Jump to content

unbillievable

Community Member
  • Posts

    4,262
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by unbillievable

  1. 2 minutes ago, muppy said:

    tell that to the moms of deadbeat dads and ones out of the picture.  Walk a mile in one of those womans shoes and then get back to me. 

     

    Im not trying to bash men I married a great one.  Finances are just one consideration when a woman makes a decision as to wether to keep or abort a pregnancy. I just dont think it is the gvernments busines to tell a woman what she should do with her body. Tell men what to do with theirs and see what happens.......

     

    Those men go to jail.

     

    The government already tells men they are legally required to sign up for the DRAFT. They have to give up their freedom, and possibly their life.

  2. 51 minutes ago, muppy said:

    I disagree amigo. If guys really did/do consider the ramifications of unprotected sex before having it I do believe there would be a lot less women end up pregnant in the first place. What is it they call it " thinking with the wrong head ".?  Im saying that ultimately even though it is the woman left "holding the bag" errr fetus it is only She who is going to be "pregnant".  Guys get to walk away and many do. 

     

    Ive said it over and over CONTRACEPTION aka no need for an abortion in the first place. And that fact remains constant. This court decision doesn't impact me personally but i fear for all the women it ultimately may. For many reasons. One of my Christian GF's posted this and Ima gonna leave it here and that'll be that. 

     

     

    Roe.jpg

     

    Not only is the father already LAWFULLY responsible for supporting the child, he is also responsible for paying for the well-being of the mother. Child support isn't solely based need, but it's home-life. This also includes men who are later found to NOT be the biological father.

     

    • Like (+1) 1
  3. 10 minutes ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

     

    There is no "penalty" in cutting them. But you've also just paid 5 million dollars and received nothing in return. There's no point in cutting someone that you've already paid for practically in full. 

    Unless they want to keep a better player in another position.

     

    Keeping players because of the sunk cost is a bad idea. They might keep Stevensen because of the draft pick too, then. They weren't afraid to cut Corey Coleman.

    • Agree 1
  4. Just now, BillsFanForever19 said:

     

    Howard has no barring on WR. He was given 3.5 million, of which 3.2 is guaranteed. You need to have more than one TE on your team. Howard isn't going anywhere.

     

    I love McKenzie. But I think the idea of him starting over Crowder is crazy talk. He'll be used the same way he always has. A gadget player that gets more slot time than your normal backup.

     

    Crowder, much like Howard, signed a 2 million dollar deal of which 1.8 is guaranteed. These aren't Jacob Hollister situations (where he signed a 1.12 of which only 150k was guaranteed). There's no point in releasing them. They're already paid for regardless.

     

    1 year guaranteed deals doesn't affect future cap so there is no penalty cutting them. While it doesn't help the team to release them, it's also not a reason to keep them either.

     

    In the Bills situation, they're not thinking about cap savings, its about who will help the team win. The did this last year where they had to cut roster spots in other positions to keep extra in others.

     

    Mckenzie moved past his gadget-player status when he filled in for Beasley last year. He is definitely considered the starter, especially since he signed an extension while Crowder is only here 1 year. Crowder is the player that has to prove he deserves the spot.

     

    Austin might take the spot from both of them.

    • Agree 1
  5. After what the Rams did, I think it's possible to give everyone $20mil/yr contracts.

    4 hours ago, MarkyMannn said:

    No player wants a back loaded contract. Everyone wants it guaranteed and up front

     

    Players should tie their money to cap inflation. Why hasn't anyone thought about asking for %10 of the cap, rather than $20mil/yr?

     

    4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

    It's possible to extend both Poyer and Hide through 2024 and frontload their contracts.  Then you can back load the contracts of whatever young players they wish to keep past their rookie deal (Edmunds, Oliver, Knox) if need be as the salary cap should go up significantly by the time 2024 rolls around.

     

    • Like (+1) 1
  6. 1 hour ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

     

    Agreed. Some combination of Stevenson, Hodgins, Gentry, and Pau'u will form our Practice Squad this season. The 53 will include:

     

    Diggs

    Davis

    Crowder

    McKenzie

    Shakir

    Austin

    Kumerow (ST)

     

    I think the surprise cut will either be Crowder or OJ Howard.

     

    Drafting Shakir AND Cook makes having a backup slot WR unnecessary. Crowder can save himself by out-playing McKenzie for the starting job.

     

    However, they might keep 7 WR if Howard continues to disappoint. Also, If Austin is not fielding punts or kickoffs in pre-season, he's not making the team at all.

     

    Stevenson's speed will get him a look from other teams if he's on the PS. Austin and Kumerow are probably safer being stashed there.

     

    • Eyeroll 1
    • Disagree 1
    • Agree 1
  7. 3 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

     Visor Josh Allen is a vibe and should be protected at all costs 

     

     

     

    I see wobble. Passes too high. 86 Tavon Austin only got 1 foot in-bounds.

     

    These are Josh Low-lights. Not impressed.

    5 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:


    Im impressed you know Fahrenheit.  I certainly don’t know celsius. 

    Did he specify Fahrenheit?

    He might literally be melting.

  8. 2 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

    Just looking at the highlights and ignoring his RAS...

     

    Pros: Soft hands; good vision (can find gaps in zone defenses and space to run when he has the ball); decent size; tough to bring down.

     

    Cons: Slow.  He never runs away from people.  In fact, he's often caught from behind.  

     

    And I only saw his highlights.  So I'm not sure about his drop rate, motor, or blocking skills.  

     

    In any case, I can't see him beating out Knox or Howard.  Not sure about Sweeney, either.  

     

     

     

    Report is that he can't block.

     

    I agree that he looked slow and stiff in highlights. Feels like he got a lot catches because the other team forgot he was there. Although he used his size to block out defenders well.

    • Like (+1) 1
  9. Diggs

    Davis

    Mckenzie

    Shakir

     

    Crowder vs Austin

     

    Kumerow, Stevenson, Hodgins, Gentry.

     

    I think Crowder and Austin are fighting for one spot. The others for the last one.  

     

    Kumerow being 30 is a real disadvantage for him, they'll want to keep a developmental prospect.

    Hodgins has a disadvantage because  Sweeney has a similar skill set at TE, plus he can't stay healthy.

    Stevenens speed is tempting.

     

    Stevenson and Austin can also sneak on as returners, which helps them win a spot as WR6, and maybe as WR7

  10. Did I read this correctly?

     

    She won because GEICO didn't bother to fight it in court.

     

    They ignored her court filing so the judge handed her the win. They appealed, but the higher court upheld the uncontested ruling of the lower court.

  11. 1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

    I don't think using a preferred pronoun is much harder than getting someone's name correct.  I also find I have no need for referring to people by their gender in typical conversation.  Names suffice.  I can recall zero times where I was admonished or even politely corrected for getting someone's pronouns wrong and I can't recall an instance where I have witnessed such an encounter with other parties.  I think if you make an earnest effort to be a decent person you probably don't have much to worry about and any microaggressions, perceived or otherwise, will be forgiven. Perhaps your truth and experiences are different.

     

    I recall many instances where I have observed someone squirm in visible discomfort at insensitive or downright offensive comments made on the topic of race, sexuality, and gender in public and in the workplace.  Nothing else happened other than that individual was made to feel that they didn't belong.  There were no public shamings or cancelations in these cases.  If calling someone a rhinoceros makes them feel like part of the team at work its not much effort on my part.  Definitely not as much effort as arguing with HR that they are in fact a humanoid species with two X chromosomes and it is my right to call them a ***** sapien woman in all communication.  

     

    The biggest inconvenience in my life from all of this is that I have unwillingly found myself on the receiving end of long winded rants about pronouns in email footers and on LinkedIn and how the whole world is going to hell because of it as if I haven't heard the same tired screed a hundred times before.  

     

    Ever tried to ask a co-worker where someone is but aren't allowed to refer to their Race, Gender, Species, Height, or weight because it might be offensive?

     

    Now try reading some of the LA times descriptions of perpetrators where they are asking the public to call the police if they see this person.

     

     

    • Dislike 1
×
×
  • Create New...