bmags

Little bit scared that he starts season without lauri, rather he be forced from gate to play with him. If he gets success early (offensively), will he feed Lauri when he comes back?

I think if injuries go through our guards, it will be so bad it will be hard to win. Very thin there. They have a lot of players, but few decent ones.

I've heard a few anecdotes from bulls season ticket holders of pax calling longtime holders guaranteeing they will never tank again. Realistically even if they are bad with Lauri out they would be in 8-12 range.

I said nothing about filling the team with them.

Thanks for doing this. I am pleased.

That was such a relief. I know 2006 featured quite a few ass whoopings but this felt like another level. Not much weird stuff, just dominating football. im surprised how little chatter I’ve seen about the drastic different Howard usage. Lots of really interesting adjustments this game. mitch was great. I’m fine with ups and downs but the lack of ups terrified me. He has shown me his ups and, baby, the ups are good. Nichols was great but I want to give some non-Mack love to Eddie Jackson, he has figured it out in terms of anticipation and closing out.

To elaborate, I think one area to focus on would be high ceiling, volatile players like that which may be in the next tier that teams like mariners etc would go after. Pollock is in that tier, Brantley too, I would not be surprised if these are the guys out there in February. If they are just league average after half a season try to move them, if you strike big hold on.

I wonder if we’ll kick tires on Yusei Kikuchi(?) whom is coming over from Japan and not under intl signing rules.

This is a fantastic post, and highlights my concerns. Great hitters are always valuable, but the history of college first baseman is not good

Really inspired finish to the season. Ricky’s voice is really resonating.

The interesting thing to me is how Corker acted like he was moving this way then ran backward. There is a sentiment in the republican legislators that doing the right thing is only good when you get a pat on the back for it, and if you still get criticized then you shouldn't do it.

Thanks and this makes sense. I did not think the VP was tie breaker for committee votes, but the idea that committee is just a rule anyway and they can take it up regardless makes sense. Thanks for pulling that info.

if he would have voted no wouldn't it be deadlocked?

He is on the judicial committee they are not. He could have voted no out of committee, he instead voted yes but said he'd vote no on the floor vote unless an FBI investigation was done. I'm not sure why that was the order.

lol

Kavanaugh isn't going to jail. This incredible punishment was that he wouldn't be confirmed for one of 9 positions on the US supreme court. Nobody is entitled to that. And considering it's a lifetime position, you want to be sure you don't put anyone on there that could be embroiled in scandal.

I think the lying so casually is significant but I see Jenks point that the topic of the lies can seem so frivelous to outside observers. Just say out loud "he lied about how much he drank as a teenager", and it starts to feel weightless, though it certainly should lower his credibility to discuss how he didn't commit this assault. That's why I wish they would have had some line of questioning about how he responded to the allegations.

Maybe, perhaps we'd be satisfied they tried every avenue of questioning and stuck as much baggage to his judgement as possible. Since we can state how alternative realities would have played out with certainty, I have one, the ABA would have called for an FBI investigation with only one dem senator trying that line of questioning, not 80% of them.

It was a risk play when I made it, but with cook you still have possibility of a 2 yard screen going 80 yards.

I agree, quite frankly most 23 year old staff that are in it every day could come up with better lines of questioning.

The stuff that happened 30 years ago is difficult to investigate without FBI help, they had opportunity to pin him down on behavior that occurred two weeks ago and he couldn't hang his "I was ON VARSITY" hat on, and they deferred because they had one play: uncover nothing except try to get an FBI investigation. Well it failed. And now he will not be under oath to answer questions about it. Bravo.

Manchin sucks, but lets be real, west virginia isn't going to produce you something better than Joe Manchin. Better to try and get two out of colorado or something.

I don't care about changing a republican vote. A play to get "more investigation" was idiotic considering vote was scheduled next day. They needed to get him on the record with as much false info as possible that could continue to be investigated. They thought tricking him into saying they should investigate more would matter? They thought that would happen, then they could say "see he said it" because they thought it was a good ad soundbite. You know what's a better ad soundbite? He voted for a supreme court justice that accused a middle school teacher of sexual assault to try and deflect from himself.

Guys like Darron Lee and Smith (there is a falcons player too I forget), should absolutely be prototype moving forward. You can just see the issue even in the cards game, fake you into putting base group on field, then use it to get linebacker on wr matchups.

Durbin needs to be primaried. His sweet sweet love of procedure is embarrassing. How many times now has he made a strong effort on a weak procedural argument over a strong effort on a strong moral argument? He's lost every time. How does nobody ask about Ed Whelan and how he may have knowingly advised proposing his classmate as committing sexual assault to help him get on the high court? This was an egregious play, putting a partisan, liar on the supreme court who will now overturn every dem congress reform bill unless roberts starts to value democratic control over radical interpretation of the constitution. And egregious plays require punishment. Courts should be packed, constitutional amendments should be fought for over curbing political spending and right to vote. To do so, the democratic party will need to win over new voters which is how it should be. Not merely eliminating opposing voters as the Republicans have done for the last decade. And you can't do that with a mealy-mouthed dick durbin being too clever by half crying for an fbi investigation because his dem consultant said it was popular.