Recent content by dgreen

I remember having really high expectations for 2006. 2004 was the return of Gibbs and 2005 was a playoff year. In the offseason, Al Saunders was brought in to modernize the offense and, for whatever reason, it just didn't work.

That's under Gamecast.

We're old.

Snap counts: Ekeler - 33 Bill - 23 McNichols - 13 The team ran 70 plays. Last year they averaged 64.8 plays/game.

I was surprised to see Terry had the highest snap count other than Daniels and the OL. He played 55 snaps (out of 70 total plays) and Deebo had 54. Last year, Terry played 80% of the offensive snaps and that's basically what he was at yesterday. So, that should be a good sign that Terry is...

Just to try to temper expectations… He only had 10 touches (and one target) in a game that Washington controlled from start to finish. He only had 50% of the RB carries. McNichols had snaps in important parts of the game. It will be interesting to see whether or not it grows into a larger role...

The pass rush was getting to Wilson pretty quickly but it was also really helpful that the DBs weren’t letting guys get open immediately. I feel like last year QBs could get rid of the ball right away because guys were open right away.

But looks like Ekeler getting a 3rd and long snap. In the first half, I don’t think they alternated within the same drive.

Bill starts second half.

Ekeler got three drives and had 7 touches. Bill will 2 drives and 4 touches. We’ll see who gets the first drive of the 2nd half.

4th and goal from the 3? Go for it. From the 2? Nah.

The hypothetical presents guaranteed pain and suffering for someone. I think I should be willing to take on the pain of losing my dog to spare someone else the pain of losing their human. Of course, I actually have this choice every day. Instead of feeding and caring for my dog, I could put...

This perspective has come up a few times in this thread. I'm curious how this would work since the child in this scenario is 21. My kids are 22, 20, and 18, and wouldn't "make" them change the name. I'd probably talk to them about it and offer my opinion, but I don't see myself taking any steps...

If someone in his group was offended by the name, then it is offensive. If not, then it wasn't offensive. If he intended it to be racist, then it was racist. If he didn't intend it to be racist (i initially interpreted it as a comment on police), then it wasn't racist. That's how I tend to use...

Eating soggy pretzels