FireChan

It matters because it paints the picture a certain way. This is all about proving something happened, and the club owner's report does not do that in the slightest. My bet is that if this report said Kane dragged the woman, who was blackout drunk, out of the bar by her hair, it would be purported as evidence that he did it.

There it is.

Yes.

Isn't this just an allegation at this point?

Gotta win that turnover battle, and I think we will.

I could see Luck having one of those 3 TD 2 INT 300 yard on 48 attempts days.

I was saying maybe that plays a part.

No, I mean years of women throwing themselves at you.

I don't know how high his value will ever get. He still has question marks and always will. And he's in his 30s.

I wonder if there's some sort of classical conditioning with these athletes and women that contributes to them doing things like this.

You think their chances of succeeding are the same? I know it's a subjective measure. But honestly, if I gave EJ a 5% chance, I'd have to give Carr at least a 6%.

Because one has a better chance of becoming a franchise guy than the other?

Fair enough. What team is more likely to want to trade for the other?

So you're telling me that the Raiders would trade Carr for EJ?

But that's my point. Carr has a chance to regress and lose the job. Which means he has a chance he won't. EJ already has. Therefore Carr > EJ.

You know, I don't believe that W/L is always a good stat for QB's, because there can be such a vast difference in talent, like the Raider and Bills. Let's say the Bills go 9-7 or 10-6 with EJ with those numbers. Sure a .8 drop in completion percentage, whatever. With 6 or 7 more wins, QBR rises. That would be progress. Even if you hold fast that it isn't, Carr is still at a better point now than EJ is now, so this tangent is a little unnecessary.

What. Car threw 21 TD's, 12 INT's and 3,200 yards his rookie year. All on the worst team in the NFL. EJ hasn't thrown that in 2 years. I'd wager that if EJ had that type of year this year that Carr had as a rookie, we'd call it progress.

Darby hasn't seen a snap, how is it a horrible comparison? Did we abandon the "why do 1st round picks for QB's matter" topic?

Ah see, I have Robey still at nickel. Darby only on the field as outside CB behind McK and Gilmore. So a dime guy, rotational at best, but Rex uses a lot of 3 S packages, which means less Darby.

Why don't we define depth players then? Most of them will see the field one way or another. Is there no such thing as a depth player? Duke will likely rotate in, is he a starter or depth? Meeks may see a down week 6. What does he qualify as? A day 1 starter next year is irrelevant, because we're talking about contributions this year. The way I see it is you have your starters, as in the 11 you'll have on the field most of the time, and everyone else is depth. Some are good, some are okay, and some are bad. And barring injury, Darby is not one of those 11. Does that make sense? Let's compare WR then. Harvin/Woods/Watkins are our starters/major contributors. Goodwin is depth/minor contributor. And Goodwin = Darby.

If McCoy gets kidnapped, Karlos is not depth. Why does it matter where we can draft QB's? Explain that to me.

Why would we pick a high first round QB if we had good one on the roster? Think about it. Again, what do they call players that are utilized when another gets hurt? It's not width...it'll come to me.

I don't know why you keep bringing up injuries, when it so clearly demonstrates that you need "depth" to fill in for injured players. Arguing against yourself, really. Yeah, he used that wrong.

No, I don't dig in, I just don't change the story to fit the events. No one at the time of the draft said, "we really need a day one contributor at DB." It was not a need, or at least a pressing one. Then we drafted a DB, and the story changed to make it seem like a great pick at a position we needed or something. It wasn't. It still isn't. Just because he's a Bill and McKelvin got hurt doesn't change that. With McKelvin healthy, Darby maybe sees 15% of defensive snaps. What did he say then John?