BoltBacker

I think it's hard to get a true gauge on a dink-and-dunk offense employed by Gruden. Maybe they didn't go downfield because of the QB's, or the receivers, or just the offense wasn't designed to do it. It just "feels"(anecdotal I know) that on any 3rd-and-9 you could expect a six yard pass. Peterson had an amazing year last year but I'm not sure how much of that is Peterson/OL and how much of it was beating up on bad opponents and Gruden running up the middle on 1st and 10 seemingly every new set of downs.

Keep in mind they could actually run on a higher % of plays, but if there are fewer plays overall it's a bigger piece of a smaller pie. If the team with the lead is running to wind the clock down, and the Redskins are running the ball even though they are behind..... there could be some very fast games without as many plays. The reputation on Callahan was he's a better positional coach than he was a HC, and the OL wasn't exactly spectacular when he was focusing on nothing but coaching the OL.

While you're not wrong, I feel like that has always been the case with roughing the passer. There is more scrutiny on every call but I grew up never knowing what would be which side of the line of roughing the passer and while it may take less to throw a flag.... it's really the same blurry line that it's always been. More often than not, WHO is getting hit still matters just as much as HOW he's getting hit. Same as it's always been. Joe Montana would tip toe up the sidelines for an extra 5-15 yards because he knew if anybody dared to SHOVE HIM(not HIT HIM) out of bounds it would be roughing the passer. All the QB's on the animal farm are protected equally, some QB's are just protected more equally than others.

The problem is the TV money is the steak. The gate receipts are just gravy for the owners. That's why the "need" for new stadiums to compete is such horse####. The Redskins "need" a new stadium...... but when was the stadium built in GB? I guess that's why GB is always buried in the standings.

That's pretty amazing because it's become pretty difficult to even have a bank account without having email/cell access. I feel like that's been the case for ~10 years now. Five years ago I walked into a physical branch and they more or less told me that I needed to go online to solve the problem. It was pretty shocking at the time but then I also asked to get a small portion of cash out of the bank to purchase a used car and was told I would have to wait a week because they physically couldn't give me the cash at the moment and they had to make a weekly order for cash. I don't even really know why there are physical branches of banks around right now.

With the advances in AI and robotics I don't think it will be all that long before any age group is "useless" by some measure, even if you have a black belt in twitter today. Digital security is a difficult subject for people of any generation imo because things change so quickly. I can't tell you the number of 20 somethings that have explained to me that they only use ios because they care about the privacy of their data. Then you ask them if they use Instagram, or Twitter, or Facebook, or any of a dozen of other social media apps than they will tell you of course they use some combination. But their private data and everything they do online is completely secure because they use ios. All you have to do is read the billboard across the street to figure that out, old man. Just because the 50yo's don't know all the latest whiz-bang features of the CURRENT version of excel, you should also realize they have probably had to un-learn and relearn excel a dozen times in their life. A lot of them could probably tell you the ins-and-outs of Windows for Workgroups that would have your head spinning.... only you came along when a more recent version of Windows existed so you never needed to know it in the first place. Just wait a few years when the 4th new app comes along that replaces twitter. At some point you reach "update fatigue" and tire of learning all the new features of an app that will be obsolete in 18 months no matter how "important" it is now. I'm always shocked at how many times technology has "improved" the way you could communicate with a group of people all at once. You know, sort of like group email that has existed for ~25+ years. How many times has that problem been solved, and re-solved, over and over by whiz bang new apps? A lot of people are at a point they don't want to spend any more than the minimum time learning the basic functionality of a new or repackaged app that has made changes even if the changes weren't really improvements, just changes. I do find it hard to believe that anyone has problems updating apps on their phone. But I find it even harder to believe that 20 year old programmers from somewhere in the world write apps so poorly that they need to be updated every couple of weeks and seemingly more and more they actually make the app being updated WORSE with a new UI for the sake of making a new UI or actually break some of the functionality that the app originally had in the first place. My favorite example of this is "PocketCast". I doubt a lot of 50yo's were behind the move to "improve" that app. The 20-somethings behind all those updates are the ones that are "useless" in my book but I'll admit that I am closer to 50yo than I am 20yo so it's easy for me to say.

I think the more likely movement will be by the owners more so than the players. Not because of the charger situation but because of the Cowboy situation. Do you really want to completely build your offense around a RB and then that one guy can hold the franchise hostage even if he's under contract? At the QB position you kind of have to be all in, but you can manage how you build and use a group of RB's. I expect NFL teams to draft RB's slightly higher and be less inclined to give ANY RB more than ~60% of touches for several reasons. First, it keeps the player better rested and healthy so he can do more with his touches. Second, it takes away leverage during contract negotiations because you avoid the "Zeke IS the offense!" situation. Third, if you are drafting guys and more importantly giving them playing time(even if they aren't quite as good as Zeke) the rookie is actually developing through experience and insulating your team from possible injury(or holdout) risk to Zeke. Fourth, if you have a group of 3(or even 4) versatile guys at RB/FB it actually isn't the end of the world if you need to go out in FA and find one guy to fill a specific niche because the salary of RB's in FA is more reasonable than other positions. Everyone acts like this is part of a movement for RB's to exert force to be treated fairly. IMO it's much more likely these holdouts will start a movement by ownership/coaching to rely on any ONE RB less and less. If it's a playoff game, sure give Kamara 80%+ of the touches out of the backfield. But for the bulk of a 16 games season that just doesn't make sense even if it makes fantasy owners happy. It may not even make sense for an Alvin Kamara himself if he could have a 12yr career touching the ball 55% of the time, versus a 7 year career touching the ball 85% of the time. I look at a guy like McCaffrey and think it's a shame the amount of abuse he's taking and it has to be shortening his career.

With neutral game script I think the split would be closer to 55/35/10 but I just don't think the chargers are as good as everyone is saying they are. That OL is just horrible and won't really be improving anytime soon, if anything they are more likely that one of those five guys gets hurt and the wheels REALLY come off at that point. Anyone that thinks Gordon was the reason the chargers were 1-2 are in for a rude awakening. The next four teams they face are a combined (1-11) this year but just before the bye they play @CHI, GB(which let's be honest will have more green and gold in the stadium no matter where the game is getting played), and KC(there will probably be more Mahomes jerseys in the stands than charger jerseys combined). Those playoff caliber teams will really expose this charger team imo. I expect the chargers to be in passing situations and behind often for the rest of the season so a 45/45/10 split may be more reasonable than most people think just based on the fact Ekeler has such a big role in the passing game. Not saying Ekeler is so good, or that Gordon is so bad, just saying the chargers are pretty bad and adding Gordon doesn't make them all that much better because RB wasn't really among the biggest problems on the lac roster.

How many draft picks do they have left to mortgage their future? All for the right to pay Gordon more than he's worth. This year they are already paying Miller/Johnson/Hyde veteran contracts (7.7+2.2+1.9= $11.8mil) and now they are going to give Gordon the money that he wants?

I would argue that if Barkley had been in the charger offense instead of the Giants offense he would have been better than "rb2". What scoring system are you using and who finished behind him? There are at least half a dozen RB's out there better than Gordon if not more than a dozen. It's frankly kind of comical that anyone would even try to make the argument that Gordon has ever been rb2 at any point in his entire career.

In the past few months, in a very public way both have found out that their chicken wasn't as popular as they had assumed. (Sorry Joe....... but only because Popeye's is better no matter what their faith)

Dropping by your house unannounced.

I hate to be a one-upper BUT, I recently was in a situation where four adults were stopped and having a standing conversation.... at the bottom of an escalator. I've seen the oblivious group conversation at the doorway of a building before but the escalator was a new one for me.

At least we should see a LOT of Moreland. It's shocking to me they have put themselves in a position where the guy taken a few months ago with the #227th pick in the draft is their #2 CB this early in the year. Well, not really.

This is really interesting. I was going to post that it really depended on what type of league you were playing in. For instance I'd lean more heavily on Dodds in 50/50 situations and Bloom more heavily if I were trying to win a contest or a winner-take-all type league. Dodds is Tony Gwynn, Bloom is Harmon Killebrew. Neither is bad, they are just different. Unlike others here I actually like Tremblay as the happy medium between the two. I agree with what some have said that he may have more outliers from popular opinion... but that's not a bad thing imo and actually gives me more to think about.