Jump to content

SoTier

Members
  • Content Count

    4,085
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,826 Excellent

About SoTier

  • Rank
    Veteran

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    ldidomizio2001@yahoo.com

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Jamestown, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

1,949 profile views
  1. The Labrador Retriever Club apparently thinks that somebody slipped in a mixed bred puppy or puppies into the registry but they couldn't prove it in the 1980s, so they had to register the dogs. It might not have even been the first breeder to have a silver lab puppy but somebody who registered a mixed bred ancestor. It's also possible that the dilute gene that causes the "silver" color was just a random mutation. Prior to DNA testing, registering non-purebreds as purebreds if they looked like purebreds was uncommon but not as rare we'd like to think. This was always done for
  2. Silver labs aren't considered legitimate Labrador Retrievers. They can be registered and compete in AKC events like obedience or field trials but they can't be shown in the breeding conformation classes. They were only allowed to be registered as chocolate labs because the earliest dogs with this color were presented for registration with the AKC before the advent of DNA parentage testing, so there was no proof that the dogs weren't purebred. See the statement from the Labrador Retriever Club here: Silver Labs. Josh Allen went to Wyoming not Montana.
  3. There is no such thing as a "silver backed" Lab. It looks like a Weimaraner puppy (they come in tan and silvery gray commonly called "blue"), hence the name "Sky" I would assume. Many breed characteristics aren't well defined in young puppies, so you often go by color especially when the color is unique to only certain breeds. The vet identified my cattledog (Blue Heeler)/Aussie shepherd mix as an Aussie shepherd at 8 weeks old because of his blue merle coloring. As he grew, his cattledog characteristics emerged. His size, color, and hair are about the only Aussie Shepherd tr
  4. Logan Thomas was a fourth round pick by the Cardinals. He was active for 2 games as a rookie in 2014, and then didn't play in another NFL game until 2017 with the Bills at a time when the Bills didn't really have an NFL-caliber offense, both players and coaches. Daboll was a new hire in 2018 and was the only offensive hold-over among the offensive coaches going into 2019 IIRC. Josh Allen was a rookie QB who was more notable for his running and "hero ball" play rather than his his passing skills. Thomas then went on to Detroit where he didn't light up the league, either. Finally, in his
  5. I'm not going to pretend to have a crystal ball with these QBs, especially Wentz. I think that a significant amount of any QB's success stems from his situation, which is why I picked Stafford, Wentz, and Fitzpatrick. They are all in situations where they're set up for success with quality teams around them, but Wentz is the one with the big question marks. If he can't return to recover his early career form on a talented team with a quality coaching staff like Indy, then there's no excuses for him. Indy is a good QB away from being a serious SB contender.
  6. How is this all that different from all the fan comments and op-ed pieces on Bills fan sites and in the Buffalo media trashing former Bills players who were traded/cut/not-resigned during the last decade of Ralph Wilson's ownership, especially when Russ Brandon ran the team? Between 2001 and 2018, under GMs Tom Donahoe and Russ Brandon, the Bills regularly shed of most of the good/excellent players they developed early in their careers, generally by letting them walk in FA but sometimes by trades. Bills fans generally turned their anger towards the players who were gone, not at the team th
  7. I didn't vote because I wasn't comfortable with the choices. I'm not worried about either QB much but I'm not willing to predict that both will bust. From past drafts, I expect that 1 QB from the 5 who were drafted in the first round will turn out to be a franchise QB for most of his career. I think that probably another 1 or 2 others will become competent NFL QBs for at least part of their careers. It's likely 2 or 3 will be, at best, disappointments if not outright busts. As Bills fans, I think we can see first hand that sometimes the QB who looks like the least likely to s
  8. I guess you're butt hurt because he didn't just call you a plain old ordinary racist, which would have been accurate. FTR, when asked in an interview recently if he thought America was a racist country, he said he didn't. The story has been on national and local news media since late last week. Maybe you should get your news from an actual news source rather than wacky right wing propagandists.
  9. I think that the future oriented aspect of the draft is the most impressive part. It's easy to improve a poor team through the draft with competent talent evaluation. It's a whole lot harder to maintain, much less improve, a very successful team over the long term. That's what separates teams that are almost always "in the hunt" like NE, KC, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Seattle, etc from most other franchises that look great for a season or two and then disintegrate. I think that Atlanta and Philly are perhaps the best and most recent examples. This is why I'm not all tha
  10. Your concern for the super wealthy is soooooo heart wrenching. Let's do some math ... the current estate tax exclusion is almost $23 million. Somebody who leaves and estate of $50 million would owe tax on $27 million, which at 40% would be $10.8 million, leaving the heirs $39.2 million. If the estate exclusion was lowered to $10 million, the tax on $ 40 million would be $16 million, leaving the heirs a paltry $34 million. If the estate exclusion was lowered to $3 million, the tax on $47 million would be $18.8 million, leaving the heirs in poverty since they would on
  11. That's what estate planning is for. If the children are "deeply involved in that business", then why don't they have ownership stakes?
  12. The average net worth of the top 1% of Americans is $10.8 million. The average net worth of the top 2% of Americans is only $2.4 million. I think excluding the first $10 million is ok. I don't think it's fair since the median net worth of American households is $121,700, but I would be ok with it because it would put the exclusion just below what it was before before Trump doubled it in 2018.
×
×
  • Create New...