Simon

Only if he's carrying an oversized sheperd's crook.

No, my son lives up North of there.

I'm not a meme guy but that is just outstanding.

I'm leaving for Michigan tomorrow morning and will be off the clock. Sorry.

No spoilers. No tipping picks. People have been quickly removed for both.

Any opinions on what is the best channel to have on in the background during the draft? My preference would be the most analytical, football-focused crew with the least amount of screeching, self-promoting attention ho's.

Y'all have fun.... Customary reminder: No tipping picks, spoilers, etc. People have been, and will be rapidly removed for it.

I know nothing about the Hauschka thing but Tre Hendrickson has absolutely gone for Allen's legs with dirtbag moves, not just once, but at least twice.

Dirty gets you nowhere. I'd rather add legit toughness, not slimy little skulkers.

Yeah, trying to injure people from the backside away from the play really shows toughness.

I don't think anybody is suggesting they are going to spread the ball around and piece together scoring drives. More like, under perfect conditions with good protection, I can go 11-50 for 67 yards with 0 TD's, 7 INT's and 2 first downs.

SS and RB are the two funnest positions on the field. I'll take the Jordan Poyer role, please and thank you.

Just go with the 'ol Archie Manning

Probably nothing outside the hashes because I'm too old and DBs are too athletic, but with enough attempts I could probably hit some digs and curls and maybe a few pop passes if I had a good TE. Maybe a 20%-25% completion rate?

And I bet you've been happily married for a long time!

I thought "Why would somebody start a thread with some stupid picture of Mahomes?"

Ummmm, you might want to look above your post.

Tiger 5 over today. On the front side.

Yeah, but did Churchill know about Coventry?

I am glad for it. Half the field was under par after one round; that shouldn't be the case at the Masters, imo.

I agree this is true, but I also think Edmunds was just not as good an athlete as the other two guys.

[This is an automated response] Please don' use clickbait titles. Thank you.

Because they weren't good enough and the organization recognized it and acted on it.

I'm blown away by those Canon rf models, but I'll never be a good enough photographer to be worthy of a $1000+ lens. I was looking for something more along the lines of around 1/2-3/4 of that amount for the whole rig. Maybe at this point I'd be smarter to stick with DSLR, sacrifice a few modern conveniences, and get more bang for the buck on the hardware. At least until I have a better idea of how well and how often I'd use it. Does that make sense?

Really want to focus on increasing telephotic capability without carrying multiple lenses everywhere, and consider weight and size to be worth a pretty respectable amount of gold. Large, deep landscapes are my favorite and I also can sneak up on a fair amount of wildlife; but it's wildlife, so you can only close to 50-100' before you spook it. Just tonight I was on a ridgeline 500' above the Allegheny with a unique, just budding tree full of turkey vultures 100+' directly below me with gorgeous evening light and a watery background with great depth. Didn't even bother taking a shot because I can't pull anything in with an Iphone. 🤷‍♂️ Can I can get any telephotic capability worth a damn with just a body and a compact lens (or even no additional lens)? Say shooting an elk at 100' or a bird at 30'? Or am I going to have to nut up and add another 5lbs to my pack? 1) That's going to be me, good or bad, so I can't change that variable 2-3) Can I shoot solid landscapes with just a body and then carry only one telephoto lens that snaps on quick?