BFLO

I’d settle for our first 1st down of the game.

We don't need Coop to be a superstar. We just need him to make a few of the tough catches that Hollins, MVS, Coleman, Samuel, Kincaid, Knox, etc. haven't been making.

To all of the people saying he's been fine... have you looked at the stats? Bass is in a 4 way tie for 28th-31st in FG% and he is 31st in XP%. None of the 4 guys he is tied with in FG% has missed an XP, so I'd say he loses that tie breaker. We have the 31st most accurate kicker. He's 2nd worst in the league. He is 2 for 5 from 40-49 yards

Brady was carried by the team around him far more than Mahomes. Mahomes is physically gifted in a way that sets him far above Brady.

Mahomes is better than Brady.

Guess I'm never watching fox again

Going 5-0 after dropping to 6-6 was the worst thing that could have happened to us this season because it bought McD at least one more season.

Josh had stopped looking for Diggs by that point. Last 3 attempts to Diggs were incomplete.

There's no way Mahomes loses from that situation.

He should have been fired at half time of the Jet's game.

If you want the other side of the story, read the other 99.9% of McD coverage. Where's the criticism for that coverage not telling both sides of the story? The Dunne article is the first time we've gotten this side of the story. We wouldn't need a Dunne article to balance the scales if the other reporters did their jobs. The purpose of this article was to tell us the side of the story we haven't already heard. Why waste any time in it fluffing up McD by repeating the stuff we've already heard 1000 times? In conclusion. You don't need to "tell both sides" in every piece of journalism, especially when one side of the story has already dominated the coverage of that subject, and you're telling the opposite side of the story.

Deep Throat didn't even work at the White House.

The purpose of news journalism is to speak truth to power. To reveal what the rich and powerful do behind closed doors. To attempt to hold them accountable for their actions. Imagine if Bob Woodward had spent half his time interviewing Nixon's sycophants to get some positive quotes during the Watergate investigation instead of revealing the scandal. It's laughable. There's no balance to the article? So? There's no balance to the coverage of McDermott either. 99% of it is empty, vapid, fluff. It's a breath of fresh air to get an article that brings a little balance to the overall coverage.

No. The purpose of the article is to shame and humiliate Terry into firing this clown.

How did McDermott keep his job after the 9/11 speech for 2 years? How does he possibly keep it now that the story is public and he's confirmed it?