A Dog Named Kelso

Then there is this from the WRG site: http://www.wgr550.com/Dareus-sits-out-Jackson-takes-charge/21888703

grammarian

So you are saying Brady and Payton would do much better getting bombard by blitzes behind a 3rd string line? Look at Brady's KC game last year and you will see what happens with poor offensive line play. I am not saying EJ is a HOFer or even the starter for the Bills, but you need to compare the three on equal footing. EJ should have a chance to show his skill or lack there of behind a first team line. Then let the chips fall where they may.

If I am really evaluating the 3 and since in the 3rd PS game starters normally play the first 3 quarters you give each QB one of those quarters and let Simms finish up. That way you would get a good comparision. All Three playing with and against the other team firsts.

I can hear Sanchez going through PTSD watching EJ right now

EJ should just walk the ball over to Simms and say "Here they don't want to give me a real chance ... why don't you kill yourself instead"

Maybe people can post those as some of us don't ... twitter lol

We will see if the press sees it the same way

Its not that they are necessarily attacking him; however, there does seem to be a lot of amplification of his mistakes and less of the other two's. Are we really to believe Tyrod and Cassel do not make poor throws? Friday is a perfect example. EJ threw a bad bad on a play scramble play and really that is what is focused on. There is a lot of "sure he plays well but then you get a pass like that". Every QB has bad passes but EJs sure seem to be more highly analysed than others. I am not saying EJ should be the starter, but if people fail to see the difference in reporting they are kidding themselves.

My only thoughts on the subject are this: When they drafted EJ they knew he would not be ready to start right away so they came up with a plan. Veteran QB to hold the team while EJ learned ... then the great mat incident of 2013 occurred and whatever reasonable plan went out the window and I do not think they really followed up on that, even with bringing in Orton it was more about winning then rather than developing EJ. Also, I am not sure this was really a 3 man competition as Cassel has been the only QB to get first team reps for every practice thus removing one of the other two(EJ or TT) for building "Chemistry" with the ones. Take that for what it is worth I just think it is strange that it is rarely mentioned. I would love to see the break down by QB and first team reps. That said this is a different coaching staff and unless Whaley directed them to not give EJ a chance I would assume they had no dog in the fight when it began.

That is an interesting take. The other thing people seem to forget is that Cassel should have the most chemistry and be in the lead, probably by a wider margin, as he is the only one to get first team reps every practice, no? That being the case your thoughts may be even more relevant.

Sounds good but doesn't Matt have an year of seniority over EJ?

RANDY! Their defense better get its head on straight to face RANDY!

IDK about starts but he has a long way to go to eclipse this guy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._T._O%27Sullivan

This ... the way it was always explained to me is, Before college: throw after the break During college: throw right when the break occurs Pros: throw before the break Basically during the time in college and before they are watching the receiver and know where they are going to be, but during the pros the are throwing to a spot where the receiver "should" be. I have never played but it make a lot of sense as to why you see a so called regression. It takes a lot to trust your receivers to be where they are supposed to be some guys probably can get out of the habit of watching their receivers

Isn't half time at most 15 minutes? I don't understand how it could be much later? From what I can gather from your reasoning, you are basically allowing for every circumstance to allow for the deflation of the Pat* equipment while stating that Colts equipment could not possible fall into such a state.

Wouldn't the wetness be very similar as they were used on the same field? As for timing ... wouldn't they need a multitude of hours(in the initial weighting) for any large disparity? Wait so in this situation we account for only Well's lying and no one else?

Say I agree with you on the point about the pats* football's(so as not to rehash the last x amount of pages). What is the reason you provide that none of the opposing team's equipment suffered the same fate? Was it the trip to the bathroom that was the biggest variable in this instance? As we know that the balls went from the same official's room to the same field under the same weather conditions, correct?

Just some thoughts: No they shouldn't ... in an service based economy a server should be able to live on their tips. Unfortunately; the US is not accustomed to paying for service, they are trained to find the best bargain. Yes ... do you feel get great service from your fast food servers? Obviously, there is a slight difference but a teenager making close to 10 bucks an hour(depending on location) is not more pleasant than a wait staff at a restaurant whose salary is reliant on tips. This statement is a little misleading it depends on type of restaurant we are talking about. In franchise environment perhaps; however, in a high scale restaurant not so much(surprisingly these are the places where servers probably do pretty well any how).

I guess my point is if the native american population was offended by a term as benign as Indian(which, I would think the population from that sub continent may actually have more an issue with) some may feel that its been over played. Even if they have a legit problem this time. This is the problem with over zealous PC ... after a while the public turns on you. Basically they got their wish with the with not being named "Indians" and now much the public after 25 years is no longer interested in their plight ... right or wrong. That is probably what you are seeing on this board, I am guessing. I'll have to take a look at the CK Louis bit ... thanks for the heads up.

Not to take a side, but I am pretty sure there have be several high school and college team that have had their mascots change because a term like "Warrior" may imply that Native American population may have been savages. The one that comes to mind is the former name of William & Mary College's teams ... what was the name of their mascot before it was the Tribe? .... "The Indians"

Also, isn't a little hypocritical to claim subjugation is wrong for the Confederate States while also claiming is acceptable for them to want to secede, without consequence, in part to continue subjugation of Blacks? I ask that of a Confederate State not you personally.

No it was one of preservation, for the North. Regardless, the outcome is the same in this instance.

Most wars come with land won claimed by the victor. I am not sure when it became vogue to pretend this is not that case. Yes, most of the wars the US has been part of ceded lands back to countries they fought, but through out history conquered lands have be enveloped by the victor, in this case the Union, no? Lincoln believe the "Persevere" portion of the his oath was pretty clear. Those states that seceded were committing treason, in his eyes. Through out the formation of the Union, as I recall, SC was always weary of the federal power I would think, if there was a legitimate way to handle succession they would be the state to know how to do it. However; I am not sure if there was anyway to secede formally. It would most likely require a congressional vote to go their way at the least, which they never received.

When did that happen? As a Jet he played for Mangini ... right?