Richard Noggin

You're conveniently only acknowledging the older, more etymologically-literal definition. There is another, official, completely legitimate and in fact more often used meaning of the term. Don't be dishonest (or oblivious). If teams were required to actually HIRE based on "race," rather than simply interview, then these new rules would be problematic. As someone else pointed out earlier in this thread, there is potentially some problematic territory with respect to what, exactly, constitutes a person's "race." If we're being annoying and technical, one could argue that many/most/all persons have some degree of "racial" diversity in their ancestries. Of course, that line of thinking tries to overtly sidestep the obvious and important social constructs and historical implications of race in the U.S. The NFL so often triggers anger from certain cultural tribes in our country, and maybe we should all just relax and realize no one is being harmed when the NFL strives to correct or at least recognize an institutional/cultural bias that continues to work against well-qualified "minority" candidates.

I endorse this message.

I'm going to skip ahead after reading the first page of posts and just say this: you Tom Brady apologists, especially in light of this newest malfeasance, are a special breed.

I have also made many, many terrible decisions. I just happen to be both quite gifted at driving and at speaking with authority figures, and...maybe more importantly, I'm a ginger, which is about as white as a person can be. Never overlook the advantage that provides when dealing with police.

Dammit I loved the NBA and specifically the East in the 90s. Was a Knicks fan, which was tough. But what a physical and emotional contest back then.

I really needed that.

Size queen.

I think GreggTX raises a number of valid concerns. I don't really agree, but I cannot tell him he's wrong about his takes.

That dude is schizophrenic. I used to live not far from where he's from. It's not a great area at all. But it's not the carnage he has apparently witnessed often. Of course I cannot deny his experience, but I can question it. Sounds more like he's untethered. Was plain to see when I waited on him as part of 8-12 person tables at my now former high-end restaurant gig. Always with the solo bottle of pink bubbles, even when first drafted and underage (I'm no stickler). Always aloof. Not connected to his group. From there he'd head down to Encore to do what people used to do there: get obliterated. Waste of immense talent. Unfortunate.

I'll say it: upon first glance, the Dolphins have assembled a decent starting roster. Not really laughable at all. Possibly kind of dangerous. I was expecting something funnier when I scanned their projected starters. They played the Bills tough as heck last year, and look to be much improved (although that many new pieces could take time to synch up). Hate myself for typing any of this.

I hate every point you make mostly because they could be true. New England COULD grind out a 9-11 win season on the merits of their stifling defense and ball--control offense, no matter who the QB is. One mitigating, up-yours factor at play here is the annually unpredictable nature of NFL defensive success. But even there we find numbers that don't feel good: since and including 1996, NE's scoring defense has ranked outside the top-10 only six times (IN 24 SEASONS)! They had a fairly bad run of yards-allowed rankings from 2010-14 and 2017-18, but that didn't matter much with prime, top-5 Brady-led offenses. Belichick really is the best defensive coordinator I've ever seen. He's done it so many times, with so many different rosters. I'd say THAT's the number one argument in favor of the 2020 Pats being good. Then again, if the offense takes a major step back, that makes it MUCH more difficult for the D to play to its strengths. So that is the potential fly in the Hoodie's three-quarter sleeve ointment.

Um... ...have you watched the news lately?

Oh...boy.

They cheated. It's been documented, punished, and covered-up. That's the established science here. Like global warming. It's just a fact.

I see what you did there. However, in McDermott's new 2020 mantra, "Find a way," the "within established ethical/legal boundaries" is silent.

See, that's the thing. Most leaders lack the strength to admit the obvious: that we will not return to business as usual by the fall. And I understand why competition pressures them into advertising optimistic plans for the near future. The NFL won't walk away from revenue until it's absolutely forced to. My college's president (I'm full-time faculty) hasn't really weighed in one way or the other. It's a bind, I get it. But it's a failure of imagination and leadership to keep pushing for a somewhat unlikely and definitely irresponsible outcome. We currently lack the testing/tracking infrastructure to fully reopen schools and any large public gatherings, like sporting events (and concerts, etc.) any time soon. So the brave and ethical thing to do is to openly plan for this extended disruption in innovative ways. But the market might punish companies who publicly announce such continued restrictions earlier than their competitors. Colleges who lay out plans for exclusively hybrid and/or online curricula and reduced resident density fear losing enrollment to other schools who don't, for example. I think an unchanged 17-week NFL schedule is unrealistic, and maybe irresponsible. There must be creative ways to adapt and uncover temporary opportunities.

Maybe it's been floated here already, but I haven't heard much talk about condensing the schedule via: eliminating inter-conference games. Seems like the no-brainer way to build-in flexibility to the 2020 schedule, reduce travel, and maintain competitive integrity. Plus, who wants to play the NFCW anyways?

The catch might be that Foles--who doesn't seem to relish the daily competition and locker room camaraderie, like one Ryan Fitzpatrick is known to do--had already considered walking away from football before going to Philly, and I'm guessing his professional fulfillment under HC Marrone was...lacking. I could see him being done with the game sooner rather than later.

Criticizing Brady and Belichick for repeated, documented cheating is NOT some fringe perspective. It is our evidence-based reality. Doesn't make us obsessed or deranged to point that out. I see no reason for a sports fan (or anyone, really) of any allegiance to whitewash history.

Interesting analysis of his actual throwing motion; we get so little of this. Remember Fitz winding up and finishing all sideways like he was hurling a javelin? I'll bet the more "quiet," arm-based, pure sporting-L motion helps with consistency/accuracy. Fewer moving parts. But, alas, with less leg drive and core torque, maybe it also robs velocity.

I really think Corey Thompson (LB) makes the team. He has started games, exhibits the traits McDermott covets (mobility), and is still cheap. People overlook this guy all the time (understandably, but he might surprise people).

Wildcard move

That was actually the LEAST prickish response I could have imagined to my post, and I mean that sincerely. Thanks. Just responding to the potential nudge towards an anti-science/anti-public health stance there. But that's not terribly football-related, so I'll just return to "our" original point here: FINALLY the Bills are poised for success, and a damned public health crisis shuts it down. Or whatever you want to call it. Of course. Because we're cursed.

Fixed it for you.

It's the Billsy-est thing of all time.