JimBob2232

I think you are forgetting Vernon Davis...

Or since Mike Williams

And even if Furgy doesnt fall...someone will.

Not sure why you are listing using the franchise tag AND 5.9 million...the 2 go together like white on rice. But, yes. He is worth that. I am of the opinion Nate is not as good as Nate thinks he is. I dont think he is a top 10 corner in the league. But he is good. And in this market, he would fetch ALOT more than 5.9 mil. So we are getting a bargain here, and keep one hole in the sinking boat plugged for at least one more season. I like this move. I would like to trade him for a first rounder even more. My tune will completely change if we sign him to a Champ Bailey contract.

Cutler has been shooting up the boards recently (ala Rivers). It wouldnt suprise me if, after the combine, he is the #1 or #2 QB on many teams draft boards. Combine that with the fact that Ten, NYJ and NO all need a QB (unless ten thinks volek is the long term solution), its possible picks 2-4 will be QBs. If nothing else, if cutler is on the board at #8, we may be able to field some interesting phone calls from arizona looking to leapfrog the Lions sitting at #10, and may still be able to get Ngata at #10, as detroit really doesnt need a DT. Draft day should be interesting... 1) Move down and STILL get ngata 2) One of the big 6 falls. Good possibilities of either of the above scenarios.

I'm not either...rightnow.. if we lose EM, we need another WR

JJ would be a good option IMO. We can look to the draft and see if we cant get Chad Jackson in the 2nd round, or Travis Wilson in the 3rd. Not many draft options..lets see, who are the FAs.. Some options here David Givens Reggie Wayne Antonio Bryant Nate Burleson Kevin Curtis Joe Jurivicious (Peerless Price...) I think any of the above (not in parenthesis) might be an adequate replacement for moulds. I'd still rather have EM than any of the above. But if it came down to it, I could live with Evans/Curtis/Parrish or Evans/Wayne/Parrish.

Yeah, Teague was not good, but, at the right price, was a decent backup. No big deal though. But reed? the guy seemed to finally start coming into his own. Perhaps he wants a solid #2 gig somewhere. I'd still like to see him back...but not the end of the world. I think letting go of reed probably means moulds stays however. Young QB, loses 2 of his top 3 WRs, has a new TE (Everett), and (presumably) a revamped oline. He needs SOME consistency.

As soon as he starts dominating when playing againsts teams best corner, then I will consider him a legit #1. I like lee alot. I think he is a great reciever. However, i think he benefits alot by having EM here. If we lose EM i think Evans will be hurting. Not to say he cant be another Holt, Harrison or Steve Smith...i think he can, but I also think his odds of doing that are better with a big physical EM type reciever opposite him.

At least with takeo, i know who my favorite bill is. without him...I might have to look at Mike Gandy.

Bills take the hit either way (cut or trade). Problem is, if it becomes evident we will cut him if we cant trade him, our bargaining ability goes down drastically (see LJ Shelton last year). In addition, there might not be a big benefit to another team trading for moulds. They have to honor his salary for 06, or restructure his contract. It might be cost benefitial for them to just sign him as a FA.

I guess it makes sense...but I cant imagine having an ambulance on call for me 24 hours a day.

Yeah, I heard that too. I was yelling at the tv "you idiot, he threw it up for grabs into the field of play, thats NOT what he needs to do more of" Then McGuire proceeded to echo my comments. Funny stuff.

Ahh...start the evening with an aventinus, end it with a boddingtons ( <--Beer Snob)

He is....if he remembers to do it.

How can they not have this game in HD?

1) "that would be bad" is not a technical reason. I shell out 30% of my salary to make a mortgage payment. This isnt including my car loan or my student loans. Does this mean I have too much debt, and am having deep financial dificulties? Furthermore, should I not own a house, car or have an education? 2) Interest rates are (or were) at historic lows. This means we are replacing high interest debt with lower interest debt (in most cases) This is like refinancing your 12% home loan for 6%. Hardly seems like a bad situation.

I think alot of what i have posted here has been misinterperrete, so I'll take it in stride. I am not trying to make the point that bush is wonderful. He is not. I am trying to make the point that democrats have no clue what they are talking about, and trip over their own feet to make bush look worse than he actually is, especially when it comes to the economy. I only injected it into the conversation in relation to what I have heard some democrats say. My retort to you was not directed (necessarily) at you, but to anyone who says the deficit is too big. Give me proof, or else I cant take you seriously. Reserve board policy plays a role, no doubt. But stimulating economic growth is just one aspect of the reserve board. They have to carefully weigh what each move will do to inflationary pressures and unemployment. To rely on the reserve board to stimulate the economy is a poor decision, though they do have that effect. Case in point, rates are going up pretty fast right now. They are going up in an attempt to protect against inflationary pressures. While the economy is improving on its own, its not in a position where we need to stifle its growth. Oh, and as far as cutting rates further goes..the federal funds rate was sitting pretty at 1.0 pecent. Cant really go much lower! Not at all my point. Anyone well versed in stock market fundementals knows that there is a rate of growth that can be sustained. When companies start selling for 100 times earnings (or more!), or stocks go through the roof based on the anticipation of unsubstainable future earnings, there are problems. This is what happened in the 90s, and (nobody wants to hear this), but its what is happening with real estate now. This is an interesting question you are asking. I would think someone with as strong views and opinions on the economy and monetary policy would at least have an understanding of overall stock market valuation. That said, stock market valuation analysis is done by many investors. Each one takes the same data and comes to a conclusion. Conclusions vary by investor. One common indication is S&P500 PE Ratios, which averaged around 16 between 1950 and 2000. During the bubble it got up near 40, which indicates a drastically overvalued stock market, and should have been a warning sign to all. At present it is back in the 15-16 range. Of course, this is just one indication of a fairly valued stock market, but it is an important one. My personal opinion and analysis says the market is fairly valued right now, but as I said earlier, there are probably 1000 economists who disagree with me. It should be said that typically momentum will shift the market to an oversold condition prior to turning around. Not sure that is the case here...as downward momentum has slowed...but time will tell. The president does have some effect long term. But very little short term effect. I tend to agree with you on this. But remember between when he took office and Oct 2003, we had 911, Enron, Global Crossing, Worldcom, Tyco, etc. etc. Thats a big pill to swallow for an economy already in a recession.

They let him take the 5 second penalty and he finished 4th. Without the 5 second penalty, he would have won by 2-3 seconds. Basically, if he tried to push the sled, and did an average job (average compared to the linemen and backs in the competition), he would have won.

No. He did a half a$$ed job. Its like the guy who is driving drunk down the highway at 90mph without a seatbelt on. Now, he has started wearing a seatbelt, but he is still plastered and driving 90. Maybe he's a little better off than he was, but he's still an idioit, even though I think putting his seatbelt on was a good move. 1) Give me a technical reason why the federal deficit, at its current level, is bad. I cant make the case that it is good either, so dont ask me to, but show me its bad, or dont inject it into the conversation. 2) Federal Revenue has dramatically increased over the last several years, so im not sure how you can somehow say that the tax cut, which drove the revenue increase, is causing the deficit to soar. What goes up, must come down. The stock market was overvalued. It is now, by most accounts, fairly valued again and can resume its normal growth, dependant on the economy. My point was not how good bush's stock market is, because its not. But my point was that its not as bad as most people think. Most people on the street think the stock market took a drastic nose dive under bush. This is untrue.

Fastest man competition coming up after the commercial. GO MORM!

That was awsome! what was his time? With the 5 second penalty, I wouldnt be suprised if he would have won this thing!

For what its worth http://www.economagic.com/gif/g70016108701...73046489953.gif With the exception of 1997-2001, the unemployement rate is the lowest it has been since 1974.

Economists never know what they want. For every economist who says one thing, i am sure i can find 10,000 who will say the opposite. Not discrediting this particular economist, just making an observation in general. For what its worth, i think you are correct though. Outsourcing is greatly overstated. It makes for good political banter. But because its overstated does not mean its not a problem. Companies exist for one reason: To make money for their stakeholders. If you can agree with that premise, then there is only one reason to move outside the United States...to make more money. In many cases, companies are setting up shop outside the US to gain a competitive advantage there. (i.e. dont need to worry about shipping products from NY to China if you have a manufacturing plant in china). This is fine, and good for the us. The other reason to move, is that it is simply too expensive to do business in the united states, and therefore they pick up shop and go somewhere else. You see this in New York. Look at Kodak, Xerox, General Electric, B&L etc, etc. New York is killing corporations (and individuals) with taxation. As a result, they are moving to southern states, or offshore where it is cheaper.

I may be wrong, but I dont think you will see many june 1 cuts this year. With the CBA expiring, you can no longer spread dead cap money over multiple seasons. Someone correct me if i am wrong.