week 1. Which is exactly what I was saying in the last few pages.

There is no technological naivete on my part. I could explain to you my background in network administrating, where I installed peer to peer networks in schools and hospitals. Or the fact that i'm "fluent" in Java and PHP. But telling you all that would just be boasting, wouldn't it? So let me just state that I know what i'm talking about and leave it at that. I think the issue is that you're not understanding what i'm writing. I've tried to be as clear as possible, but I'll go over it again, step by step, to explain what i'm thinking. No one said they didn't have composite outputs. What was said is that many older TV's only have one composite bank. Therefore, when your Apple TV for example is plugged in, nothing else can be. Therefore, you have to continuously unplug and plug in your device. And lose an incredible amount of resolution. That's not really a solution. The issue you don't seem to understand is that these TV's you're talking about aren't 30 years old. TV's made as soon as 10 years ago had very limited options in the budget price range which millions of people have. You missed the point entirely. Apple TV, Roku, Tivo and Netflix don't come even CLOSE to the bandwidth that Sunday Ticket would require. The fact that you use them as comparisons make me question you technical acumen. Netflix, for example, has thousands and thousands of movies and documentaries and TV shows. In other words, the folks who are watching their content are spread out far and wide. Their digital footprint and pull is not overloading one server (for example). Not to mention, they watch at all different times of the day. There are people who work nights, watching Netflix at noon. People who work during the day are watching at night. Stoners are watching at 3am, while buzzed. Kids are watching in the morning at daycare. Sunday Ticket on the other hand, would be approximately 8 to 12 single channel games, pulling from one quad (each). So there will be 3 million people, watching 8 to 12 "shows" at the SAME EXACT TIME pulling. LOL, it's almost hysterical thinking about it. This is something that the engineers (much smarter than I) at YouTube/Google have been trying their damnedest to figure out for a long time now. Advertisers obviously are not to happy when their advertisement gets buffered and the user clicks another link. YouTube has historically had issues even when popular music videos are released and a few hundred thousand people are watching at the same time. I never ever said that. But that does serve to prove the point that you aren't reading and comprehending what I write. You're glancing over my posts and gathering some ideas and responding. Just like you thought I said that Tuel deserves the starting job, which is absolute nonsense and I couldn't care less if he was cut tomorrow. Ok, yes. But that is not the same thing that is being offered via DirecTV or Cable. It's a completely different beast.

I don't? Ok... You still haven't explained anything. My original post was whether Google would be in addition to DirecTV or a sole provider. Then all subsequent posts were under the assumption that Google received sole rights to the service.

Perhaps I am not understanding. Where would the internet TV come from? What service are you speaking of exactly?

Who said anyone was arguing for more access? I think you are having trouble understanding. Furthermore, Chromecast does not cover live television broadcast unless one of the applications support it. Therefore you would still have to have your cable box.

I'll have to find it. I can't remember where I saw it. Edit: Found it. I'm on my cell phone, and I'm having trouble copying the link so just google it. "It's a new system, and it's an intricate system. Safeties make a lot of calls, so he's missed that. (He's missed) a lot of the tempo of practice, so he's going to have some ground to make up. And I never said Byrd wouldn't be able to handle it. I said he won't be able to do it in 2 weeks time.

I did this last year for my parents via Sunday Ticket's online feature since my parents house doesn't have a clear view of the sky for a signal. The end result: HORRIBLE. It'll work fine during the pre-season when 20 people are watching. During the regular season: 10 seconds of play, buffering, 10 seconds of play, buffering, 10 seconds of play, buffering, just the sound but no picture, buffering ... etc. Hopefully that'll be fixed this year. Read what I wrote above ^ The YouTube comparison was because someone else brought up YouTube. Which is hilarious why people were so outraged. You're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that YouTube doesn't have full television broadcasting. So they are STILL going to have to pay for that external DirecTV box and then PAY AGAIN for the Apple TV (or insert other comparable) and then PAY AGAIN for service.

Yes, a life without a DVD player is a life of suffering.

Most of them aren't. You have to realize that this world is made up of more than you and your friends. There are people in their 70's, and 80's, and 90's who like football as well but don't watch DVD players and Xbox and so forth. They have their television and a DirecTV Box. I don't mean just an RF connection. I mean TV's with only one component input. And if you think the number of people who have these are small, I direct your attention to the millions of people who outraged when digital television took hold and they had to buy the adapters. That's not true. If it was, YouTube wouldn't have the severe buffering issues it does. If that were true, Google wouldn't have had to assure Advertisers over and over again that they are working on the buffering issues. You're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that YouTube doesn't have full television broadcasting. So they are STILL going to have to pay for that external DirecTV box and then PAY AGAIN for the Apple TV (or insert other comparable) and then PAY AGAIN for service. If the NFL wants to sell to both DirecTV AND Google, then great. That's a good step forward. However, if they are giving the sole rights to Google, like they have done with DirecTV, that would be a horrible mistake. There is already a 10+ page thread on how to save money with DirecTV's Sunday Ticket. I can't imagine what that would turn into if they had to pay for DirecTV + External Viewing Medium + Sunday Ticket.

Part of learning the defense is executing it. That is why we have scrimmages and exhibition games. That is their entire purpose. If you believe that learning a defense (or offense) is as simple as learning the playbook, then I would venture to say that you haven't played many organized sports. If I remember correctly, the staff said that Byrd's position is who will be calling many of the plays... You can argue with me if you want. But the fact of the matter is that he is far behind the other players and two weeks of practice is not going to catch him up.

In which game? The final game against the 2nd and 3rd stringers? I doubt he's going to play one day after he shows up, so that rules out the Washington game.