Magox

Ok, we get it, your sources dispute what Rapaport's are saying. Case closed.

That's fine. Your sources are in dispute with Ian Rapaport's sources.

It's kinda funny how people read and then interpret things how they wish to see things. The disconnect, dude, is that he said it was my source, when in fact it wasn't. Got it? I've got an idea, how about you re read my response and then check back in with me. Oh, and Rapaport's comments don't back up what you believe it does. You mean to tell me that leadership would dispute such a damning comment that denegrates their HOF QB that allegedly came from the organization? You don't say?

I'm shocked that Brees would clear that up for us. In any case, we'll see. But in my view, the Saints would be crazy to not at least entertain trade offers.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000436091/article/saints-plan-to-draft-a-quarterback-high-in-2015 It's not my sources, dude. But thanks for playing Maybe, but that runs contradictory to what some others are saying. I'm not saying what you believe is wrong, just that you may be.

They have lots of reasons to do it. 1) According to sources within NO, he is showing signs of aging with decreased arm strength, etc. and that they believe he has cost them a couple games this year with timely interceptions. In other words, they believe he is on the decline. 2) NO is believed to be aiming to go after a QB in the draft early on. 3) They are significantly over the cap and keeping Brees is a big reason for that. 4) They may make the calculation that NO doesn't have a realistic opportunity to win a Super Bowl in the next couple years and just decide to rebuild. It's ok if you don't believe that they won't trade him but to say that NO reason has No reason to do so is inaccurate.

I wouldn't be so sure about that for a number of reasons. There are already reports of NOLA looking towards "life after Brees". They are rumored to be looking to draft a QB high in the draft to replace him. Two, they take a huge cap hit if they keep him on the books next year. Three, they believe that Brees is already showing signs of him aging with decreased arm strength, etc. And lastly, they may just make the calculation that they don't really have a shot at winning a super bowl in the next year or so and just decide to rebuild. They would be nuts to not entertain any trade offers. I believe that if the right deal comes along they'd ship him. And yes, I'd trade a 2016 #1 and 2015 #3.

No, and I don't know.

No way they bail on Kap at this point.

First or second for Manuel? You just arriving home from a night out?

It's not deflection but rather amusement. Hypocrisy does that for me. Did some of the CIA operatives involved in the program go a little too far with their interrogation tactics? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean the program was fruitless, it served it's purpose and I'd prefer they look to improve it rather than to indict those involved whose motives were well-intentioned. This country was paralyzed, people were afraid to vacation, travel etc. The air line industry almost went belly up. American's were angry at those who committed these atrocities and demanded our government do everything in it's power to make things right. These CIA operatives or for that matter this country wasn't prepared for 9/11. They were tasked to protect the country and to gather actionable intelligence to prevent further harm to the country and initially were ill-equipped to do so. They were essentially asked to stretch the limits of the law to do everything they could to achieve these honorable goals. They got down and dirty and did things that some people found to be morally objectionable, but they did it for everyone's safety. Now, many years removed, that fear has subsided and all the arm-chair hypocrites come out of the wood works to display their feigned outrage and claim the moral high ground with empty statements such as "We are better than that". Puhh leasse. Better than what? You telling me that it is wrong to waterboard terrorists who are guilty of causing mass atrocities in order to acquire actionable intelligence that could possibly save more lives? Is that what you are telling me? I'll gladly take the other side of your argument.

I just don't see it happening. Having said that, I could see him being a decent backup for some team.

This looming decision that the Supreme court could possibly have profound impacts on the healthcare system or it may simply have no effect at all. The idea is that if they decide that the Federal government providing subsidies rather than the states is illegal, the thinking is that this basically may shut down almost the entire program. I find that hard to believe, the federal government still could set up an exchange for people to view the plans available and once the clients choose a plan through this exchange it could automatically direct them to the carriers website where the application for subsidies could be administered. Am I missing something here?

Venezuela, Russia and Iran are sooo screwed!

It's hard to take some people's "outrage" on this matter seriously without them expressing an even more virulent sentiment towards the U.S's drone program.

If anything their motives wouldn't be to hurt the American's but rather the Iranians.

What would offend me is if the government wouldn't do all it could to protect it's citizens. THAT would offend me.

As much as I love Freddy, I have to agree that it appears that he is slowing down. I think it's time to give Brown the keys and allow Freddy to come in for spot duty and pass protection.

It was a bad call. I've explained in other threads to why I believe it was. Isn't there a rule where you can't launch yourself like a rocket, lifting both feet off of the ground to block someone? Or did I just invent that?

Someone once corrected me on this. It's "for all intents and purposes"

You would like to think that if the calls are too close to call that they would exercise overall judgement. I could understand that if this was a call made somewhere down the field in first down territory and the ref believes that there was a decent chance that there was a penalty that he would feel the need to call it. But on this particular play, where the receiver had NO shot of making the first down and that a "maybe so, maybe not" penalty such as this extends the drive on what was a drive killing third down play, to give Denver a second opportunity is from my view point, maddening.

For me, the Chiefs. I kept reliving those fumbles over and over. It hurt on so many levels.