Still Jimmy Graham?  Chicago had a TD stolen on the next play Fields got cracked after he threw it, then on a slide.  No call. 

19 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Problem is that both det and hou need a qb…

How is that a problem?  Take QBs, PLEASE!

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Fields isn’t going to last the season.  

No idea how someone as athletic as he is slid the way he did. He almost got himself killed. 

1 minute ago, The Blackfish said:

Still Jimmy Graham?  Chicago had a TD stolen on the next play Fields got cracked after he threw it, then on a slide.  No call. 

I thought the next play he could’ve also gotten a roughing the passer with how things are called nowadays 

2 hours ago, Utebird said:

She was aware he was drunk driving and let him.

Why didn't she call a cab???

Being aware someone is committing a crime doesn’t make you an accessory to the crime. 

Lol, that Big Ben deep ball died, if it had any life to begin with. 

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Lol, that Big Ben deep ball died, if it had any life to begin with. 

I heard it quack 

8 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

How is that a problem?  Take QBs, PLEASE!

If they identify a kid they want, likely have to trade up. Want no part of that. 

gimme stingley and hutchinson and ill smile

58 minutes ago, austinfan said:

In a strange way, there's been excessive caution in both directions. On the one hand, they've been paranoid about any potential adverse reaction to the vaccines, which were still outweighed by a couple orders of magnitude by the benefits (in the US alone, estimates of 140K lives saved v a few deaths that may or may not be due to the vaccines). This is driven by social media, one or two bad reactions get blown up into a full blown scare, causing thousand to die b/c they don't get vaccinated. So being overly cautious preserves government credibility (we're carefully watching the issue).

On the other hand, the mask rules and other measures went way overboard, it was obvious after the first couple months that it was not being spread by surfaces (maybe in hospitals, but not in real life, in small rooms with multiple infected patients it might be an issue, but on paper bags from the grocery?), that masks worked (even 50% effective meant a huge decline in virus spread) and that you didn't have to be so paranoid outside. Mandates would have been more successful if they were based more on common sense than  "zero risk," that is, address the most dangerous situations, maskless in enclosed spaces without adequate ventilation for an extended period. A bar around Sturgis was far more dangerous than a BLM demonstration.

 

Well, let’s consider this in two pieces.  The pharmaceutical industry and government moved at "warp speed” to develop and authorize for use the vaccines. So for some there is concern over the vaccines probably fueled by side effects reported after such emergency use.  Media reports highlight these and the changes in scientific understanding every time they report.

Which leads us to initial precautions.  Don’t mask because medical professionals need masks.  Mask everywhere. Mask only indoors.  Vaccinated need not mask.  Everyone in masks again.  Huh.  Welcome to science in reality as our understanding changes. Wash surfaces and groceries driven by what we know of cold germ transference initially, which made sense. Mass closures, same thing.  Understanding improved as we gained information. Science tends to work that way. 

36 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Problem is that both det and hou need a qb…

Please let them draft QBs. No QB is worth 1,2,3 in this year’s draft. 

22 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I say that too based off what I’ve seen. However we would be discounting this is the Texans organization. And i could see houston using the route more of building up their team rather than spending the capital on a QB right now. People use this for the eagles but houston has it way worse on that roster and can use that reasoning more so then the eagles. 

I mean the Texans are likely to have multiple firsts in 2023 if they can deal Watson.  If you don’t see a qb you think is a definite franchise qb, why draft him.  They would do better filling other positions.  I think the same can be said for the Lions. Goff hasn’t been good but he’s far from the worst player on that roster.  

2 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I mean the Texans are likely to have multiple firsts in 2023 if they can deal Watson.  If you don’t see a qb you think is a definite franchise qb, why draft him.  They would do better filling other positions.  I think the same can be said for the Lions. Goff hasn’t been good but he’s far from the worst player on that roster.  

Tbh i wouldn’t be surprised if both attempt to trade out of their spots to get a multitude of picks. The Texans likely get a nice haul for watson so maybe less so them. But i see the lions trying to trade out. But i might be giving them too much credit and do something dumb 

Who would want to come Up??

carolina or washington maybe. Not many

1 minute ago, ToastJenkins said:

Who would want to come Up??

carolina or washington maybe. Not many

I think it depends on how far down the lions and Texans are willing to move tbh 

3 hours ago, greendestiny27 said:

A couple free agent safety's on the market to look at for the next year, if they don't get extended. 
Jessie Bates, Marcus Williams. 
Neither will be cheap, but it's time they invest in the position for a long term fix. Both players are 25. Grab one of them then invest say round 2 for another safety to pair up.
I'm sure Howie won't do either because it makes sense and will improve the defense and apparently he's dumb deaf and blind to that side of the ball. 

Might not have any money under the cap for a decent 25 year old safety.

4 hours ago, eagle45 said:

Underqualified attorneys who pretend to be medical and scientific experts are a pet peeve of mine, as are those who repeatedly push predictable and tired political issues in social forums where they do not belong.  Your football opinions are the easiest to deal with, but admittedly the icing on the cake.  You're just a royal flush.  

Do you have a reference for saying that surgeons only know how to cut or for implying that docs from 3rd tier medical schools are not to be trusted because they are not up to date on research?  Being a former science major at Penn does not qualify...

I wasn't going to push on that, but there was just so much irony in that particular post.  

FA safeties are going to be too costly.

Hamilton if he's there with one of the two top 1st round picks is a no brainer.

Joseph/Cine in the late 1st-early 2nd as fallback options.

No excuses to not address safety with at least one of the first four picks in 2022.

Another taunting penalty decides a prime time game. Terrible. 

These refs are ruining the game.  That doesn't warrant taunting. Kid makes a play and the refs decide to ruin the play.

Is this pee wee football? Taunting is such bs

Wow!! These refs are literally screwing the Bears, I’m not a bash the ref fan, but it’s obvious. 

Man, taunting is terrible enough, but even if we're going to start calling it like that, why should it give the team a first down? It has nothing to do with the game. Give a guy 2-3 of those a game and then eject him or something.

There should be 20 taunting penalties a game if that one on Marsh is taunting. What a stupid league.

The ref didn't like the bump.

Fix is in for Pittsburgh.

That's BS.

3 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Man, taunting is terrible enough, but even if we're going to start calling it like that, why should it give the team a first down? It has nothing to do with the game. Give a guy 2-3 of those a game and then eject him or something.

There should be 20 taunting penalties a game if that one on Marsh is taunting. What a stupid league.

I think if you get 2 you get ejected right? I wonder if this rule changes in the off-season. It’s ruining the game.