TPS

Because someone like Belichek would've picked him and picked his brain.

I think Moats benefits the most from Dareus. He only played about half the games at OLB and still had pretty decent stats for a rookie, from a small school, learning a new position, after initially being tested at ILB.

I think most of them are described as hard working, high character too--much like last year's crop.

This is pretty good from his Coach: Davis on Searcy and White

You need to have some credibility in order to lose it....

It's the CFTC commission members. Chilton is the only one fighting for strict limits. You mean, "how long can a bubble last?" This one started a little over a year ago. I think we're getting close to the tipping point--look for a serious correction in oil this month. Also, what I have said is that the investment demand is the main driver now, that does not mean there is no influence from "fundamental" underlying demand. My contention is that if you removed the influence from the investment flows, then prices would mainly reflect the STEADY growing demand from emerging markets, and we would not see the rapid spikes and volatility. Take a look at the most recent trade data. Oil imports are at a 12 year low (in barrels, not dollars). Demand in the US is falling and inventories are maxed out. So you really believe the current price is "market clearing"? This piece suggests the fundamental price should be $75-85 and that the CFTC has basically turned a blind eye... seeking alpha

As I stated, there was a positive correlation from 1973 to 2001; it has since reversed. The negative relationship begins in the early 2000s, and it is statistically significant.

Pretty obvious it helped with several of the picks, especially LBs, and especially Sheppard. It also appears they tried to stick with high character, high motor, tough guys.

You'll enjoy this GG: Go Bernie!

People keep throwing that oil-dollar link out there, but that's a relatively recent phenomenon. Prior to 2000, there is a positive correlation between the dollar and oil, but it turns negative after 2000. I wonder what has changed since then.....

From what i just read about him, I agree about Wilson--like his speed over Ayers. I wouldn't mind OT Ijalana with the pick as well.

What jumped out to me--Ijalana rated above Sherrod. If the Bills' ranking is similar, I wonder if they take him in the 2nd? I certainly wouldn't mind if they did...

We were arguing over who has more influence, no one said anything about carte blanche. "The ultimate market clearing price"....can you define exactly what you mean by that? Is that the price that would be determined if there were no speculators/investors? It's not a dubious claim. It's a fact as reported by Business Week and the Wall Street Journal...unless you don't trust them? That last statement was funny...."full separation"....yeah, they've always made sure there was a wall....hahahahhahaha! The grain merchants have taken advantage of their position for years, having the capability to store and sell in contango markets. It's not a crime, it's a riskless profit opportunity. As I stated, nothing that's being done is illegal, which is why any taskforece won't find manipulation--the rules have simply changed to favor investors. Most of the "harm" is caused by "investment instruments" which are based on futures contracts. Joe Shmoe buys an ETF to "invest" in commodities, the more shmoes who buy etfs, the more demand for futures contracts, and that demand directly influences futures prices and therefore the underlying commodity price.

A guy like Dareus will make Moats better. Now we need help at ILB. I really like this: Carrington--Williams--Dareus Merriman--ILB---Poz---Moats

Are you seriously saying the Wall STreet lobby is not as powerful? Is there any lobby more powerful than finance? There certainly isn't one that spends more. As for the %, it's actually a conservative estimate--something I saw on Yahoo finance and the quote was "adding $25-30/barrel." AS for AV, it's a nice little outlet when I want to put my thoughts down without having to do a journal piece that will be read by even less people...

Don't blame Exxon. If you're cost/barrel to pump oil is $40, and "other factors" cause the price to go up from $80 to $110, then your gross margin just went up. They reap the benefits of those "other factors" pushing prices up.

Most of you already know my position on this, but if you're interested, here's a broad look at how innovations and investment flows have added a premium to oil (estimated by Goldman to be between 15-20%). Oil/Gas prices

That's a calling out? This seems more like the post of a paranoid right-wingnut. What exactly are you expecting him to explain? You did get a rise from wacka and 3rdnlong though.

The futures markets have been "financialized" so that anyone can bet on commodities now. This has increased volatility and created an upward bias in prices. We've gone through two speculative bubbles in the past 15 years, each of which lasted several years--dot.com and housing. Historically one could only bet on commodities by either buying and holding (precious metals mostly), buying stock in the companies that mine, produce them, or buying futures. It's changes in the latter where the problems have emerged. In the past, speculators were given position limits in order to ensure that the fundamentals determined prices. This is no longer the case. Now investment flows have overwhelmed the futures markets, and they no longer function as they were designed to--to allow producers and users of commodities to hedge against price movements. Swaps allow big institutional investors to bet on commodities and ETFs allow anyone to bet on commodities, mostly on price increases. The flow of money into ETFs has increased by about 150%/year since early 2000s. So most of the futures contracts being created support these "speculative investments." The real users of commodities have little impact on futures prices now. So what you have, as I stated, people can buy shares (ETFs) of commodity bets, traded like stock, the value of which is determined by futures contracts, other pieces of paper that imply investors taking delivery of a good, but never have to because they offset and roll the contract as they expire. For most commodities now the value of futures contracts taking delivery represent, in some cases, a years supply of product--and these are monthly or quarterly volumes. The financial flows overwhelm the real underlying demand. I would argue that we need to end these hew types of investments that use futures contracts as their underlying value. I don't care about traditional speculators in the futures markets who are subject to position limits--these new products aren't. Thats' the problem. And it is all commodities, not just oil, as they invest in indexes. It's a bubble, and it will last as long as you allow average retail investors to make bets on futures instead of the underlying stocks of companines that produce the things. I dont' care if they push up stock prices, but when you push up the price of the things we eat, then it's a problem....

Doc, It's really not speculation as in something pernicious, it's the fact that they have turned the futures markets into something that allows anyone to bet on commodities via ETFs. Anyone can now buy an ETF which trades like a stock, but the value of which is based on futures contracts--paper, based on another piece of paper, based on the possibility of taking delivery... The futures markets no longer function like they were meant to because they are now overwhelmed by these so-called "investors," which is pushing prices up. This is why the airlines are complaining. I can't see Wall Street losing this one though...

Ruff comment Can this series get any better!?

Was this question for me? I was simply posting a link about the OP, but I'd be happy to answer it...

speculators

Wow! This might be a first, I agree with YOU.

I've read it.