Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Maurile Tremblay

Admin
  • Content Count

    41,917
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Maurile Tremblay last won the day on July 30

Maurile Tremblay had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13,847 Excellent

About Maurile Tremblay

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    San Diego Chargers

Recent Profile Visitors

44,146 profile views
  1. Maurile Tremblay

    Why the big dropoff in the PSF?

    Your recent posting and insults show this to be false. This is exactly what the rest of us don’t want to read.
  2. Maurile Tremblay

    Why the big dropoff in the PSF?

    For the record, the Bushes are not a globalist family. George H. W. Bush was Episcopalian, and George W. Bush is Methodist.
  3. Maurile Tremblay

    Why the big dropoff in the PSF?

    If Jon wants that, fine. Though I hesitate to put someone on ignore simply because I disagree with them. That’s not why I suggested it. It’s because of the mutual abrasiveness that you mentioned.
  4. Maurile Tremblay

    Why the big dropoff in the PSF?

    What do you think about my suggestion that you two put each other on ignore? Worth a shot?
  5. Maurile Tremblay

    Why the big dropoff in the PSF?

    That's cool. I know some disagree. I firmly believe people just tire of the constant bickering. And maybe it's the tone of the bickering. Much of this in the last couple of years has elevated to more than the usual intensity. That could be some of it too. And there are always some people who love the fighting and shouting. Tons of people love Stephen A Smith or Skip Bayless. For a ton of people though, they tire of it in my opinion. Just speaking for myself, I enjoy debate. When everyone agrees, it’s kind of boring. But more boring still, by a wide margin, is bickering. There’s a huge difference beteeen debate and bickering.
  6. “Being a crook is not a crime. At worst it’s just a process crime.”
  7. Russian disinformation teams targeted Robert S. Mueller III, says report prepared for Senate From The Washington Post. Try it in incognito if the link doesn’t work.
  8. Nadler and Waters and Cummings may be partisans, but it's not because they've spoken about impeachment. Lots of Republicans (of the David Frum variety) have spoken of impeachment as well.
  9. Nothing matters anymore, but that doesn't stop us from discussing things.
  10. I think Guccifer2 was a Crowdstrike cutout. I also don't think he (they) were the source for either of the DNC/Podesta leaks. Crowdstrike falsely attributed hacking to Russia for a Ukrainian weapons system malfunction. Their founders are an anti-Russia Atlantic Council member and a former cybersec deputy under Mueller. You couldn't find more insular, conflicted 'analysts' if you tried. I can't tell if that's a yes or a no.
  11. Maurile Tremblay

    Why the big dropoff in the PSF?

    Why don’t you and sho nuff put each other on ignore? How about if you both agree to put each other on ignore for two weeks? If it doesn’t improve your experience here, you can un-ignore each other after that.
  12. Maurile Tremblay

    ***Official*** Free Speech Thread

    Donald Trump Suggests Unfair Media Coverage of His Presidency Could Be Illegal "Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?" Robby Soave | Dec. 16, 2018 12:20 pm President Trump has once again taken the position that criticism of him is, or ought to be, illegal. On Sunday morning, he railed against "one-sided coverage" of his presidency, tweeting this: No, the real scandal is the president's oft-stated desire to censor his opponents. Trump's tweet is as wrongheaded as it is incoherent. (Collusion? What?) The First Amendment protects the right of the people to speak out against the government, even if the president thinks such speech is one-sided or unfair. This has already been tested in court numerous times throughout the Bill of Rights' 200-year-history. It's true that not all speech enjoys legal protection. But as a general rule, speech is only considered defamatory if it meets certain criteria: reckless disregard for the truth, actual malice, etc. And obviously, true statements of fact can't be defamatory. Just because Trump doesn't like what NBC and SNL are saying about him, this does not mean what they are saying is wrong, let alone defamatory. Trump has First Amendment rights, too, and thus he is free to make appalling statements. But everyone in the conservative camp ought to condemn his remarks. Press freedom is a cornerstone of American democracy, and while it's true that many presidents have sought to undermine it—including recent presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama—few have proclaimed their desire so openly.
  13. Maurile Tremblay

    2020: The Race For the White House

    If that would have been the case Democrats would flocked to the polls for Hillary, but just running against Trump was not enough in itself for her to win the electoral college - nor would just being the standard bearer be enough for any candidate, contrary to your belief that any dull, colorless candidate would do well running against Trump. Neither candidate in 2016 was dull or colorless. A dull and colorless Democrat probably would have beaten Trump, IMO. This paper (which I summarized here) brings a lot of good data to the question of whether being a crazy extremist (i.e., "energizing your base") is better than being dull and colorless (i.e., avoiding energizing your opponent's base). The conclusion is that, in a general election, it's generally better to be dull and colorless (though obviously there's more to it than that). (Hillary was not a crazy extremist at all, of course, but for other reasons, she was still far more off-putting to Republicans than most Democrats are.) The real trick, IMO, is being able to do both at once: to energize your own base while avoiding energizing your opponent's base. Obama did this quite well (outside of the racist portion of the Republican base). I think Beto O'Rourke has an exceptional natural talent for it. Maybe Amy Klobuchar can do it as well. Hillary Clinton couldn't. I don't think Elizabeth Warren can, either. My initial impression is that Cory Booker and Kamala Harris may not be quite as good at it as O'Rourke, but they'd be plenty good enough to defeat Trump.
  14. Maurile Tremblay

    Week 15 Injury Thread

    The following players are questionable or doubtful heading into the weekend: Sun 1:00 pm - Allen Robinson [Q] - WR, CHI - Active Sun 1:00 pm - Chad Williams [Q] - WR, ARI - OUT Sun 1:00 pm - Chris Ivory [Q] - RB, BUF - OUT Sun 1:00 pm - Chris Thompson [Q] - RB, WAS - Active Sun 1:00 pm - Joe Flacco [Q] - QB, BAL - Active Sun 1:00 pm - Josh Doctson [Q] - WR, WAS - Active Sun 1:00 pm - Josh Lambo [Q] - PK, JAC - OUT Sun 1:00 pm - LeSean McCoy [Q] - RB, BUF - OUT Sun 1:00 pm - Matthew Stafford [Q] - QB, DET - Active Sun 1:00 pm - T.Y. Hilton [Q] - WR, IND - Active Sun 1:00 pm - Tavon Austin [Q] - WR, DAL - OUT Sun 4:05 pm - Dante Pettis [Q] - WR, SF - Active Sun 4:05 pm - Doug Baldwin [Q] - WR, SEA - Active Sun 4:05 pm - Marquise Goodwin [Q] - WR, SF - Active Sun 4:05 pm - Matt Breida [Q] - RB, SF - Active Sun 4:25 pm - James Conner [Q] - RB, PIT - OUT Sun 8:20 pm - Carson Wentz [D] - QB, PHI - OUT MNF - Cam Newton [Q] - QB, CAR MNF - Graham Gano [Q] - PK, CAR - OUT