Rob's House

Anybody got some excuses for this guy? It looks like he needs them. Apparently cutting $44 billion out of a $3.7 trillion is going to cause the children to starve, the fire departments to shut down, the schools to close, etc., etc. For a little perspective, it would be as if I had a $3700 household budget and told my wife if I had to cut $44 a month we'd have to cancel the cable, eat ramen, sell the car, and tell my daughter we can't afford her tuition any longer. Is anyone really buying this? Jonah Goldberg has a good take on it: http://townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2013/02/22/blame-game-rages-on-over-looming-sequester-n1517732/page/2

I always wonder what libs think about this kind of ****. Who knows. They get very quiet, ignore it, then never bring it up again. If President (*^*&%^$^#wasn't on their team they'd be soaking tampons over the **** he's doing, but instead they just flip the page to the next Obama puff piece and lube it up.

I like the idea of taking Jalson Fowler next year. Fowler and Spiller would be the sickest thunder & lightning combo the NFL has ever seen.

In fairness to Juror #8, he was much more measured in his assessment than the race-baiting reactionaries who had their pitchforks ready as soon as they heard about the Skittles.

He's intriguing. Great size, decent draft position (3rd rd?), moves well for such a big guy. Outside of his one big game he hasn't done much, but he's also been buried on a pretty solid depth chart.

Is Moats really good looking? It seems he's quite a favorite with the female fan base.

From a purely legal standpoint I've seen nothing that establishes Zimmerman's guilt for murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'm for it, unless Barkley's available when we pick at 8. Maybe even then.

If you're always this premature I feel sorry for your woman.

This is kind of what I was thinking. It's a good bet Byrd will be back, in which case the starting line-up doesn't look so bad. I like Ron Brooks at CB and have high hopes for Searcy/A Williams at S, so perhaps I'm overly optimistic, but add a solid starting LB, maybe a S, and a few depth players and I feel pretty good about this unit.

I would love this draft. It does a good job of maximizing the value this draft has to offer while addressing team needs.

Apparently playing at USC leads to some genetic modification that renders one incapable of playing QB in the NFL. It has nothing to do with the coach, offensive system, or individual under center. It's some other factor that science hasn't been able to identify yet, but guys who forget or ignore the fact that Carson Palmer was a premier NFL QB have. Personally I think the Colts were tards for taking Luck. Do you realize it had been almost 30 years since a viable NFL QB came out of Stanford? Coincidence? Luck was obviously the next Trent Edwards.

And you're welcome to your opinion. In my opinion it's silly to try to manage a game by counting carries rather than letting the situation dictate the play, but again, that's my opinion. I said in the first post that CJ should be the focal point, but I suppose you missed that part.

Please, not this again. You really didn't contradict anything I said, but seemed to take a contradictory tone, so I'm not sure what your point is, or if you even have one. This is the NFL, not Madden. Anyone who watched the games last year (or even looked at the stat sheet for that matter) knows CJ plays better when he's part of a tandem. They also understand that CJ's style of running, while explosive, is not conducive to running all the types of plays the coach wants to run. It takes a special kind of simplicity to think otherwise. I would still use Fred up the middle, not necessarily in short yardage situations, because it keeps the defense honest, opens up opportunities for CJ, and keeps 2nd and 3rd down manageable..

At this point it's a bit of exaggeration. If I can't take a guy out inside a minute I'm toast. I just don't have that much steam anymore. But there was a time...

Bench press doesn't necessarily mean that much anyway. The fact that he can put it up means he's probably strong enough to play effectively if he knows how to use it. I can't bench 225 once, but I can put most guys who can on their backs.

I doubt the coaching staff views Fred as CJ's back up. CJ will be the focal point, but I imagine they'll view it more as a tandem.

She's the first driver in the history of Nascar I'd have sex with.

I think Walker's purpose is to give blurbs of the team's recent events for the casual fan who checks in to ESPN occassionally to get the new scoop. I don't think people that peruse Bills message boards on a daily basis are his target audience. I do agree, however, that despite the shortcomings of his personality, Tim Graham did a much better job.

Anyone who makes more than enough to afford a middle class lifestyle and have a little something to put toward retirement. You don't need more than that. And what you don't need, we take.

This kind of makes it hard to hate the guy. I hate him for that.

I pretty much disagree with every premise you've laid out. I completely disagree with your assessment of Barkley. For those who say he is in "descent" I can only assume they looked at the stat sheet and saw bigger numbers in 2011 than 2012 and stopped the analysis there. The only concern I have regarding him is the shoulder injury. To equate what Barkley's shown to what Patterson has shown is just not possible. Barkley's got a 4 year resume. Patterson had 1 year where he put up decent (not spectacular) numbers as a #2 WR that no one was game planning for. Yes, he's got some nice highlights, but we haven't seen if he can consistently beat coverage, if he can beat double teams, and if he can consistently make tough catches. We know he can run and change direction like very few, but a #1 NFL WR needs to be able to do all of those things. As far as the risk factor goes, QB is an inherrently riskier position to draft than WR. But as far as QBs go, especially those in this draft, he may not have the highest ceiling, but he's got the lowest floor, and is the least likely to be a bust IMO. He understands the nuances of the game, and I don't buy the line about him not having the arm for it. I find it easier to see him developing into the next Drew Brees than Patterson developing into the next AJ Green. I also don't buy the part about pocket QBs being on the way out. I've been hearing that for close to 20 years, yet Brees, Brady, Manning, Ryan, and Flacco still find themseloves among the game's elite year in, year out. I'm not saying Patterson won't be good. He could become one of the greats. I just think the risk is high and if it were up to me I'd either shoot for QB or take someone who's more of a blue chip than a high risk high reward pick in the top 10.

A year or so back someone started a Glee thread and surprisingly several posters came forward to express what a great show they thought it was.

Are you really asking me to explain the concept of variations in risk to reward analysis? Sure, no one is a guaranteed elite player out the gate, but a guy who has consistently shown his ability to translate his athletic talent into on-field production against top opposition has a considerably lower chance of busing than a guy with off the chart measurables who has a handful of sick highlights, but hasn't proven that he can consistently beat coverage, get open, and make tough catches in traffic.

This guy's high risk, high reward, and I wouldn't even dream of touching him at #8. Sure, he has elite talent, but NFL history is littered with high talent busts who couldn't translate their physical gifts to the football field. If he turns into an elite WR that's great, but if he turns out to be one of those great YAC guys who can't get the ball, or has a bad case of the drops, what would we say about that pick 3 years out?