Greg F

No. That would be holding.

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/11/8/13560260/richard-sherman-bills-illegal-contact-walter-powell

If Taylor was outside the pocket the hit was legal .

Perhaps, but if you have exclusive access by owning all the property around the lake/pond (with no navigable waters going to it) you effectively own it as this one is. P.S. I know the caretaker for this association.

It's Deer Valley Trails. Nice place. The walls are plastered with Bills and Sabers stuff. Our camp is half to three quarters of an hour away and the wife and I go a couple times a year.

Might explain why the offence struggled with the Ravens.

That worked ... Shady couldn't get away from me fast enough.

They did change the rule this year. Nothing in the rule about being taken down from behind. TT was not in the tackle box or in the pocket. He was grabbed on the "jersey at the name plate". The only reason for not throwing the flag is it may be arguable that his knees were not 'buckled'.

Not in the tackle box by a long shot. Looks like a Horse-Collar to me.

Could have been worse ... could have run into Incognito's butt and fumbled!

Why do I feel like you're Lucy and we are Charlie Brown?

The RAM's scored 37 on the Buccaneers who are giving up 32 points per game. In the other 3 games the RAM's have scored a total of 22 points (7.33 points/game).

Nope ... the spread and over/under are further down the page.

Correct.

It's also predicting Cleveland over the Pat's with a 79% chance of being correct.

The above is nonsense and tells me all I need to know about Theresa Payton. ICANN does not assign or approve any "website's domain". ICANN is responsible for delegating the management of the TLD's (Top Level Domains). Some of the more well known TLD's are .com, .net, .org. For example, the .com domain is managed by VeriSign Global Registry Services. VeriSign maintains the registry of all the registered domains for TLD .com and are the ones who "approve your website’s domain", not ICANN. There is a lot of nonsense in that article and I would take what Theresa says with a huge grain of salt.

The object may appear to go behind the tower but it is not possible to determine if it did or didn't. What is happening is your brain is filing in what happens between frames. If you examine the video frame by frame (there are 6 frames from the time the object appeared and the explosion) you will see that none of the pictures are taken when the object is passing in front/behind the towers. I captured all six frames in sequence and uploaded to the following link. http://s116.photobucket.com/user/techtipmail/library/PublicFiles

Were already in one called the Pleistocene Epoch. Recent interglacials were about 10,000 years. We are likely at the end of the current interglacial.

Some people really need to start with the basics. Say's Law and Economic Growth

I think he has the "onerous regulatory and restrictive environment" covered. It appears his business model is exploiting the regulations. Economist refer to this as rent seeking.

Let refresh your memory. Your statement that "Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be" after I clearly stated prior to that "We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want". Since I didn't say it was impossible your claim that I did is a lie. Pretty simple really.

Let see if you can follow this. The $100,000,000 was in response to your "If it prevents one shooting it's worth doing". It was an economic argument to expose the reality of trade offs. That a single minded attempt to preventing "one shooting" has consequences since those resources cannot be used elsewhere. It had zip nadda nothing to do with whether GPS on a gun was at all practical. It simple doesn't matter if you "install the trackers on all guns made from here on out". It is still trivial to defeat the technology. What part of that don't you understand? I don't think your dishonesty has any limit. Your statement that "Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be" after I clearly stated prior to that "We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want".

More dishonesty from you. You responded to my post where I stated:

Your the one that couldn't let it go as you repeated the same claim at 7:47 with your "Eventually all guns will be equipped with it". Keep digging. As I stated before we could do it today. The problem being it is trivial to defeat.