Jump to content

billsfan89

Community Member
  • Posts

    14,369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by billsfan89

  1. Mahomes is smart enough to take over the offense more and more as he gets more starts. Peyton wasn't Peyton his first few years. I think Reid is underrated as a coach but has weak points to his game. However I think Mahomes is just so unreal that he can win despite only having a good not great coach. I never really liked Dungy as a coach esp for Peyton but he was good enough.
  2. Odds are that the team will likely have some off years (only making the division round) once Mahomes gets paid and they have to compromise on other aspects of their roster. But then once they manage the cap hit and take a year or two to rebuild the roster they will be back in contention. It all starts and ends with a QB and you keep your amazing QB at all costs. Hopefully we are talking about Josh that way soon.
  3. Kind of similar to Peyton's Indy run in the mid-00's. The team and his play were so good that eventually one year they would win it. Mahomes is a freaking cheat code. Just completely unreal. I think he at least gets one title by the time it is all done esp since he has 2 more years on his rookie deal which makes the Chiefs able to keep talent around him longer.
  4. I miss when a lot of other channels would counter program with content during halftime. Don't get me wrong J-Lo is keeping it tight at 50 and Shakaria is easy on the eyes too but it is always nice to have some options.
  5. Knox has had one good game and Tommy Sweeney hasn't lit the world on fire. Don't get me wrong I like both players and I think they have a future in the league but I am not ready to anoint the team as having two great TE's just yet. Both will have their ups and downs. I see Sweeny as a solid back up TE, a bit of a do it all guy. Knox I could see as a top 10 TE in the league or a lower end starter. He has to develop a lot and I can see him disappearing a lot this season against better defenses.
  6. Trump met with the Ukrainian president in an official capacity as president. A meeting with a foreign leader to discuss matters is by definition an official act.
  7. There are channels through the justice department to go through if Trump wanted this investigated. He went straight to the Ukraine a country the US has power over to expedite the process to use Ukranian resources for political gain. Thus using his position as president to ask for a political favor. Thus breaking the law regardless of Biden's guilt or innocence.
  8. Once again Biden being corrupt is irrelevant to wither or not Trump broke the law. Yeah throw Biden in jail, I don't care to defend Joe Biden but the corruption charges against Biden being true or untrue do not factor into wither or not what Trump did was illegal.
  9. “the intangible right of honest services.” 18 U.S.C. § 1346. The theory is that by performing an official act in exchange for personal gain, a public official defrauds his constituents of his honest services
  10. Asking a foreign government for a political favor.
  11. First off I never implied that running for office makes you immune from prosecution. My point was that by the letter of the law what Trump did was illegal. It does not matter if what he was investigating was valid or not. If the charges of corruption are legit and there was a justification for it I honestly wouldn't care if he asked the justice department to look into it. I really try not to be a partisan hack mainly because the Dems outside of a few old school FDR types only virtue is being less ***** than the GOP. It would in my mind be more so about the validity of the case. My take isn't that Trump should be thrown out of office for this as it currently stands. My take is that by the letter of the law what Trump did was illegal. Bill Clinton lied under oath thus doing something illegal but was and should not have been thrown out of office. My stance is more so that this needs to be investigated further and then we can make a decision as to if not this warrants more serious trial by the Senate. However you simply cannot say with any legitimacy that what Trump did was not illegal.
  12. You cannot ask a foreign government for an item of value for political gain. That's what he did. Trump could have asked Congress or the Justice department to look into the matter but he wanted Ukranian resources on the matter and used his position as president to do so that's illegal.
  13. It could very well be that Joe Biden is corrupt but that doesn't make what Trump did legal. "Being Right" does not absolve Trump at all. That's not a defense. You can not ask a foreign government to take a call with your personal attorney on a political matter. Trump broke the law and released a memo proving it. His personal attorney admitted it. I feel like if this was Obama in 2011 asking for dirt on Romney from a foreign government you wouldn't feel that being right on the matter would absolve him.
  14. There are serious engineering challenges that come with LST Reactors, it isn't as close to being a proven concept as many of it's ardent proponents would lead on. I don't think I have ever promoted it as a cure all so maybe someone else was a really ardent supporter. My position on the matter is that more R&D dollars should got into developing the technology as the possible benefits of it would be tremendous.
  15. He asked the president of the Ukraine to take a call with his personal attorney about the Biden matter ("get to the bottom of it."). I literally don't know what you could defend on that.
  16. Nuclear also has some environmental risks given that it produces toxic waste that you have to find a waste to store. However I agree that newer forms of nuclear such as Thorium based nuclear energy that are both safer and produce less waste should be a big part of fighting climate change. But the aversion to nuclear from some people looking to fight climate change is not an admission that the whole thing is a scam.It's more so an over estimated fears of the risks and environmental impact it has.
  17. That's changing given the value a implementation of running backs in the passing game. Do it all style RB's like Bell, Barkley, and Gurley have tremendous value as they represent home run threats on the ground and via the air. Gordon however falls into a weird value slot. He certainly is top 10 at his position but not near the top 5. He brings value but not elite value. He is a good player at a position where good's value is not very well valued. So he will be seeking elite value in his contract but his team and other teams would rather save the cap space for other positions and take the dip which isn't as dramatic.
  18. Yes he asked the president of a foreign government to take a phone call from his personal attorney regarding digging up dirt on Biden. Did you not read the transcript? There literally does not need to be a quid pro quo.
  19. Your analogy is way off. Trump isn't the HR department of the government checking references. That is the jurisdiction of the Justice Department. If someone is trying to get your job you can't use your companies resources to try and sabotage their bid to unseat you. That's corporate espionage. You simply can't use the office you occupy to promote your own political campaign. I don't understand this idea that there needs to be a quid pro quo for this to be illegal. You simply can't ask a foreign government to help dig up dirt on a rival.
  20. 10 years ago if you drafted a RT and had to kick him into Guard you might have been right that it would have disappointed. But given the new emphasis on interior pass rushing and the lack of imminent development for many offensive linemen in recent years getting a guard in early round 2 when you initially wanted a RT is far from a significant disappointment. Granted Beane finding two quality guards in the off-season makes Ford struggling at RT a bit of a sore spot but it at the very least adds depth and help the O-line long term. I still love the Ford pick as I think when you have a young QB it helps to have multiple young pieces along the O-line and outside of Dawkins going into the draft most of the O-line was older or unproven. So getting a second foundational young piece to the unit adds to the long term health of the unit.
  21. Impact is a relative term. I think Oliver has looked to be a quality player at his position. I think expecting a rookie even in football to play at a pro-bowl or higher level is a bit unrealistic. It happens more often in football that rookies can some in and play at a All-Star or even All-Pro level but even some of the best players have decent but unspectacular rookie years. JJ Watt had 5.5 sacks his rookie year but improved tremendously his second year and was off to the races. I don't think there is a player that could have been had at pick 9 realistically that would have had the impact you wanted.
  22. I am not going to do all that research but I just don't think the way the draft board fell that there was an pass catcher there that you could have justified taking over a player that was a complete steal at pick 9. I think the better argument is to have taken DK by trading back up into the second as he was falling close to pick 60. They wouldn't have had a chance to draft Singletary most likely as they would have had to package the pick used for him and one of their 4th rounders to make such a trade. But I would have much rather come away with Oliver, Ford DK, and taken a chance that Knox falls to the late 4th or take another TE there than to have had Oliver, Ford, Singletary, and Knox. But as with anything it is always going to come down to results. If Knox and Singletary end up as quality starters and DK's career is derailed with injuries it proves everyone wrong or right . He was drawing comparisons to Aaron Donald and Jarrett both of whom are top DT's in the league. Is your issue that you think he won't ever be a Warren Sapp type player or that he isn't one right out of the gate?
  23. The media being super reactive to players in big markets is nothing new. Week to week things always get overreacted and overanalyzed.
  24. Who at pick 9 would you have rather drafted? I get wanting DK but he fell to the very late stages of the second round for a reason (and I would agree that the team would have been better served trading up for him from pick 76 but not taking him at pick 9 or 41.) I don't see what receivers were there instead of Ed Oliver that would have really changed the dimensions of the offense. Without Ed the team would only have J.Phillips and Star at DT thanks the Henry's injury. The team is also a bit old on the D-line only Henery and Shaq (who is on the last year of his deal) being true young players there. So not only does Ed help the team solidify their D-line depth but he is a key cog that the D-line can be built around the the next 5-7 years.
  25. Ed has been pretty good esp for a rookie, but you would like to see those big impact plays like sacks and QB hits. But the eye test and now the advanced stats give you the impression that it is only a matter of time.
×
×
  • Create New...