colin

he's the goat of all time. also, they need to have him sling the ball more than what we did in the first half. w the oline, tes, rbs, and seemingly almost serviceable wrs now, we don't need teh small ball anym

im banging this drum, but i think it's right. i really am convinced that we have our d with too many reads and too much inter dependence. we have heard time and time again no d uses more pre snap communication that ours does. it just makes it too easy to break our integrity and it means teams, especially teams like baltimore, have too easy a time finding things that work. the bishop late blitz play was because the snapped the ball super quick, since they knew we were disguising out intent. we need more of a comprehensive and cohesive idea so we can play fast, but i think our coaches go the other way to make it too complicated with too many reads. i remember reading about rex ryan's d being so multiple and hard to run only certain players can run it properly. well, last year and every playoffs since the 2021 season our d has been worse that what that one was for us, there needs to be a way to run the d without analysis paralysis.

Insane heart and effort, coaches need to get it in gear, some shat calls

Players on d are making awful mistakes, but they are also making the odd play and showing effort. There has got to be a scheme where an NFL d with the same players ours has doesn't just let Henry run all day without being touched. I think the scheme/coaching has players over thinking and making to many inter dependant adjustments and it means they play tentatively. The gm could be a whole lot better, but this head coach is Marvin Lewis with Allen instead of Dalton. Every coordinator is a lick spittle, some first year unproven nerd until he gets hired away.

Really smart play calls on these two pointers.

This team need a new GM and that new GM better bring in winners for coaches. Clapper and his 2nd and 3rd year coordinators is just sad.

Our wrs blow, but this Ravens team is constantly getting away with physical fouls and no flags. Hamilton is another in a long line of big talented and super dirty afc North safeties

How have the dirtiest NFL team, the ravens, not gotten flagged?

Well, a couple good plays to start, and then constant and continuous breakdowns leading to an easy walk td. That third down blitz call was ######ed, and then such a simple screen with blockers on guys late to fill in. This team is not prepared to play tonight, certainly not on d.

The big failure on d is simple execution and being predictable. All the big plays have been Henry running off tackle on the right side, or Jackson reading the left end on a zone read. Basic college and even highschool stuff. They should know how to fix this, but they just might not have the horses

Well, that was some excitement!

It's our worst match up, and the bills almost always play their worst games early, but it still stings to see this so far. It's always some guy making a mistake w the ball on O, and just getting whip sawed on d

Dang, that coulda been our miracle turnover

The o is pressing and trying to be too cute. The d is just outmatched. Trash so far

In terms of skill set and ability, Parsons suits Green Bay about as much as a player can suit a team. He's exactly what they need, even more than Garrett was what we needed this off-season. But the cost of this was so insane I still think it won't work out for Green Bay. If they do get over and win a chip this year, then it's all worth it, but w Detroit and Minnesota in their divisions, and the rams, Washington and Philly ia d the Rams n their conference, and the monsters in the AFC, GB could be every part of a chip team this season and still not won it, and then they have no picks and guys start walking and they are in cap jail. To me, the formula that works best is the one the rams Philly and KC have, where you start w a great coach and top level QB (hurts stretches that, but they had wentz and a recent chip and still went for hurts, so they realized there was a min level of QB) and you add stars in important places around them, but that can only be done sustainability w some really good drafting. Dicky j was right, it is hard to win in the NFL

If you can find a woman who doesn't chuckle at men talking in a serious time about big slots and tight ends and a penetration based d, she's prolly either a coaches daughter or doesn't speak English as her first language. My wife chortles and smirks at me every time the announcer says anything like that.

he looked to me like he always did. really athletic and capable of playing well when driving forward, just entirely lost when he has to turn around or use any technique. he never got better after we drafted him, that's not a good sign.

Ricard and Likely have really done damage to us, as has henry. ravens in 11 formations and the bills having some outside and side athletes to block (coleman, knox and kinkaid, not to mention when we go heavy jumbo, or palmer on the other side) could be why we win this game. the ravens have not been good vs TEs or backs in the passing game. that would be the only other thing (aside from deep ball success, but i don't think we have the horses for that) that we need to add to this O.

I won't out collusion of some kind beyond anyone in the NFL, but I don't think this (or kap) is a case of a vast conspiracy. No matter what shenanigans may have happened behind the scenes, all players are evaluated on a cost benefit basis. What's the player cost, in terms of money and picks and all the B's he brings, and what benefits does he bring to a team, which is 95% scheme fit and talent. Sanders just doesn't have the benefits to beat out his costs IMO. He looks a bit like a less feeble Josh Rosen to me. Skilled, polished, knows his craft, but just lacks any elite traits to deliver high level play. I could be wrong, and he might be another brady or kurt warner, but he's not fast, big, strong, or a rocket armed guy. So I don't think the NFL are perfect or even good in most things at all, but in this case I think Occam's razor tells me that sanders wrote checks his talent couldn't cash

I like the very tough early test. Even tho we've been bounced vs KC in the post season so much, I think our worst match ups are cinci and Baltimore (you can throw in Philly, the only team Allen has never beaten). We have the suspensions and whatever injuries, but this season will come down to our new look defense. Good test out the gate!

You and your friend seem to be pretty impressed with yourselves, but this is pretty well treaded ground. Economic scarcity and IP have had a lot written about them, and it is very different from communal property, and way way different than slavery. You might want to read something on the topic.

Not at all, you are missing a simple point entirely. Firstly, you just claim it's theft, the argument I described is that it's not. Information is simply not economically scarce. There is no finite element to the supply of information. Your assumption is that watching in a stream lowers the revenue of the producer of the content. That is only true if the person watching the stream would have other wise payed the full price to watch it. If I'm willing to pay one dollar for a bills game broadcast, and they charge 10, they don't lose 10 if I watch it for free (be it via a bootleg stream or by me staring through my neighbor's window) because I would not have chosen to pay them that price anyhow. Producer surplus does not exist without a paying customer. If a person is willing to watch a game for free, say as background noise, but otherwise would never bother, then the NFL (or broadcaster or whoever) loses nothing because of the stream. Intellectual property rights are different from all other property rights, and in fact they violate other property rights in their enforcement. I own my phone, I pay a telecom provider for their spectrum (which they lease from the government who on paper works for me as a taxpayer) and enforcing the NFL broadcast monopoly violated my personal rights to use my phone (which is economically scarce) how I want. Your examples about big business being greedy, or that retail loss is covered by insurance, are quite separate from my argument. The point of the thought experiment is to determine at what point does one violate someone else's (in this the IP owner) property rights. Is me singing a Taylor Swift song stealing from her? What if my daughter likes my version as much as Taylor's so she doesn't go out and buy or stream the song, which means less revenue for Taylor Swift? There were laws against lending compact discs when they were new because the record companies were worried people could make really good copies and just not buy their own. I think those might have eventually been struck down (John's stossel had some shows about this stuff a while back). Einstein is claiming a bootleg stream is theft, my question is why? At what point is not paying for intellectual property theft, and at what point is it not?

At first I thought this was about Adrian Peterson. I was like cot dang this guy is having a rough post retirement life.

There is a very meaningful distinction (economically and possibly morally) between shoplifting and watching streamed stuff without paying the going rate. Goods at Walmart (or anywhere) are economically scarce -- for you to have them someone else must in principle not have them. Information is not economically scarce, if I know (or watch something) no one else will lose that knowledge because of my streaming (or playing a song, reading a pay wall article, etc). Now, of your morality is strictly inline with the legal code, then it's definitely illegal, so by that code it's wrong. Things like my TV and even Napster when it first came out are much more gray. There were cases and arguments and so on where sharing on Napster was not illegal, or at least not punishable at some point, for example. You also have a nearly perfectly segregated market -- prices in Europe or Canada are a small fraction of what they are here in America. You will see a similar thing with soccer but I'm reverse -- way cheaper here for say Italian league seasons pass vs in Italy or Europe in general. A further complicating factor is that the NFL is not a free enterprise but a regulated trust. They have a special status existing as an exception to anti trust laws, so some people feel the law should not be how it is, and the current practices in streaming and black outs (in the past at least) are not legal in a correct interpretation of the law. From a libertarian/pure free market point of view it's no clearer. Information ownership requires government intervention to enforce IP laws. If your morality is at least in part based on a libertarian view of fairness (and in fact many Americans poll strongly along these lines) then you will see these IP laws, or at least the case of the NFLs current implementation of it, as wrong. For physical goods (and some services) there is a rule that "the lowest price is the law" where it is in at least some cases illegal to charge one person more for something than you would charge another. Limited offers, sales, and so on often get around this, but it is still a thing. It's complicated, but here is a little thought experiment -- if it's wrong to watch streamed content on a bootleg stream, is it wrong to watch the same content at your friend's house? What if he's a paying official stream customer? How about using his login when he's not using it? How about watching it through the window of a bar? Would it be wrong to cover a song you heard on the radio and record it? Would it be wrong to sing a Taylor Swift song with your daughter and record it (many do this on tik tok and such)?

The new coaches they brought in make me think McDermott is making changes within his scheme. I know baby babich is the DC, but unless I see something entirely different in a more than occasional basis, I'm saying this d is still McD's