RLflutie7

I just said the same sort of thing in another post. However, I would disagree with you about taking a CB or Safety high in the draft. Pacman Jones, Roy Williams are classic examples of big time bust. I also can't see taking a WR that high. The trend for that is for WR to drop. However, I see your point about high impact and you can't do that with an OT.

I wanted to post my thoughts on draft strategy that teams should use. Like last year, I think teams should use the draft to select offensive players and/or the core of all teams. i.e. QBs, RBs, OL before they go to LB, DL. I can't see why teams waste so many high picks on positions that simply don't see the ball that much or tackle the ball that much, i.e. WRs, TEs and DBs. Historically speaking DBs have been a very stupid position to take early in the draft. If you look at all the No. 1's the Raiders wasted on DBs, it's a pretty sad situation. We all hear about how important the running game is, so I think most teams should draft a RB, if not two, almost every year because they get hurt and blown out the league so quick.

Crap? What? Who created the financial meltdown? College grads. Who created the bailouts? College grads. College grads have created more problems then they've solved.

Michelle Caruso-Cabrera presents things as facts when they are not. To me, she lies. And her co-workers don't let her get away with it. I think David Faber is one of the best reporters that I've seen in my lifetime. He tells the good and the bad. Good old Michelle is on TV because of her big boobs and sex appeal. I like the guy on squawk box in the morning. He says he's not going to tell people what they want to hear. Love the guy. I watch and try to ignore the jerk offs . . . but it's getting harder to since the republicans got their a@@ kicked in the election. I watch out of habit. They have 17 hours of live TV. I'll watch about 10 hours on Tuesday and Wednesday. Good night.

I have a college degree from Michigan State and I'm glad I do. However, I think the money spent by states on state supported colleges does go to rich people in a sense and I would put my family in that catagory. I had to take out loans, like everyone else, and I paid mine off already. However, that doesn't mean that poor people didn't help pay for my education. They did and that's a fact. I think if people really value an education then the schools should raise their prices of tuition and drop state aid. But that would be unpopular, wouldn't it. BTW, make every US citizen spend two years in the military.

I guess your idea of "pro business" is lying.

I was having some random thoughts after reading about governors grappling with state budgets that don't add up. Here's one thing I think they should do: Suspend operations at all state colleges for two years. Every state that is building massive debt should do it. To me education is in a tight spot right now. And I think investing in education that is going to be squandered, for the time being, is kind of stupid. This would not be a popular decision but I think spending on unemployment and health care is a more pressing need, rather than spending tax payer dollars to support the rich people that go to college. If the well off want to go to college have them go to a private school. I know of three or four recent college grads who can't even get jobs, so I think the time has come to call state-supported schools wasteful spending.

I added a little more for you my right wing nut case.

I think CNBC should be muzzling some of their anchors. As a long time CNBC news addict, I can say about half of their on-air staff is extreme republican pro business/cheerleader types. I've even seen some blame the victims in the Bernie Madoff scandal. An example would be Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, who should be fired. One day, she started popping off about the Merrill Lynch CEO protecting his share holders when it was learned that he withheld info about the condition of that company when BofA bought it. She was quickly slapped down by the other anchors, but I found it weird how she could defend such a crook. I was wondering about who hired her. Rick Santelli is a great guy and many right wingers are posting his stuff on youtube. But what many of these nuts fail to understand or know is that Santelli is a pro-union guy. He once got into a heated discussion about the UAW and walked off the set. Cabrera and some other nut were saying the unions and the legacy costs are the problem with the Big 3, when it's clearly the loss of market share, which was caused by management and not the unions. And if memory serves, Santelli got into a shouting match and stormed off the set.

And it's part of the reason McCain lost. He's too short. Obama's height helped him during the election.

Yes they benched him aburtly.

I'm going crazy because everything is going downhill and going downhill fast.

I think this says it all. Although, Cutler is from the midwest and I think he wants to be closer to home, even though his parents bought a house in the Denver area. I think Detroit would be perfect for him. He's a midwest guy and they need a QB. But I think the bottom line is Cutler didn't like the changes in Denver . . . they had a good thing going last year on offense.

Michael Vick does have a great arm. He just doesn't use it, he uses his legs. I always said that about Donovan McNabb and his stats prove it. Vick's stats prove it also. I thought he was a great QB for a while and I thought that he could develop to be even better, provided he stop running the ball so much. I think in 2004 he ran 121 times. He could escape pressure and find an open man, but he started to regress and he only chose to run with the ball. And then the debate started between him, the coach, and the media about should they let him run or not. And I think Vick was so selfish he wouldn't listen to a coach anyway. There's going to be media pressure on teams to sign Vick. I don't think it's going to be a problem if he choses to play running back, which is where he should have been drafted. He has great talent for the running back spot and he won't be the face of the franchise. But he'll insist on playing QB and I don't think teams are going to want to sign him for QB. He acts like he's entitled to play that position.

Vick is going to get a suspension from the NFL. Here's how I would suspend Vick: I'd give him a 30-game suspension to be served over the rest of his career. I'd give him a 10-game suspension this coming season. That way he can still sell his services this year. A team looking forward to the 2010 season would be able to sign him and test him out to see if he still has some upside as the 2009 season winds down. Then I'd suspend him 2 games a year for the rest of his career to serve as a reminder not to screw up and how bad he did screw up. Those games would be regular season games. And they would be his choice. If he plays 10 more years he'd have 20 games on top of his first 10 games.

I had a 401K in 1989 when I made $4.50 an hour. And it is my point: Going broke and in debt to save 401K money or any other retirement vehicle. Sounds pretty stupid to me. Why don't individuals insist that they get more wage per hour and forget about a 401K program. Create wealth now and forget about this "pot and the end of the rainbow BS". My company just reduced the 50% matching to 25%.

It could be those that work on Wall Street or anyone who has a 401k. Obama went to school with Wall Street types, didn't he.

Keep protecting those rich Wall Street types. Right, Tom.

We don't know how to think. The media does it for us.

Get a life

and notice how Wall Street responded to the new act of socialism. Like Clinton, we will have a jobless recovery. Every president protects the rich. Thoughts?

Anderson has a better skill set than Brady Quinn. Quinn will only start because of the public pressure to start him. The Browns need to move one of these guys. It's not going to work with both.

Here's what I'm thinking. I'm about to become a former Denver fan. I like nothing that's going on.

It will never work. I think 20 teams is needed. It's going to be on VS. cable channel. That's a lot of rematches.

At the same point in their careers, Jay Cutler is better than John Elway and he has every bit as strong of an arm as Elway had. The difference is Elway threw the ball more powerfully and was less accurate, while Cutler throws a more catchable ball and is way more accurate than Elway. In short Cutler has touch and Elway didn't have touch in his first 1-5 years. Elway developed an incredible touch late in his career and he had a knack for making game winning plays early on in his career. Cutler may lack a little game winning savvy that Elway had early on. PS: Stay away from my QB. I'm sick enough as it is with Denver Bronco land.