PetermansRedemption

So, why doesn’t Detroit go QB here? Assuming they don’t. It’s tough to draft this high in the NFL. And you have to draft this high to get a good QB prospect. You can get a good CB prospect anywhere in the first.

Lions make the pick. This will be interesting.

Hoping the chargers come up here

Silly me actually thought this draft had the potential to move along. Fool me once I suppose. The NFL was never going to let that happen.

Now number 3 is where it could get interesting

Well espn just gave away the pick

Arizona was the first team.... ever? To draft a QB in round 1 and come back and draft another QB in round 1 the following year. I would be utterly shocked if Washington did that.

NFL traits comparison... Tom Brady ?. Ok let’s compare the kid to the greatest QB to ever play.

I’m always leery of someone who comes out of no where. Not even sniffing the top 3 rounds to start the year and takes off like a rocket. Curious to see how his career plays out.

Booger!!!!

I’m not sure if it’s the Bengals or the NFL holding the pick hostage and waiting until the clock runs out to announce.

Exactly. So just put the damn pick in. Idk if it’s Cincinnati purposely holding it up or if the NFL purposely holds the pick hostage until the clock runs out.

If there was any year not to have a first rounder, this is absolutely the year.

I hate the virtual draft. It’s even more boring than I thought it would so far.

Ok Cinci. Just put the damn pick in.

Only the NFL and Goodell could find a way to draw out a virtual draft.

I hadn’t realized that the commissioner didn’t open the draft yet ?

It always pisses me off when the team with first overall takes all 10 minutes. You’ve had months to make a trade or decide on your pick, you really have to waste 10 minutes every.damn.time.

Intro give anyone else chills

They won’t anyways unless they kick Fitzpatrick to the curb and roll with Rosen. Which they have shown before they will not do.

The story says the two homes are identical. I’d be willing to bet he was texting with Leftwich prior to arrival and Leftwich just told him to come in when he got there.

Trading away a premium pick for peanuts would likely accelerate the loss of their job. They would need Thuney, Gilmore, 2020 1st, 2nd and 2021 1st. That might get it done. Doesn’t leave New England with much of a team though.

Thought this was pretty interesting today. [Edit: Fox news link downrated Look, this Fox News story doesn't even have the link to the study nor much data though it includes links to all of Fox News NYC and covid-19 coverage. That's Total BS, sorry. Fox News is notorious for allowing misrepresentations (They allowed Gregory Rigono false claims to be an "advisor" at Stanford University to tout 100% cure rate of tiny study that excluded all the outcomes that died or went to ICU, for example. Stanford had to publicly come out and say "No, he's not, and we had no part in that "study"). I'll deconstruct the Fox News coverage further on.] I'm trying to use quotes to make clear who wrote what, hope I succeeded: Fox News deconstruct: Hap sez: No, that is NOT what the study says. Nowhere does it make that claim. 5,700 people is a fraction of those hospitalized in the NYC area. Per this source, there have been 35,920. So 5,700/35920 = 16%. This hospital network self describes in the article as "the largest academic health system in New York". Academic health systems (systems associated with medical schools) are sometimes called "tertiary care centers", meaning they typically get the sickest, most complicated cases that are referred from other hospitals. So, we have to say "yes, there could be a selection for the sickest patients here". Is the data from those 5,700 patients representative? Maybe, maybe not - it's simply NOT a claim the study tries to make. Hap sez; The "94% more than one other disease" is correct. The "most patients in the country" is misleading - it makes it sound like this data is the majority of the covid-19 patients in the country. Not even close, it's not even the majority in NYC! It may be true that this hospital group has more patients compared to other hospital groups, but the wording is misleading. Hap Sez: Again, technically true but misleading - it's actually 60.7% of covid-19 patients who suffer from obesity, because the authors separated obesity and morbid obesity (not coronavirus, that is also misleading, there are multiple coronaviruses known to infect humans). I think this may be one of the biggest "news" in the article, because there just aren't that many obese people in China to know if it was a risk factor or not, and it clearly is. I don't need advanced statistics to say that 60.7% of covid-19 patients being obese overrepresents the 40.2% of US adults with obesity, while 42% (cited by Fox) vs 40.2% could just be random chance. Basically, Fox is being careless here thus obscuring what may be one of the study's most important findings. Hap sez: Once more: we have no idea what happened to the "majority of patients on ventilators" - they could still be on ventilators. They correctly give the information that we only have outcomes for 316 patients on ventilators, of whom 278 died. But there could be more patients who are still on ventilators, without an outcome - we don't know the outcomes for 3066 patients. It's very careless writing at best. Please, please please - if you choose to read Fox, please cross-check how that news is covered with another source than FOX. At best, Fox is careless and misleading in how it presents data. And that's if it's not outright allowing people to fabricate credentials and misrepresent stuff on-air.

I did too!!! I loved that guy. Wanted him badly in the draft.

Came here to post 2020-2021 season only to be massively disappointed that I was beat to the punch.