Magox

Do I sense sarcasm? lol

This is something that I think doesn't get recognized enough. Good post Rico!

If you do it then I want in as well.

This train left had left years before Trump was selected by the Republican base. There is a reason why those voters were attracted to him in the first place. I think beginning around 2006 when Bush was defeated by his base and liberals (although that was purely for political reasons) for his immigration push, the base of the party became something different than what it used to be. I'm not going to get into the characterizations of what I believe they now have become, but it certainly isn't anything that I want to be a part of.

More than ever, we need a viable third party.

This is not a black or white formula. If you have a franchise QB, this increases the odds of winning a superbowl. If you have a top organization and coach, then this increases the odds of winning a superbowl. Rarely can a team win the superbowl without either. It happens, Ravens, TampaBay, 90's Redskins and 90's Giants come to mind. If you ask me would I rather have a franchise QB or a top notch organization and coach? That would be tough. I suppose I'd go with the top notch organization and coach because that would entail drafting and coaching a talented team and translating that into wins. But that isn't the poll question. The poll question is whether or not you believe in "Building a winning culture". I don't know what person in their right mind could possibly say that this doesn't exist. Of course it's a thing, it's a thing with small companies, corporations, highschool and college sports, all star regional teams. A winning culture is a thing, I've been part of them from both an amateur and in business. It's format, repetition, execution, training, support and a general vibe of winning that reverberates within the organization. You and I are going to have to agree to disagree with what "star studded" means. You believe that they have been and I don't.

Yes, they've had a number of good players. But rarely where they ever a team that was "star studded".

He is, which of course is asinine.

You can judge them based off of that one game, I will judge them in totality.

I think they have a lot of good players on their team, but outside of Brady, they aren't quote unquote "stars". They turn decent players from other teams to good players when they are plugged in to their system. ie their slot WR's. They have good solid defensive players, but they aren't "stars". We can quibble over what the word "star" entails, but the point is that outside of Brady, they aren't star studded like some other successful franchises

All one has to do is look at NE. When Brady is hurt, they still win at around 70% of the time. And outside of Brady, NE typically isn't a team loaded with stars.

The problem GG is and I hate to keep using a term that has been regurgitated over and over is that there is no moral equivalence between Nazi's and the Ku Klux Klan vs. BLM and Antifa. BLM from my perspective is a grievance based movement that certainly have strong elements of racism within their own ranks and Antifa are essentially a bunch of anarchist quasi political speech fascists that both are groups that seem to escape the ire of the mainstream media, because we know why, they share common values with those from the left. BUT To focus on the issues of Antifa and BLM on this particular issue is a form of equating this movement with Nazi's and the KKK. Focusing on issues of the inactions of the police is a form of equating one with the other. The way Trump handled this was what you'd expect. He initially didn't specifically condemn the Nazi's, KKK which was a nod to his populist nationalist part of his coalition. Then after his advisers told him he screwed up he then came out with a scripted condemnation of them, which wasn't heartfelt. Then the very next day he was soo peeved that he had to backtrack, his true feelings came out and he spoke with passion. And what did he convey? That there are some good guys on both sides and that the other side is equally as wrong. He doesn't get it. Sure, some of those that sympathize with this message get it, but it's completely tone deaf to what the country wants to hear and as president of the country he failed miserably. I've proven to be a lousy political prognosticator, but what I do know is that his political capital with elected officials is plummeting. At this rate, he won't even be able to get tax reform through.

But I thought that the McD was the puppet master of it all. I'm confused.

Only if that person has had injury issues. Let's not lose sight of that important detail.

This is all under the assumption that they didn't believe that the moves they made was for the betterment of this franchise moving forward. It's ok for anyone to believe that they didn't make the right moves but I find it highly improbable that when they decided to trade Sammy and Darby that they believed they were making the calculations that they were "handicapping" this team. They made a judgement that Sammy wasn't worth the financial risk. Anyone can reasonably disagree with their decision, but that was the calculation. With all due respect, the basis of a good portion of your argument is that they pay for the sins of a Jauron/Levy's draft decisions. That is not a valid criticism.

Interesting take from Vic: Quarterback: Nathan Peterman. First, it should be noted that none of the three players here was exceptional by any stretch. Each had his highly impressive moments, but each also had his share of ugly plays. Not once did I find myself saying, "Wow! This guy is special." I'm going with the rookie, though, because he was more consistent in delivering good and sometimes even great throws. Granted, Peterman spent most of camp doing taking third-team reps against bottom-of-the-roster defenders, but he looked more mechanically sound than Tyrod Taylor or T.J. Yates. His promotion to the No. 2 spot was a no-brainer, especially with Yates' mostly mediocre to poor showings. Let's see what Peterman does from here.

Reading through these posts and on Social Media tells me that more people than at any point in my lifetime are not ready to have grown-up discussions. The anger and emotion that is out there is out-of-this-world. You just cannot have a reasoned conversation with anything pertaining to Trump or the alt-right. I dare not even make my views known on my social media accounts because if there is anything that could be seen as not an outright spewing of hate on this topic, I would be lumped in as some sort of supporter of them. It's pathetic.

He's a white coach that values good character. Must be a Jauron clone! /Baldo

So if you aren't a Diva, you aren't confident enough to go out and out-battle a DB?? I've read some interesting commentary, but this is certainly a different take.

Oh, so the fact that he's played in over 95% of the games that his team has played in since he's been on their team shouldn't factor in. Gotcha

I think when a new regime comes in they should be judged by the merits of their own actions and not pay for the sins of previous ones. You can have two separate franchises who follow similar models and have two completely different results because of the execution of that model, so just because one regime's actions have similarities than previous ones does not automatically mean that they will be as lousy as the last.

I would venture to guess that Matthews will be back in.

Congratulations! You've become what you used to hate!

Seymour looked good to me, his PFF analytics were solid and I thought that the coaching staff were pretty high on him last year.

The hysterics is off the charts. Btw, anyone know what the "off field" issue was?