Chisoxfn

Hoyer definitely does a better job reading defenses. I don't find him very accurate but he knows how to read a defense and make quicker decisions and avoid the rush much better than jay. Jay is more talented but we know what he is and while he will make more big plays and more things from nothing he will also make mistakes (Hoyer does too just not as frequently as jay)

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 2, 2016 -> 11:28 AM) Barth is awful I said he was a lousy pick up right when it happened. That said it wasn't like the kick was a gimme. Barth can't hit from deep like Robbie.

Will be interesting to see what happens here. Given all the talk a month back or whenever it was by JR about everyone being on the same page together, this would be a surprise. I wonder if there was so much disagreement that JR finally decided it was time or if KW is kind of resigning (or if this is just a bunch of nothing).

I don't have a major issue with this. I presume we'll see some coaches replaced as well. I'd have prefered a totally fresh start, but Renteria is well respected and has plenty of experience as well as a positive reputation of working with young players. Would love to know what happened with this whole Ventura coming back bit and then not. I don't know why the Sox would have leaked bad info to Nightengale.

If this is true, LOL

QUOTE (flavum @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 01:32 PM) Or he gives the balls to people when he parks the boat near bars/restaurants. Doesn't seem anything other than three guys in their 20's doing something extremely risky, and the worst thing possible happened. I only ask because of the texts that talked about how Jose was frustrated and needed to go out. I presume maybe he did just presign balls to give away where he went, I don't know. But the texts did indicate Jose wasn't in a happy state that night (and needed to blow off steam).

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 02:53 PM) Once Trump wins the election, the rich will move to Canada, the Canadian economy and dollar will prosper, and the salary cap will skyrocket. Problem solved. Change that to Hillary.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 10:52 AM) If that happened (peeling off enough states to keep anyone from hitting 270), the vote gets thrown to the House so whichever party controls the House will just choose their candidate anyway. This year would mean we get President Trump. You're right that it wouldn't work because there just isn't a natural constiuency to build around a spoiler candidate that would fall between the current Democratic and Republican parties. Maine's last two governor races which resulted in a proto-Trump winning are a case study of how third party cannibalization ends up working. California's new-ish "jungle primary" system where the top two vote-getters regardless of party in the primaries make it to the general has had some similar results--you have say five Democrats running in a pretty blue district in their primary and all split the votes pretty evenly while there's only two Republicans. Because the Democrats split their vote so many ways, only Republicans would be on the ballot despite Democrats collectively making up a much larger percentage of the vote. See, this is the wild card...I don't know whether the republicans would still vote Trump (if they were able to maintain control, especially given the Trump backlash). I presume the Dems would pass the torch to Hillary, though. And the reason I ask this is, if the make-up was right, you could have a republican come into the race as a big wild card to throw this to the house so that the house republicans pick someone other than Trump. Again, probably a moot point. I do think if a Romney entered the field as an independent, he'd win at least a few states (and could even impact some of Hillary states) but net net, he probably mainly takes items away from Hillary and probably hands Hillary a state or two she wouldn't have won otherwise (due to the split vote). For it to really work, you'd have to have Romney and Sanders both running as independents (so they both cannibalize each other). If we had those four candidates, I truly believe we would have the house picking who the president is. I can see why Romney would do it, but unless something bad (that is new) comes up on Hillary, I can't see Bernie (or some other dem leaning person) taking a similar path. Would be interesting though and hey, its already been a crazy election so why not add to that craze.

QUOTE (shipps @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 02:30 PM) Just another clown popping out of the car in this circus season. I read on Fuller that there is more to this. He had been practicing fine and people were wondering why he wasn't actually playing (given how minor the scope was, etc). Even alluded to the fact that Fuller was a little irritated that he hadn't seen the field yet.

In other news, there are some reports that Pace and Fox don't see as eye to eye as previously reported. In fact, some of the reports go as far as saying that Pace never wanted to hire Fox (he wanted Bowles) and Fox was forced by McCaskey's (at the recommendation of Ernie Ocorsi who suggested a veteran coach to counter Pace's inexperience). Also some reports that Fox struggles with discipline (evidently that was one of the matters that really irked Elway). Obviously negative stories are going to come up around now and who knows how much truth there is to these reports.

I'm so glad Rose is gone. Unfortunate he got hurt and I cheered like heck for him a long time, but man, what a breath of fresh air to have him some place else. One thing to be certain, the start to this upcoming season will be interesting. I sure as hell hope this works and that we can land a big name next off-season.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 11:04 AM) A bag of signed Jose Fernandez baseballs, also containing his checkbook, washed up on the shore yesterday about a mile from the accident. Why was all of this in a bag? Was this a suicide? Seems like there is more to this story.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 10:33 AM) That's the logic that gets Donald Trump elected President with 40% of the popular vote. What does the world look like today if Nader doesn't swing the 2000 election to Bush? Does the US ever invade Iraq? Is the entire Middle East destabalized to the point that we end up with ISIS? If the Iraq War doesn't happen, and we don't have the "everyone gets $300" tax break, is the deficit as high as it is? That's the issue with not voting for Clinton in a swing state (in California or Illinois, sure, go ahead and vote your conscience). If you are scared of a Trump Presidency, and you cast a vote in a swing state for Johnson or Stein or write-in somebody, you are in essence casting a vote for a Trump Presidency. Because the choice is ultimately a binary one. On November 8, 2016, either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump are going to be the next President of the United States. Not if a third party candidate can steal a state or two...if you can somehow get to that, then you don't get anyone with enough delegates potentially and it could be none of them that get elected. I often wonder what would happen if a high profile person ran independent. It probably wouldn't work because if it was a high profile dem or republican, they'd canabilize their base and the other candidate would win enough, but if that candidate could steal a few dem and a few repub states, it would work out brilliantly. And no, if I think both candidates are crap, I won't vote for either candidate. It helps that I'm in California so no matter what I do, my vote doesn't matter. Probably a tougher decision if I were in Ohio or Florida.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 12, 2016 -> 08:30 AM) Based on what I knew of Johnson from his time as a governor, and looking at his policy points, I was pretty sure I was going to vote for him for President. But around the time of his Aleppo flub, I had started reading other things that were disturbing in terms of a lack of understanding of the workings of the world. The more I look, the more I can't do it. So I'm owning up to my own mistake, lol. I'll be voting for Clinton, sadly. Not happy about it, but I don't really have another reasonable choice. A ham sandwich on stale white bread isn't appealing, but it's a lot better than a pile of steaming garbage, and the third party "alternative" dish gets a lot worse the more you look at it. Matt - You absolutely have a choice. Write in the candidate you wanted. At least then you have a clear conscious knowing that you voted for who you thought would be the best candidate and you never put your name next to the candidate that was the "least" bad.

By the way, I should make one thing clear. I am 1000% not voting for Trump. My only debate is do I actually associate my vote with Hillary or do I write in a candidate. So technically, Hillary was speaking to me or someone like me in the audience. My current prevailing wisdom is I disagree with her on too much policy related matters (not to mention I have zero trust in her) to give her my vote and thus will write-in a candidate.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 09:18 AM) I presume 98% of his contractors get paid, or some high percentage. IF people didn't do their job, they shouldn't be paid. You can have amazing hotels without always having the best contractors on various sub-projects, etc. That is life in business. Now there could be examples where he is being ridiculous, I don't know, but not enough facts were presented to make me care one way or another. The tax issue was played brilliantly by Hillary and he was a knuckle head...should have just said those are the laws of this country and I follow the laws. By the way, that is my presumption. IF he is just stiffing people to stiff people, well that is another story.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 08:14 AM) A multi-billionaire who claims that he is going to be good for the middle class who, at the same time, has a history of not paying contractors is absolutely relevant. If he's been spending his professional stiffing people who did work for him, then why should we think that will change once he's in office? I do a fair bit of construction work as well, and agree that there are a lot of really crappy contractors. BUT in one breath he says that his hotels are all the best in the world, and in the other breath, the contractors who built them did poor jobs and shouldn't be paid. It can't be both... I presume 98% of his contractors get paid, or some high percentage. IF people didn't do their job, they shouldn't be paid. You can have amazing hotels without always having the best contractors on various sub-projects, etc. That is life in business. Now there could be examples where he is being ridiculous, I don't know, but not enough facts were presented to make me care one way or another. The tax issue was played brilliantly by Hillary and he was a knuckle head...should have just said those are the laws of this country and I follow the laws.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 07:14 AM) Well, he did reply later that he "followed the laws of the nation," which, to me, is a better way to reply to the tax issue. I am quite certain that the Clinton's take advantage of tax law and tax loopholes to avoid paying excess taxes as well. Trump is a businessman and many of his supporters admire him for those qualities and want him in the White House because of those qualities. The fact that he hires intelligent tax lawyers is so far down the list of reasons not to vote for him that it is a non-issue. What is incredible to me is how the guy is not intelligent enough to just use Hillary's "establishment" label against her in a civil way (use Bernie's playbook) and then mix in some of his own thoughts and ideas with a bent on his business experience and his ability to "get things done." To me, that is a potential winning blueprint that either his team fails to see (which I highly doubt), or he simply is not disciplined enough to execute. Look at how the Clinton's use their charities. They absolutely tax advantage of the tax code beyond what a normal american could possibly do. In fact, I'd argue that what they do is not appropriate (as they are in my opinion, in an ethically gray zone). That said, I'm sure some of Trump's positions are in similar zones.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Sep 26, 2016 -> 08:40 PM) Yup. She really didn't change her gameplan in the middle of the debates to really stick it to him. Perhaps the lack of commercial breaks makes that harder to do. Again, Trump's true supporters wouldn't change their minds regardless of what happened. But the truth is that they both needed to win independent voters. I don't know how you can listen to Trump without being bored or losing interest if you're undecided. He adds in so many narcissistic and off-topic remarks that he loses the viewer 10-20 seconds into his talk. Hillary, I thought, started out strong, but seemed to lose a little bit of coherence in her speech as the debate moved along (insert stamina joke here). It is interesting these views on Hillary, because I tend to think of her as the master of giving this massive, long answers, that do anything but answer the question. Of coruse that is all politicians. Trump does the same thing, just with more blatant lies and in a far less articulate fashion. In general, Hillary uses a ton of words, often times to say very little. I would have loved to see this come down to Kasich vs. her or even Carly vs. Hillary. That would have been entertainment (from a debate perspective). I actually think Chris Christie would have been too...but Trump is the opposite of entertaining to me. He get frustrated, says stupids hit, blabs on and on, throws out some greatness and absolute comments and that is it. That said, for the first 30 minutes, Trump was pretty damn good (by my very low Trump standards...she got under his skin).

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Sep 26, 2016 -> 08:37 PM) My dad was beginning to think Trump was gonna win and now thinks Hillary just beat him down. Look at all the posts on this site saying Trump had no chance...at this point, I just assume whatever I think (which is that he's awful and can't possibly win) is wrong and that he'll end up our next president. I can't even pretend to think anything else at this point.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 26, 2016 -> 08:21 PM) It had 16 people. He was never in a 1-on-1 debate If they widdled down sooner, Trump probably would have gotten eliminated.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 26, 2016 -> 07:56 PM) She needed to excite democrats and I think that happened. I can't really comment on that, but I can't imagine anyone walking away from that excited about Hillary. Unless by excited, you mean, democrats are just so scared of Trump that it means they'll unite with Hillary because of it (not because of her).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 26, 2016 -> 07:50 PM) I mean she certainly did better than him, but that is no high bar. Nothing that happened tonight is new; and while that may be all that Hillary needs to win, I thought it was far from a dominating effort on her part. I agree with you. I think Trump imploded about 30 minutes in (prior to that, for a guy who doesn't like him, I didn't think he was awful). Hillary was bad, she just didn't fully implode. She did nothing which made me go, yes, I want to vote for her as president (Trump did everything to tell me what I already knew...that I don't want to vote for him), but Hillary has yet to do anything that has gotten me excited or even close to the point where I'd even grudingly go, yes, I'll vote for her. America lost tonight.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 26, 2016 -> 07:23 PM) OTOH, I don't think she is helping herself by behaving so condescending towards him. She should just be completely oblivious to his nonsense and pretend as though she is debating someone who isn't a complete fool. I thought America lost tonight. Embarassing on both sides. Yes, I'm a republican but I think we have the two greatest scum possible running for the highest ranking position in our government. Hillary came off as rude and condescending herself (not that Trump isn't rude too). At least she says more about building our economy then Trump, with a focus on creating jobs vs. Trump 100% focused on stopping jobs from leaving (vs. doing anything around real actual growth...certain jobs can leave, as long as better, higher paying jobs (in greater fold) can replace them. Common sense we should attack things from multiple angles and I don't disagree with Trump on certain points as it relates to our trade deals, I just can't deal with his total absolutes as it relates to everything because it means I have zero idea what he actually plans on doing. I also don't actually think Donald is a racist, although he has certainly played up that card in certain instances, I don't think for one second he is a racist (just my personal belief). Either way I won't vote for either of these clowns. Romney will probably get my 3rd straight vote (twice written in...cause why change my trend now, haha).

Welp....that debate was more embarrassing then I ever suspected. We lost as a country. What horrific candidates we have on both sides.