whatdrought

Yup. Franchise QB (supposedly) plus an extra second? That's cash in the bank.

Brown makes sense to the Panthers, though I imagine they would like to trade out if possible.

So is the Browns whole draft pretty much Okudah and Williams?

Browns going up for Okudah would be somewhat surprising, but makes some amount of sense.

Actually, it makes sense to do those two first. Tre’s value really can’t go up much more as he can’t play better (relatively speaking) and the market isn’t likely to go up much more. Ramsey will probably add a couple mil, but I don’t think that’ll jack up the market all that much. Dawkins and Milano can both greatly increase their value next year as each have another step to take in their development. So if we’re betting on them taking that step, it makes sense to lock them in now.

Also, I don’t get the Isaiah Simmons love. I see the potential, but there’s a lot of ways it could go wrong as well. Players without positions are scary.

These are all ones I can get behind. Moss looks the part for that one to come true.

What's something out of the ordinary, or slightly unusual that you think about the upcoming draft? Not crazy predictions, per se, but just something you think/believe that is unlikely to be widely agreed upon. Mine has no real backing other than just my gut feeling from minimal research: Jacob Eason will end up being better than most of the QB's in this draft... Maybe the best. Not sure why I feel that way, but there it is. Another one of mine is that Chase Young is probably overrated... Not because he's not good, but just because he's seen as too sure a thing. It's always a red flag to me. Whatcha got?

It's not a great look that they acquire a QB who is known to love TE's and they still want to move him.

That’s such bull####. Thought glazer was better than that.

Hurdles and then takes down three linemen. The receiver on the near sideline shrugs his head like "Just Josh."

That feels like agent generated buzz/smokeshow... He's been 4th on every list I've seen.

this is going to go a long way to understanding this whole thing...

Maybe a company can come up with a little pouch that's useful for carrying your mask and your papers, that way when you get stopped they're easy to get to...

I disagree. Distancing and shutdown has helped curb the numbers at this point, surely (though another conversation is the long term plan and whether or not it will eventually have its way anyways), but I don't think there's a good argument that distancing has taken the extreme models and completely blown them up. The disparity is too severe. This is fundamentally disagree with. Moral imparatives change with the seasons. Individual rights (constitutional rights, specifically) are set in stone. That's the foundation of America. Without that we're just waiting to be taken advantage of. I do agree with this- but with the main emphasis on "voluntary." That's not what we're seeing. We're seeing little baby tyrants popping up all over our country. I get your meaning here, but this really misses the historical realities of the "slippery slope" that is political precedence.

Hey... Maybe if this all goes on long enough there wont be any debates.... I wonder who that would help the most...

Trump should put out a model based on what would have happened if he hadn't cut off traffic from China when he did. Just say the whole ***** world would have died. The data is all there. Clearly. Best response to this tweet:

But the government has shown us so often how capable they are of taking care of our every need... Why would we doubt them?

Go back to where I addressed that. It's through due process that rights can be limited or curbed. Such as your example, as well as in cases of felons who lose their rights. It's through the checks and balances of a three tier government with the ultimate authority being the constitution as applied by the judicial branch. It is not the right of the government to willy nilly steal away rights - even in the context of "public safety." Two things- 1- this is 100% wrong. They do not have the right to abridge constitutional rights without modifying the constitution. That's why we have the constitution. 2- you still haven't shown a single "right" that is overpowering any other right that is being suppressed right now. Public health is not a constitutional right and it certainly is not an excuse to pull my rights - especially me as someone who isn't infected and is not doing anything to harm anyone else- regardless of what the government says.

I think social distancing worked to an extent, but that it's widely irelevent in most of the country. In my county, with 5 cases, 1 hospitalization, 3 recovery's, and like 50 negative tests (the set up testing locally and all the tests came back negative) it's worthless. And it really hasn't been followed which proves how unneeded it is.

What right is overriding the right of free expression of religion? That's not about rights. It's about a generation that has a broken understanding and believes that the government owes them safety and security from all things, even at the expense of their rights. That's not in the constitution, and it's directly against the heart and intent of the founding of this FREE country.

You’re arguing that the government gets to decide what rights are reasonable and when. That’s tyranny and it’s the exact opposite of what this Country was founded on. We as a society can agree on laws, via the checks and balances of the 3 tiers of government that act in the best interest of the nation (such as your fire in a theatre) example. But there is no room in the foundational origin of this country for one branch of government (specifically the legislative) at a state or federal level to suppress the Constitutionally protected rights of the citizens. If that existed, the constitution would be meaningless. Furthermore, creating the precedent that says the government can call something a public health/safety crisis and strip rights willy nilly is exactly how you get a totalitarian government. The models were wrong. Horribly so. This is not nearly the crisis that it was said to be when this all started which proves that government actors can exaggerate or lie and use that to steal away unalienable rights. It’s idiotic to submit to that.

I don't think it'll be official NFL news such as scheduling change or anything like that. The NFL would know that he knows and scoop him by releasing an official statement.

Wanting accurate numbers, from the models to the reporting, is not minimizing anything. It’s rational human behavior. Assuming that what is being reported, and the severity therein, to be accurate is idiotic. It can be a real deal, and it can be a big deal and yet still be overblown by the media using false models and inflated numbers.