WhoTom

Exactly. Beane would call that drafting for need, while others would call it a reach. It's pretty obvious that EJ wasn't the BPA at that point in the draft. Ideally, you want the BPA to be in a position of need, so you wheel and deal to make that happen. That's what Beane did last year.

It's not an either/or situation. You draft the best player available who fits a need. If you're on the clock and the BPA doesn't satisfy a need, then you have the option of trading back so you can fill other positions of need. If that doesn't work, then you can draft the BPA, who's likely an upgrade at a position where you don't have a need. then you've got depth or trade value in a player. On the flip side, if you need something - like a franchise QB - then you trade up so that when you are on the clock, the BPA will be a QB that you want. I'm pretty sure that what Beane meant was the he wouldn't reach on a pick just because the need is there.

Well, it shows that he doesn't care about laws, that's for sure. But judging from some of the prostitution arrest threads that we see here, it's also possible that he didn't want to pay for sex with a drugged-out streetwalker. I'm guessing that the employees are more attractive in places where it's legal and regulated.

Seriously - this is one of many reasons why prostitution should be legal.

Well, he might finally lose his virginity, but not in the way he was hoping.

Here's the context in a nutshell: It takes two people to make a completion. All the QB can do is get it there, and as the above shows, he did that 72% of the time.

I change my G string every six months. While I'm at it, I also change my e, B, D, A, and E strings.

That's what she said.

What? No Applebee's? ESPN is gonna hear about this!

I don't think he was asking about sex. ?

I like people with a quirky sense of humor; Steven Wright and Demetri Martin both crack me up.

Look on the bright side: if they win the SB, they'll get a really crappy meal at the White House.

Outside is where you need to be. If you have light-polluted skies, then a telescope is good for viewing the planets and lunar details, but not much else. In that case, a 3" or 4" diameter scope is all you need, and you can get a nice one for under $500. Don't waste money on a super-high magnification lens - around 30x is good for amateur scopes. If you have dark skies and you want to see galaxies and nebulae (e.g., the Messier objects), then something in the 6" to 8" range is good. The motorized tracking mounts are nice, especially if they have the on-board computer that automatically points at the object, but they're more difficult to set up because the mount has to be precisely aligned with true north. The best way to get started in amateur astronomy is to learn the constellations. Check out "The Stars," a book by H.A. Rey. Do a lot of naked-eye observing before spending money on a telescope.

Cumming Man - isn't that some kind of festival? If not, then it should be.

Soooo ... Flutie or Johnson?

Fair enough, but check out Picard responding to the Klingon starting around 3:40 of this clip: https://playithub.net/watch/KUa4n5KFUGw/star-trek-stng-moments-65-sins-of-the-father.html

I'm a Storm Trooper but when I tried to vote, I missed the button.

Back in my day, we just called it "softball."

This happened about 15 years ago. Just as I was about to start a class, a student asked me, "Star Wars or Star Trek?" I said I like both, but had to give the slight nod to Trek, because it paved the way for Star Wars. He respectfully disagreed and we left it at that. Then, at the end of class when I asked if there were any questions, he inquired, "Kirk or Picard?" Without hesitation, I responded, "Picard." He paused and then said, "Alright. You're cool."

I was half-joking about that part. But you have to admit, a couple of Super Bowl wins would convince the skeptics. (So would all the stuff you wrote.)

For most skeptics, a Lombardi or two might do the trick. I guess I wouldn't say I'm skeptical about Josh. He looked pretty sharp for a rookie, he seems to have a good attitude, and he's coachable. That makes me optimistic. But I've been burned before, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

Yes: Buffalo Bills football. When I was young, I was a four-season fan - football (Bills and Browns), baseball (Mets and Indians), basketball (Knicks and Braves), and hockey (Sabres) - but I lost interest in sports when I went to college. Between classes, a job, and a social life, there wasn't much time to watch. I eventually rekindled my interest in football; think it's partly because I enjoyed playing football as a kid, both in the sandlot and in a league, so watching it reminds me of those good times. I played Little League baseball and then softball, but it wasn't as much fun as football, so I don't get into watching it. My basketball playing was limited to a hoop on a friend's garage, and I never played hockey, so neither of those sports have the same allure to me anymore.

No. Our two dogs sleep on dog beds in our bedroom.

Ditto.