Hoss

You answered your first gripe with your second statement. There aren't great stats. But some are better than others. Yards, touchdowns, interceptions are better gauges than attempts and even passer rating for me. That was my entire point (and that's why I made sure to type half an essay when explaining my stance on yards). There are exceptions to every statistic. Most statistics are just numbers with no context or meaning. Chances are, when we got heated in discussion, I said he was far above average. He's not far above it. He's average or, at best, JUST above it. This whole thing started when I defended Tannehill after Bills fans continuously laughed or "picked on" his play. I was arguing that he's a starter you're comfortable with in this league and isn't a joke in line with guys like Sanchez, EJ, etc. He's probably not going to lead you to a Super Bowl with almost himself playing well, but he's definitely good enough to give you a chance to win any game when surrounded with a good roster. There are very few guys in this league that will outright win you games more than once or twice a year.

QBR is also a "meh" stat. Neither are good gauges of the QB position (do we really think Tyrod Taylor is better than or has played better than Aaron Rodgers all season? Passer rating thinks so, and QBR has them close). Sample size also comes into play when considering Manuel who has only played in a few games. This is really a worthless discussion since Manuel will likely never start a game at QB without injuries to the starter and Tannehill will be starting for the next few years at least. But it's worth discussing find a good way to judge QBs. When looking at basic statistics I generally look for the stats that have the best guys at the top and the worst at the bottom. Lately it's been yards per game that has done a good job of separating them. It's extremely basic thinking, but if you don't want to take a deep dive into advanced stats you can put your mind more around why they might have more yards per game. A lot of it has to do with the fact that their teams trust them in every situation and will have a playbook designed to let them make the plays. It's not indicative of who is better, but it is pretty indicative of who has played better. It also won't give you anything conclusive without looking at other stats and watching games, but it's a start.

News organizations follow your standard of not warning prior to spoilers.

You're better than that. ;)

I agree with everything except the part where you said he isn't a lot better than EJ. He's leaps and bounds better than EJ.

Looks like his center is the only one with any meaningful trolling today.

This one will give you an obvious hint to as who he was (I haven't seen it, but I saw a ton of plot in the leaked Sony emails). They could also make it so ALL Bonds have been different people and the only reason their past is so mysterious is because they've been essentially brainwashed and disconnected from any reality of their own. It would explain the dead parents storyline because it's easy to appease somebody who wants to know about their parents if you say they died in a crash. I'm also fine if they're all one guy. I just kind of like a few different storylines they could go with.

Lupita Nyong'o. She plays Maz Kanata.

Today was a good day for these guys...

I hadn't heard Hardy before, but I also love that idea. It'll be interesting to see if they just go on with what they've been doing or go for a newer Bond. Craig could also do another movie, but I would prefer if they moved on after he admitted he hated doing it. If they do another one I think they should kill him at the end or have him retire and then reveal that Bond is now going to become a persona filled by different special agents in the future. I just like the idea of "Bond" being a nameless and faceless force.

They'll have to get into the franchise with somebody else now. He appears to have done his final movie. I'll be interested in the next choice. I think Idris Elba could absolutely do an awesome Bond (he's got all the qualities). But I don't see it happening.

That's what I would expect and want. It won't happen, though. This is that scene in the movie where the cops seemingly catch the murder, but then the murderer pulls out his badge. Except replace murderer with "financial threat lobber."

A threat is a threat is a threat. Especially when vague. "We've got something for him" is a ridiculous comment coming from anybody. The response if the official BLM group were to say that would be pandemonium. Even if they followed up, as the Union leader did, with a hint at it being something monetary. I'd assume it's a boycott or a call for one, but it's vague enough to leave plenty of options. Are they going to seize his bank accounts for some reason?

1. Understood on the first point, but it's still a direct threat. Threats don't have to be violent in nature to be uncalled for or wrong. BLM probably couldn't boycott much since police get paid whether they're killing or protecting the public. But the point still remains. This type of threat from another group would be considered felonious. 2. Not protected of free speech in general, but they would definitely get involved if somebody was lawfully exercising their right to free speech and was being infringed upon in an unlawful way. Regardless, they're propped up as protector of that right and more when people complain. I'd be rich if I had a penny for every time I saw/heard somebody say "The police risk their lives so you can execute your right to free speech/right to post that/right to whatever." Also - funny on the sarcasm. :thumbsup: 3. Seems to be there's a net cast around that line in the minds of police. They can cross it as much as they want as long as they don't get too far or too on-camera. And yes, that is alarming. I read that aloud to my colleagues and they all laughed it off but still added it's a scary thought if indicative of others.

I'm for embellishment and against diving.

I have no problem with embellishment of actually penalties. If somebody gives you a high stick go down. It's basically just a way to make sure the ref sees the illegal play the opponent just made. With that said, the Bruins aren't doing that above. What they're doing is lame.

:huh: :rolleyes: What they're doing is pathetic, but you got lost somewhere on this. And I'm sure diving isn't a new concept.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-police-union-pissed-at-quentin-tarantino-has-a-surprise-in-store-for-him-vgtrn-591 The largest police union in the country essentially threatened Quentin Tarantino because he recently spoke at an anti police brutality event. Some good points I thought of immediately and a few I saw others mention: 1. Imagine if the police union was holding an event and a Black Lives Matter leader said "we've got something coming for them." It'd be a national story and police everywhere would go nuts. 2. I don't want to here that police are protectors of free speech again if this is how the police union's leaders feel. 3. Shouldn't police be anti police brutality, too?

While I'm with We've here that's very strangely worded. Who is "him?" Kane or Buff? I'm assuming Buff demanded "me or him" type of ultimatum, but I can't be sure. If he did go "me or him" it's childish and selfish. It gets even worse if Buff walks in free agency. Forcing your GM to move a player and then walking anyways? Leadership.

I have both Michael Crabtree and Sammy Watkins on my bench in fantasy football right now. They both have 22 points. Luckily the three WRs (two WRs and a FLEX) in my lineup had solid days. Allen Robinson (12), Amari Cooper (14) and Randall Cobb (15) in the lineup.

Since we now know the Bills have two very good running backs anybody willing to bet against them drafting one in the first round? I know I'm not.

Tossing on the safety blanket, eh? He had a strong day today. Didn't get any help from his coach or defense, though.

Karlos is a monster

I take that back.

Saw that hold on Suh live and was shocked it wasn't called. You won't see a more obvious holding in this league. But thanks, Zebras. ;)