Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/22/2018 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    You didn’t keep the receipt?
  2. 3 points
    That's exactly my point as well. You KNOW if we traded Coleman we wouldn't get jack squat for him, so what would be the point? Corey still has vast potential, despite never coming close to realizing it. The pieces are definitely in place for him to have a breakout season, and I hope he takes advantage of them all. As I've said before, we have to figure out ways to get Corey the ball in space. Too many times he had to dive for the ball across the middle, or slow down, or jump...whatever. I want to see him catch some passes in stride and get some YAC. It's what he did so well in college, and I firmly believe that translates to the pros. Don't forget, Corey had multiple terrific catches, especially in the middle, where he had to dive low to make the grab. We obviously remember the 2 awful, inexplicable drops (the TD against the Bengals, and obviously the last game versus Steelers), but the guy was generally the only WR on the team who made tough catches. Suffice to say, Kizer didn't do the guy too many favors. Todd Haley specializes in short passes that maximize yards, and Corey just might have a resurrection because of our new OC.
  3. 2 points
    Stuart These days everybody leans right to wrong.
  4. 2 points
    This is Bull S**t. Let those expansion suckers wait for 20 years or so to make it. 1999 Browns = Super Bowl.
  5. 1 point
    The Hill: Senate panel overwhelmingly approves amendment blocking Trump on ZTE "The Senate Banking Committee approved an amendment in an overwhelming and bipartisan 23-2 vote that would block Trump from easing sanctions on ZTE without first certifying to Congress that the company is complying with U.S. law... ...The Department of Commerce barred U.S. businesses from selling to ZTE last month after it found that the company had lied to investigators looking into its business with Iran and North Korea. The ban crippled ZTE, which is heavily reliant on U.S. suppliers, and forced the company to shutter its operations earlier this month. ZTE and Huawei, another Chinese firm, have been the subject of intense scrutiny from the U.S. government. A 2012 report from Congress warned that the companies' technology could be used by the Chinese government to conduct surveillance on the U.S." ---------- What I bolded is the operative phrase that you are missing in your argument. ZTE and Huawei weren't sanctioned as part of the on going trade war with China, they were sanctioned because they were doing an end-around of US sanctions of North Korea and Iran while lying to the US about it, and also using their technology to spy on the US for the Chinese government. So, Rubio and the others are saying that the Senate won't lift lift sanctions or ratify any economic treaty with China over ZTE until they comply with US laws; which, according to Article II of the Constitution, is within the Senate's perview to do: "[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..." - Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, of the United States Constitution
  6. 1 point
    Okay we know that JB was kind of worked up about this, but take a deep breath and think about it. Yhe same people who scream about raising tariffs on the Chinese Goods assumedly to help balance the playing field are the same ones who are now having a fit about an olive branch Trump gave to the Chinese. Now you don't care about the trade War? Or just more interested in stirring up trouble? GOP Sen. Marco Rubio threatens 'veto-proof congressional action' to check Trump's move to save Chinese telecom company ZTE https://search.app.goo.gl/kF2zk Shared from my Google feed WSS
  7. 1 point
    Hamilton oh yeah, got pulled over there around 1972....the local cops didn't appreciate my 1969 Camaro Z-28 with headers. Gave me two choices put mufflers on it or leave Canada, I put mufflers on to finish up my vacation there. Yeah not Vegas but a nice place, good beer!
  8. 1 point
    I wish I'd known about that when I bought mine. I probably paid too much at the mall. WSS
  9. 1 point
    Cal, Christians =\= loons Mike Pence level of “evangelical Catholicism” (his words) = loon Religion =\= race. You can’t choose your race. You can dislike Islam while not having some issue with people who are Arabic. Also, Hillary and Trump can both be trash. It isn’t mutually exclusive. She should be in a cage. That doesn’t mean Trump is a good President or human being.
  10. 1 point
    Ok, well your personal analysis aside, most NFL evaluators have him rated as an average starting corner and an NFL team just traded for him and they'll plan to stick him right in the starting lineup. We're fortunate to have been able to upgrade the position this offseason and find guys that work for our defense, glad Taylor found a spot where he'll still be contributing on Sundays. Zombo
  11. 1 point
    But, after he gets speech therapy:
  12. 1 point
  13. 1 point
    Taylor was a stopgap. He had enough talent to start. We flipped 7th rounders to get him and signed him to a stopgap contract. We got him when Sashi Brown was GM and Ray Horton was DC. Two years later, Dorsey has been able to get the kind of corners Williams wants ... press corners. We brought in 3 free agent corners and drafted two ... one with the #4 pick overall, so Williams has his press corners and Taylor can move to a situation that fits him better. We're growing, we're getting better. We're building an actual "team" where the parts fit together. But Taylor wasn't a shitty CB, he's a good NFL corner who no longer fits what we are doing in Cleveland. Thank you for your service. He gave 100% two years in a row on a shitty team, I wish him well with the Cards. Zombo
  14. 1 point
    I'm trying desperately to give him the benefit of the doubt....don't distract me....
  15. 1 point
  16. 1 point
    1981 Superbowl after the 1980 season.
  17. 1 point
    Yeah I have no idea why BLM would exist when it is clear that racism is a thing of the pa....
  18. 1 point
    Famous tickets "on the front row" from Bob Uecker, former major league baseball player.
  19. 1 point
    Finally an explanation of deep state belief and other conspiracies. https://cosmosmagazine.com/society/religion-and-delusion-determine-fake-news-belief
  20. 1 point
    "Coons"? "Yard apes"? Easy there, George Wallace.
  21. 1 point
    Stuart LOL, If only Woodley could see my post debunking those reasons of his...the little sissy has me on ignore. Then there is this: https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/03/17/snopes-blows-fact-checking-crime-prevention-research-center/
  22. 1 point
    Yeah, Mirage is high on my list although Wynn takes the cake in terms of quality. The best experience I've had by far though was in Lagasse's stadium at the Palazzo. Sounds crazy at first, but we got private recliner seats and the area is stadium style seating with the typical myriad of screens setup. The reserved seats also come with a private (not high roller) area with craps & blackjack, so free booze (and good booze at that). It was during an OSU game and I can safely say I haven't had that was an amazing evening.
  23. 1 point
    Great show.. Markie Post was HOT!
  24. 1 point
    Stuart Sigh. Let me guess...Think Progress. You got that shitt straight out of Think Progress right Woodley? Defamation suit On April 10, 2006, John Lott filed suit[48] for defamation against Steven Levitt and HarperCollins Publishers over the book Freakonomics and against Levitt over a series of emails to John McCall. In the book Freakonomics, Levitt and coauthor Stephen J. Dubner claimed that the results of Lott's research in More Guns, Less Crime had not been replicated by other academics. In the emails to economist John McCall, who had pointed to a number of papers in different academic publications that had replicated Lott's work, Levitt wrote that the work by several authors supporting Lott in a special 2001 issue of the Journal of Law and Economics had not been peer reviewed, Lott had paid the University of Chicago Press to publish the papers, and that papers with results opposite of Lott's had been blocked from publication in that issue.[49] A federal judge found that Levitt's replication claim in Freakonomics was not defamation but found merit in Lott's complaint over the email claims.[50] Levitt settled the second defamation claim by admitting in a letter to John McCall that he himself was a peer reviewer in the 2001 issue of the Journal of Law and Economics, that Lott had not engaged in bribery (paying for extra costs of printing and postage for a conference issue is customary), and that he knew that "scholars with varying opinions" (including Levitt himself) had been invited to participate.[51][52] The Chronicle of Higher Education characterized Levitt's letter as offering "a doozy of a concession."[53][/B] The dismissal of the first half of Lott's suit was unanimously upheld by The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on February 11, 2009.[54] Charges that gun makers or the NRA have paid for Lott's research In 1996 when Lott's research first received media attention, Charles Schumer wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "The Associated Press reports that Prof. Lott's fellowship at the University of Chicago is funded by the Olin Foundation, which is 'associated with the Olin Corporation,' one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers. Maybe that's a coincidence, too. But it's also a fact."[55]Olin Foundation head William E. Simon strongly denied Schumer's claims in a reply letter in which he stated that: Olin Foundation was funded by the personal estate of the late John M. Olin independently of Olin Corp. Like all candidates, Lott was selected to receive his Olin Fellowship by the faculty of the university, not by Olin Foundation and certainly not by Olin Corp.[56][57] In a debate on Piers Morgan Tonight on July 23, 2012, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz claimed: "This is junk science at its worst. Paid for and financed by the National Rifle Association." Lott countered: "The NRA hasn't paid for my research." Dershowitz continued: "Your conclusions are paid for and financed—The National Rifle Association—only funds research that will lead to these conclusions."[58][59] Separately both Lott and the NRA have denied NRA funding of Lott's research So Woodley, Lotts research paid for by the NRA just because Think Progress and Dershowitz says so?...
  25. 1 point
    The guy is such a freak athlete. I'm sure he'll start making highlight reels soon enough. Seems like he's got his head on straight, and he works hard. Didn't really matter what team he went to because I knew he wasn't going to the Browns. I'd simply like to see him do well. He's one of the most exciting players I've ever seen.
  26. 1 point
    You sound good. Never would have imagined you having a speech impediment.
  27. 1 point
    I'd say Higgins and Louis are cuts. Coleman is a trade and if no takers a cut unless he shows up huge in camp.
  28. 1 point
    I agree with both of these statements. I don't think Dorsey is high at all on Coleman, based on one of his interviews when he said he expects that Coleman will have a big year this year - in a sense like, He BETTER have a big year. But I also don't think he's just gonna kick him to the curb to a team who offers a 5th rounder or something. Our passing attack has been bad. Anybody that might help it is required on deck this preseason.
  29. 1 point
    Uh JG is also a wrong move away from a permanent suspension.
  30. 1 point
    Dorsey didn’t draft Coleman so he could be the odd man out , wouldn’t be surprised if he’s traded before the first game
  31. 1 point
    The mobetta the weapons the harder it is to cover them all. This group has that potential for sure.
  32. 1 point
    I supported him...and his injuries...but when you LOSE us a game against the steelers then you go straight to my doghouse. He and Hue are BOTH in there (and RG3). 1st and goal, in OT, on the steelers one yard line....and you call a bubble screen...and we lose. And last year, STANDING...not running or nothin', ALL ALONE, not covered...and you drop a 4th down pass at the steeler eleven, and we lose. - Not against the Tennessee Tuxedos, or the Panthers or something...no, THE STEELERS. That's ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK of the doghouse.
  33. 1 point
    Not to mention all of Motely,, and Ozzie
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00