TD_washingtonredskins

2 hours ago, TheDoyler23 said:

It’s been a while since the O’s and Nats were .500 or better for this matchup as both teams have been rebuilding. Nats aren’t a contender or anything yet, but they’re frisky. 

Yep. My son follows the Nats as his second team and I told him last year that I thought they were ahead of schedule. It would be VERY exciting if they could make some wild card noise into the late-summer this year. I think they are a 2025-and-beyond playoff contender. 

38 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Yeah, I don't get the "I missed a graduation so boo ****ing hoo" aspect of it.  

Do you think the people who had their college life disrupted during Vietnam protests during the 60s and 70s want to hear these millennials **** and moan???? *end sarcasm* 

When I started dating my wife (we are both on our second marriage), I wanted to pay for everything. She made/makes pretty good money, but it's more that I feel like the guy should take the girl out. There were times when she would treat (like if she took me out for my birthday) or she would have me over and make dinner and we'd have the wine or alcohol she had at her house. But, if we went out, I insisted on picking up the check or buying the tickets or whatever. 

Now that we are married we don't have any separation of finances. It all goes into joint accounts and flows out (sometimes just as fast, it seems). 

On 4/22/2024 at 7:20 PM, NickyJ said:

Broncos uniforms look more like UVA uniforms.

 

  Hide contents

 

Oooh, nice, blue and orange Chargers lightning bolts on the shoulders. Looks like the Broncos took some inspiration from Washington using Dallas's stars.

 

  Hide contents

 

The throwbacks are sweet (obviously) and the white jersey paired with orange pants are actually pretty cool. Everything else I could do without. 

Also, the part the screams "fiction" to me is the dramatic smoking scene under a tree. That feels like a scene pulled from Good Will Hunting more than something that would happen in real life. In actuality, if this happened, they would just go and talk in someone's office. 

16 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

Once I find someone annoying--it's very hard for me to get off that idea. They were incredibly condescending to anyone with a different opinion back in ~2014-17. They would deride anyone that disagreed with them, no matter how reasonable, with "you can think that, we'll just go on being right." They blocked me when they were ****ing about lineup choices and I posted an article from FanGraphs showing how meaningless batting order is over the course of a season. I also argued that players have preferences that make them more comfortable and productive. They got increasingly aggressive with their whole "we're on the radio so we're experts" grandstanding. They blocked me after throwing back at them the going on being right bit (Paulsen) and asking if they knew what batting splits were (Rouhier).

Wow, I had no idea. Yeah, that definitely seems ridiculous. I don't blame you for feeling the way that you do!

1 hour ago, Riggo#44 said:

I still listen to the Junkies mostly out of habit--but I don't take them seriously, especially when they talk about baseball. JP and Finlay are the best show on the station. Grant and Danny are atrocious--I stopped listening to them years ago. Every time I see or hear anything they say, it's dripping with unaware arrogance. They're both dumber than a bag of hammers, but think they're the smartest guys in the room. There is a reason Danny never made it as a comedian.

G&D don't bother me as much as they bother others. It's not that I think they are brilliant or anything, they aren't. But, I have never gotten the impression that they believe they are or are trying to be. They facilitate - interview people, give their "sport fan" opinions on the local teams, etc. Maybe that's why it's never bothered me...they seem to have the same level of knowledge that I do...

Sheehan has been my favorite in the area for a long time. He has generally held the same opinions as me, but he's much more informed and articulate than I am. 

On 3/12/2024 at 12:51 PM, @DCGoldPants said:

Driving around just now and jumping back and forth from 980 and 106.7, my biggest take away is this: if this franchise is going to get out of the gutter, the quality of the shows on these two stations need to do the same. These shows stink.

I don't tune in much, but I don't think the shows are all that bad. I've lived here for 40+ years and listened to sports radio for most of that time...I think Sheehan, Grant & Danny, Finley, etc. are all perfectly capable local sports guys. 

44 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

People also need to look at what they're spending money on and how ****ing good they have it.

 

Buzzette makes low 6 figures. I make about $70k after taxes. Definitely good money but not killing it either. We live IN a major metropolitan city. I've got a luxury vehicle less than 3 years old paid off. I own my harley. Gas isn't so ridiculous that it's preventing me from going somewhere. We really don't want for anything. We eat out 4-5 times a week. We have season tickets for the Orioles. We don't even bother asking each other if spending less than $5k or so.

 

A very large portion of America is doing great if they're being honest. They can afford their priorities. They just need to be honest about what their priorities actually are. 

 

Edit: and we are also able to still put significant amounts monthly into stock and 401k plans. So it's not like we're mortgaging the future.

That's fair and my wife and I aren't much different than that. A couple comments on this outlook though: 

1) I don't think this is representative of the entire country, so we too might risk being tone deaf, and

2) Doing all of these things today costs far more than it did just a few years ago and results in less money leftover. 

32 minutes ago, tshile said:

I agree peoples expectations are out of whack. I watch people buy a brand new iPhone pro max, then complain about financial struggles. 
 

one place I very much disagree with the liberals on is the notion of what is and isn’t fair when it comes to expectations about what you have in life. 
 

but in the context of the thread/subject of the discussion, generally it seems people vote how they feel. If they feel things are OK or better, they tend to vote to keep what we have. If they feel it’s worse than OK, they tend to vote for change. 
 

To me we have the republicans pushing negative outlooks and highlighting bad things, we have the Biden team that seems disconnected as we’ve discussed wondering why they can’t run victory laps, and we have a public that’s not very good at details or separating causality. All of this adds up to a bad situation for the Biden team. 
 

I still would prefer to think that as they unleash their war chest, and we get closer and Trump maybe gets in more trouble but at least is still in the news for numerous crimes, abortion… that the general public will reject Trump. I just have zero confidence, because on top of everything else it just never seems the traditional rules (of anything) apply to Trump…

I agree with you that too many people expect that they are entitled to too much even if they cannot afford it. That said, to me it's simply the comparison of what they could afford a few years ago vs. now. The same items (whether they were entitled to them or not) cost far too much compared to 3-5 years ago. 

3 hours ago, tshile said:

 

I personally, would prefer the Biden team stick to their real accomplishments, point out how the republicans are hampering the government and making it dysfunctional, and be more honest (or at least more connect to how people feel) when it comes to talking about average people’s lives. 
 

im also not a political strategist and one might look at me and think I’m an idiot for thinking that way 🤷‍♂️ 

 

This is a good post. It comes off as tone deaf and insulting to tell people who are experiencing a problem that your metrics tell you they are wrong. Take another aspect of life other than personal finance. If you went to your doctor and said you were vomiting 3x per day...it would frustrate the **** out of you if they ran a couple tests and sent you home feeling nuts telling you that their tests told you that you shouldn't be feeling sick. 

I love that the only context in that Tweet was the distance between Hawaii and The Vatican. 

hahahahhahahahhahaha what nuts. 

4 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

You guys keep saying China and he's going to post an 8 paragraph reply here soon. 

 

You've been warned. 

51 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

No.  (At least, not where I am).  

 

Yes, when you vote, your paper ballot has a serial number.  And the book you signed in, when you checked in, says that serial so-and-so was issued to you.  

 

So that, if your right to vote is challenged, your ballot can be withheld.  

 

But, before the ballots get counted, the piece with the serial number gets removed from the ballot.  

 

------

 

As I understand it, it's even better, with mail-in ballots.  

 

When you mail in your ballot, the envelope says it's my ballot.  And has my signature on the outside of the envelope.  

 

If somebody wants to claim that's not my signature, or I'm not really eligible to vote, they have to challenge it before they open the envelope.  Once all parties have decided not to challenge, then they open the envelope, and throw it out.  And now it's just "somebody's ballot".  

 

Aren't these all steps that require trust of humans NOT to break rules or protocol? If a group truly wanted to know how you voted, they could trace it back by not discarding the envelope or not separating the section with the serial number...

The same would be true online. Those elections and votes COULD be secure. Sure, if a group of bad actors wanted to go to great lengths to break rules and protocols to attach votes to people, I'm sure they could. 

That ScarJo impression was great!

Those are fantastic - I really wish those aired here. 

24 minutes ago, Simmsy said:

 

One is a protest vote, the other is a vote out of disgust of Donald Trump. Not the same thing.

 

 

I think they are a lot closer to the same thing than you think...not in all cases, but in many of them. There are plenty of Republican voters who will vote Republican in the GE but were protesting Trump in the primaries. 

5 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

Much of your post is inaccurate.  I'm going to deal with this part specifically.

 

A 1/3 of the party hasn't said they wouldn't vote for him.  In some states, 1/3 of the people that are voting in the Republican primary have voted against him.  Those states have mostly been open primaries where Democrats can show vote in a Republican primary.  Also, in any primary there are people that vote against a candidate that then vote for that candidate.  Having 1/3 of the voters in a primary like VA vote for the other candidate doesn't mean that a 1/3 of the party wouldn't vote for him.  It means that 1/3 of the people that voted in the Republican primary, which could include Democrats, didn't vote for him.  And of those who knows how many will vote for him in a GE when it is just him and Biden.

 

Halley winning a 1/3 of the vote in VA isn't an indication that 1/3 of the GOP voters won't vote for Trump in a GE any more than the fact that he didn't 50% of the vote in VA in 2016 was an indication that 50% of the GOP in VA wasn't going to vote for him in the GE.

 

Do you understand that?

Exactly. It's very similar to assuming that the 18-19% of Minnesota voters who chose "Uncommitted" are all not going to vote for Biden in November. Sure, a subset might stay home, a smaller subset might actually vote for Trump. But, most of those people will vote for Biden. 

That is the same on the Republican side (with different ratios). Some of those Haley voters will just not vote, some will vote for Biden, some might even vote for RFK or something...but many will vote for the Republican candidate. 

2 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

Nikki dropping out tomorrow. Which is weird, when you don't actually stand for anything, will anyone notice you are gone?

 

Also lol at GOPers who are happy that Garvey made it through. They all hate Schiff with a burning passion and he'll win 65% of the vote come November. They'd have been better off giving him a real challenger in Porter. 

That was a brilliant move on his part. Slimy and underhanded, but some good, old-fashioned politics. 

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I'm thinking wait to get another year of contract out of him.

Exactly. Maybe this new ownership group doesn't care since they have money? But, I don't see why they'd just recklessly give up a year of team control. 

1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

Is Jim Rome still on radio? I swear................................................................ I haven't........................................................................... heard his................................................. voice........................................................ in 15 years.. /Crumples paper.

 

John Thompson was amazing. He would randomly ask Doc Walker to explain, like, what a Linebacker does.

 

"Doc, you've been around football a long time. Those linebackers.....what are they doing?"

 

And then Doc would fail to explain it. I'm not sure John Thompson understood the rules to any sport besides basketball.

 

That was 90 percent of the show and then ten percent of the time, you would randomly hit something in Thompson's wheelhouse and suddenly he was giving a MLK speech but totally off the cuff.

This is a perfect explanation! The only thing that I'd add is his lead-up to to asking the question...

"Doc, I'm just Joe the Fan, so can you explain to me why teams usually pass the ball when they need more yards? I've seen long runs before...why wouldn't teams just do a long run so there's no risk of an interception?" 

The "Joe the Fan" thing used to crack my friends and me up! 

2 hours ago, Spearfeather said:

 

Yep. And almost all these sub-eras fall under one era. The Snyder era. Starting this off-season everything,  and I do mean pretty much everything associated with him will finally be finished. ( I digress but hopefully that means our brand too. We need something different not associated totally and solely with him, that doesn't ignore our history, but instead has some sort of connection and incorperates what we were for over eight decades, with what we are going to be from now on.)

 

The Snyder era will officially be over.

 

 

Agreed! I really hope the house is completely cleaned and they rebrand completely as well. It would be great if they found a uniform/name concept that harkens back to their roots. 

On 12/31/2023 at 3:59 PM, Spearfeather said:

      

                                      vs.

 

 

      

 

Prescott is currently second in the league in passing yards, with 32 TD's and only nine Int's.

 

Our offense is bad. Our defense is terrible.

 

Could be and hopefully, an end of an era.

 

 

 

It's pretty sad. I know that we all have seen this coming for a while now, but how many eras has this organization had since it has been any good? The Norv Era. The Marty Era. The Spurrier Era. The Gibbs 2.0 Era. The Zorn Era. The Shanahan Pre-RG3 Era. The Shanahan w/RG3 Era. The Gruden Era. The Rivera Era. Christ on a Cracker...that's even ignoring Richie's one year simply because we were at least caught with our pants down and had many of the same players. 

I really hope Harris can stabilize things. 

Oh, Dallas will win, but not as big as most people expect. I hope Rivera does something stupid and is fired the very next day. 

17 hours ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

No politics here. I’d edit that comment, Sic.

 

The dream of a Top 5 pick dies.

 

Sam gets benched at halftime and Jacoby leads us to a comeback win. The win pushes us out of the Top 5.

 

Ron’s Revenge 13

Jets 9

I don't think RR will bench Howell again. 

2 hours ago, ixcuincle said:

10 am ice cream and cookies 

Good thing you have your cookbook out for that dish. 

24 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

What on earth has Ron done to earn any role here beyond, Jan. 7/8?

 

He will get fired and get his money, since coach’s contracts are guaranteed. He will then enjoy retirement on a golf course in California. Maybe gets a tv or radio gig in the future. I can see him on SiriusXM radio in the future.

 

Josh will make a clean break from anything Dan.

Agreed. Outside of seemingly being a wonderful human being, Ron Rivera has shown absolutely nothing football-wise to be given any considerations by the new ownership group. He's making tons of money to be one of the more disappointing coaches/front office hires in quite some time.