Dorkington

I know nothing about the Sabres, but I don't care what Russ's intentions are... we haven't made the playoffs in 14 years. He's had his hand in that, imo.

It is problematic that our educational systems don't provide the country what it needs. But the news networks, social media and print media are all valuable resources in raising awareness for various causes (whether they are a valuable cause or not is up to each individual to decide).

There will never be a point where we employ 100% of American citizens. One could also argue that the immigrants coming in take jobs that most citizens don't want to take. And further, they spend money in the US, and that money spent creates more jobs. Nope. I've already covered that, though.

People will write to their representatives when they are aware of the issue(s). Twitter/hashtags are awareness campaigns.

Ah yes, Christians have it so rough in this country/on this site.

The White House tweeted it after it had been going around, and after it got media attention. To me, now they publicly know about it, and they publicly acknowledge it, that's at least a start. I don't think tweeting stuff like this is harmful. Does it fix things by itself? Hell no. Does it help awareness? A bit. Maybe public pressure will get congress to move on it, the President can't do a whole lot by himself, unless he's declaring all governmental power for himself. Again, I want to clarify, I'm not saying this is some solution to things, but various hashtag movements have been shown to raise awareness and start various processes of change. To me, that's not a bad thing. --- Personally, considering our history though, I don't see why we as a country care about these girls, when we as a country start wars that kill thousands of innocents, and then also use drone strikes that also kill innocents. But hey, I guess we get to be picky about that stuff.

I'll give this a +1 If the worst thing someone has done is enter into another country to find work opportunities, then frankly they have been living a good life. We have people out there who are thieves, murderers, rapists, etc who are free to live and work as they please (mostly) because they happened to be born to the "right" woman. Good people, with good intentions, shouldn't be treated like criminals, imo.

I love all the people that basically assume if you suck as a rookie, you suck for your career. What a load of BS. (For the record, I don't agree that he sucked last year, but whatever)

We haven't made the playoffs under him, nor have we even improved our record, so as far as I'm concerned, he gets an F.

I'm not about to say that having a QB coach will guarantee success. But EJ is still early in development, so there's always a chance that increased coaching will help. We'll find out over the course of the next two years (yes, I think he's going to get this season and next, unless something catastrophic happens).

I think the team is better, but I'm not sure it'll translate to more wins. I'm not sold on our coaches, and I think our schedule didn't get any easier.

It certainly helped that EJ looked better than Kolb from the start.

Because the 49ers are a legitimate franchise.

That's essentially been my view. I feel like if someone comes here, pays taxes, doesn't break any (other) laws, and generally contributes to their communities, they should be granted some sort of green card/visa/citizenship if they choose. Maybe they have to give up citizenship elsewhere, or do some mandatory government service, who knows. But frankly the hard lined ideas of citizenship to me are a bit old school.

As corny as the hashtag movement, and others before it, have been, the result is increased awareness for issues in areas that are often times ignored. There's always been atrocities happening in Africa, and we tend to largely ignore them here. It's nice to see people taking an interest, which can sometimes lead to political pressure, and our government assisting those in need.

If it makes anyone feel better, his YPC jumped from 4.0 to 5.1 in the second half of the season. So either he learned, Hackett learned, he healed, or all of the above. I consider 5+ ypc to be stellar, personally.

Ah the subtle homophobia of this site. Goes well with the subtle racism.

Pears is a pretty easy pick. Especially if coaches see no difference between him and our other tackles. Even though I want to keep both Hughes and Lawson, I could see one of the two being a surprise cut because they don't work for our new defense. Other than that, anything big would be surprising, the rest of it will likely be depth guys, I'd think.

This is all true. Play calling had him run inside more often, iirc. OL wasn't opening up holes at times. CJ wasn't seeing, trusting, or waiting for holes and tried to bounce things outside. CJ was also injured for much of the year. Lots of things working against him, still had respectable numbers.

Good luck to him. I used to rag on him until an article last year.

Yeah, I factored the boom or bust thing into my "C". If you use one #1 on a guy, a lot of times it's kind of a 50/50 chance on if you're getting greatness, or mediocre/bust. You use two #1s on a guy? That increases the risk, because you could wiff with one draftpick one year, and hit with the next... now we have both of those #1s invested in one guy. I'm not crapping on the move. I think it's exciting. I just think it's risky, and considering what we have at HC/OC/QB it's even riskier. Hence the C. I think Watkins, himself, looks to be an A+ player from what I've seen and heard (I'm no college expert, as has been said many times).

Man, just 9? months ago, people here were calling for Tuel to be the starting QB. Now they want him gone? Sheesh.

Cue "Kenny G will be the starter, guaranteed" talk after he completes his first two "nice" passes in training camp.

I give the Watkins pick a C, personally. The rest of the draft is solidly in the B to A area. Why do I give Watkins a C? Not because of the player, but because of what we have around the player. We have an organization that historically gets it wrong, which doesn't help when we have questions at HC/OC and at QB. When you're looking at a WRs development, the play calls and the guy throwing to you are very important. Since those are generally question marks going into the pick, and we had SJ13 (arguably, a solid WR), picked up Williams, and have two promising guys last year... in many ways, Watkins didn't fill a "real" need. The "real" receiving need was a big "always open" guy for EJ to use as a safety valve. That all being said, Watkins looks to be great. So my C is not anything against him. It's just what he's going into that dulls things. It's a huge risk move, with a lot of questions, and so in the end, it gets a C, since it's not guaranteed (as much as one can guarantee) success, and it's not guaranteed failure. The rest of the picks all filled needs, other than the ILB, but one could argue we need depth there since we only have Spikes for a year. So that's all in the B-A range.