• 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

21 minutes ago, FanboyOf91 said:
 

Ouch.

 

I like things about Barr. Not least of which is knowing when he is losing and shutting the hell up and listening when he is. Not many people can do that. Even less people who feel like they are in a position of power can do it. Maybe he just understands the game better than most. But any one of these republican senators would have kept running head first into that wall and that woman doesn't often talk about **** she doesn't have facts about. He was smart enough to understand that at least. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dream ticket is Harris/O'Rourke. I wouldn't be opposed to Biden but I just think he's a bit too old. He should have ran in 2016 though.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that Beto is polling really well with college-educated liberals. If they are the backbone of the new Dem urban-suburban coalition, there might be a path for Beto-mania to go national. 

5 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Here is an interesting nugget from the NPR/Marist poll:

 

image.png.9ab5d6d29217587c9ccf719a21df7127.png

 

This is interesting, especially if more than one poll can confirm it. 

 

A major schism in the GOP where the post-2010 nutjobs are booted out would be a welcome sign in our politics. I will take the smug, holier than thou Bush-era politics over this trash heap of racist anarcho-libertarians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2019 at 12:22 PM, PleaseBlitz said:

Here is an interesting nugget from the NPR/Marist poll:

 

image.png.9ab5d6d29217587c9ccf719a21df7127.png

 

 

PLEEEEEEEEEEEASE give me a republican to vote for over Trump.   PLEASEEEEEE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, superozman said:

 

 

PLEEEEEEEEEEEASE give me a republican to vote for over Trump.   PLEASEEEEEE

 

Why?  

 

How much will anybody with an R after their name actually differ from Trump?

 

OK, maybe this imaginary Republican won't think the US should pull out of NATO. (And yeah, that is a kinda significant policy difference.)

 

(Although I note the complete absence of any R at all willing to openly disagree with Trump, right now, over the issue.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

How much will anybody with an R after their name actually differ from Trump?

Recent chatter is that Larry Hogan might primary DJT.  Popular governor in a blue state who is somewhat liberal on social issues. Don't know what kind of chance he would have in a GOP primary against an incumbent president, but there perhaps is the chance that enough folks, even GOP voters, might be getting tired of Trump's act. 

Edited by hail2skins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was watching Maher's return episode of Real Time tonight and towards the end one of the new rules struck a chord.  What exactly does "middle class" mean in 2019 as opposed to 1950-1980?  It seems when people use the term middle class they instantly think back to a time that no longer exists.

 

in 2019, a lot of people might be considered middle class due to the tax bracket they are in, but by every other metric they don't seem to be.   How did this country go from a 1 income per family was enough to pay the mortgage, go on vacation, raise kids, etc etc to a country where dual income houses often are scraping by paycheck to paycheck or maybe a couple missed paychecks away from disaster.   We can skip the anecdotes about people living beyond their means or being irresponsible because there are those in every income level, but they aren't the majority.   Was this a slow transition?  I am curious how did it happen and how were the vast majority of Americans duped into being ok with this direction.

 

As a liberal myself, I sometimes feel the left tackles this issue in a short-sighted way.  Yes the minimum wage (not to mention wages period) should probably be raised, but the bigger overall issue to me is why is the value of the dollar itself seeming to drop.  Why is a 100k household in 2019 so much less capable than a 40-50k household 50 years ago.  I am sure it is a loaded question with many answers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Why?  

 

How much will anybody with an R after their name actually differ from Trump?

....

Quite a bit I think. Any other Republican would have succeeded in repealing the ACA (sticking fingers in the eyes of votes needed isn't smart deal making - McCain's no vote wouldn't have happened), any other Republican would have secured border security as part of an immigration deal, any other Republican would not have wrecked or attempt to wreck our international alliances, any other Republican wouldn't have started trade wars with everyone at once), etc. etc, etc. 

 

Well except maybe Patrick Buchanan.    

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@NoCalMike imo it has a lot to do with the dissolution of American Unions. Which has led to a loss of benefits and wage stagnation. Wages simply haven't increased to account for inflation. Same goes for the cost of living increase.

 

Another contributing factor is also the decline in the American educational system. Having access to an affordable college education was and still is key to the growth of the middle class in America. 

 

Oh and globalization. Everyone makes all kinds of stuff now. America has far more competition in the global market than in 1950 or 1970. So corporations have a lot of options on where they choose to do business. 

 

 

Edited by clietas
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nonniey said:

Quite a bit I think. Any other Republican would have succeeded in repealing the ACA (sticking fingers in the eyes of votes needed isn't smart deal making - McCain's no vote wouldn't have happened), any other Republican would have secured border security as part of an immigration deal, any other Republican would not have wrecked or attempt to wreck our international alliances, any other Republican wouldn't have started trade wars with everyone at once), etc. etc, etc. 

 

Well except maybe Patrick Buchanan.    

 

President Jeb! or Rubio or Walker probably would have done those things. All of those Republicans were tarred and feathered by Trump during the primaries and the base had no problem with it. 

 

The two favorite choices were Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, two men who are more alike than different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like reading about all the candidates 'evolving' because it's science-affirming :D

 

and it offers a contrast to the gopers who have largely clung to their neanderthal origins

 

(it is fun to watch politicians of any label who are so slippery in their positions over time that they rival the salmon right out of the river)

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect one of Kamala's to mention the one she employed

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.