Juror#8
-
Posts
1,568 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Juror#8
-
-
Just now, MikePJ76 said:
*****.
I hate when Bills fans from Maryland give out all the inside information. Its always the bills fans from maryland.
Josh Allen has now been exposed. All this time he was watching Arrested Development episodes when he was supposed to be studying tape. I guess he has made a huge mistake.
(Note-He torched the greatest defensive coach in history's defense in the playoffs a few years ago....must have been pure luck)
The V8 has a cast iron block, forged internals including connecting rods, lacks an EGR syster and multiple other design features that make it one of the most bulletproof power plants ever put in a consumer truck. -
7 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:
😂😂😂
Big moments like out dueling Mahomes, in Arrowhead in a classic playoff game, to go up with 13 seconds left..
I’m a big Josh fan. My post history supports that.
But thanks for reminding me of the playoff game and for your skillful use of the tears face thing.
-
3 minutes ago, Mango said:
So I think there is some weight to all of this. I started to think it when I was going through A22 this past season. Josh just wasn't seeing the field, there were a lot of moments where he was just getting by by sheer physiology.
Then he had that QB room interview where the entire thing was satire, and part of it was "how much film do you watch", and they went on and on about how that is all they do. Film 16 hours per day, then film of them watching film. I assumed that meant they actually weren't because that was the entire vibe of the interview.
Source: Are you saying that you are hearing this from somebody who volunteers at Diggs former HS?
I should have been more clear - a member of Stefon Diggs’ family occasionally volunteers at Sherwood. We sparked up a conversation a couple of months ago. In May, I asked about the whole blow up at the end of the Bengals game. What I typed was the response I got back. Stefon Diggs has been frustrated with Josh Allen for some months.
Whether that’s why he skipped mini-camp or not, who knows. I can’t speak to that. I can only say that a member of his family alleges that Stefon Diggs is dissatisfied with Josh Allen for the reasons mentioned.
I wasn’t going to share because I figured it would be met with the “parrots, dogs, sister said responses …” But with the mini-camp thing I figured I’d share my little piece of info.
-
2
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:
She's a family member of Josh's?
With family members like that...
No sir. Of Mr. Diggs.
-
4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:
Well, I have no idea about whether your sources are credible or not. But the general take? Yeah, that makes some sense.
Wouldn’t consider it a source. I live in Maryland. An event frequently puts me into contact with a family member who volunteers at a local high school. Her Bills lanyard initially sparked the conversation. -
Just now, Heitz said:
Perfect, because I 100% do not. 🙄 I would think, you know, the results on the field show that Josh is pretty well prepared. For f's sake, HE carried the team to several wins on his back... 🤷♂️
This thread, wow.
Sounds good. Thanks for contributing. -
4 minutes ago, Big Turk said:
So because she knew him in high school, she somehow knows what he is like as a pro? This doesn't gibe with a person who relentlessly worked and sought out people to help him literally transformed his entire throwing motion in a way that every analyst on the planet has said was impossible prior to him doing it. The level of dedication and commitment to do that was far greater anything most players do.
She’s a family member of his. She knew him and high school and all his life and presumably is connected now.
I know her because of where she volunteers.
-
Edit: it’s captured in replies anyway. Wasn’t worth posting. Caused more *****-stirring and agitation than I thought it would.
It’s unbelievably tough to talk to someone who is associated with a public personality and discuss just the content of the person’s comments online.
We can never get away from getting sucked into the game of challenge the veracity of the poster, the veracity of the alleged association, the veracity of the content. I knew that before I posted though. Zero sum game.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Solid! The move I was hoping for for O.C.
-
Didn’t watch the game because the loss last weekend hurt. With that said, glad the Bengals won. I’ll always not hate the Bengals because of 2017.
-
Warning: this may be the dumbest idea you’ve read all week. But here goes nothing …
Has it ever worked that a team built to stop _________ has been successful?
I’ve been reading people mentioning that we need to spend draft capital on meat up front to be disruptive to the run.
But isn’t that reactionary?
Doesn’t then the issue become when the nfl offensive paradigm shifts [again] another part of the defense is exposed that wasn't the point of emphasis causing this perpetual cycle of fitting pieces to keep pace with some sense of perfect state team archetype?
Maybe I’m way off base but it just seems like the successful teams get really good at something and punish the rest of the league with that something. Those same teams stay on the cutting edge continuing to diversify that something so that as the rest of the league attempts to adjust, the rest of the league stays a step slow.
Belichick has crap for receivers and their quarterback is a Trent Edwards-esque game manager but they’re running behind big uglies and they have an opportunistic and disciplined defense.
Kansas City had a bs running game last year and their defense has remained largely suspect for the two years they made it to the Super Bowl.
Tampa Bay is susceptible to the pass. Very much so. And their run game last year was suspect but they won the dance.
I mean every team has a “something.” The 2021 Buffalo Bills is bad at run defense and have a poor to middling running game.
From the standpoint of roster construction and team building philosophy, I almost wonder if it makes more sense to spend draft capital on lineman for pass pro (which will also help the run game), a better between the tackles runner who is an animal on dump offs, and then challenge the league to keep up.
Yes you’re reading this right. I’m suggesting do nothing from a personnel standpoint to address the run defense and instead focus on getting insanely good at that something (in this case Josh and a high powered passing attack).
The difference between 2020 and 2021 was the rest of the league adapted enough to keep up and McDermott and Co. weren’t innovative enough to stay a step ahead.
Try to lead the pack instead of keeping pace.
2007 Colts.
-
On 1/17/2021 at 2:58 PM, zow2 said:
Totally agree. not that it isn’t classy but i’m kinda done donating to other team charities. rather support our own guys now...unless it’s something super special and organic like the Dalton to Boyd play was.
Why does it matter what millionaire athlete the cause is connected to?The kids that the donations support are probably not a fan of a sports team as much as they are a fan of for once having two meals in the same day.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Sherlock Holmes said:
He is not a Trumper, he is a BLM, Antifa, Democrat
There may have been different factions there as mob mentality brings in all sorts of characters. What we know factually is that the intent, coordination, and communication of the rally was by Trump supporters (and by design) to protest (ostensibly peacefully) the election results.
I imagine that there were many Trump supporters (along with supporters of no one and supporters of chaos, the left, the right, and anarchy) who broke into the Capitol.
The key takeaway here is that no party owns or can claim law and order. The right and the left have good people and ***** people. There is a lot of ethical relativism that’s taken over politics.
You can either be on the side of moral relativism or on the side of facts and solutions. Not sure you can have both.
If you’re bringing up some guy who claims to be a part of some far left group as a way to assuage the culpability of the party you support then you may be being morally relativistic and not part of the solution to fix that crap from yesterday.
There is, of course, another option. The option abandoning any notion that party affiliation carries with it any inherent qualities of good or bad. Rather political parties are comprised of many flawed people with imperfect ideologies that need to meet moderation in order to work for the majority of the law abiding citizenry.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Phins been playing good football and Flores being talked about for coach of the year.
And yet they were just beat down - nearly a half of which was by the second teamers.
Can’t underestimate how well Bills are playing.
-
1
-
-
We’re playing such good football. Happy to be playing the Colts but honestly not intimidated by anyone ... not the Titans and not even the Chiefs.
Think Buffalo can stand toe to toe with anyone. Cool to be playing the best football in January.
-
3
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, westside2 said:
I'm curious as to what you believe. I ask thus with no malice. I agree with quite a bit of what you said, now I'd like to hear what you believe in if you care to share. Thank you in advance.
I think we’re in a politically vulnerable place. I think sides are entrenched and that makes for bad presidential politics and then bad legislative politics.
Politicians spend news cycles talking the shittiest of the ***** about one another and then expect to work together last minute.
It doesn’t work for anyone - most importantly the American people.
Trump hasn’t been close to perfect. He’s struggled with consensus-building. He’s probably more of a ‘labeler’ than he should be if he really wants to get something done for the country. He’s also reactionary and indiscreet. That’s ‘cool’ and outsiderish but it also has consequences for governance that he needs to understand.
But recall what I said about entrenched interests. Dems don’t want to work with the man. They really want him to fail which is bad for the country. I don’t have any data to support that but I believe it’s obvious. In that way Democrats are acting in a way contrary to what’s best for the country.
‘Putting the country first’ has become a cliche but truly no one is doing it.
Not Trump. Not the Republicans. Not Democrats. Everyone is trying to consolidate and institutionalize power for the sake of its own perpetuation.
Not sure what the final act to that is. But it’s not to the enduring benefit of any one civilian who has to live within it.
18 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
My data has been posted a number of times. Please do some digging into this forum. 🙂
No thank you.
I figured you mentioned it so you could provide the support.
I’m ok with my ask of you.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
Fox runs negative Trump stories 52% of the time. Not sure how that means they are pro-Trump. (You can search this group for the link to that 52/48 number. I have posted it a few times.) You may not be as independent as you think if you consider Fox news pro-Trump.
I loved, loved, loved Bill Clinton. Over the years, I have found out more and more about him and his administration and have come to er, not love Bill Clinton. It has simply been a matter of reading information as it becomes available.
W - weapons of mass destruction.
I cannot say I hated him though, nor did I admire him. He did some good, and did some bad.
I could not stand Obama from Day 1. He was running against Hillary in the Democratic primary (who I wholeheartedly supported), and I saw him as an empty suit. Nothing I have read (in supported government documents) will ever make me think well of a man who spied on Americans, sicced the IRS on his detractors, and knew fully about the soft-coup against President Trump and did nothing to stop it (I suppose that is one thing I think well about him for... I do not believe it was his idea), was a good President, or a good person.
Trump? If the media was even semi-fair to him (90%+ negative stories... and since Fox accounts for 48% positive stories, that must mean CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS are close to 100% negative) I would be willing to listen. But, since the press has been an arm of the "deep state" and Democratic party since he was elected? Nawwww. He has not been perfect, but for a political neophyte? He's been darned near close. Heck, peace in the Middle East? Whoddathunkit? How much coverage has the "msm" given that?
What I think is that Fox is very much pro-Trump narrative.
‘The world is on the brink of destruction at the hands of urban baddies!’
Check.
‘Dems trying to cancel culture in some small unknown town in the upper peninsula of Michigan’ three stories down on Fox’ front page.
check.
‘Suburban moms quake at the threat of Lamont and Leroy bringing blm to their doorstep. You’re next!’
Ok cool.
White business owner in (name the battle ground state) going out of business because they refuse to mandate masks.
Check.
Cnn is pro-Biden narrative‘Vote for Trump means you’re gonna die of smallpox and Covid cocktail.’
‘Trump hates vets!’
Sure.
Look at the front page(s) right now. And put the narrative puzzle together.
It’s a lot of skullduggery.
It’s clear where the allegiances are.
But let’s see your data. And let’s vet the sources.
-
Just now, Tiberius said:
What does your independence lead you to think about the Presidency of Donald J Trump?
That he is a good man trying to do what’s best for the country based on his vision of America.
He’s made mistakes.
He’s had some big wins!Like I said with Obama, I’ll give him his full presidency before I appraise fully. I think he deserves that.
-
5
-
1
-
-
Confirmation bias.
I am completely politically independent. It took some time to get here but it’s a good place to be. I try to take in as much data as I can and then make a decision based on what candidate I feel represents the most of what I want. I don’t restrictively align with party because I think that misses an opportunity to learn. I don’t demonize the other party who I didn’t vote for because I think that’s stupid.
I remember here during Obama days the usual suspects who hated him found every story - as unvetted and fledging as it might have been - and posted it (and supported it) as gospel.
The Obama lovers refuted every negative Obama story with their own “support.” They wouldn’t believe anything no matter what.
No one (not even the self-proclaim investigative journalists here) really dug into anything besides the most cursory research to verify what they wanted to believe anyway.
Fast-forward to Trump and it’s the same thing all over again. Those who hate him post every freakin thing as if it’s gospel. Those who love Trump won’t believe anything negative - any reporting or negative news story period.
Fox News is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic.
I get it Fox - the world is coming apart at the seems because of the “Libs” and Trump is going to save it.
cnn is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic.
I get it cnn, Trump is going to send us into the depths of humanity and wipe out minorities from North America.
What happened to non-editorial journalism?
Everyone finds everything to support what they already believe or want to believe. And there is support for every branch of opinion.
Maybe it’s comforting.
Maybe it’s re-affirmation.
I wish I could stop everyone mid-argument in a sort of freeze frame soliloquy style and ask: does anyone care about the truth?
Is anyone really comfortable thinking that there side is always right and the other side is always wrong?
Does anyone want to know (or are do they have the capacity to believe) something different than what they already think?
Or better, what would it take to believe something different than what you already believe about Trump, Obama, Bush, the Clintons?
Every question in here but the last is truly rhetorical. This thread is probably self-righteous and I’m ok with that. I don’t imagine much discussion on this topic anyway and that’s ok. It’s not salacious. There’s no red meat or slant in here.
Maybe just think about it huh.
Happy 2020.
-
4
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:
It'd be pretty damn difficult to find fault with anything Thomas Sowell writes.
Be that as it may, I’m gonna try.
It’s 1:09 in the morning and I woke up sort of abruptly. I’ve been thinking about this for the last few hours and at least I think I’ve realized the issue I have with it.
The call of his comment suggests that there is or there may be or we are venturing near a societal circumstance where posterity will be asked to atone for historical wrongs damn near in perpetuity.
Even if we bring to bear the most leftist sense of racial reckoning, I don’t think it’s one of architecturalizing contrition by whites towards blacks now and for decades hence.
I think that’s an exaggeration of even the more extremely leftist viewpoints.
And I think his comments are disingenuously calculated as a dog whistle to capitalize on the sensation of the moment.
At least I think.
Even the most helplessly lost left of center viewpoints seem to be asking for reparations and perhaps a greater acknowledgment and show of responsibility for slavery and its progeny: segregation, systemic oppression, legally sanctioned racial injustice, etc.
But I think that even they want to heal and find a place where race isn’t part of their daily calculation.
I think that everyone’s end game - right, left, and middle - is that we reach a place where no apologies are needed and we find a post-racial same state starting point for every baby born for the many more decades and the many more hences.
I think that Sowell [purposely] misses that point.
Anyway, the difference ideologically (between normal folks and the far far left especially) is where that post-racialism point happens. Some say it’s happened. Some say it’s happening. I think the far left says it’s far off in the hinterlands somewhere.
But I think everyone agrees that we need to get there.
Sowell’s words suggest a world that no one wants: contrition in perpetuity and no environment of healing or at some point having already made right a wrong that we can then proceed forward from.
That kind of dog whistle scares people and naturally finds an audience amongst people who don’t want to now or in the future apologize for something that they weren’t complicit in.
Its now 1:22 in the am and those are my thoughts that I think I think. My lady probably thinks I’m texting some other chick. Gotta get to bed.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, dubs said:
Double Dose of Intellectual Power!
Something about this doesn’t work.I mean I get it.
I do.
I get what he’s saying: we can’t countenance the propagation of historical grievances.
Or maybe we have to be better in the space between no longer and not yet.
But how he says it, I think, is somehow just structurally suspect.
Gotta give it some thought though.
-
The unfortunate part is that there are some folks who want to protest peacefully but they’re now inextricably conflated with the anarchists.
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
-
Crazy how much rancor we have in our politics.
It’s so bad.
I wonder if we revert back to the mean at some point or if politics is irretrievably lost in this beastly, meaningless, partisan, place.
-
2 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said:
Dude. Welcome back.
Appreciate you bro!
-
1
-
Diggs NOT at mandatory minicamp, McDermott "very concerned" DAY 2 UPDATE: He's back
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Very well could be the case man. Hopefully it’s all resolved amicably. They’re too good to not get through this. A part of me hopes the family member is wrong although I believe what she says. I don’t believe she has a reason to make it up.