Rockpile233

This thread is ridiculous. There is absolutely no way a TV star can or should be president. Dwayne needs to stay in his lane.

This made me laugh heartily.

I would argue that the environment is ripe for an independent who's campaign was built upon opposition to that very brand of politics. But, that could be a ways off still or maybe I am still naive. Technology has cleared at least some of the hurdles third party candidates experience.

To be fair, while I'm completely against the NFL's ridiculous marijuana rule, the first offenses for failing tests carry pretty minimal punishments. If the above referenced were repeat offenders it would probably escalate to Gordon's point far quicker. I do feel for guy's who had unbelievable earning potential only to be blackballed by a marijuana addiction, which is barely anything, but yet there is a level of personal responsibility here.

I have already identified that as my worst nightmare. I agree with you on most of these points. The media has hurt its' cause more than they've helped it. (so many problems with the fact this sentence makes sense). I still think Trump is actually great for the Democrats' prospects looking forward. Much better than Hillary would have been.

I'm not ignoring your essay request by the way, just don't feel like devoting the time right now. Oh well. To the above quote...hard to judge considering main stream media outlets we all encounter are primarily firmly left slanted. But how can I forget gems about Obama the muslim not born in America. Or Obama didn't really go to Harvard. Or any of the other drivel out there. You should at least admit you love liberal bashing.

I was in the sixth grade when GWB was elected. What proceded was eight years of dems and the liberal media thrashing him every step of the way. Then Obama was elected and what proceded was the right thrashing him every step of the way. Here we are with Trump...guess what happens next. I think it's funny that both sides upon their candidates victories all of a sudden decide, "common guy and gals, let's grow up now and get stuff done.", while the other side is comprised of whiney children until the roles are reversed.

You've completely missed the point, congratulations.

But you had eight years to revel in the stupidity of your foes. Everyone is supposed to grow up now? For the record I agree with you, but it's been a vicious cycle we have all fed into. It hasn't been long since my former forum of choice was eliminated, but I noticed quickly that you LOVE zingers towards liberals and the politicians that represent them.

Yes, I want less people to be better off if more people are out of destitution. If the increased tax revenue is used wisely the economy will be fine, mistrust of government aside. Trump is pushing to boost spending although I am skeptical of that paired with tax cuts, but we'll see.

Higher taxation, larger/more involved government, more social programs, etc. Pretty run of the mill left wing ****. Trump at least likes spending.

Fair points. I have argued this with people. I absolutely can't stand Trump. I think he's a total embarrassment almost every day. Did you hear he invented the phrase "prime the pump?" lol. BUTTTTTT The chain of succession is rife with real conservatives. That's far worse for my liberal causes.

At the end of the day it's a very personal decision, but I wouldn't sweat the staffing agency angle. My significant other is a staffing manager so I've got to learn quite a bit about that business. It's in everyone's interest for you to work out so as long as you are a productive employee there won't be an issue.

I had a professor who loved to track days considered "sunny days" in Buffalo vs. Orlando, FL. It was usually a toss up most years, although I never verified whether he was correctly tracking it and took his word for it.

I used to be on Gordon's side, but how many chances can you give a guy?

Guilty until proven innocent.

Seems qualified. I'm looking forward to learning more about his style of management.

The league doesn't need to make any judgements one way or the other. They don't need to announce an updated stance on marijuana use or anything like that. They would just need to stop including it on drug screenings. I'm fairly certain that's how the other leagues treat it.

If you follow every law...you are a square. Let them smoke.

Pegula is evaluating QBs now?

Whether it's Terry and Kim or Brandon, either way someone grossly unqualified is leading the search for an NHL GM. Hopefully they have good league consultants.

I really like what McDermott is saying, but talk is cheap. There have always been buzz phrases surrounding new coaching hires and "detail-oriented" is the latest and greatest. When the real games start, I'll start developing a real opinion on McDermott. With that being said, I'm generally pessimistic about the fact that the owners want to hire everyone and be very involved. I don't think they are very qualified to make direct football/hockey operations hires, yet they insist on it. I would like a president of ops on both sides who is qualified to make GM/coaching hires based on X's and O's more than intangible personal characteristics.

This is a rough presser for Pegula. I'm disappointed he's sticking to the collaborative structure and insists on being a micromanager.

Agreed, they have to eventually trust someone, but I'd argue that the president/czar role is an easier hire to make based off of past accomplishments and gut feelings on someone. The lower you move down the organizational chart into more direct hockey/football operations, the less qualified I feel they are to make those hires. Yet they seem dead set on making them. The Bills is a clearer example.

At this point, when I hear the Pegulas will be directly hiring coaches/GM I cringe. I understand they own the teams and it is their right. I'll hold off on making judgements until someone is hired, but we have seen a bit on the Bills side. We know the Pegulas directly hired Rex and seemed to have directly hired McDermott. Sure you can get a sense of the "intangibles", but to me any conversation coaching related should be rooted in X's and O's and how philosophies fit with the current roster talents. Focusing too much on the person got us a coach in Ryan, who's scheme didn't jive with the already dominant defensive talent leading to regression. My point here being...what qualifies Terry and Kim to make these sport specific decisions? I understand at some point you need to trust someone, but I have come around to the "czar" philosophy for both teams. I think we need a qualified buffer between the Pegulas and direct ops decisions. The owners seem to desire direct involvement though, which I'm skeptical of.