34 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Damn - Michael Oher must have already blown through all his $ from his playing days 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38190720/blind-side-subject-michael-oher-alleges-adoption-was-lie-family-took-all-film-proceeds

I'd still give Sandra Bullock the best 37 seconds of her life, but damn the Tuohy's are gross people if this is all true.

1 minute ago, Outlaw said:

I'd still give Sandra Bullock the best 37 seconds of her life, but damn the Tuohy's are gross people if this is all true.

The movie made it seem like they were already very well off. I think he owned a bunch of fast food chains. If that’s the case, they definitely aren’t hurting for cash. 

15 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

OFF TOPIC:

Someone made a social media post accusing Tampa Ray's Wander Franco of having sexual relations with a minor and Tampa put him on a restricted list pending investigation. I think this sets a terrible precedent in sports. If he was criminally charged like Josh Sills was, that would be a different story. Because that would indicate law enforcement has enough evidence for the DA to bring charges. And even then in Josh Sills' case, he was acquitted.

But done via a mere social media post? This opens the door for any nut to just make something up and post it online and get them kicked off their team. What's to stop some troll right before a playoff game accusing Patrick Mahomes of sexually assaulting them in a bathroom? Or accusing Lebron James of something right before a playoff series?

Unless you have sufficient evidence, I say athletes should be allowed to continue to play. And if the investigation finds the accusations are true, then you remove them from the team. Nothing is lost though by allowing them to continue to play, if the accusations are true the damage is already done. But if they aren't true and you removed them from the team, much is lost.

Should always give the benefit of the doubt to the accused minus sufficient evidence.

His name is Wander, so according to the definition, he's definitely guilty:

 

wander

ˈwän-dər

VERB

wandered; wandering\ ˈwän-d(ə-)riŋ \

1. to move about without a fixed course, aim, or goal
   to go idly about : ramble
2. to follow a winding course : meander
3. to go astray (as from a course) : stray
   to go astray morally : err
   ...
4. to roam over

3 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

I'd still give Sandra Bullock the best 37 seconds of her life, but damn the Tuohy's are gross people if this is all true.

One night she stopped over my house and she kept banging and banging and banging on my bedroom door so finally I had to get up a let her out

21 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

If you had to trade 1, who would it be? And what do you think their value is? 

Before you get your panties in a bunch, this is hypothetical. 

But I think Sweat would be the most likely trade candidate and could fish a 2nd rounder. Barnett isn’t worth it and I think Williams is more valuable than what we’d get for him. 

Barnett should be a trade candidate. I don't think his re-worked deal makes them scared of trading him. I wonder if Schwartz would think about asking about him in Cleveland. Barnett seems like a player for player type deal.  Maybe the Ravens consider him for Queen.  They don't have a lot of depth at DE. If he goes to the Browns, I think he would probably get something like a 4th or 5th round pick.  He would be a depth player on that defense.  The most likely other candidate is Reddick.  Reddick may get a first from the right team.  Trading Sweat would be an all-time stupid move.  

4 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

Barnett should be a trade candidate. I don't think his re-worked deal makes them scared of trading him. I wonder if Schwartz would think about asking about him in Cleveland. Barnett seems like a player for player type deal.  Maybe the Ravens consider him for Queen.  They don't have a lot of depth at DE. If he goes to the Browns, I think he would probably get something like a 4th or 5th round pick.  He would be a depth player on that defense.  The most likely other candidate is Reddick.  Reddick may get a first from the right team.  Trading Sweat would be an all-time stupid move.  

I'm not much of a fan of Barnett, but my concern with trading him is who else is available to play edge? We have Graham, Sweat, Barnett, and ... Ojomo may be able to play, but I like him at DT as he eats double teams.

31 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

OFF TOPIC:

Someone made a social media post accusing Tampa Ray's Wander Franco of having sexual relations with a minor and Tampa put him on a restricted list pending investigation. I think this sets a terrible precedent in sports. If he was criminally charged like Josh Sills was, that would be a different story. Because that would indicate law enforcement has enough evidence for the DA to bring charges. And even then in Josh Sills' case, he was acquitted.

But done via a mere social media post? This opens the door for any nut to just make something up and post it online and get them kicked off their team. What's to stop some troll right before a playoff game accusing Patrick Mahomes of sexually assaulting them in a bathroom? Or accusing Lebron James of something right before a playoff series?

Unless you have sufficient evidence, I say athletes should be allowed to continue to play. And if the investigation finds the accusations are true, then you remove them from the team. Nothing is lost though by allowing them to continue to play, if the accusations are true the damage is already done. But if they aren't true and you removed them from the team, much is lost.

Should always give the benefit of the doubt to the accused minus sufficient evidence.

MLB players have the protection of a union.  It's not like the teams can take unilateral actions without following the terms of the CBA. My guess would be that there is nothing about the steps the Rays have taken that isn't supported by the terms of the collective bargaining agreement.  I don't think this is something that is setting a precedent.  I also don't think the Rays would put him on the list if they did not have real concerns about the allegations being true.  

1 minute ago, NCiggles said:

MLB players have the protection of a union.  It's not like the teams can take unilateral actions without following the terms of the CBA. My guess would be that there is nothing about the steps the Rays have taken that isn't supported by the terms of the collective bargaining agreement.  I don't think this is something that is setting a precedent.  I also don't think the Rays would put him on the list if they did not have real concerns about the allegations being true.  

He agreed to go on the list. It's a nothing story. 

1 hour ago, mikemack8 said:

Damn - Michael Oher must have already blown through all his $ from his playing days 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38190720/blind-side-subject-michael-oher-alleges-adoption-was-lie-family-took-all-film-proceeds

It sounds like the family may have shafted him on he deal for the royalties. It doesn't sound like he's out of money.  

1 hour ago, Nivraga said:

Ourlads has a month to month archive.

Do I have to be a subscriber to find that? I'm not seeing much besides the current team.

4 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

It sounds like the family may have shafted him on he deal for the royalties. It doesn't sound like he's out of money.  

My comment was mainly tongue in cheek - I don't have a horse in the race.  Nothing would surprise me...I just thought the timing was a little odd.

How is Fowlers twitter today? Is that situation under control yet?

 

20 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

This is where I'm at after the game

QB (3): Hurts, Mariota, McKee. I am a better QB than Ian Book.

RB (4): Swift, Penny, Gainwell and Scott. They gave Scott over $1mm guaranteed, and they know him. Sermon hopefully sneaks to the PS.

WR (5): Brown, Smith, Watkins, Zaccheus, Covey. Everyone gets hyped about the longshot WRs every camp, but a couple of them will clear waivers.

TE (3): Goedert, Stoll and Calcaterra. No surprises here.

OL (9): Mailata, Dickerson, Kelce, Jurgens, Johnson, Steen, Sills, Andrews, Driscoll. Sills being cleared spells the end of Opeta, who likely ends up on the PS.

Total Offense: 24

DE (3): Sweat, Graham, Barnett. Barnett's contract restructure guaranteed his spot.

DT (6): Cox, Davis, Williams, Carter, Ojomo, Tuipoloto. Can't cut any of these guys, and we went 6 deep at DT last year.

SLB (3):  Reddick, Smith, P. Johnson. I want to keep K. Johnson for ST, but just no room.

ILB (4): Dean, Morrow, Jack, Elliss. Before this game, I thought Morrow was in trouble. Now, looks like he is set and Cunningham is gone.

CB (6): Slay, Bradberry, Maddox, Jobe, McPhearson, Ringo. Gotta hope Ricks makes it to the PS.

S (4): Blankenship, Edmunds, Brown, Wallace. I'd consider cutting Wallace to keep Ricks, because I think better chance K'Von clears waivers. But I think team keeps him.

Total Defense: 26

Lovato, Siposs, Elliott

So here is a question for you. I have higlighted several of your statements and a number of players in BLUE.  You say you want to keep K. Johnson, but there is no room. In a simple one-to-one comparison of value to the team (both week to week and also in the long run, who is more valuable Andrews or K. Johnson?  or Boston Scott or K. Johnson?

Same questions for Ricks ... who is more valuable Andrews or Ricks?  or Boston Scott or Ricks?

Also with respect to Jack.  If he is on the Week One roster, he is guaranteed his whole season's salary whether he plays or doesn't play.  It seems wiser to cut him and then sign him after Week One so that he only gets paid on a week by week basis.

10 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

 

 

1 hour ago, garingovt2000 said:

One night she stopped over my house and she kept banging and banging and banging on my bedroom door so finally I had to get up a let her out

Yeah, you get hotter on the reg.

It's funny how Jones went from saying he'll get nothing, to doing that

3 hours ago, Utebird said:

8 seems a bit heavy, I mean I get it's a passing league and corner is a premium position, but 8???

I'm just not sure where else on the roster one goes light to compensate for going heavy at corner.?

3 QBs
3 RBs (let Scott and/or Sermon go to the PS as injury insurance
6 WRs (allowing one spot for a developmental WR)
3 TEs
8 OL (allowing Andrews and Kelly to go to the PS as injury insurance ... possibly Roderick Johnson as well

23 Offense

3 OLBs (including either P. Johnson or K. Johnson.  If P. Johnson can go on a short term IL designation, that would be ideal)
3 DEs (including Barnett)
5 DTs (possibly 6 if Tui gets a spot)
3 ILBs (Jack and Cunningham both go to the Practice Squad until at least after Week One)
8 CBs (either Garner or Goodrich goes to the Practice Squad)
4 Safeties

26 Defense

3 Special Teams

52 Total (leaving one spot for whatever player you choose to add)

2 hours ago, mikemack8 said:

Damn - Michael Oher must have already blown through all his $ from his playing days 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38190720/blind-side-subject-michael-oher-alleges-adoption-was-lie-family-took-all-film-proceeds

I always felt bad for him. He seems like a pretty normal guy when you hear him talk but that movie for some reason portrayed him like a 300 pound black Forrest Gump.

"THE QB IS FAMILY MICHAEL! FAMILY! PROTECT YOUR FAMILY MICHAEL" 🤣

12 minutes ago, mattwill said:

So here is a question for you. I have higlighted several of your statements and a number of players in BLUE.  You say you want to keep K. Johnson, but there is no room. In a simple one-to-one comparison of value to the team (both week to week and also in the long run, who is more valuable Andrews or K. Johnson?  or Boston Scott or K. Johnson?

Same questions for Ricks ... who is more valuable Andrews or Ricks?  or Boston Scott or Ricks?

Also with respect to Jack.  If he is on the Week One roster, he is guaranteed his whole season's salary whether he plays or doesn't play.  It seems wiser to cut him and then sign him after Week One so that he only gets paid on a week by week basis.

Andrews is more valuable that Johnson or Ricks easily, IMO. I want a backup center so if something happens to Kelce, we don't have to change 2 positions (Jurgens to C, Steen to RG).

Scott or Sermon are more valuable than Ricks. Someone needs to return KOs.

A 7th CB is basically worthless. If he is ever playing, we are screwed.

5 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Andrews is more valuable that Johnson or Ricks easily, IMO. I want a backup center so if something happens to Kelce, we don't have to change 2 positions (Jurgens to C, Steen to RG).

Scott or Sermon are more valuable than Ricks. Someone needs to return KOs.

A 7th CB is basically worthless. If he is ever playing, we are screwed.

That means you have to activate Andrews each week.  Are you ready to do that?

Every KO can be fair caught or be a touchback.  No KOR needed, just a KO catcher.

The 7th CB and 8th CB are valuable for Succession Planning the future years.  Building a roster is about the future as well as the present.

1 hour ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

The movie made it seem like they were already very well off. I think he owned a bunch of fast food chains. If that’s the case, they definitely aren’t hurting for cash. 

Just because someone is already well off doesn't make it ok to screw someone over for more money.

19 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

Of course you do. But its beyond time to record that experiment as a failure.

Why don't we wait until Tyree Jackson actually sucks on the field?  I haven't seen him suck on the field.

There are others who have played solidly,  but they don't have the high ceiling.   Tyree has the high ceiling.

And we've seen players like Quez suck.

12 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

I always felt bad for him. He seems like a pretty normal guy when you hear him talk but that movie portrayed for some reason portrayed him like a 300 pound black Forrest Gump.

"THE QB IS FAMILY MICHAEL! FAMILY! PROTECT YOUR FAMILY MICHAEL" 🤣

The best part of this movie is when they did the testing for Michael and they're like he received a 98% on Protective Instincts and played it off like that was an actual thing.  4:10 or so mark

 

 

1 hour ago, wussbasket said:

I'm not much of a fan of Barnett, but my concern with trading him is who else is available to play edge? We have Graham, Sweat, Barnett, and ... Ojomo may be able to play, but I like him at DT as he eats double teams.

Taron Jackson and Robinson, which is almost the same as nothing.