TPS

I posted this in some other Washington thread, but his overall stats (except sacks) were better than Kyles when adjusted for snap counts. I'm sure you're opinion s based on what you observe, not the stats.

While I'm sure you're being facetious, Reilly fits the Pats WR type, so I would not be surprised to see that happen, if he doesn't make the team.

It would be interesting to see who the alternative was in each case? Regarding Allen, I think what most people suggest here, me included, is that he only starts if he is the clear cut winner in the preseason. If not, there IS value in having him watch and learn early in the season.

The projection is straightforward, and it's given all the time when comparing the US system to all other advanced countries with universal healthcare, ours is more expensive and does not insure all citizens. If someone is going to evaluate what it will cost, then you must compare it to the cost of what it will replace. While "funding" it would create a shocking (to some) increase in the government's budget, higher "taxes" would be offset by lower expenditures for businesses and households. For example, about 20% of corporations' total wage compensation goes to paying healthcare benefits. While they would pay higher taxes to fund Medicare for all, they would no longer need to pay those benefits. They would experience a net gain since the system's overall costs are lower.

Thanks, that was $3.5 trillion in 2017 in total healthcare spending in the US. The point, the Medicare for all proposal would reduce total US healthcare spending by almost $1 trillion/year relative to the current system over the next 10 years.

Maybe a little context? According to this article https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-healthcare-spending/u-s-healthcare-spending-to-climb-5-3-percent-in-2018-agency-idUSKCN1FY2ZD we spent about $3.5 trillion in 2017, which is expected to rise by 5.5%\year through 2026. That means we will spend over $40 trillion over the next 10 years compared to $32.6 trillion under the Medicare for all plan where everyone is insured. This is roughly a trillion per year cheaper...

Yes, and Holmes v Reilly is a perfect example. Also, No one seems to be factoring in a QB that sees and uses the entire field. Having smart, shifty guys who can find openings Is as valuable as speed sometimes... so im with John from “my hometown” on this one—we may be pleasantly surprised this season.

As I mentioned in the Allen thread earlier, the QB competition will be about consistency not flashy throws and plays, which is why I think ajm will win out (which I think is best for Allen's development too).

Another creative wrinkle by Daboll with the 6-5 group. Like it.

I think that was Kaelin not Charles.

Great...thanks to your post yesterday, I’m well aware of where you will be in 10 minutes...

I’m guessing consistency will win out in this competition. If Allen is up and down over the preseason and ajm is more consistent though unspectacular, then he’ll be the starter. At least the preseason games will be interesting this year!

He was a guy I hoped they would draft, but They have a lot of TE bodies in camp already.

Ok, last counter point then. While his experience is "minimal," he has watched and learned, and he's started a playoff game in which he brought them back to the cusp of a victory but for the stupid flagrant foul on the D. Again, the argument here is you only start Allen if the competition is not close.

1. An away game against a good defensive front to start. 2. They play some very good teams in the first 8, so if he/they start poorly the haters will start the bust talk. 3. A couple of bad games against those first good teams won’t be good for his psyche. 4. He hasn’t seen anything close to nfl defenses, so better to watch and learn. My preference is they take the mahomes approach, let him start at the end of the season if they are out of contention. These are in no no particular order. Again, unless it’s no contest, which I doubt will happen.

Unless it’s not even close, I’d rather see AJ (or peterman) initially take the reins to start the year.

Correct. If Q3 is similar, then 2018 should make the 3-4% range I predicted for the year.

I'll get this in before B-Man, Q2 GDP estimate in at 4.1%. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-27/u-s-gdp-growth-hits-4-1-fastest-since-2014-in-win-for-trump

That is a very ignorant statement overall.

Just showing my affection for you Tom.

?

You like to focus on the mundane. Of course, since you view Russia and Putin as evil incarnate, I am sure that you disagree with his main thesis... If the Russia-gate hysterics prevent Trump from normalizing relations with Russia, then Putin has no choice but to ally with China, which would also raise the risk of a major conflict.

I understood Escobar's main point as the elites mistakenly want to isolate Russia as a foe, which of course helps the funding stream; however, by doing so it pushes Russia into an alliance with China, which is the real threat to the future superiority of the US. But let's argue about a minor statement related to the technology gap 50 years ago....

@Deranged Rhino you should enjoy this piece by Escobar: http://www.atimes.com/article/heres-the-real-reason-the-us-must-talk-to-russia/

Sorry for your loss Royale. I was a wreck after putting mine down last fall after 14 years. He was the one constant through a lot of changes in mylife over that time. I still miss him...