Dibs

I think it isn't necessarily must get killed.....but is very likely will get killed at some point. And not because they are a QB....but because they run. At the moment, our first 5 RBs are out with injury. RBs are regularly getting injured. It just stands to reason that if your QB takes off and runs like a RB regularly, then missing time due to injury is inevitable.....unless they have that rare ability(luck?) that some of the great RBs have had in avoiding injuries through their careers.

Assuming the figures quoted are correct(6 new years, $90M), this is a $15M/year offer. Considering that Suh's contract is over $19M/year, I can see why Dareus is vocally upset.

Yep.

He definitely can read....it just takes him longer than most, what with his slow eyes and all.

He could try deflating the balls a bit.

Will be interesting to see what Watkins, Woods and Harvin would do with those balls.

Wow!

Maybe Tasker needs glasses. First commentator whom I have actually been embarrassed for.

Yeah, it's not like 5 out of 6 1st round QBs don't pan out. What a massive screw up!

I don't think the reason that EJ is #3 this week is purely random. Likely there is definite reasons the coaches have for the ordering at the moment. Whether that is because they don't have much faith in EJ becoming the #1, or it is strategic to get the Cassel evaluation out of the way and have EJ training with the #1s leading into the more important preseason game & season won't be known by us till at least after next week(as you said).

This is fantastic news!

Huh? Are you being purposefully obtuse? We can prove that the outside temperature was not below a certain level.....and we can prove that the locker room was not above a certain level. Those two levels are nowhere near the amount needed for a natural change in the PSI....therefore we can prove that the difference in PSI was due to factors that are not related to temperature. Just because we cannot prove the precise temperature difference, this does not mean that we cannot prove that the temperature difference was not within the necessary range. As a scientist you should easily be able to understand this.

But do you disagree with what I wrote? "We can assume that if the temperature difference between the coldest feasible temperature and the hottest feasible temperature is nowhere near close enough to match the temperature difference needed to naturally explain the PSI changes.....then it would be beyond any reasonable doubt that the PSI drop did not occur due to natural temperature differences."

I think that's why Occum was trying to shave off those feathers.....to see if it was a horse or something underneath.

I believe that Occum attempted to shave that duck.

The flaw in your argument is that you seem to think that making assumptions is somehow unacceptable. They are definitely acceptable and are presented scientifically often in the court experts system. We can assume that if the temperature difference between the coldest feasible temperature and the hottest feasible temperature is nowhere near close enough to match the temperature difference needed to naturally explain the PSI changes.....then it would be beyond any reasonable doubt that the PSI drop did not occur due to natural temperature differences. Surely you couldn't argue with that? In my example there was no radar at all.

Nearly all evidence is circumstantial. Fingerprints, DNA, etc. Pretty much the only time something is direct evidence is when somebody actually witnesses the crime.

Aside from the fact that the temperature variance needed to explain the drop in Patriot PSI is well outside the reasonably predicted actual range.....all of the other damning evidence must be taken into account. It is not a stand alone presumption, it is additional information that points towards the bigger picture of cheating. If one is driving at the speed limit and another car speeds past you....one does not need to have the radar clocked time on the other car, nor have the 100% accurate speed that one is travelling to know that the other car was driving above the speed limit.

Go on then.....easily refute it.

It makes your views a little suspicious as it suggests that you might be somewhat of a fan of the Patriots, and therefore might potentially have your perceptions skewed due to emotional biases.....similar to the concept that a Bills fan potentially may be skewed the other way due to emotional biases against the Pats/Brady.

Any future number one pick was at best going to be a major question mark anyway, particularly if using it on QB. Even #1 overall QBs are usually major question marks after only one year in the league. You keep looking at things from your own insular perspective. You personally didn't rate EJ as a legit 1st round prospect prior to the draft so your view of what sound strategy is, is skewed. Imagine that you put in a tonne of effort in scouting a QB and you find one that you determine is of high potential and worthy of 1st round selection. After an up & down rookie season, do you start second guessing yourself? Of course you don't. You continue with your plan to build a winning team by stacking the roster with as much talent as you can. The receiver rich draft line of thinking is specious logic in regards to Watkins. Every draft there is usually 3-8 rare prospects that are considered to be elite. Watkins was one of these. Having extra very good WRs in the draft makes no difference to the concept that Watkins was the only elite WR prospect. Again, maybe you didn't personally consider him as such prior to the draft and your view is skewed from your personal viewpoint....but imagine, as the Bills and several other teams thought, that after all of your work in studying the prospects that you too believed that Watkins was the best prospect overall in the entire draft. Do you pass up getting him purely because there are several other good WR prospects? That would be like passing on Elway because you could get Tony Eason instead.

The Watkins pick actually makes perfect sense. When one drafts a QB in the 1st round one is hopeful that he will become a frachise calibre QB. This means that you don't look to waste the pick by seeking to replace him after one year(unless he shows himself to be a disaster). You might also want to draft a WR who theoretically will blossom at a similar time to your young QB(WRs traditionally coming on in their 3rd year). Assuming that EJ never pans out, it does not mean that Whaley's plan to build a team was bad.....for had his prime piece of the puzzle(QB) panned out, he would be sitting pretty with a WR like Watkins on the team.

Goddell however stated that Brady's cheating(and one assumes any premeditated and systematic cheating) should be looked at in the same way as PED usage....which typically gets a 4 game suspension for first offenders. He may have worded things as such in anticipation of the Brady law suit.....but one would truly hope that the NFL has decided to finally treat cheating with seriousness that it deserves. Ignoring the lenient history regarding cheating in US professional sports, there is zero sound logic that could stand against giving a harsh penalty, one that provides some sort of legitimate future deterrent, to those that are found to have premeditatedly broken the rules. When one combines the actual cheating with the circus that has followed due to Brady's noncompliance.....4 games is extremely lenient IMO.