Logic
-
Posts
9,712 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Logic
-
-
The "climate change isn't real" stuff in this thread is so over the top that it's hard for me to tell if some posters are being serious or actually believe what they're saying. So if you were being facetious, please ignore the following. If you're serious, though...
http://grist.org/article/sorry-winter-storm-jonas-doesnt-make-climate-change-a-liberal-hoax/
"But what is the connection between climate change and snow storms? First, it’s important to remember that weather and climate are two different things: Weather is the rain falling on your head as you walk to work; climate is the very long-term forecast. NASA puts it this way: “An easy way to remember the difference is that climate is what you expect, like a very hot summer, and weather is what you get, like a hot day with pop-up thunderstorms.”And, according to actual scientists and not conspiracy-addled politicians, climate change could actually make snow storms worse. ThinkProgress spoke to Michael Mann, the nation’s preeminent climatologist, about Winter Storm Jonas, which is currently blanketing the eastern seaboard in feet of snow. He said this is not a fluke. “There is peer-reviewed science that now suggests that climate change will lead to more of these intense, blizzard-producing nor’easters,” according to Mann. This is because a warming climate means increased moisture in the atmosphere, and when cold air meets moisture — surprise! — it snows. Sometimes a lot, like we’re seeing right now."
For good measure, here's another bit from https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position."
On many issues discussed in this forum, there are multiple reasonable viewpoints. People's subjective opinions can be very different and not be "incorrect". On this issue, there really can't/shouldn't be any debate. When 97% of scientists in a given field agree on something, it's pretty foolhardy to completely disavow it and call it a hoax. I understand that climate change is scary, and that it is much easier mentally and emotionally to laugh it all off and call it a hoax. But like Neil Degrasse Tyson said: "The good thing about science is that it's true whether you believe it or not".
I now fully expect to be laughed at and told why I'm wrong by the chorus of like-minded climate change deniers on this forum. That's fine, I can take it. But no matter how much you want to put your head in the sand, the science is not on your side. And as I said, many of the "but it snowed a lot this winter!" comments are just absurdly ignorant of actual facts like, for instance, the difference between climate and weather.
Anyway, go ahead, tell me why I'm wrong like Al Gore and that I'm an alarmist liberal snowflake and blah, blah, blah. I'll just keep quoting peer-reviewed scientific research. -
So today Andy Benoit tweeted the following. Forgive me, but I have no idea how to embed Tweets.
https://twitter.com/Andy_Benoit
Micah Hyde will be missed. He was big reason #Packers were comfortable playing so much nickel and dime packages on 1st+2nd down.
Interesting comment in and of itself. Hyde, I think, was a lot more important a signing than many realized, and NOT as a traditional every down safety.
How is this relevant to the Bills? Well, take the following article:
http://www.heraldonline.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article12310142.html
"Carolina being in nickel for nearly 94 percent of its defensive snaps last week was by far the most the Panthers have done this season. In wins against Tampa Bay and Detroit, Carolina was in nickel for 71 percent and 77 percent of the snaps, respectively."
Obviously, the percentage of time that teams are in nickel defense is up across the league and climbing every year. McDermott's Panthers defenses in particular, though, seemed to employ this tactic to great effect the last couple of seasons.
This tells me that OLB is perhaps slightly less of a need than CB and S at this point. CB because we still need bodies there and S because Hyde won't be a full time safety. We still NEED an OLB, of course, but to the extent that the Bills will likely spend so much time in a nickel and thus, will only have two LBs on the field, I can't help but wonder if they feel pretty good about Preston and Reggie and feel the more pressing needs lie in the secondary.
Anyway...excited to see what Hyde brings to this defense! -
Watching old school wrestling on the WWE Network. I have zero point zero interest in the current stuff, but watching 1985-1998 WWF or WCW is more addicting than I like to admit in mixed company.
-
I don't think the Bills WANT someone to sign Gillislee. I think that, IF it happens, they are okay with getting a 5th round pick. It wouldn't surprise me if they then USED that 5th round pick on a running back. That seems to be the round in which Whaley finds a running back that dropped (Karlos and John Williams, for instance). Could it be a Joe Mixon this year?
Me? I hope Gillislee stays. His style is a perfect counter-punch to McCoy's, and he seems to be a PERFECT fit for the new offensive scheme. He also has low mileage on his wheels, and should be able to contribute for the next few seasons, at least. Put it this way: If McCoy is out a few games with injury, which depth chart makes you feel more comfortable: Gilly, Tolbert, Williams, or Williams, Tolbert, Banyard? Yeah, that's what I thought. -
I think the secondary, as a whole, is the biggest need.
The only way the Bills make the playoffs next year is to improve significantly on defense. To keep the score low. If they can keep the opposition under 21 points a game, the Bills have a good chance of being a quality team. If, however, the opposition scores in droves, we all know Tyrod is NOT the type of guy -- and the Bills don't have the type of offense -- to play from behind and win shootouts.
Offensively, I personally think that JUST adding a legit WR2 would be enough. A TE2 and a RT would be great, but they're not the same level of NEED. They're more of "would be nice to have"s.
Secondary? WR2? NEEDS. Big ones, if the Bills hope to compete in 2017. -
That's what I'm thinking. Looking more and more like CB at #10. I'd prefer a trade down, or OJ Howard, to be honest.
Yeah.
While I'd love to see them draft Davis or Williams, the fact that they have added 4 (!) WRs and have only added 1 CB while cutting Gilmore and Robey leads me to believe CB will be the pick in the 1st. Shame, too, since the corner class is so deep. As you said, either an elite offensive weapon or a trade-down would be preferable, as both corner and safety can be ably addressed later in the draft.
-
Too much defensive talent at the top of the board and too many WRs throughout the draft to take Davis or Williams at 10. I'd be fine with Howard (I think he's clearly separated from the other TEs) and could be ok with Bolles, especially after a move down, but I just don't see where Williams and Davis have separated themselves enough from the WR pack to take at #10, especially in our offense.
That's funny, I feel exactly the opposite.
While the cornerback and safety classes are said to be the deepest they have been in many, many years, Davis and Williams seem appreciably better than, say, Cooper Kupp and Zay Jones.
I'd rather see the team add an elite offensive talent like Davis, Williams, or Howard with the first pick and then fill corner and safety needs in the later rounds.
-
I dont think it does......but maybe we go TE high instead of WR in this offense?
I think Homes is a little better then a JAG....and young. Not ready to call him a 1a but he looks like a really good fit for TT as he has that size and large catch radius
Need one more quality pass catcher either through free agency and draft and this is a strong TE draft
While I can see why some are saying that Holmes is a shade above a JAG, the fact remains that he was a WR4 and he's 28 years old. It's hard for me to buy into the idea that he's suddenly gonna jump from a WR4 to a WR2. It certainly could happen, and I hope it does. I'm just not holding my breath. As it stands now, a Watkins/Holmes/Brown/Listenbee top 4 isn't awful, but it certainly isn't nearly as dangerous as the addition of a 1st or 2nd round WR would make it.
-
Suddenly, the WR corps looks pretty solid.
Yes. Just need one quality #2 caliber guy opposite Sammy and we're good to go. Right now, it's Sammy and a bunch of JAGs.
-
Awesome!
I hope the signing of 4 veteran receivers doesn't mean the Bills don't plan to address the position in the draft.
Still need a rookie who can realistically fight for the #2 spot.
Despite my preferences, though, the Bills now have:
Watkins
Listenbee
Holmes
Brown
Washington
Butler
Powell -
Good thing it's a deep draft for DB's.
Wow, what a physical freak. I hope he has a good push-off move, better be working on it.
I am all in on Corey Davis at 10 and filling the DB/LB needs in subsequent rounds. This is said to be a very deep draft for both corners and safeties, with some analysts saying it's possible to get starting caliber DBs into the 4th and 5th rounds. If that's the case, we can address the glaring WR2 hole in round 1 and go DB later.
That being said, I may be one of the few that think Davis will be gone by 10. I think people underestimate the demand for big, fast, productive receivers. I hope I'm wrong, and I hope the Bills draft him.
Watkins and Davis in a WCO? Yes please!
-
My gut feeling has been wrong 17 years running, so I'm not sure how much credence to give it.
That said...my gut feeling is 9-7 and a lot of encouragement going into next year. Next year 11-5 and, at long last, an end to the playoff drought. -
I'm just waiting for all those that ripped Whaley to come swarming into this thread to eat crow and admit that Whaley played it right.
Any time now...
Oh, and can I make a request? Can the loyal TBDers not lump all us BBMB refugees into the "awful, reactionary swine" column? Can you just judge us individually as posters? I've now seen a few different posts that were derogatory/inflammatory toward "the new guys" as a whole, and that's not really fair. Some bad apples may have come over, but some good ones did, too. Don't assume that just because someone hasn't been on this forum all along, they're automatically crazy Hill People. -
The thing I don't like about OJ Howard is that there are questions about his commitment to football and love of the game. That's one trait that I just can't overlook in a prospect.
-
I certainly hope so. Wood is a hard swallow with injury #47 and a big contract. He is marquise Goodwin on the ol
You mean the Eric Wood who, prior to this past season, started 16, 16, 16, and 14 games? Yeah, so often injured!
-
800k more for a second round tender on this guy. It just baffles me that a NFL Gm would not use this to their advantage. Am I missing something? 800k more for a guy that provide solid depth on the interior offensive line.
Same thing with Mike Gillislee this year and hogan last year. It makes no sense to not tender guys with that kind of value to a 2nd Rd pick for that price. If we can see it why can the front office not?
It is far more complicated than you make it sound.
A GM has a certain budget allotted for every position or position group. If you tender Groy at that higher level, you have to pay him that extra amount of money. YOU may look at it and say "What's 800k?"...but again, when you have to manage the cap for an entire football team and sign as many guys as the Bills still need to sign....you can't just look at $800k as peanuts and act like it's no big deal to offer a player the extra cash.
If GMing were as easy as you make it sound, there'd be a lot more quality GMs in the NFL than there are.
You know what happens if you give a bunch of backups high tenders? You wind up overpaying for a bunch of backups.
-
It's got to be either CB, S, or WR. I went with WR simply because the depth at the CB and S positions is supposed to be excellent. I don't see the WR class being nearly as deep. Furthermore, it makes sense to have a WR2 on a cheap deal for the next 5 years (1st round players get 5th round contract option) since we're about to spend a boatload on Sammy next season.
WR in the 1st, FS in the 2nd, CB in the 3rd looks great to me. -
I would have rather grabbed USC's Darreus Rodgers in a late round... STUD kid with hands for days...
Yeah. Shame the draft already happened and we missed out on Rodgers.
-
Watched him down here also, Philly, then Corey( changed his name to change his luck) then Philly again.
Has good hands.... till he doesn't.
It's not a question of who he replaces, he doesn't make us better.
He is NO Woods. This is not a good pickup.
Right. Because teams don't need WR4/5 or special teams guys. All receivers MUST be big-named stars. That's how the NFL works.
-
The fact is this: With the number of players the Bills have on their roster, they HAVE to sign a bunch of players. The draft alone will not provide enough players to field a 90 man roster at camp.
Furthermore, with the amount of money the Bills have, and given the simple realities of roster building in the NFL, not every player signed is going to be a star or even a starter.
To field a complete football team, you need depth, special teams players, 4th wide receivers...in short, you need JAGs. It should come as no surprise and should upset no one that some of the players the Bills sign will be very average players, 3rd string quality guys.
On top of those very simple realities, it is also true that Doug Whaley has had far more free agent hits than he has had misses. Nobody last year was very excited about Lorenzo Alexander or Ryan Groy, and I'm sure no one the year before was very excited about Gillislee. You simply never know how a player will perform in a new system, with new coaches, in a new environment (case in point, Alexander's 12.5 sacks in year 1 of being a Bill).
The whining and eye-rolling any time the Bills sign someone other than "favorite star player X" is silly, short sighted, and based on an unrealistic view of NFL roster building.
All that being said, welcome to Buffalo, Philly Brown. May your 20 catches a year and special teams contributions be worth the tiny amount of money the Bills spent on you. -
Two things. Read post #166 of this thread. That's the answer why he won't release his tax returns. The other is he can't be impeached for something he did before he was in office. Hanged maybe, but not impeached.
Learn to use the quote function. He was probably just trying to sell uranium to them.
Sorry I didn't format my post exactly as you'd have liked me to.
I suppose the offense was so great that there's no sense in commenting on the content of the link I posted?
All just coincidence, nothing to see here, right?
-
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868
That's quite a lot of connections!
More smoke = less fire? I disagree. -
Why should he? There's no earthly reason for him to.
"Release your tax returns" is the second-stupidest demand to make of a political candidate, right after "release your college grades!"
I mean...he's the first president in 40 years not to do so. Aren't you curious why?
No, of course you're not. Me? I just find it odd that one of the most boastful, braggadocios men in U.S. history -- one who largely made his name off of tooting his own horn with regard to his financial acumen -- absolutely refuses to do something that every president since Nixon has done.
I just want to be completely clear: If it comes out that there WAS collusion with Russia to sway the election, you'll readily go along with calls for impeachment, right? You'd be in full agreement that Trump had committed treason and there would be no other recourse? Is that fair to say?
-
so when you simply check the facts you're more likely to find they're false. simple as that.
Is that really what you took from that?
70% vs 26%. My point in posting it was to suggest that yes, Tapper has a point. You have to fact check Trump more because he (demonstrably, statistically) lies more often. Simple as that.
-
1
-
Trump and Russia
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/adam-schiff-trump-twitter-wiretapping-russia-ties-236249
FBI Director James Comey confirmed Monday the FBI is investigating Russia’s meddling in the presidential election, including possible links between the Trump campaign and Moscow.
Comey told the House Intelligence Committee at a hearing that the bureau normally does not comment on the existence of counterintelligence investigations, but that he was authorized to do so in this case because of the extraordinary public interest.
And from Adam Schiff:
“Mr. President, the Russians hacked our election and interfered. No one disputes this now, but you. This is what is called 'fact,'” Schiff wrote in a series of tweets denouncing Trump's claim that his predecessor wiretapped Trump Tower. “The intelligence community concluded the Russians will interfere again. This is why full investigation is important to country. Please stop.”
While this obviously does not mean that there WAS collusion, since no guilt has yet been proven, it shows that the topic is at least serious enough and likely enough that there is an active investigation underway. While I and many others had zero doubt that such an investigation existed, many here laughed off even the notion that it COULD happen.
I suppose it's just more Deep State persecution, eh?