Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by esmort

  1. Why?... They are a contender in the AFC and an obstacle for the Colts. I hope it blows up in their face.
  2. Yeah there are a lot of good alternative places to listen if you just turn the sound off.
  3. I hate cable and would love to get rid of them; but if you get your internet through the cable company the alternatives (sling, PSV, etc..) aren't really that great of deal anymore. They keep raising prices/adding tiers just like cable, and if you add anything ala carte on the side (HBO, Disney, NFL, etc ...) and/or add extras DVR, multiple TVs/streams, etc... (depending on service) than you are right back up where you were with cable. Whenever I run the numbers I might save $15-$20 a month, but lose the convenience of all the channels/interface in the same place.
  4. I get why the Colts might want the New England pick, but I don't see how it makes sense for NE. I realize there are tons of scenarios that could cause trades in real life on draft day(maybe even this one) . But, for mock purposes this trade only seems to serve to give the Colts the picks you want them to have. Given who is picking after #26 any QB there at 26 is likely to drop to the Patriots at #32.
  5. Yeah he is all over the place ... I have seen him anywhere from an early 1st rounder to a late 3rd rounder (majority putting him somewhere in the 2nd). Seems to be a hard guy for a lot of people to pin down.
  6. The knock on Abram is his lack of coverage ability. I have seen Adderley all over the place in mock drafts but seems to be in the second more often than not. I am not sure either would be a value pick at #26. Not like there are 1 or 2 Safeties who are being talked about as consensus top 15-20 picks that happen to slide to us at #26.
  7. What Safety do you think is worth pick #26? I'm not saying we won't pick one there, but I am not seeing how that is the value pick. I would rather go with a different position other than S in the 1st. I think one of the 2nd round picks would probably offer more value if we were looking for a safety.
  8. If you believe that, I have some prime swampland for sale! If he did not like where he was being traded he could have made it so difficult that the official trade would have not have happened tomorrow.
  9. They were just talking about OBJs bad qualities that caused the Giants to trade him earlier. Among them ... he was supposed to be more of a team player and keep his mouth shut after his big pay day (not a contract stipulation, but a gentleman's/business mans understanding) ... which he didn't. He also made a comment about not liking to drink water (which I had never heard before) but I guess it has led to 2nd half dehydration (performance) issues and he refuses to listen to trainers on increasing fluids. There were some other issues listed I don't remember them all. Secondly - We likely would not have gotten him for what Cleveland got him for ... it would have cost us significantly more, because he wanted to be with there with Landry so he didn't make the trade difficult. I am not thrilled about Funchness, but you are too obsessed with the big names. I think Ballard will eventually be willing to take more chances on guys like AB, OBJ, etc ... after the locker room is more solidly built.
  10. Alshon Jeffery didn't run at combine; his times are from his pro day... So Funchess pro-day 40 time should be an equally valid comparison.
  11. I agree which makes me think there must be something I am missing (because I was like "what???" when I heard the news). I don't think CB goes out this early in FA and gives out a big contract (even though only 1 yr) without something more than "Ryan Grant 2.0" in mind. Maybe we are all seeing slow WR, where CB/Reich sees some sort of WR/TE (he's got the size and blocking skills) insurance policy in case Doyle is more broken than advertised. Who knows ....
  12. You must be going to a different part of the internet that has different boards than me. There are things that I think could be changed and/or improved here, but overall it is not a "mess" compared to most of the sports forums I have been to. Some boards don't have a lot of duplicate posts, but many have tumbleweeds blowing through them and they only get a fraction of the activity this forum does. Other boards are so structured and try to keep things so on topic that a lot of people often won't participate because the threads are too narrowly focused. You could pin it, but than you have like 2 pages of pins before you get to non-pinned content. IMO over-pinning is worse than duplicate threads. Also some threads may have start on one subject, but for whatever reason evolved into either something different or a very specific aspect about the player or subject of the original thread. Often these threads are very active and even though may have drifted from the original topic the discussion still is very active and often times the subject being discussed is interesting and worthwhile ... when threads like these get merged you lose the "sub-discussion". IMO it's easier just to let any threads that don't get merged or locked to die on their own ... eventually they drift a few pages back and disappear if something important was in there someone will usually bump revive it.
  13. You have to expect it this time of year. The Mods lock and merge new/duplicate threads all the time ... but a lot of posters give them push back because they feel do it(close/merge threads) too much. Can't please everyone. This forum is a lot more organized than many teams websites I have visited.
  14. Every other position would come up with some reason they deserved the same 4 yr contracts. It would open up a huge can of worms.
  15. I disagree ... all these players (and everyone who chooses to play contact sports (boxing, MMA, hockey, etc ..) know the risk when they sign up. The players/union could arrange to pay for insurance out of their cut if it was that important to them and maybe get the NFL to contribute a percentage based on player contributions, or maybe all injury settlements go into this "lifetime insurance fund", etc ... Why should the NFL foot the entire bill for life for injuries that may have happened (or started) in HS, or College both of which are profiting from the players while giving them much less compensation than the NFL.
  16. Even of we get Humphries I would like to see CB bring Inman back
  17. It was obvious from your comment, when you lecture one side to wait and "stop minimizing" but are curiously quiet to all the outrageous comments from the other side...hmmm.
  18. Wouldn't want to shatter the illusion of your good guy/bad guy, black and white world.
  19. I think you are purposely trying to be obtuse now. He is the one who brought up bias and made a comment insinuating that he wasn't biased because he didn't say anything negative about Kraft. If he is in fact biased toward guilt (as you suggest is his right) and not withholding judgement(as he seemed to suggest) until further evidence than he should not chastising someone for being biased toward innocence from a perceived moral high ground. The fact that assumption of innocence is not required of the public does not change the spirit the right. It would be pretty horrible if everyone was guilty until proven innocent, and the court of public opinion is making that slippery slope more of a reality.
  20. It does have bearing ... you are supposed to have a "bias" towards innocence. You didn't make a statement about everyone stop making assumptions before all the facts are out. The very fact your statement was made only at a defender to stop "minimizing it" shows you assume guilt (which was exactly my point). Don't get me wrong I love when the Patriots and their fans are miserable and Kraft caught in a massage parlor is priceless; but this Kangaroo court of public opinion (for everything lately not just Kraft) is getting ridiculous. So far we only know he went a massage parlor for a quickie, but some people are already trying to tie him to a sex trafficking ring. Accusations like that do need to be "minimized" until they are proven.
  21. Isn't it supposed to work the opposite of that? (Innocent until proven guilty)
  22. You are only going to marginally change demand by increasing penalties. Prohibition and the war on drugs show that demand will remain even with increased penalties. If the death penalty cant stop crimes, murder, drugs (in several places), etc ... even the harshest penalty that would be reasonably considered would not stop the sex trade. Alcohol, drugs, and sex (anything that offers an "escape" or a "high") ... are "punishment proof" as far as trying to outlaw people buying them.
  23. I am assuming from your previous posts you are a teacher ... teaching is not held to such a high lofty standard that the profession doesn't have some latitude in disregarding some laws. Jaywalking(to use an extreme example) isn't going to get you fired. In a lot of places even a misdemeanor arrest for soliciting isn't even going to get you fired(especially if it happened out of state and wasn't public knowledge)... on the flip-side I am sure there are several things that aren't illegal you could do that would get you fired. Many things fall somewhere in the middle and thus my point .. in reality it is not as simple as illegal - not illegal. Voting or even being in office doesn't automatically change bad or outdated laws. Most people disregard some laws from time to time; which laws and where you live is going to be what determines whether you are a "criminal" or not.
  24. It's a nice saying, but surely you know that is not reality. All illegal acts are not created equal ... not only are there varying degrees of illegality, some things that are technically illegal shouldn't be (by any reasonable standard) and some laws are so outdated they aren't even actively enforced. I know you can't really believe that it is that black and white.
  • Create New...