• Blog Entries

    • By TK in ES Coverage
         1
      In today's Divisional Debacle, the Defense under Greg Manusky in the first half, gave up 207 yards of offense (105 rushing/102 passing) and two touchdowns.  That said, they did manage a single INT on which the Offense actually managed to score a touchdown off of. They allowed 12 of 16 passes to be completed . 
       
      In the second half it was 107 yards given up (58 rushing//49 passing) a field goal and a touchdown. They traded their first half pick for a second half sack. However, Dallas completed all five of their pass attempts. 
       
      Don't read that thinking "Well it seems like they tightened up some in the 2nd half."  They didn't. They simply had about half the plays in the second half. 30 plays in the First and 18 in the Second.
       
      So far in two Divisional matchups, the Defense has faltered in the Second half. They start out like a house of fire for the first few drives until their opponents gradually make adjustments. This Defensive coaching staff fails make any adjustments, whether in game or at the very least at Halftime. They've given up over 30 points per game for a total of 63 points given up in two games. While the Bears are up next, the Pats await and they've put up over 70 points in two games. Yeah. Ok. They did shut out the Dolphins today which is looking like the NFL version of ... ahem... shooting fish in a barrel. 
       
      The frustrating thing is Manusky is the DC that the Front Office actively looked to replace during the off season without firing him. When you know they're looking to replace you, most people would make a concentrated effort to show an improvement. Yet Manusky's Defense still keeps acting like it's starring in Groundhog Day.
       
      In his post game presser, when asked directly about if any coaching changes would be made, Gruden said "No, I think after two games – you’re talking about playing two very good offensive football teams and two of the best offensive lines in pro football we just played back-to-back. That’s no excuse whatsoever, but I don’t think we need to hit the panic button yet. We just have to continue to focus on what we can do better to win. Get Jonathan [Allen] in here, get a couple of our corners back in here and let’s go back and strap it up against Chicago [Bears] next week and see what happens.” 
       
      Here's another frustrating thing. The defensive communication was an issue last season as well. Wasn't this supposed to have been worked on during OTA's and Training Camp? It's understandable that the rookies would still be on a learning curve, but NFL vets like Collins and DRC you'd think they would have down by the start of the season. 
       
      Gruden said they're a very talented group on Defense but that they weren't reaching them. When questioned as to why the coaching staff that has been in place for several years, wasn't reaching them, he defended the comment as them being a young defense. “We have some moving parts now. Landon Collins is a veteran guy but this is his first year, [Montez] Sweat’s in his first year, [Cole] Holcomb, it’s his first year, [Jon] Bostic is in his first year. We’re playing Dominique [Rodgers-Cromartie] at corner and this is Jimmy Moreland’s first year, so it’s not like we are the most experienced group. We feel like were very talented, but we`re still fighting through somethings. There are a lot of things to look forward to, without a doubt, but we do have to play better and strap it up and get back to work."

       
       
       
Rdskns2000

Presidential Election 2020 - Baby Sharpie vs Batwoman or Batman

Recommended Posts

Petition calls to rename street in front of Trump Tower after Obama

 

Thousands of people have signed a petition in New York City to rename the block in front of Trump Tower after former President Obama.

 

A MoveOn petition started by Elizabeth Rowin is calling for the stretch of Fifth Avenue between 56th and 57th streets to be renamed "President Barack H. Obama Avenue."

 

The petition would require President Trump to formally change the address of his Trump Tower building, where his 2020 reelection campaign will be headquartered on the 15th floor. 

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Haha 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden made a point that is worth listening to because I believe he would've best Trump in 2016.  I'd rather someone else, but that has to be in the table.

 

If someone doesn't step up as clearly capable of beating Trump, Biden should run and pick a VP that's young and keeps the progressives happy. 

 

If we do end up a situation where the field doesn't clear its self quickly and candidates are just spent beating up on each other, he should step in and just flat out overqualify them and focus on beating Trump, don't even hide it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Please no to Biden. Go campaign for the the nominee. I like him but he missed his time. 

I have never voted for a Dem, likely never will - I'd consider Biden though - maybe, but probably not, unless......nah........ 

Edited by nonniey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I’m gonna vote for whomever Sean Hannity tells me to vote for.  There is great security within the herd.

Edited by TryTheBeal!
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

If someone doesn't step up as clearly capable of beating Trump, Biden should run and pick a VP that's young and keeps the progressives happy. 

 

 

This has been my thought since Trump won. There simply is nobody who I have confidence in at the top of the ticket other than Biden.  Not one.  Biden's quote was right, I dont see a person either I feel good about.

 

Yes, the Dem needs to get younger, yada, yada, but 2020 is about winning, getting Trump out, and restoring some order.  You HAVE to win. Biden is the guy.  Now, he absolutely would have to pick a younger, charismatic successor to be groomed.  No Tim Kaine types.  So I think Biden/Beto is the move.  Trump cant beat that.  If they try to pull some no-name out of thin air and try to prop them up, that's gonna fail.  

 

My scenario is Biden/Beto in 2020.  Maybe even with the understanding that Biden might not run in 2024.  The cabinet makes itself.  Kamala Harris as Attorney General.  Sec of Def and State candidates will be coming out of the woodwork with an adult in the room.

Edited by justice98
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

This has been my thought since Trump won. There simply is nobody who I have confidence in at the top of the ticket other than Biden.  Not one.  Biden's quote was right, I dont see a person either I feel good about.

 

Yes, the Dem needs to get younger, yada, yada, but 2020 is about winning, getting Trump out, and restoring some order.  You HAVE to win. Biden is the guy.  Now, he absolutely would have to pick a younger, charismatic successor to be groomed.  No Tim Kaine types.  So I think Biden/Beto is the move.  Trump cant beat that.  If they try to pull some no-name out of thin air and try to prop them up, that's gonna fail.  

 

My scenario is Biden/Beto in 2020.  Maybe even with the understanding that Biden might not run in 2024.  The cabinet makes itself.  Kamala Harris as Attorney General.  Sec of Def and State candidates will be coming out of the woodwork with an adult in the room.

 

There must be a woman on the ticket. People not thinking so are not paying attention to the strength women have displayed at the voting booth and running for office over the last couple years. Harris or Gillibrand or any number of women that won't be tainted the way Hillary was.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 on Biden even saying he's not running for a second term, just get Trump out and go from there as an option

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

I’m gonna vote for whomever Sean Hannity tells me to vote for.  There is great security within the herd.

You did in 2016 so nothing new here.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

There must be a woman on the ticket. People not thinking so are not paying attention to the strength women have displayed at the voting booth and running for office over the last couple years. Harris or Gillibrand or any number of women that won't be tainted the way Hillary was.  

 

I used to have Harris on my hypothetical ticket, but the more I observe her, I dont think she presents as liable enough.  Her demeanor comes off as "cold" to me. If she has a personality, I havent seen it.  She would have some work to do.  That's why I moved her to AG.  I think that might be a better fit for her.  She was at the top for me at first, then I moved her down to VP, then down again.  

 

And Gillibrand just doesnt move the needle at all in terms of inspiring people to do anything.  Nothing really objectionable about her, I guess though.  Maybe in another year, she would be cool.

 

I mean, I smell what you're cooking with the power of the female electorate, but I dont think a woman has to be on the ticket.  The guys on the ticket just cant be openly hostile to women and womens' issues, like Trump and Pence.

Edited by justice98

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hersh said:

 

There must be a woman on the ticket. People not thinking so are not paying attention to the strength women have displayed at the voting booth and running for office over the last couple years. Harris or Gillibrand or any number of women that won't be tainted the way Hillary was.  

I get why people say there needs to be a certain gender/race/age/etc on a ticket but I think it is wrong.  I think who is on the ticket should be based off their mind, not the color of their skin or what is between their legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I get why people say there needs to be a certain gender/race/age/etc on a ticket but I think it is wrong.  I think who is on the ticket should be based off their mind, not the color of their skin or what is between their legs.

 

In the future yes, but we need to break this glass ceiling. Women being able to elected without second thought leads to the ideal you posted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden is right.  He is the only one to bring out the obamastar power and voting.  Young people dont give a damn about Bernie or Warren. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

In the future yes, but we need to break this glass ceiling. Women being able to elected without second thought leads to the ideal you posted. 

So would you say you prefer a less qualified women or a women you disagree with more ideologically over an old white dude just because of what is between their legs?  I believe judging a person first on their gender or race or whatever instead of their mind is wrong.  Plain and simple.  I actually believe a pretty cool dude made a powerful statement regarding how to judge people.  Maybe you're familiar with it. (Sorry this isn't an attack on you, just on a mindset)

 

Quote

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

-MLK


 

Race/gender/religion/sexual orientation/etc all apply to this statement.  Judge a candidate on them personally, not physically.  Anything else is a step in the wrong direction.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, skinfan2k said:

Biden is right.  He is the only one to bring out the obamastar power and voting.  Young people dont give a damn about Bernie or Warren. 

 

Joe Biden is not Barack. I like Biden and all, but he’s not that level. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JCB said:

Heard, Buzz, but in the same speech King spoke at length about achieving racial justice, and full equality, as necessary before the dream can ever be realized.

 

https://www.archives.gov/files/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf

 

And sadly we’re still a long ways away.

I am familiar with his speeches (I know that is odd for a former Republican) and I doubt he would want gender or race or whatever being the first consideration in a candidate.  Yes we have a lot of work to do on achieving racial justice and full equality but that isn't the way to get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

So would you say you prefer a less qualified women or a women you disagree with more ideologically over an old white dude just because of what is between their legs?  

 

This is a false choice. The women that run will be as qualified as any man. (This is specific to the upcoming Democratic primary and who should be on the ticket. No matter what, they will be more aligned with me than anyone on the right) Among the women that don’t run and those that don’t win in the primaries, there are plenty of choices that are qualified to be POTUS in a moments notice. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I am familiar with his speeches (I know that is odd for a former Republican) and I doubt he would want gender or race or whatever being the first consideration in a candidate.  Yes we have a lot of work to do on achieving racial justice and full equality but that isn't the way to get there.

 

You are creating an argument that no one is making. Are there women qualified to be POTUS? Yes. Are there men qualified? Yes. They will both represent me and my views more than the GOP. As those two things are equal, I’m voting for the woman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@TheGreatBuzz  what you are talking about is not what MLK meant by his dream.  It was a dream for a reason, it was extremely idealistic and in the context of how our species operates not possible in the literal sense, and he knew that.

 

There will always be people that judge others by the color of their skin, their gender, their religion, sexual orientation, etc.  So what he fought and died for was equal protection under the law, the civil rights act, end of segregation, voter protections, he wanted the constitution to apply to everyone as that was the promise America made, that was our potential, keeping that promise that no one else had ever made before.

 

You may have a room full of the most qualified people be all old white guys from Ivy League that grew up rich and have no idea what the rest of America is going through and don't care.  Obama wasn't the most qualified but he was qualified enough to get the job done.

 

They should not put someone on the ticket just to say they did anymore then they should just stick who literally is the most qualified person in the room.  Diversifying an administration and government for multiple perspectives more representative of what the country actually is right now is a strength we arent taking advantage of. 

 

I'm sure you've given interviews or been on the side that gives them like I have. Having the most experience doesn't always make the best candidate, we just saw that I'm 2016.

 

The people have spoken, they want diversity in their government.  Give it to them, plenty of people more then qualified even if they aren't the best at it.

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I also think the larger contextual factor is how consistently the Republicans have tried to cherry-pick that quote in order to bury talk about race. The only way to deal with America’s diversity problem is to dig deep into differences rather than believe in the myth of identity blindness.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hersh said:

This is a false choice. The women that run will be as qualified as any man.

I was phrasing it as a hypothetical, binary choice.  More qualified man or less qualified women.  It is way too early to say which gender candidate will be more qualified or as qualified when compared to the other.  I'm talking about people saying there must be a certain gender or whatever on the ticket.  Why not just decide who is best based on what they believe and what they propose?  Maybe I just admire Lady Justice too much.

 

 

@Renegade7 Your response popped up while I was typing the above.  I really like it while I don't necessary agree with it all.  I started typing out a response but realized it was more about prejudice tenancies than the 2020 election.  I'm not sure this is the place for it.  I'm happy to discuss but want to make sure it is in the right place.  But because I just can't shut up I will respond to a few spots.

 

7 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

what you are talking about is not what MLK meant by his dream.  It was a dream for a reason,

It is exactly what he meant.  It is what he dreamed of.  That doesn't mean it would happen but it is what he wanted.  And aiming for that will make you better even if you don't hit it.  An officer told me a quote a long time ago I still carry with me;  (paraphrasing)"You will never achieve perfection but if you aim for it, you may just achieve greatness."

 

15 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

You may have a room full of the most qualified people be all old white guys from Ivy League that grew up rich and have no idea what the rest of America is going through and don't care.

Then that doesn't make them the most qualified.  An Ivy League education and government experience doesn't make you the most qualified.

 

16 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

The people have spoken, they want diversity in their government

The people gave us Trump.  And a recent GOP majority.  Just something to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.