BobbyC81

I saw this question submitted to an on-line Q&A and the answer was 'that it made it fairer for a game if one team had more injured players'. I think that's somewhat of a lame answer. For football, injuries are expected. The concussion protocol now makes it even more likely players will miss games. I think it would help all teams a lot to add at least 5 more players to their rosters and have all available for a game. Look at the Bills right now. With the 53 man limit, they chose to keep 4 CBs and 4 safeties. With just about all teams running 4 and even 5 receiver sets at times, you need those 4 CBs all active. Still, if one or more goes out with injury, you're screwed. Gaines got injured so the Bills had to activate Mabin and drop a player at another position. The NY Giants on Sunday had 4 WRs go out with injury, which of course is rare. They were forced to play multiple TEs and split out RBs. They probably would've lost the game anyways but those injuries made a win more difficult.

Same as the guy who inherited a Top 5 defense playing the 4-3 and ruined it by changing it to his favorite 3-4 with linemen going back into coverage. Ego, stubbornness, inflexible, etc.

I don't recall him signing with anyone.

Yeah, we seem to forget Webb is supposed to also be a WR. Career 8 receptions for 61 yards.

Orton should be on the 'Wall of Shame' for that infamous slide short of the first down and for the way he left.

And after Tampa plays the Pats this week, their scoring defense should be even lower.

Also, while we all have to be happy with the TreDavious White pick, the 1st round pick we got from Kansas City may be very late in the round. The 182 yards are not significant being against Atlanta. The Falcons did not make it to the Super Bowl because of their defense. They won many close high-scoring games last season.

I also think that if Tate isn't going to be active to return kicks and since he's never shown much as a receiver, why not replace him with a reliable receiver.

Yep, my guess is Corey "Philly" Brown

Here in Northern California, the Oakland A's had a catcher names Stephen Vogt, who was a big fan favorite. In one section of the stadium, this group of fans would chant when he came to bat "I believe in Stephen Vogt!!" They even had T-shirts made with the chant on it. I think it may be time for "I believe in Sean McDermott!!"

Herman Munster. Man, what an arm. He could kick, too!

The odds seem to favor Cousins joining Shanahan in SF but you never know. Many of us expected Marrone to influence drafting Nassib and it didn't happen.

I'd say it could be three controversial moves: 1. Traded a 1st round pick to move up and took Watkins over Khalil Mack when they could've just taken OBJ at their original pick 2. Did not exercise the option for the 5th year of Sammy's contract, which may have partially influenced trading him to get something for him if they didn't re-sign him 3. Trading such a talent away for a lesser player and a 2nd round pick, severely weakening the talent at the WR position

to take Coleman's roster spot?

Good one. I was trying to figure out how to word that reference but I think you nailed it so I'll quit.

Many 300 yard passing games come from a team being behind and passing on every down. They don't mean much, unless you get bonus pts in your fantasy league.

You will be so spot-on with Jauron ball when they finish with a 7-9 record.

Nobody beats the Stanford band!!

Didn't Blanton suck last year, so it was no surprise that he wasn't brought back?

As long as he doesn't wear a Ryan sweater vest!

With this head coach/GM combo, for once we actually need Jerry Sullivan's probing questions. The angle of "trusting the process" and "making decisions best for the team for short term and long term" is not cutting it anymore. I liked the addition of Jenkins because he provided some experience that seemed needed for depth with rookies as backups. It seemed risky having only 4 CBs and 4 safeties and now they get rid of one of the backup safeties? Their defense is playing so well, you want to trust what they're doing, and the scheme is supposedly not complex so it seems new players can pick it up quickly, unlike the Ryan system, but they just keep making moves that don't make sense.

I agree with you that it was a bang bang play and it shouldn't be called a drop for Zay. Could he have caught it? Sure, but by the time he was turned around the ball was right there and he had little time to react.

Josh Allen isn't helping his draft ranking any so far this season. I guess Falk rebounded but I watched his previous game and he was awful. Looking forward to seeing Rosen vs Stanford this Saturday.

They lost about 15 secs in not calling timeout after one play (Tyrod scramble?). If there was more time on the clock, they wouldn't have had to go for broke on the last play instead of just getting a first down. The clock management to end the 1st half was also puzzling. They let time run off, then called a timeout after 2nd down, then called another after 3rd down to force Carolina to punt to get the ball back. Then they call a run to run out the clock? Why did they bother? Did McD just want to use up his 1st half timeouts? Were they just trying to block the punt, which they had come close to a couple of times?

I believe the Bisons ended when the Sabres began. I also still follow the NBA but only casually followed the former Braves after they moved to San Diego and pretty much stopped when guys like Randy Smith retired. Now that I'm in Northern California, the Clippers are the enemy to the Warriors.