3 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

For the lawyers out there:

I recently defended a colleague in an administrative hearing conducted by my university. The university hired a "judge' to oversee the proceedings and to render a final judgement. I later found out through FOMA requests that our diversity officer (read prosecutor) used to work in the same law office as the "judge" and that they are still friends. Part of my defense strategy was to seek a summary dismissal because the diversity officer had exhibited bias against my colleague in violation of Title IX. I tried to outline the evidence of bias in my opening statement, but I was cut off by the "judge" before I could finish. I was not offended during the course of the hearing  the opportunity to present the evidence of bias. At no time did the diversity officer or the judge disclose to us their prior relationship.

Is this a violation of legal ethics?

Thanks.

No. It just sounds like the usual predecided foul play afoot.

1 hour ago, NCiggles said:

-5 Howies, please charge your phone.  

Think that was good...I love this one:

TRADES:

15, 101, 2023 3rd for HOU 13, 2023 5th

18 for CHI 39, 48, 148

5 minutes ago, Cliftoma said:

There was a discussion about him not being in the paint more.  Considering how the refs were allowing the Raptors to hack him at will last night, I don't know how you complain about his game last night.  

Well, I made a comment, and my comment was based on the last two possessions, and nothing more.  

Settling for a 3 point shot in a tie game to win it, when you have the most physically imposing offensive threat in the NBA on your team is weak basketball.  I had no problem with the way the game played out, but hated those last two possessions.   They decided to dribble the time out and fire up a contested 3.  No ball movement, no screens, just dribble and then fire away.   The possession at the end of OT was an absolute disaster of a possession and Embiid got himself trapped at half court and only the Timeout from Rivers saved that possession.  With 0.9 seconds left on the shot clock, there was no other option at that point.  Great job.   BUT, the fact that they allowed themselves to be put in that position is the problem.  

I am not complaining about the entirety of the game, just the final possessions of both regulation and OT.  They were both bad.  And, I made the comment (and posted it here) during the TO.  The outcome of the shot after the timeout doesn't change the fact that that was a bad possession.   They left themselves with a very low percentage shot left to win the game.  

8 minutes ago, Cliftoma said:

There was a discussion about him not being in the paint more.  Considering how the refs were allowing the Raptors to hack him at will last night, I don't know how you complain about his game last night.  

Embiid gets into hero mode, where he wants to take over, but forgets that it's a team game.

The refs were swallowing their whistles, but Embiid was also forcing things instead of seeing the double coming and quickly moving the ball, then resetting in the post.

Too many turnovers, and Embiid and Harden were the primary culprits, though Maxey didn't have a good game.

Sixers were getting wide open looks from the 3 early, missed a couple then stopped moving the ball or their feet.

4 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Especially in that one game where he went 2/3 for 19 yards.

Oh, you mean that game they won in absolutely horrid conditions ??  Mac Jones across the board was way better than Hurts in his first 17 starts.

6 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Especially in that one game where he went 2/3 for 19 yards.

context matters...

Still thinking about that Embiid basket.

Just now, downundermike said:

Oh, you mean that game they won in absolutely horrid conditions ??  Mac Jones across the board was way better than Hurts in his first 17 starts.

Yes, the one game where Belichick did not trust him to throw the ball so they ran on every play.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

context matters...

No it doesnt. When has context ever mattered here?

Just now, pallidrone said:

Yes, the one game where Belichick did not trust him to throw the ball so they ran on every play.

context context context

1 minute ago, pallidrone said:

No it doesnt. When has context ever mattered here?

It always has.  Pretend otherwise, if you like.

25 minutes ago, purplefiggy said:

Take it a step further - what’s a college coach’s primary goal?

to win games  

for these guys, it is all about the short term,  not developing QBs for the NFL.

They recruit running QBs out of HS because they think they can win games with them. they may work on his passing but aren’t bringing those guys in so they can break them down and turn them into legit NFL passing QBs  

It is very rare for someone to have really high levels of success over years doing something (anything in life) one way and be willing and able to abandon what it is that brought you that success.

running QBs are running QB’s because that’s how they have found success in the past.  Most of them simply don’t have high levels of passing skills, because if they did, we would have already seen it  

 

 

One argument for doing away with amateurism in college athletics is it impedes player development.  You have to wonder if NFL teams or the League were able to finance college athletes and coaching staffs in order to impact player development how it would go.  The reality is that the system is designed for the interest of the college coaches and the college programs.  

3 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Yes, the one game where Belichick did not trust him to throw the ball so they ran on every play.

You are being a clown.  That weather was horrendous and Belichek did the right thing, and won the game.

#facts, Mac Jones was developed coming into the NFL and he proved it as a rookie.  Light years ahead of Hurts as a passer.

3 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Yes, the one game where Belichick did not trust him to throw the ball so they ran on every play.

Get serious, man.  Jones threw the ball 137 times over the Pats next 4 games after.  Belichick seems to trust him enough, and NE is light years ahead of where the Eagles are at the QB position.

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Mac Jones was developed coming into the NFL and he proved it as a rookie.  Light years ahead of Hurts as a passer.

Strictly as it pertains to Mac Jones and not anything to do with Hurts -- it will be interesting to see what happens with Jones this season.  I don't see any OC listed on the Pats coaching staff, and only Joe Judge listed as an offensive assistant.

Good luck to Mac Jones

5 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

context context context

It always has.  Pretend otherwise, if you like.

That's great to know.

So then we can all agree that last year really did not define a single person on the team considering that it was a young staff, playing a murders row of teams to start the year, that took some time to gel and that everyone should play a lot better next year?

Can we also agree that the playoff game was a predictable outcome because of the same things said above? 

I mean that is the context of things.

2 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Get serious, man.  Jones threw the ball 137 times over the Pats next 4 games after.  Belichick seems to trust him enough, and NE is light years ahead of where the Eagles are at the QB position.

It's pretty funny to read.  I would question anyone's understanding of football if they wouldn't trade Hurts for Jones right now straight up.

3 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

One argument for doing away with amateurism in college athletics is it impedes player development.  You have to wonder if NFL teams or the League were able to finance college athletes and coaching staffs in order to impact player development how it would go.  The reality is that the system is designed for the interest of the college coaches and the college programs.  

The NFL enjoys their no-cost minor league, I doubt they are eager to meddle with it for some incremental increases to pro play.  Even a developmental league which is pretty much a vacuum (sorry USFL), is likely a non-starter for the NFL unless it is in the black.

22 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Luck, had he not broken his leg, might have won one with an all time great defense in 1991.

Team went 9-6 with McMahon, Kemp and Goebel at QB. Joseph/Sherman at RB, Byars RB, Barnett WR, Jackson TE.

OL:  Heller - McKnight - Alexander - Solt - A Davis

Yup, Bryce Paup is eagles public enemy #1.

That defense was stacked and the offense wasn't too shabby either though without Randall the run game was pretty average and that O line as all of randalls eagle career was trash 

That they won 10 games that year in the toughest division in football says a lot of out that defense, who lest we forget also started Jessie small who was replaced by William Thomas mid season and Ben Smith who was having a good season opposite Eric Allen got hurt week 10 against the broncos and was replaced by rookie Otis Smith.

Even then not sure they beat the Redskins that year in the playoffs with Randall, as good as that 91 team could have been with Randall that skins team was really stacked.

21 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Just ask @HazletonEagle, he is an expert in this area.

I have no problem with his game.  

It remains to be seen how his contract ends up looking due to his health and short career historically for bigs.

11 minutes ago, downundermike said:

You are being a clown.  That weather was horrendous and Belichek did the right thing, and won the game.

#facts, Mac Jones was developed coming into the NFL and he proved it as a rookie.  Light years ahead of Hurts as a passer.

Of course I am. I mean Mac Jones is not as great as everyone here thinks he is, but he is decent.

Just now, pallidrone said:

That's great to know.

So then we can all agree that last year really did not define a single person on the team considering that it was a young staff, playing a murders row of teams to start the year, that took some time to gel and that everyone should play a lot better next year?

Can we also agree that the playoff game was a predictable outcome because of the same things said above? 

I mean that is the context of things.

We can all agree that Hurts showed the same weaknesses with this team as he did in college as a passer.  That's Hurts in context.  The coaching staff saw it for themselves and limited Hurts' attempts to give the team a better chance to win... and increased his running.

First 7 starts: 34.5 attempts per game.   9.4 rushes per game
Last 8 starts: 23.75 attempts per game.   9.1 rushes per game (only decreased because of the last 4 games where he was dinged with the ankle injury which caused him to miss a game).  The 4 games before the ankle injury, he rushed 12 times per game on average.

 

And somehow, despite fewer attempts, he actually threw more INTs.   (5 over the last 8 games, 4 in the first 7.)

 

We can agree that the playoff game was a predictable outcome because Hurts didn't improve from the beginning of the season to the end of it.  They just hid him more as a passer in the second half of the season. 

3 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Of course I am. I mean Mac Jones is not as great as everyone here thinks he is, but he is decent.

No one declared he was great.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2022-nfl-seven-round-mock-draft-trades-in-every-round-seahawks-go-qb-in-round-2-falcons-pick-malik-willis/

So this mock has us trading down 18 to the Bears for 39/48 + 2023 3rd. I like the trade but not a fan of the picks. Kind of okay with Booth at 15 if the board falls that way, but the 2nd round picks seem wrong. If we don't go WR in the 1st there's probably zero chance we pass on Pickens @ 39. Brisker and Travis Jones still available @ 48 which I think is the direction we'd go instead with multiple DEs on the board before our next pick @ 51.

If it was up to me I'd go:

15 - Booth

39 - Pickens

48 - Jones

51 - Thomas

Not sure how I feel about passing on Brisker but there's other safeties I like later too.

3 hours ago, Penn7980 said:

Samuel of the 49ers is asking to be traded.  An intriguing possibility for the WR group.  A proven yet in the prime player who can catch and rush, adding many options to the offense.  Only thing is what does it cost to get him?

He doesn't want to rush the ball. That's why he wants out of San Fran 

29 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

For the lawyers out there:

I recently defended a colleague in an administrative hearing conducted by my university. The university hired a "judge' to oversee the proceedings and to render a final judgement. I later found out through FOMA requests that our diversity officer (read prosecutor) used to work in the same law office as the "judge" and that they are still friends. Part of my defense strategy was to seek a summary dismissal because the diversity officer had exhibited bias against my colleague in violation of Title IX. I tried to outline the evidence of bias in my opening statement, but I was cut off by the "judge" before I could finish. I was not offended during the course of the hearing  the opportunity to present the evidence of bias. At no time did the diversity officer or the judge disclose to us their prior relationship.

Is this a violation of legal ethics?

Thanks.

Non-lawyer, but yes, this has the appearance of a non disclosure of potential conflict.  "Judge” should have recused. 

9 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Think that was good...I love this one:

TRADES:

15, 101, 2023 3rd for HOU 13, 2023 5th

18 for CHI 39, 48, 148

I like the Kerby Joseph pick.  I would rather grab Cine.  I am not sure what the team gets out of taking a player like Ridder.  He's unlikely to take over as a starter and even if he did would leave us with the same questions as Hurts in terms of still needing a better QB.  Gordon and Jones are good picks.  If the team added Zion Johnson or Muma at 39, I think that would be an A+ draft.