TakeYouToTasker

A lot of these guys don't love the sport they play, and only continue to play because of the financial incentives. Mario is probably one of those guys, and will likely be retired soon.

It kills me to agree with you, but this is 100% accurate. Tyrod's largest issue last year was his propensity for 3-and-outs, and a terrible success rate on 3rd down. That's been the major difference so far this season.

A combination of the two.

No thanks, Madonna. I think I'll pass on the herpes.

Valid.

If you're going to attack me personally, you should at least have the decency to tell me what was wrong with the exchange Gugny and I had in the thread in question. I understand that you disagree with my assessment of a certain WR on this team. Why do you believe that makes it OK to launch personal attacks?

What in the blue hell are you talking about? He certainly does, and as many have said, he's an idiot for judging history through the lens of modern American morality.

I'm voting Johnson with the hope that Rand Paul will declare (L) next cycle, and that he'll have access to the Federal Election Fund Grant when he does.

Are you looking for silver bullet ideas, where Big Government imposes a one-size-fits-all non-solution on complex problems, like the ACA?

I didn't hijack the thread. The poster who made originally made the comment in the thread did. Until he commented, my only contribution to the thread was a post with the single word "Jacksonville", answering the OPs question. I was also fine to let it go at that until you brought it up again. I'm still willing to if you are.

Certainly far from ideal, but if he has to miss a week, this is the week I'd like him to miss.

Except for the societal value part.

PM sent

Jacksonville.

I haven't refused to answer it, I answered that societal value is quantified in several ways.

Not only is he a first ballot Hall of Famer, he might be the single most obvious first ballot Hall of Famer ever. If he's not a unanimous selection, it's near criminal.

I understand that you don't like me, and that's fine; but you really should either just put me on ignore, or learn to live with the idea that people are going to post things you don't like, and that it's your problem and not theirs. Why not ask that of the individuals making the counter argument?

Society quantifies value in many different ways. You simply want to say it's quantified expressly in dollars in order that you can be dismissive of moral failings, and I'm providing you with examples the demonstrate that you're wrong. Obviously you dislike that, but it doesn't make your argument any better.

From a societal perspective? Everything. The nuclear family is the bedrock of preventing poverty and creating economic mobility. The illicit mind altering kind. My point is that I could tell you were going to say that society defines a person's value through earnings, and I wanted to demonstrate the flaw in your reasoning. Mother Theresa of Calcutta has immense societal value, yet she was in poverty.

Multiple ways. If you're going to make the case that it comes down to earnings, I'm more than happy to preempt you by pointing out that Pablo Escobar's net worth was more than $50 billion in today's dollars. Sammy won't be playing.

I'm not going to get into an argument with you about taxes benefiting society here, but if you'd like to venture down to PPP, I'd be happy to engage you on that topic. To the rest, I believe that the choice to use drugs, to have multiple children out of wedlock, to belittle individuals working hard to support their families, and to pay lip service to getting a meaningful education are things that are unacceptable in a moral society. You are free to disagree.

The largest criticism of Goodell has been his inconsistency, and I think he and the owners are very aware of it. On issues like this, I tend to think he is wise to work with precedent, as it gives him a position of strength when bargaining the next CBA. And, to be honest, he really isn't any worse than Suh, the Harrisons (James and Rodney), Finnegan, Pac Man, ODB, etc. Where did I say I was completely OK with Burfict's on field behavior, or judge him to have good moral character? I simply said a fine is consistent with NFL precedent, and given that, I don't think he should be suspended. The sentiment is completely mutual, believe me. And I'm not sure how you managed to delete the thread with both hands so clearly occupied by your pearls. I hope your fainting couch was near by.

Pearl clutching much? Sorry you couldn't handle Gugny and I having what we both agreed was a very civil tangential discussion about baseball, as directly relates to good/bad sportsmanship. Says more about you than anyone involved in the thread.

It's something he's going to have to overcome, as Drew Brees did, if he's going to have success past 30 when his speed and athleticism will decrease. For now I'm content with him bailing on clean pockets less often.