Billionaires aren't noted for folding... I won't make any guesses, nor will I play chicken littleWhat is your quess of how many pro sports franchises (from any sport) will fold before all this is over with? And you're not going to be packing stadiums anytime soon.
I'm thinking a lot of casual fans have found other things to do during this mess. I know I have. If the NFL goes under, I'm not sure I'll miss it.You never know. Pro sports is going to lose an incredible amount of money this year, and possibly next year as well, how they recover from that might be the dreaded "reorganization" effect. Owners aren't going to bleed money forever.
Probably still don’t know, but taking a stab at explaining what I was thinking.What are you talking about?
Nah... I couldn't care less about that Dallas drama. Brady/Gronk...Have I moved up from an “F”? To a “D” at least?
We're upset enough as it is for what we got, but reducing it to just a 4th... I mean, I thought we were friends.In my reference to Hopkins, I left out key information leading to I don’t understand IMO, why Hopkins was traded for so little in return. I still hope Johnson and picks are worth it.
How is it that you don't think you'll be in that predicament any way with Dak? They already have shown that they really don't want to pay him and he could potentially walk. That is actually your best case scenario at this point. If they pay Dak, they'll be making a foolish decision. He won't be worth anywhere near what the Cowboys will be forced to pay him. They could have traded him and landed Brady for likely two years and had a combo of Gronk/Witten. Instead they're stuck in the same negotiation stalemate with a QB that couldn't even win them the division last year in the worst division in football where the other 3 teams begged them to take it. I don't even dislike Dak, but he isn't anything special. QB's are way overpaid in this league and even elite QB's won't be worth $40 plus million a season.Probably still don’t know, but taking a stab at explaining what I was thinking.
I didn’t think it would be easy, as Tex had indicated routinely, for another team to give up a 1st round pick for a QBs, and I questioned why to take Dak and his contract expectations. Personally, I wasn’t warm about acquiring Brady/Gronk deal because in another year maybe 2 we would be back to square one in needing a QB.
In my reference to Hopkins, I left out key information leading to I don’t understand IMO, why Hopkins was traded for so little in return. I still hope Johnson and picks are worth it.
Have I moved up from an “F”? To a “D” at least?
I still don't understand these new onside kick rules.The owners will vote on this Thursday.
Onside kick alternative changed, now an untimed down
Posted by Michael David Smith on May 27, 2020, 9:36 AM EDT
The “fourth-and-15” alternative to the onside kick has been tweaked in advance of tomorrow’s vote by NFL owners.
The biggest change to the rules proposal is that it will now be an untimed down. The initial proposal put forward was for the clock to start on the snap and run as it would on a normal play. But as we’ve previously noted, that would give a team that takes a lead with a few seconds remaining an easy way to run the last few seconds off the clock: Have the quarterback scramble around and then throw the ball deep, like Patrick Mahomes did on the last play of the Super Bowl. As an untimed down, that’s no longer an option.
Changing the play to an untimed down makes it more exciting regardless of who’s winning: It both prevents leading teams from using it to run the rest of the time off the clock, and also gives trailing teams more time to mount a comeback. Under the current rules, a team that scores a touchdown to make it a one-possession game with 0:01 remaining on the clock has no chance, because an onside kick would use that last second. With the untimed onside kick alternative, that team would have a chance.
Other tweaks to the rules proposal include a clarification that the fourth-and-15 play can be used in regulation only, not in overtime. And a team that initially declares its intention to use the onside kick alternative can change its mind and kick off, but only if it calls timeout first.
So a young stud like Peterson in the physical prime of his life is included in that dreaded preexisting category.Patrick Peterson’s diabetes gives him different perspective on COVID-19
Posted by Darin Gantt on May 29, 2020, 6:06 AM EDT
Yes. Most cardiovascular disease involves the immune system. Diabetes type II is now well-established to be an immune disease..........an autoimmune disease.So a young stud like Peterson in the physical prime of his life is included in that dreaded preexisting category.
And also as I understand it a cardiovascular disease covers a whole lot of territory including heart attacks and strokes ?
So therefor guess that means anybody who has a heart attack or stroke in his or her medical history is included in that preexisting category re COVID-19 exposure ?