colin

nonsense. i don't know much about you, but i gather from your posts you don't understand economics at all. under a free market, without government subsidy or protection, you have competition. while it MAY be true that a given pharma won't want to sell a cure for a disease that it thinks it will make more money off of just treating rather than curing, don't you think their competition might have just a touch of incentive to sell the cure and make some money while taking market share from their competitor? you make the mistake most (economic) socialists make, you are assuming that free market means "corporations are in control". corporations are not government (although they are protected by the government, and would have less protection in a more free market, but that's a whole other ball of wax), they are groups of people with some capital and ideas trying to make money and grow. the do not (and can not) simply conspire to maximize their own collective profits at the expense of all the good men and women living under their despotic heel. they are at the mercy of the buying public, and of each other. even if some corporations schemed to collude and eliminate competition (in other words act something like a labour union) there is huge incentive to cheat (ever heard of a prisoner's dilema?) and groups outside of the cartel will look at the protectionist ring as something to eat. so no, you don't think corporations left unfettered will hold back cures for diseases (since they can't), you just FEEL it emotionaly. and it is wrong.

i don't like sapp, but that hit was clean and sherman is a girlyman for crying about it. how much do you want to bet that that o lineman (like all of them) has made a few dirty hits in his life?

haha! that made me laugh

how'd you guys feel about throw backs full time? i'd dig it myself

getting through the FDA costs much more than R&D.

the biggest thing to me is the coaching. the teams that make the play offs have kick ass coaches. i really don't think mularky or our old batch of goofs had a snowballs chance in hell of winning a playoff game

brown, pat williams, prelou (however you spell it), antoine, jonas, bledsoe, price, reimersma, centers all those guys were cast off as donahoe moves. some of them were better than others, but the big ting is they all got ditched without proper replacements. he did an ok job replacing some guys, but he seems out of touch with what players to retain

ben roth makes plays happen by avoiding the rush. manning is a pure pocket passer, he will kill you if you make an early mistake, but doesn't seem to be able to wiggle out of a blitz to extend a play that well.

didn't campbell do some things for us last year? the biggest problem with our entire ex coaching staff is they just picked plays as if they were playing madden (badly at that). nothing was ever run to set up other plays or to wear down the opponents. we never showed them one tendency and got them when the bit. these guys just sucked

no bently or hutch? what about FAs from the jests?

pit also dumbed down the passing game for ben his first year. we have had a dumb ass bunch of HORRIBLE offensive coached who have had zero sucess but still think they have to throw the kitchen sink at every game.

the "underclass" in america can easily live better than the below average european. all the need is a job.

as good as they have been the pats are a very DIRTY team. they hold chip and block low all the time on O. on D it is frickin horrible, they play physically but do so much clutching and grabbing and late hitting it makes me sick. seymore is a great lineman, but he leads with his head, twists at the knees and hits qbs late all the damn time. dirty dirty team, i love watching them lose

a young guy will take a few years to learn. let's just get a quality guy with some experience

ok so seeing that none of them are available (good list, but let's assume they aren't there because that is what it looks like right now), who would you like and why? one of the points i am making is that we can turn our nose up at coaches (and sure i might be wrong wanting haz) but you have to rank them by who is there, not who we might like.

i'd take him as DC

ok, so haslett started his starting QB instead of the back up who turned out better than his starter? didn't marty do that when he had grbac in over gannon and KC failed to make the SB inspite of home field and the NFL's best record? gannon went on to kick ass for the raiders. sure haslett is not perfect, and his team sucked this year. that team also has the worst owner and some of the worst management in the NFL. the postives (only play off win in NO history) outweight the negatives (bad disciplin, starting the wrong QB) considering the circumstances (that team lost more talent than any other while haslett was there and ditka saddled them with a problem child RB and a lack of other young players) and i'm willing to throw out his last year (katrina). the bottom line is if you don't like haslett because you don't think he did enough record and play off wise, then the clear choice is martz because he is the one coach who did have success that is being canned. if you think martz is a bad candidate for some other non record reasons, then using haslett's record as the reason not to hire him (and i think his record wasn't that bad) is a bit dishonest sherman took a built up franchise no where. he also more or less just decided to ride favre however he went. if he was smarter he might have avoided all those big melt down games that favre likes to have in the playoffs.

there are millions of people in america who are neither white nor black. obviously because of slavery and what not white/black issues in the US are more politically charged and exciting to talk about. but if we are going to talk about white and black crime and poverty in america (and the point made sarcasticly above about black racists being impossible is ironic because there are plenty of people who say that there cannot be black racists) we shouldn't call it racism because all races besides white and black tend to be left out.

the diminishing standard is the big thing here. there are some stupid kids. they nearly always have stupid parents and in many cases have never challenged their brains (just like there are fat sloppy kids who have fat sloppy parents and have never challenenged their bodies). dumb kids will have to struggle their whole lives to scratch the surface of average on most things. they tend to be lazy and more of them than average will be violent or cruel or disruptive. public school (in the states and canada for the most part) caters to them at the expense of average to smart children. if sports catered to the fat slow lazy clowns, we'd never have a pop warner game worth playing let alone the NFL. smarter and particularly more driven children should take harder and more rewarding courses than little morons. the number of students in a class isn't the largest factor either. having fewer students per teacher is generally so that little idiots can get extra help because their barely double digit IQ brains can't understand fractions. the model of schools being large central institutions that have to be all things to all people is just bad. the teachers in these schools are more often than not pretty poor as well. the smarter and more ambitious people stay clear of teaching, so you end up with not too bright people who think showing up is enough and that's why schools graduate idiots. you can look at what students in south korea, hungary, many parts of india, japan, hong kong, and france learn to how under stimulated many young people are in public school here.

OK. i have seen more sarcastic and dismissive remarks about hazz and martz here than any other coaching candidate. I have seen people criticise hazz because of his record. the thing is, NO has sucked as a franchise for ever and he didn't have a terrible record with them. they had 16 road games last year, he won them their first and only ever play off game, and he was in a VERY tough division (atlanta, TB and Carolina, over the previous 3 seasons one of these teams made it to the NFC championship game, and two of them won it!) and accept for last season always was ahead of one of those teams. if you don't like hazz because of his record, you HAVE to like Martz because of his. no fired head coach has nearly the results that martz has had over the years, both as an OC and HC. if you don't like either, who should be the coach? please don't point out annecdotal stuff (Martz never runs, hazz was mean to my buddy hull!) unless you are going to point out all the annecdotes for all the coaches. thanks

i don't think marv is gonna coach i'll also take the hazz, i think he has some really strong positives and will learn from some of the mistakes he made in NO

hazz i'm happy to have him, but we need some co-ordinators

are you being sarcastic? i honestly can't tell. if you are NOT being sarcastic, i agree with you. that has been a killer division and NO has had some issues.

haslett

martz would be a hell of an OC