Giants wanna f with the bull now they get the horns. 48-22 is a curb stomp and everyone outside their locker room knows Daniel Jones is a bust 

18 minutes ago, DawkinsOwnage03 said:

Giants wanna f with the bull now they get the horns. 48-22 is a curb stomp and everyone outside their locker room knows Daniel Jones is a bust 

Wat

49 minutes ago, DawkinsOwnage03 said:

Giants wanna f with the bull now they get the horns. 48-22 is a curb stomp and everyone outside their locker room knows Daniel Jones is a bust 

Jones>hurts

22 minutes ago, olsilverhair said:

Jones>hurts

The best parts of you ran down your mothers leg

 

 

Bills fans in Philly as a neutral site for an AFC Championship game would be a scene. 

Just now, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Two games on the same field in the same day?  Can’t see that happening.  

At the same time!

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

They’re at different times, duh.  

Well thats no fun. 

@LeanMeanGM

Eagles 30

Giants 0

Bonus: Hurts has 5+ rushes, and Siri turns to yell at the fans each time he runs

3 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

I read an article in USA Today on "Seven Head Coaches Who Could Be Fired On Black Monday".  Here's who I think should and should not be fired:

 

Dennis Allen -- definitely fired.  Mickey Loomis can go with him as the Saints are in annual cap hell.  Allen was bad with the Raiders, too

Todd Bowles -- definitely fired.  I almost pity him because the Bucs are dysfunctional, but Bowles isn't a head coach; he's a coordinator.

Kliff Kingsbury -- definitely fired.  Is there a category for never should have been hired?  He did deliver some wins but they're going off a Kliff now

Ron Rivera -- definitely fired.  Last place team with a roster that should be better.  Have they had a winning season since he arrived?

Lovie Smith -- definitely fired, and same deal as Kingsbury.  Let Cesario do a real coaching search/hire.

Brandon Staley -- not fired.  Thought sure he was a goner at mid season, but the Chargers are improving each year (little by little)

Kevin Stefanski -- not fired.  The organization above him is a mess, and Berry should be fired.  Too bad the owner can't be fired (could be said for almost all these teams)

Staley should go IMO. He's too full of himself. That team should have been so much better

5 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

He’s no Graziano, but.  
 

 

I enjoyed seeing the bummed niner and boys fans 

3 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

I read an article in USA Today on "Seven Head Coaches Who Could Be Fired On Black Monday".  Here's who I think should and should not be fired:

 

Dennis Allen -- definitely fired.  Mickey Loomis can go with him as the Saints are in annual cap hell.  Allen was bad with the Raiders, too

Todd Bowles -- definitely fired.  I almost pity him because the Bucs are dysfunctional, but Bowles isn't a head coach; he's a coordinator.

Kliff Kingsbury -- definitely fired.  Is there a category for never should have been hired?  He did deliver some wins but they're going off a Kliff now

Ron Rivera -- definitely fired.  Last place team with a roster that should be better.  Have they had a winning season since he arrived?

Lovie Smith -- definitely fired, and same deal as Kingsbury.  Let Cesario do a real coaching search/hire.

Brandon Staley -- not fired.  Thought sure he was a goner at mid season, but the Chargers are improving each year (little by little)

Kevin Stefanski -- not fired.  The organization above him is a mess, and Berry should be fired.  Too bad the owner can't be fired (could be said for almost all these teams)

Feel like Allen did the best he could do this season with the Saints. I wouldn’t consider them a bad team and they have a chance to finish one game below .500. Loomis I agree with. 

 

4 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Yeah.  I don’t see Allen, Rivera and Bowles as definitely.  

Rivera feels like the only guy holding that team together in the disaster franchise it is with Snyder. His players love him and I think he brings a sense of stability and a good distraction to keep them focused on football. That’s hard to replace. 

52 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

 

the goodell statement in there sounds good. He has more common sense than a lot of posters here. 

"...our principles have been to minimize disruption across the league... ". 

duh.

Important note: I was able to watch the second half of the Saints’ loss to keep my consecutive Eagles games watched streak alive. 

My second half notes:

* Minshew was embarrassingly bad. 

1 hour ago, Sack that QB said:

That's the propaganda DEI proponents like to use to make it sound better, but in reality, in practice, it always ends up with equality of outcome policies.

You're seeing it in schools where some schools are adopting policies anywhere from no kids fail classes, everyone gets a passing grade, everyone gets an A, eliminating higher ed programs.  That is not an Equity issue.  That is a Job Performance issue.  The NFL instituted Equity when it established its Rookie Pay Scale, where the same or comparable pay is paid to the same or comparable players. That tightly constructed scale does not apply to either performance bonuses such as Super Bowl bonuses or performance-based payment in second contracts.  Very few teachers have performance-based pay contracts, and no students are actually paid.

In colleges, mandating the acceptance of a certain % of ethnicities or cutting back on the number of ethnicities who are accepted into schools. That is not an equity issue, but rather a diversity issue.  Further, the diversity issue is complicated by timing.  If the timeframe of admission analysis covers the full history of the college/university, the proportion of admissions is very different than it is if the timeframe is only the single current year.  

You saw this with the Harvard acceptance scandal where they consciously cut down on the number of Asians they accepted into their university because Asians had the highest % of acceptance of all ethnicities. Again, a diversity issue, not an equity issue.  Some DEI lessons even grouped Asian Americans in with white people in the "privileged" category, to conveniently give them a means to discriminate in educational acceptance.

You see it in the workplace where certain companies advertise certain majority demographics "need not apply, because they won't be hired, and we are only hiring ____ demographics for this position."  Again, a diversity issue, not an equity issue.

The reality is, you can't provide better starting points for individuals. It's virtually impossible, because to accomplish that, you'd need to improve everyone's individual financial, economic, and social standing and give every family and individual the same resources everyone else in society has.  Correct Given that society is divided by class, that is the problem/condition that needs to be corrected.  It is not a given.  this is a feat that can't be accomplished. So what ends up happening is instead of giving everyone a level playing field of opportunity, they hold down everyone to bring them down to the same level as those who aren't achieving highly. It's the only way for equity policies to work. Incorrect.  Lots of companies pay all their salespeople the same base salary, and provide Incentive Compensation Plans that reward the people whose effort produces better performance.  NFL contracts have lots of incentives built into them.  It can be done if there is the will to do so.

And you're seeing it in certain school systems in California, where studies have been done that show since DEI policies started to take root, their proficiency and test overall collective test score levels have plummeted. You see this in other states as well.

One of the reasons DEI and equity officers get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars sometimes is it's a very effective grift. They polish up their rhetoric with fancy(and sometimes unintelligible images) with a bunch of arrows and charts and catch phrases, that preach reaching a level of Utopia where everyone can and will flourish. In reality, the more you read, the more it sounds like Marxism in nature, which is no surprise because so many DEI people are Marxists.

My comments imbedded above.

4 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Important note: I was able to watch the second half of the Saints’ loss to keep my consecutive Eagles games watched streak alive. 

My second half notes:

* Minshew was embarrassingly bad. 

3 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

the goodell statement in there sounds good. He has more common sense than a lot of posters here. 

"...our principles have been to minimize disruption across the league... ". 

duh.

Does the same logic apply to a Bills-Chiefs matchup?

EDIT: since 4 for 4 is confused by my question above, here is what I am asking.  Since the Bills beat the Chiefs 24-20 on October 16th, should a Bills-Chefs playoffs game also be played with the same neutral approach described in the tweet ... specifically  "As part of the cancellation, league also announces that if the Bills and Chiefs wind up matching up in any round of the Playoffs, the host team for that game will be decided by a coin toss."

9 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Does the same logic apply to a Bills-Chiefs matchup?

What ?????

1 hour ago, UndyTaker said:

At the same time!

Hey! Steal someone else’s idea!

4 hours ago, ManuManu said:

 

I'm also thinking that Shaun Bradley's wrist injury might suddenly take a turn for the worst.

1 hour ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Two games on the same field in the same day?  Can’t see that happening.  

Cleveland is always available this time of year

5 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I'm also thinking that Shaun Bradley's wrist injury might suddenly take a turn for the worst.

Everyone is banged up this time of year. I'm not sure how severe something has to be, but I'm sure it isn't hard to find something.

If anyone is interested in a ticket (face value) to the Eagles-Giants game on Sunday, hit me up with a PM.