Dr. Who

Non-qb, unless this is a snide commentary on those two qb options.

I wonder if these folks were also against taking Watson or Mahomes. What criteria and combination of circumstances would allow a trade-up by their lights? Seems to me many of them would never pick a qb early in the first apart from a magical synchronicity where the team has the worst record and a can't miss prospect is available at the top of the draft.

Love this book. I have a copy signed by Sally Fitzgerald. If you like O'Connor, I recommend the work of Marion Montgomery.

Why would you be happy with second-tier qbs? Though if we miss out on the top four, I would prefer we just went BPA and grabbed Lauletta or White later in the draft.

The fellas on the HockeyFutures Sabres' board seem to like Hughes after Dahlin, though some prefer Boqvist. I would be fine with Svechnikov or Zadina early and trying to trade back up into the 1st for D if we miss out on Dahlin.

If you could add Dahlin, Borgen, and Guhle next year, the future of the D suddenly looks transformed. If we miss out on Dahlin, however, I would be tempted to take Svechnikov. But as we know, the hockey gods are cruel to Buffalo. We'll finish last and end up picking fourth

In a state of quantum flux, depends on which second you ask me. In general, I think Mayfield and Rosen are the safest picks and I would be happy with either. I like Darnold, think there is more risk there, and almost zero chance we can get him. I have changed my mind on Allen and now like him, though the risk is great. I am always tempted to swing for the fences on a fella like that, so it's probably good that I am not a GM. I do want one of those four, though. Jackson worries me. I don't think he did himself any favors not having an agent and he just seems slight to me. I'm afraid he will be another RG3, but he does potentially have a high ceiling. I don't think Rudolph is a first round qb, but Gunner likes him as a borderline first round guy and he has a more expert eye.

One fella's tantalizing is another's excruciating, apparently

That's how I see it as well. This would imply that there is no way we can trade up before Cleveland's pick at one unless they definitively declare they are taking Darnold prior to the draft.

It's just a joke, but thanks for ruining my lunch.

Not unless it will make you feel better

Sorry, philosophical theology and Christian theology are in my wheelhouse. I actually write articles on this stuff on a theoblog.

One has to hope that Beane and McD are sound football minds with good judgment. I presume the hype is for the entertainment of fans. If the GM gets caught up in that, he won't be good at his job.

You have five grouped together, but OBD might have separation where one or two are strongly preferred. If they have five grouped roughly in the same area, obviously, one does not need to trade up to 2.

What is eternal life? What is eternity? What is love? None of these questions are limited to easy, univocal answers. Differences in Christian theology give profoundly different responses to the matter of suffering, for instance. In some Protestant versions of soteriology, justification is forensic and God's heaven a reward extrinsic to a metaphysical state of being. The Cross is suffering taken on by Christ so that the believer does not suffer. (In vulgar terms, this is categorized as "cheap grace.") It is likely a caricature of many forms of Reformation-inspired theology. Regardless, for much of the Christian tradition, the Cross is not extrinsic, not part of a purely individualist understanding of salvation, and not separable from Resurrected life. Hence, suffering is indeed central to Christian praxis for much of the tradition.

Alright, let me rephrase. The last draft folks talk about as being rich with multiple qbs (and of course only some worked out) was 1983. That's 35 years ago. It is rare to have a draft with 4 or more qbs that might be considered for the first round. A normal draft has 1 or 2 or actually zero. We have the draft capital this year, not next year, etc.

Fine, you can wait another 25 years and hope when the perfect qb appears you have the first overall pick, because folks don't trade that player away. Rare to have a draft with multiple potential franchise qbs and we set ourselves up for it by acquiring draft capital.

Fixed it for you, Phil.

There are diverse forms of Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, any religion, for the most part. In my view, fundamentalism is a modern phenomenon, not simply an older, atavistic cosmological model. Fundamentalists are anti-modern moderns, though unaware of it. One of my oldest friends is Buddhist. Went to see the Dalai Lama when he came to UCLA decades ago. Unfortunately, I had a few too many beers the night before and fell asleep. I think my pal has forgiven me that by now. It's obvious ethical behavior is achievable outside of a specifically religious affiliation, but Western monotheisms tend to make historical truth claims that are not simply separable from notions of person and love that are consequential upon forms of revelation. People who are following a path within a tradition will not see specific truth claims as arbitrary or discardable.

A completely privatized religion is part of the Post-Enlightenment project. Part of the impasse between Islam and the West is that sharia law rejects a purely secular public forum. There is an entire metaphysics with particular notions of what constitutes a person, freedom, the nature of the will and social bonds that underlies modernity and the West. I don't think Dreher actually thinks one can constitute a radically alternative society, though I haven't read the book. My surmise was that he wanted to put in question some of the complacent presuppositions that found the modern sensibility. I am sympathetic to Dreher's perspective, but I suspect it is largely a pipedream.

I think it's called The Benedict Option. Rod Dreher is Eastern Orthodox, not Catholic. He's an intellectual and the kind of Christian culture alternative he talks about is not synonymous with hard-line Traditionalism, imo, though it might seem so to those with progressive social values.

Everyone has their own tastes, but that kind of casual, populist store front church appalls my own sensibility. The old sci-fi writer, R.A. Lafferty has some very funny satire about the folk guitar, kumbaya mass of the sixties. This latter thing is a more Protestant variant, imo.

Well, good for you for persevering. I'm not really a baseball guy, but even I know there is a premium on left-handed pitching. To the OP, there will always be enclaves, albeit, increasingly miniscule, of a certain kind of reactionary traditionalism. I don't think the alternative is necessarily a kind of tolerant indifference. There are forms of tradition that are creative and synthetic, but the theologies of that kind generally get censure from both right and left, so to speak.

Really messed up. Should have encouraged you to be a pitcher.

Sorry, I don't get the comment. I didn't embed any videos.