DrDawkinstein

They do to an extent. Dion got away with it a couple times.

Well then McD should make sure, as HC, that his team doesnt run it. But that isnt a reason to ban it from the league completely. Of all the times the Tush Push has been run, by the Eagles, Bills, and everyone else, how many injuries have come out of it? The Bills and Eagles ran it more than everyone else and I dont remember them losing any players. (I'm just thinking out loud, not arguing with you)

We dont even know the discussion was "heated" as some here have speculated. We just know it was "animated". That could have been all of them laughing and Sean demonstrating differences between whats safe and what isnt. Maybe he started clapping and couldnt stop. We dont know. IMO, the movement to ban the Tush Push is lame. It's an old school football play, and getting rid of it would just show the game is abandoning every aspect of what made it. The play has been stopped. If defenses dont like it, then stop it.

lol you guys cant even take an obvious joke about it.

Super low class of Beane to take negotiations to social media like this. If Beane wants to get a deal done he should keep his mouth shut and be a good soldier. Wonder if he has some gangster in him? Kids these days...

***** the Pats. ***** Gronk. And ***** Edelman. We'll be laughing as Diggs steals their money the same way Poyer played the Dolphins last year. It's still Josh's division.

So as usual, folks want to restrict the individual things they dont like or partake in, and not restrict similar/same things they do like or partake in. Classic humans! End of the day, no matter what substance or product we prefer or not, we just have to hold our noses and deal with it. None of it is a big deal.

Fair enough. No weed, cigarettes, cigars, pipes, or vapes in public. You got my vote.

Sure. But cigarettes and alcohol also have a ton of advertising money poured into them, often targeted at kids. And both are far more addicting. For sure on the vape garbage. There is definitely a problem there. My point in the usage comment was to illustrate the shift in thinking about "weed". We all grew up being taught a much different mindset. It will be interesting to see how it all shifts over the next years/decades. There has definitely been a change. The numbers dont lie. https://www.fau.edu/newsdesk/articles/marijuana-use-teens-study Now, that report does not that usage goes up as kids get to 12th grade and continues to increase as they age. But that is just adults making their own decision. To my earlier point, the young kids dont care as much anymore. It isnt as big a deal.

I hear you. But he also might not have brought it up because to him, it's just a normal piece of the background landscape that he barely notices. Whereas you and I have 40, 50, 60ish years of bias ingrained in us that it is "bad" and to always notice it because it is (or used to be) a big deal. Gen Alpha is already showing much, much lower usage than previous generations. Especially in states where it is fully legal. It is something "parents do" and therefore the kids think it's lame. It's no longer something cool and badass and subversive. And still probably better than NYC smelled in the 80s

Dunno. But up until now your entire beef in this thread has been about the smell and having to smell it, and finding it disgusting, pervasive, and gross. Same could easily be said for cigs and any/all types of smoke. If you want to move the goal posts now that we are getting into limiting a lot of products of the same nature then that's on you. Let's be consistent tho. As far as the intoxicating nature goes, ask any cop on your walk into the stadium or working any crowd control. They'll tell you they'd rather have everyone on weed which chills people out and makes them more peaceful over alcohol which almost always leads to trouble. So not sure that shift in argument makes sense.

Even as a pot head I could get behind this, if you mean no smoking cigarettes, cigars, pipes or anything else either. Cigarette smoke is the worst. But then that is quite the nanny state you are setting up.

This isnt some secret. They dont pretend to be fair and balanced. They are Bills employees doing a 2 hour show where the main purpose is marketing that team. If that annoys you and you still listen, thats on you.

Two points to address: 1. It's our OL... Sure, but that's always a part of EVERY good/great RB (outside of maybe Barry Sanders, who retired early because he was sick of running behind a bad OL). OJ had the Electric Company, Thurman had 5 All-Pros in front of him. No one diminished their abilities because of their OL. 2. He can be easily replaced/Davis can replace him... I already illustrated a few pages back that Beane has spent multiple day-2 picks and plenty of FA resources before we were able to find Cook. As far as the backup, Ray Davis is no James Cook. He just isnt. I know we all love the feel good story of the up-and-comer, but he is not as talented as Cook. Speaking of Davis, we had a great backup to Thurman in Kenny Davis, but Kenny was no Thurman. One could even argue Ray is no Kenny. We'll see. I'm not saying Cook is anything close to OJ or Thurman, but he is far closer to them and their situations than our other options.

That's 90% of the team/NFL. The league doesnt even test for it anymore. Beyond that... A real shame for fans to start personally attacking/slandering the guy with no real evidence just because he's trying to maximize his one-time payout from the trillion dollar NFL.

As much as I hate Tom Brady, I appreciated him continuing to play as long as he did. Since he's 2 years older than me, as long as he was playing, I still had hope my pro career would take off...

Ok, but it wont be easy to fill his shoes. We'll spend more high picks and hope for the best.

3rd rd pick on Singletary, wasnt the guy. 3rd rd pick on Moss, wasnt the guy. FA money on Chris Ivory, Frank Gore Sr, TJ Yeldon, Latavius Murray... Trade and re-sign Nyheim Hines... None of them, NONE of them, are anything close to the playmaker Cook has proven to be. Not even current board favorite, Ray Davis (the backups are always the most popular guys). Getting a true playmaker at RB who can be a gamechanger and take it to the house on any given play is NOT an easy position to fill. Finding a guy who has that special ability and who can therefore take those dangerous carries out of Josh's hands and prolong his health is NOT an easy position to fill. We finally have that and everyone is ready to let him walk because of a few meaningless posts on social media. Absolutely insane.

I'd say it's working exactly as intended for both the teams and the players.

I gave way more examples than that. Namely, 2021, 2022, and 2023's drafts. I've even added the links now so you can see for yourself. And I'm sure if I went through more drafts, we wouldnt be surprised to see the talent fall off after the first 25 picks or so. And there is no guarantee that Jefferson/Josh works out like Diggs/Josh. Remember, Diggs was the savvy vet who provided some guidance to a young Josh. Much different when our development project QB now has to also coach up a rookie at WR. Could've happened, but success doesnt happen in a vacuum. It's very situational in the NFL. I'm not saying we always should. I'm just saying that doing so isnt crazy.

True, but it's not just about Elam and our worst busts. The reality of the situation is, there isnt (or at least hasnt been) talent available when we pick. Therefore, trading our 1st for a known quantity and high level talent shouldnt be seen aas a crazy idea. Ideally, sure, we hit on the pick and have a top talent for 4-5 very affordable years. But that talent hasnt even been there to hit on.

I'll look up the numbers for 2023 which is the only year all 4 were on the team, and for overall contracts. But before I do I'll assume the three of them added up still cost far less than Diggs on his own. But I'd also argue we got way more production out of Diggs than all 3 of them combined. Elam really sandbagging and helping my argument there haha. edit: 2023 Rousseau $1.7M Elam $1.3M Kincaid ~$1.5M Diggs like $25M lol So, I see the value in the 1st round picks, especially dollar-wise. But if those picks don't, won't, or can't produce then what's the point of saving the money? And again, it isnt even a GM problem. Look at those drafts again. There simply isnt anyone there that wouldve been a better pick even with the benefit of hindsight.

I get that. But the talent simply isnt there where we are picking in the 1st.

You could probably replace those names with all our own players we extended. I know that doesnt follow the exact path of your conversation, but it is relevant to the overall discussion of the Bengals FO/Mike Brown and how they build a team (od dont). To rewind the tape all the way back to the beginning, I think if the Bengals were an organization that, like the Bills, extends players early it changes everything. Assuming they did it the "right" way, they would already have Chase and Hendrickson re-signed. By having them re-signed early, they would have 1. likely saved some money, and 2. at least give the illusion of being proactive and having a plan. So that when they don't re-sign Higgins, instead of looking inept and like they are always playing catch up from a position of weakness, they could say "we have a lot of guys to pay, we paid all the guys in our plan, can't pay everyone". Then, with the money they're saving with early extensions and the money they are saving by being able to choose to not pay Higgins, they could take that and sign other FAs. It's just another perspective on why teams like the Bills and Eagles are doing it right, and teams like the Cowboys and Bengals are doing it wrong.

It's technically possible. It just isnt typical Mike Brown behavior. I think folks assume he stretched so far to get these deals done that he's done stretching. We'll see.