HappyDays
-
Posts
26,606 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HappyDays
-
-
This isn't the first time I've seen a Julio trade rumor FWIW. And yes I would do what it takes to get him including giving up our 2019 1st. There are maybe 5 WRs in the NFL that I would give a monster contract to and Julio is one of them. The downside is we'd lose out on a top pass rusher in the draft next year but our defense has enough talent. An offense with Shady and Julio would be potent no matter who the QB is.
-
45 minutes ago, eball said:
Don't forget the difference a competent OC can make. Dennison was so bad it's scary. But thanks, Royale, for bringing up something I've been thinking -- the offense last year was gawd-awful outside of Shady, which is why I'm stunned that people think this year's O will be worse.
I like Daboll and I expect our offense to be better this year. But it isn't hard to envision it being worse. Imagine last year's offense but with worse protection and more turnovers. That is well within the realm of possibilities.
-
2 hours ago, Zerovotlz said:
So...he takes a snap from under center, does a play action fake, turning his back on the defense..things he is supposed to suck at....he climbs up in the pocket, looks right then whips a pass to the left to the open man while moving forward...this is bad? That is everything you'd want the QB to do on that play. The second play, he takes the snap, LOOKS over the field, sets his feet and WHIPS a pass 20 yards upfeild to the open man.....LOL....yes, this IS why we are excited.
I found a time lapse of Pat Mahomes's career:
-
-
6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:
It's been a political talking point, designed to enrage you, that everyone was being prosecuted. That's never been the case. Only those who cross illegally are prosecuted, not those who go through ports of entry. Zero tolerance refers to illegal crossings, not every crossing.
This was never a misconception of mine. Like I said in my post a few pages ago the change that the Trump administration made was to start prosecuting every single illegal migrant including those with children. Since some people including asylum seekers were being turned away at the port of entry, it effectively barred some asylum seekers from following the legal process, including some with children.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:
You're right, they issued a correction:
So I guess they will no longer refer parents with children for prosecution, but they still could be prosecuted? A little weird?
And then there's this:
So it seems like they've gone from zero tolerance to 20% tolerance or so.
And here's a statement from the agency of Customs and Border Protection:
-
28 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
HereThat article from "One America News Network" (what is that?) doesn't directly quote Sessions, or anyone in the administration. So I did some research and found out Tony Perkins from the Family Research Council is the source of that claim (google "Tony Perkins DNA testing"). I would support the DNA testing but until an official administration source confirms that they're looking into it I don't know that it's something they've considered.
-
12 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
That is not what it says. "Members of family units" does not necessarily mean "illegal migrants with children". You missed the tweet about the DNA testing (which you had advocated for).
I did not see anything about DNA testing, just that illegal migrants who have their children with them would not be prosecuted, which in turn means they will not be separated from their children. But if you can direct me to the link you mentioned I would appreciate it
-
Hey look at that, the Trump admin did exactly what I said they could do. They will stop prosecuting illegal migrants with children. The zero tolerance policy is apparently now defunct. This seems to go against the idea that their whole goal was to stop child sex trafficking.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:
Why is this still on the front page?
Fitz said the same thing Tyrod is saying, "WHO CARES", close the COT down and get this other teams QB garbage off the front page.
Did you know that every time you reply to a thread it gets pushed to the top of the board?
-
1
-
3
-
-
12 hours ago, Zerovotlz said:
Dude... the footwork in these clips is beyond terrible. I can't believe this is the game that is making Chiefs fans excited. You know if he makes throws like that in legit games he's going to be awful, right? Especially when teams have film on him.
Is this is a joke?
-
General Manager Brandon Beane praised Peterman’s steadiness as well as his resilience after the rough opening to his pro career.
“That’s why I love football … it’s not how hard you get knocked down, it’s how quickly you get back up,” Beane said. “And you know, the things I’ve said to him, I can go through a lot of rookies. Troy Aikman, Peyton Manning, a lot of these guys, there are miserable games and miserable opening seasons. Peyton was 3-13 in his rookie season. It’s just, you know, it’s not easy. … I admire his toughness. He comes back in his next [starting] opportunity [against the Colts] and it’s snowing like crazy. If the guy had any luck last year it was bad luck. And yet you haven’t seen it carry over out here. I know, probably more than anybody, he’s wanting to say, ‘Let me get out there and show you what I can do. Give me another chance here.'”-
1
-
-
When's the last time we had a GM who came right out and said this player isn't performing as well as we expect and he needs to do better? It's so refreshing.
-
9
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Kelly the Dog said:
He's the third highest paid WR in the league. A perennial good team with a great coach just decided to pay him that much. He's still only 25. McVay said a lot of teams offered him a lot of money. Money talks in this league.
We paid Dareus $100 million. Big contracts don't always work out. I am not surprised he got a big contract, it only takes one team out of 32 willing to overpay. But he's getting paid for potential. For multiple reasons his raw talent has not matched his production. Andy Reid probably believes he can maximize his potential and maybe he will. But I wouldn't want to be the team taking the risk.
-
And if anyone wants to read more about how the Trump administration specifically created this new policy, this article explains it in detail:
In anticipation of cries of media bias, I will note that this paper endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016, however she was the first Democrat they had endorsed since FDR. They are not a liberal news rag. These are the facts of this new policy and no one can pretend that it is a simple matter of enforcing existing laws.
-
14 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:
Reasonably said, but the adults entering the country illegally are taking the risk and choosing separation
No they are not choosing separation. Many tried to present themselves at legal ports of entry but were turned away. If it were me and my child I wouldn't think twice about trying to cross over illegally at that point. There is a perfectly legal procedure for seeking political asylum at these legal ports of entry, but what should they do when they arrive to find that procedure blocked? I suppose they should just suck it up and go home, but if you're a parent you know that is not really an option for them. Also since this policy is new the first families affected by it literally would not have known about it, and therefore couldn't be held responsible for choosing their punishment.
The law posted above refers to persons who are criminally prosecuted for crossing the border illegally. Past administrations would not prosecute every single person that crossed illegally, certainly not those with a "credible fear" of their country of origin (asylum seekers). The Trump administration, driven by Jeff Sessions, has changed that policy and now prosecutes every single person that illegally crosses the border regardless of their situation. There is no law which says they have to do that. They intentionally created a zero tolerance policy and are trying to hide behind a law that wouldn't apply if the zero tolerance policy wasn't in effect.
-
1 minute ago, keepthefaith said:
That's a bandaid. We need to get to a point where we can legally and effectively prevent as many illegal entries as possible and turn people away immediately when that occurs.
This thread isn't about our entire immigration policy. I'm not trying to solve that and I'm not saying I have all the answers. All I want to stop is the new Trump administration policy of forcibly separating every single child from the people that claim to be their parents. It was explained to me in this thread that the true aim of this policy is to stop child sex trafficking. No one here has bothered to present statistics that show how many of these supposed parents are secretly child sex traffickers. But sure, let's assume some of them are. So I have come up with another solution that costs a mere $500 per child. I would assume that everyone in this thread agrees that child sex trafficking is bad, and that forcibly separating children from their real parents is bad. My proposed policy would solve both problems. So what is your objection?
4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
You would be ignoring the part where the parent committed a crime. Once United States citizens who commit a crime are allowed to keep their children with them in prison/jail and not have the child(ren) stay in CPS custody or with a designated family member, then your argument would make sense. (For the record, I do not want to see children incarcerated with their criminal parents.)So you mean to tell me this policy is not actually about stopping child sex trafficking, but that it is about punishment/deterrence? I guess you will have to take that up with others in this thread who explained to me that that has nothing to do with it. Apparently Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump are fighting child sex trafficking. Someone should tell them my idea.
-
11 minutes ago, OJ Tom said:
No one. Now come up with a reasonable solution.
Why not? Why is my solution less reasonable than forcibly separating every single child from their guardians for weeks at a time? I'd like to think our solution to this problem can be both reasonable and moral. It would cost $500 to save each young child and actual parent from the pain and distress that comes with months of forced separation. If my taxes have to go up 0.00025% to make it happen I would accept that.
-
I'm changing my tactic in this thread.
I'll take you all at your word that you are genuinely concerned about child trafficking victims. That we can't know for sure which adults are lying about the children they're traveling with.
Luckily there's an easy solution:
https://dnacenter.com/blog/long-take-get-dna-paternity-test-results/
Paternity test results take 1-2 days and they cost a maximum of $500. Let's say we ran it on 20,000 adult men. That would cost at most a total of $10 million, or 0.00025% of the US federal budget in 2017.
We all agree that separating parents from their children is wrong. We all agree that even if the parents are wrong for illegally crossing the border, the children don't deserve to be punished with forced separation from the only family they know.
So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests?
-
2
-
-
45 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:
Kelvin Benjamin's contract will be right there.
Watkins is better than Benjamin.
Benjamin will not have a $20 million cap hit. Don't be silly.
-
6 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:
Man. It sure would be nice to have Sammy still here.
For a $20 million cap hit in 2019 and 2020? No thanks.
-
1
-
2
-
-
I have a pretty low opinion of Sammy but he didn't say anything bad here. It's standard football player interview BS.
-
Mayfield said on the ThomaHawk Show that Taylor has been an incredible mentor to him, and Mayfield is shocked that the Browns were able to get Taylor from the Bills for just a third-round draft pick.
“They traded a third-round pick to Tyrod just doesn’t make sense,” Mayfield said. “We got a lot more out of that than anybody else could. The guy that he is for this franchise, for all of our teammates is unbelievable. For me to watch him and learn him has been great. He sets the bar high, shows up, his work ethic, it’s a great situation for me to come into to have someone like that. It’s good for me.” -
3 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:
This place is a sewer.
It's best to tune them out. Only about 25% of Americans support this policy:
It's easy to get caught up in the rage, but these opinions are not representative of our country.
-
2
-
Why Is Our Government Putting People In Cages?
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted