Chilly

I don't see it. I didn't think Sanchez was very accurate with the football last year and wasn't very good at reading defenses pre or post snap, two of the most important things for an NFL QB. I'd argue Trent was better at both, or at least equal. Sanchez also wasn't very accurate in his first pre-season games this year, which isn't boding well for him. I'm actually more excited about what I saw out of Sam Bradford last night than anything I saw out of Sanchez.

I've got to agree with you. I think Edwards aint a very good QB thus far in his career, but I think he'd do better than Sanchez did if he was in the same situation. Sanchez's season last year was horrible, and I don't see the upside in him that other people do. I'm with Ross Tucker on this one - I think Sanchez is one of the reasons why the Jets won't be getting back to the AFC Champ.

Welp, guess I know what I'm trying at the state fair this year.

Yeah, because your poll answers were totally unbiased.

I take it you haven't seen them in pre-season this year.

Ricky Williams.

Where's the "They would start for Arizona" option?

There's no way Delta is as bad as US AIr.

Quick, someone take Chad to Applebees.

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/forum-1/announcement-10-copyright-violations/

I think it's likely Camarillo was going to be their #4 receiver anyway. Given how much they run, they don't use 4 WR sets often. It's not shocking they'd try to move someone who has good value at that spot.

Ross does a great job on Sirius NFL Radio. I catch him on the drive to work almost every morning. He's one of my favorites.

That's why I tend to love the "depressing" movies mentioned in this thread, and am a big coen bro's fan. Such great stories. IMO, story > everything else with movies

I think you're weak at QB and WR #3. I love Sims-Walker as a #2. His floor is #20, with his ceiling being a legitimate #1 or top #2 WR. I never like using a TE as a flex, but I'm fine with Witten there. If you got him at a good value, he should give you good production in a PPR. I'm not a very big Rivers fan. I think Kolb & Cutler have a chance to do much better than him this year, and he's generally going above his value.

I agree with pretty much everything you've said. I do see a significant boost from having wifi turned on during the day at work for battery life. Love the phone, though.

If Native Americans take offense to the Redskins, do gay guys take offense to the Packers?

Ah, I think you finally got it. My argument *is* quite attractive, because it's correct. I'm glad you finally found the definition of the word that fits. I also see you're still resorting to insults, which, as I pointed out earlier, people only use when their argument is so terrible it can't stand on its own.

I don't think you know what specious means. For your reference: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spe...=ref&ch=dic spe·cious   [spee-shuhs] Show IPA –adjective 1. apparently good or right though lacking real merit; superficially pleasing or plausible: specious arguments. 2. pleasing to the eye but deceptive. 3. Obsolete . pleasing to the eye; fair.

Do you happen to know why Mike Leach isn't an NFL head coach?

Incorrect. It doesn't apply to starter vs non-starter. Those spots are too limited. We're simply talking roster spots & coaching spots. No one even wants Leach as a QB coach. BTW, good job continuing to undermine your argument with insults.

Because no NFL team wants him, proving that no one thinks he's good enough to make it in the pros. Kinda like players who go undrafted and aren't brought into training camp.

I see you're still insisting on losing the argument by throwing around insults. When people complain about the decline of discussion on this board, that is exactly what they are talking about. At least those guys made the NFL. Leach hasn't and didn't. You're exactly right, Vick is better than all of those guys. Again, Vick made the NFL and they didn't, and there's a reason for that. It's much easier to succeed in college than the NFL. Not everyone can make it in the pros, and it's been proven so far that Leach can't. Some team would have signed him already if he could. I expect you'll follow this up with another insult-laden, losing argument, since it seems like that's the only way you can defend your ridiculous position.

You forgot the golden rule, that whoever starts throwing insults has the weaker argument. You should probably look in the mirror. In any event, yes, Vick has NFL talent, which is why he's in the NFL. If Leach had NFL talent, he'd be there. Yet, no team wants to hire him. Thus, Vick > Leach

Yet Vick is already in the NFL. Vick > Leach

At least it's more ethical than Leach as HC.