eSJayDee

That was good for a LOL!

2 good reasons for having him play when he's ready. 1) Ultimately, the NFL is about entertainment. It is transparently clear from comments around here that most people would rather see JPL than Bledsoe. 2) MM & to a lesser extent TD have the job of providing 'production'. 4 offensive TDs in 6 weeks ain't much production. Granted, QB isn't the only cause, but look at it this way - QB is the one of the most important elements to production. It's one of the easiest to switch (i.e. the possible permutations for different OL combinations is mind-boggling) so what have you got to lose? Our offense is already just barely outscoring the opposing defense, what's it gonna come down to? Having the Dee tell the Oh, "just take a knee & bring in Moorman. This'll hold'em from scoring against you."

Where's that damn sarcasm button when you need it? I thought the smirk would do it.

Our defense, gave up a FG drive & a long TD drive. They got a turnover that put us in FG range. So they lose 10-3. Our offense managed a FG drive, gave up a TD on an INT return & another INT return put the ball in FG range, so they lost 10-3. Looks like both sides of the ball performed equally to me.

Look at it this way - The problem is that we only have 6 total. What is truly disgusting is that we only have 4 TDs on offense. We have 1 off an INT & another off a KO return. I think you'll find that this %age is typically disproportionately high. Now if you have 4 TDs, the split between run/pass could be either 0/4, 1/3, 2/2, 3/1, or 4/0. So roughly speaking (I don't know what the actual overall %age of TDs rushing vs pass is, offhand, I assume you throw for more than you run in), there's a 20% chance that we don't have a rushing TD. A minor statistical aberation, no biggie. The problem isn't that we can't run for a TD, it's that we can't score many TDs!

One correction is needed here. Through 6 games we have ZERO rushing TDs. Extrapolating that over 16 games - let me get out the calculator, equals ... Geez still zero. Let's just say that we're unlikely to get that many over the entire season unless we see significant improvement. BTW, I'm not directing this at you. I'm just trying to emphasizing how pathetic our offense is.

I'd say 3. One assumes the one in the EZ intended for Evans. He didn't see Deion? The screen pass. Shouldn't have been thrown. A guy got to it b4 WM. The high pass off Moulds hands we'll blame on EM. I forget the 4th, but IIRC, it wasn't a good pass.

I disagree w/ most of those. TH - Albeit he is limited in what he can do, but he's still be pretty good to back up WM. Bledsoe - Again, I sure as heck don't want him starting (like anytime after about the 10th game this year), but for a BU QB he's okay. Reed - See ya. If anything I would've liked to have seen him out the door b4 Shaw. Grat attitude, work ethic, whatever. He just isn't reliable. Denney/Kelsay - You can't have 11 Pro Bowlers on Dee. These guys are competent. If we could get someone better, great, but they're WAY down the list of needed improvements. Reese - Granted, we don't know the assignments of safeties, so we really can't make an accurate assessment of how well he's doing. But he doesn't make his presence felt. I'd like to see an upgrade.

Unfortunately, not good. Then again, he's probably not healthy enough yet. I'm hoping he gets in for a few plays in the next week or 2 & by midseason, is starting.

YES On top of my general dispair caused by our inept play, that actually pissed me off.

So wrong. The indication of when it's time to go shopping is when you run out of pop (soda is pop w/ ice cream in it).

Instead of choreographed, think pre-meditated. That obviously is NOT a spontaneous act.

Are those #s right? They look awefully high. Is it possible that they're for penalty assessed both against & for a team? (The #s are roughly double.) I thought if you're really bad you'd accumulate like 1000 yds in penalties a year (i.e. 63 per game).

Throwing the ball requires slowing down if running & often putting yourself in an awkward position. If you had a 250-300 Lb mean dude chasing you & you had the choice of nonchalantly stepping OB & taking a 1 or 2 yd loss or subjecting yourself to a vicious hit in most instances I'd bet you'd take the sack. In this case, discresion is the better part of valor.

The problem w/ assessing his chances were that sometimes the wind kills kicks, sometimes it doesn't. That particular kick had NO chance of making it. It had a slight draw to it like most good kicks, but then the wind just stopped it & push it back right. It landed about 3 yards in the EZ, so it was 10 yds short. By all appearances, it was a good kick. You give the guy a do-over & maybe that gust isn't there, or maybe he's able to get better contact & maybe it makes it. You've gotta believe it was a VERY low probablity kick. As someone mentioned, 4th & 4 you go for. Punting from the 25 (he's got to contend w/ the wind, too. & also consider that wind effects his drop, ergo his consistency.) doesn't make much sense. So you gamble & hope he makes it. Bear in mind, you're facing the worst offense in the NFL.

That's the way I'm viewing it. Bear in mind that had the call been overturned, Miami would have then accepted the penalty & it would have been 3rd & 15, so it was really a no-win for us. The coaching staff seems to have good situational awareness so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

I gotta think so. Although, I will add that based on his FG miss, the wind wasn't so much as with him as it wasn't against him. That FG was a good kick w/ a slight draw & it just hit a wall & dove right about 20 yards.

You know how some players are said to perform better in games than in practice? I hate to bring up the analogy of DF & RJ but compare those 2. RJ very studious, works hard, talented & is probably the best looking player on the practice field. Not to imply that DF doesn't work hard but his physical limitations and playing style would make him a worse practice player - i.e. less productive. Now bear in mind that in practice your teammates depend on you to help them learn techiniques, assignments and generally play better. If a player doesn't perform up to his abilities his other teammates suffer as well. If you're someone like Moulds (a game-time star) or Jennings (who's always hurt & a solid contributor when healthy), you can get away w/ this. When you're the 4th or perhaps 5th best WR it just doesn't cut it. I recall it mentioned that Sam Aiken often looked the best of the WRs during practice.

Happy Feller. K w/ the 'Aints in the 70s.

If possible develop a test which evaluates the talents/skills that are necessary for the job. For instance, when hiring a programmer for a financial mgmt company the test included hexadecimal arithmatic, a 'what's the biggest integer that can be stored in 2 bytes', a word problem 'a ounce of gold costs $X, you buy 100 ozs for Y & sell it for Z. A Euro is worth W. What's your profit/loss in Euros'. Failing that, get them to talk about related to what they'd be doing. Try to assess their attention to detail, problem solving abilities or whatever talent is necessary for that position. I'd also say that if a candidate appears to lack a particular talent that you deem desirable or necessary, I'd discount them regardless of their other qualifications. (That might not be pertinent if you have the only say-so, but I've been part of a hiring team b4, have been overruled & I think everyone would later agree that it was a less than optimal hire.) Good luck, sounds like quite an undertaking & I don't think it would be delegated to you unless they think you're very talented.

I think I saw there was a show on Showtime or somewhere about 'Smile', possibly Sunday night. I meant to watch it, but if it was Sunday, I was too depressed and distracted to. I'll have to look & see if it's on again.

Actually, this time, particularly relative to other performances, it wasn't the blitzers that so much caused the trouble, but just the regular DEs. More times than not, we probably handled the blitzers okay, we just got beat one-on-one. Abraham abused JJ several times.

Wasn't this website set up to keep me entertained? There's nothing new to read.

I just read that in the transcript of 'You ask it' or whatever. It was worth a chuckle. It reminded me of when a few yrs ago Parcells was coaching NE & some reporter quoted him as referring to players as 'pre-Madonnas' as opposed to 'primadonnas'.

How our very good & prolific offense made our defenses statistically suffer (IIRC one of our SB years, our Dee ranked 27 outta 28). Is it perhaps also true that our statistical success that we have on Dee, primarily last year but this year as well, is due to our offensive ineptitude? (That's a good thing to call it ) Much like how when you score many points against a team they must try to keep pace and will rack up beaucoup de yards in doing so, does it perhaps also hold that if a team knows that if they only score 2 TDs & don't screw up, they're pretty assured that our offense won't be able to keep pace? Consequently, our defense benefits by our offense's inability to score. Just food for thought.