Dr. Who

Pretty sure he's hoping for more riff raff.

Looking for the "sure as hell hope so" emoji.

Van Demark is really a LT. I like Anderson. Try a young guy with upside. He's shown versatility; looked good at C.

Getting ready for the regular season.

Best case scenario, he's likely out several weeks. Couple posts upthread says Edwards was warming up at LG.

That's an informative article you link to. Most folks won't read it. And the experts caught up in hypocrisy or error are never really held accountable. When the message is congenial to the platform that acts as a megaphone, agreement with the preferred narrative is more powerful than contrary facts. Brown is still a big question mark. I've been skeptical, but am heartened by signs that he is playing reasonably well.

@ngbills

The question is whether that is an accurate and perduring condition for this year. Can Dawkins raise his game to at least adequate? Is Brown better than some of his detractors claim, or at least, capable of not becoming a consistent liability? Maybe Van Denmark steps in and performs well at LT. I don't think one preseason game answers those questions. Concern is warranted, obviously, but it would be presumptuous to say we are doomed to play with "two weak tackles."

He can't be serious about the performance at MLB. Wonder if one of the crack journalists asked why Dodson was playing fourth quarter minutes if he was handling the defense well. At least he was honest about Dawkins, but you really couldn't even implausibly lie about that.

You might be right. It's an interesting thought.

Clipped the quote for brevity. I generally like your posts and the reasoning here is plausible. Personally, I would not keep Quessenberry. I'm not convinced he's a lock. I would add Alec Anderson to the oline names with a shot to make the team. Jordan Mims definitely in play at RB. I'd like to see Ankou and Kingsley get consideration at DT. I hope Howard gets some meaningful snaps in the third preseason game at LB.

Van Denmark has looked pretty good at LT. IOL is suddenly pretty deep. McGovern, Torrence, and 2 of Anderson, Bates, Edwards, along with Morse. It's the poor play of Dawkins added to uncertainty with Brown that elevates concern to urgency at OT.

I am keen on Anderson. Edwards is coming off injury. If he is playing well, that is a plus. I don't think your surmise unreasonable.

Has to be sarcasm.

Surely Bates would have some value in a trade if it comes to that.

Oh, I wasn't trying to say it was all short stuff. It was a diverse attack, but it was diverse because it did not neglect the entire field and always try to swing for the home run.

As @BADOLBILZ was pointing out in another thread, it's also incumbent on Dorsey to call a game that features short and intermediate routes. You can't be dully always trying to hit on the long ball. And that is equally on Josh. He's the most talented qb in the game, but he doesn't play as smart as he needs to. He's certainly bright enough to figure it out, so it's a matter of not being stubborn and foolish. Last years draft is looking like very poor returns. This years is much more promising. I was an early advocate for Kincaid, so I'm not going to fault Beane for taking him. It's hard to find good LTs picking late first round. It wasn't a particularly good year for MLB in the draft. Still, I do think this regime has not been sufficiently driven to build the best oline possible and that is a culpable failure when you have a qb who could destroy the other team if he wasn't running for his life all the time.

One hopes Dorsey has the minimal intelligence requisite to figure that much out and also that Josh abandons the need to emulate Brett Favre all the time going for the long ball. It's just not smart. When we destroyed the Pats* in a near perfect playoff game, he was taking the easy stuff and the offense was unstoppable.

You might want to look over some of the thoughts by Ralonzo, GunnerBill, Oldmanfan, etc. The initial wave of pessimism is not outright wrong, but there's legitimate pushback on some of the narratives that quickly foresaw doom. (And no one is unconcerned. It was a fiasco of a game, no doubt.) There are real issues at OT and MLB. It appears on second look that Dawkins was as atrocious as everyone thought, but that Brown was less terrible with some good play. I'd like to see Van Denmark get a lot of snaps at LT in the last preseason game. He shows promise. I don't know what the answer is at MLB, but I'm starting to think Milano and Williams are the best two LBs on the team. Williams is not up to calling the defense, so maybe they could pass that off to Milano.

I blame Marge.

I live in Georgia, so I end up watching bits of the Falcons. Seems to me their third string qb, Logan Woodside, has looked better than the starter or Heinicke, the back up. I get that he is frequently playing against lower level competition. He might be worth a look as I doubt the Falcons keep 3 qbs. Still wonder if the Texans are open to trading Davis Mills at a reasonable price. @Ralonzo started an informed thread on the oline last night. Main takeaways for me, Dawkins was the worst tackle yesterday; Brown was uneven, but better than many suppose. Van Denmark shows promise and Anderson ought to make the team if they judge on merit. I keep reading that Shorter is body catching everything, which takes away his size advantage. Haven't heard much good on Shakir. I hope they are willing to choose Ankou over Ford if the current trend in play continues. Don't have any answers for MLB. Everyone was writing off Bernard and now most are hoping he recovers from the hammy and can at least be adequate. Dorian Williams isn't ready for the job, but he looks like a player that won't bust.

I wouldn't try and prognosticate from the entrails of a preseason beast. It wasn't pretty, but it also wasn't dispositive. I indicated already what I considered of perduring concern. The folks who enjoy misery and rapidly predict doom are in fine fettle. It's a weird quirk to carry. The trolls are gleeful and the morose feel vindicated. If that's your holiday, have at it.

You've got an agenda, so this is really a futile attempt: nonetheless, look two posts above for a plausible rationale. The two teams did not approach the game in the same way. That is reflected in how the game played out. I agree that McD has not shown himself to be an elite coach. I do think he is somewhat better than average, though he has the annual clunker and when he does, it looks bad. I don't think this game is indicative as it was not game planned. They were not trying to compete and win, that was not their aim and it is rational that they had other priorities. Lots of overreaction. Concern about OT is the most significant genuine anxiety. MLB is not great, but I think they can scheme that deficiency to some degree.

Eternal is not the same as an infinite amount of time. Eternity is not time. If Eternity has genuine meaning, it explodes the antinomies that end in apparent contradiction for finite minds and the conditions of contingent, mortal being. Certainly, it is not something that can ever be approached or mastered by technology or any other action available to either a single being or an aggregate of all the beings that start from a condition of need and lack. Either there is a plenitude that is Pure Act from the Origin that is able to gift "eternal life" or it is a surd concept with only the emotive suggestion of meaning.

Yeah, I'm not sure what they can do about OT. Van Denmark appears to have some promise. He's better at LT. Betting on Brown was always risky and seemed unwise from the get go. I think we can overcome deficiencies elsewhere, but improving the IOL is not going to be a win if the tackles disappoint as badly as last night.