Fenrir
-
Posts
1,404 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Fenrir
-
-
It is still billboard #1. That's staying power.
-
Regular season -> Playoffs, McKinnie played waaaay more consistently on LT and Oher hit RT. Off-season, I doubt McKinnie's coming back and our center retired. We do have another center, but here's hoping for
some good draft picks to fill the LT spot and give us a center.
Ok I see. I've got trouble keeping track of O-Lines on the main teams I track.
I think it's every team's goal to compete for the super bowl so I don't understand this point
Well I'm saying they'll have dropped off the top tier of teams. Which is expected when you have a team that used(USED, as in 2+ years ago, they were balanced last season in the playoffs and more of an offensive team in the regular season) to be centered around defense and now is watching those cornerstones retire.
He's huge (and Dickson is athletic to contrast), he's good at drops though. Here's hoping we could develop him some more, because he has potential. Coverage and difference between WR and TE aside, I could see him fulfilling a role not unlike Boldin's
2 ?_? Unless you count NE-HOU as "lucky"
Well there was a degree of luck in the SF game is what I'm saying. 49ers played awful in the 1st half and then were unable to score from 5 yards out in 4 tries.
Giants, Colts, (weakened) Patriots
Caldwell's got a good track record though (save a season with the Colts), he's worked with Manning as a head coach (though obviously Manning was basically the OC). I think their major differences were that Cameron was more of a control freak and Caldwell is more of a hands-off kind of OC wrt the qb, probably explaining why the Colts went from good to shit between 2010 and 2011... Of course, only the season can tell us if he really did make that big an impact...
Caldwell was an awful coach in my opinion, even though he had great teams, he didn't do all that much. I agree with your point though. Cameron always instills every single one of his offensive philosophies on his team, he doesn't really adjust it based on personnel, he adjusts the personnel based on his offense.(What really makes a bad coache)
Amusing that you reject statistics when they contradict your argument, just saying. I wouldn't say Jones is "way" better than Brady's old receivers; I'd only class Smith as way better. Not even way better so much as complementary to a skillset, although he's a nice secondary magnet in general.
How can you not say Anquan Boldin was way better than Brady's guys? It's not that I'm rejecting the statistics overall, I just think that there is a difference in the context in how the stats were earned. Here's a number that's amazing for Flacco, 11-0. That was his TD-Turnover rate last postseason. That alone puts him as a top 10 QB in my mind. In my own rankings he's #6-8. Tossup of the three gunslingers of him, Rothlisberger and Luck. Going forward I'd want Luck, judging from just last season Flacco is clearly the best. Rothlisberger is probably 3rd of the three,(Durability alone may make him even lower than these guys) but he should be mentioned.
Eli's more of a fourth quarter clutch kinda guy, I'd say Flacco's more consistent than Eli in that sense.
Well Eli's put up much better numbers, even with much better receivers it's not very close. He also receives more attention from defenses because the Giants have had a bad run game the last couple of years.
Sorry the format for this is fucked up. New layout has changed the way you can reply/quote people and it's just so different it's getting a while to get used to.
-
There is no way this is an accident. The who or why is not known (not yet at least), but that someone would premeditate killing random, innocent people like this is sickening. For the people involved, my heart goes out to them.
Sadly I think I agree. Fucked up that I would expect it to be a person. But that's this broken world.
Why the hell would you wanna bomb a marathon? Mindless, needless killing. Terrible.
-
Two explosions(I think two, I could be wrong) near the finish line. At the time I'm posting this I think 2 people had been offically declared dead but that number will likely go up.
Nobody yet knows if it's a terrorist attack or some weird accident.
What the fuck is wrong with people bombing a peaceful event like this?
So much sadness. Praying for the entire community.
-
I don't see how we can't easily replicate this with a tight end though?
Well one, what tight end do the Ravens have who could get that could get a guarenteed 800+ yard season? And then a tight end is a whole other offensive concept. Boldin is covered by cornerbacks, and TEs are gonna be covered by LBs/safties. Playing Boldin also lets Jacoby play the #3 CB.
I'd argue he had only two really hot games with Cameron this year - Bengals and Raiders. Maybe Patriots. Everything else came within a touchdown or a field goal (save Browns 25-15) until the Giants game, and often times it was some lucky last minute thing that saved us (see: cowboys missing a field goal, getting a field goal on the Patriots that went right over the upright), and there are games that exist which prove what could happen if the luck were shifted in the other direction (Redskins). The Super Bowl went similar, but it was slightly different in that scenario if only because there wasn't much luck involved towards the end, the 49ers just choked their way out of a win (and it was bad luck because our receivers were dropping shit).Well they had 2 games where they obviously got lucky in the playoffs too. It's just how it works, you've got to be very lucky to win the super bowl. I don't think they'd have been blowing teams out with Jim Caldwell anyways. One huge reason for Flacco's numbers going way up in the playoffs was he had way more long plays, he only had 3 games with passes of 50 or more yards all season, and then got hot and had 3 of those in 4 playoff games. You could give all the credit to Caldwell but I don't think that he's going to continue throwing that many bombs in every game now that defenses are going to expect it from seeing the highlights over and over.
Smarter decisions = minor? Improved O-Line = minor?Well the stuff you're talking about is minor, it's not like he's changed his release and they've got a revamped offensive system. And how much better did the offensive line get? I thought they were supposed to be worse with their center retiring?
Ain't the salary cap a bitch?Yeah I think they need to bring the minimum salary up. We've got lots of teams cutting veterans like crazy and then there's the Bucs and Jags just staying like 20 mill under the limit.
I think he'd get restructured no matter what happens during his next 3 years. If he's that Brady/Manning class, then they'll extend and spread it out over more years. Then he'll probably go down to 10-15 million for his last 2-3 years of contract. At that point he's not worth that much more or less than Eli Manning to be honest.I don't know why Flacco would want to do that, I don't think they'll be competing for the super bowl in 3 seasons, so why would he take a big pay cut? That's why Peyton and Brady have restructured in the past, they were knocking on the door.
Kruger and the browns too. We chose the worst year to win the Super Bowl LOL And if this 2013 season ends up really good then we may lose Dickson and Pitta, which I'm more concerned about right now.Pitta seems like a pretty bland TE to me. There are tons of TE's floating around the league now.
Yeah but I don't think it would be as bitter, given the fact that Patriots probably would not have lost due to a whiffed chip shot or somethingBut the Patriots would have had Ray Lewis celebrating on their own field engraved into their heads. New England is one of the most scary revenge teams in the NFL. Brady and Belicheck love to hold grudges.
Also, I researched the numbers and I still think it's fun to speculate how Flacco's 2013 will go, but in the end you can't predict anything properly. Brady's first 5 years are not too different from Flacco's first five years in terms of statistics. The only real difference is that Brady was 10-1 in the postseason, making the postseason four times in his first five years; Flacco hit 9-4 and one at least one game per postseason. Regular season numbers seem almost the same. I'm not saying he will reach Brady's level of productivity in the future (though he may), but I think he will definitely be able to beat Eli at the very least considering his style (minus the fourth quarter comebacks) is more like Eli's than Brady's... except I think they had the better O-line throughout. At least more consistent.
Well the major difference between Brady and Flacco is that Brady played in a methodical offense that emphasized ball control early in his career, and usually with bad receivers.(Deion Branch was his #1, he's never been very good anywhere else) Flacco has had way better receivers and a much different offensive style.
I think down the road Flacco ends up falling in between Matt Stafford and Eli Manning. Huge arm, a little more polished than Stafford, and plays big in big games, but not quite like Eli does.
-
I think the Offense will get better but the Defense will get worse
I think the offense's production could definitely increase but they've lost talent.
idk Reed was clearly slacking if our defense was average by the end of the year, and considering how most of our games came within a field goal (let alone a touchdown)
I don't think you can really pin all that on Reed. They gave up tons of yards in the run game.
Boldin was his lead receiver but a) he often times lacked the ability to get separated from his defender and b) the way he played made him seem like more of a tight end than anything, and we already have two pretty solid tight ends. Getting a receiver from the draft or developing one of our second strings could make them do what Boldin could do (though you can argue their effectiveness, but he was never particularly flashy throughout his career as a receiver anyway)I disagree on your second point. Just because Boldin isn't a superfast receiver doesn't mean he has a weak skillset. He's a possesion receiver. There's a reason not many guys have his game and are as sucessful as he is. You could see in the New England game that after Talib went out he was just too physical for those DBs.
But weird stuff right? I think it began with the hurry-up, but then something happened somewhere - teams beginning to pick up on it maybe - and then Cameron's stale playcalling was more or less getting us fucked out there. I'm still not sure how to explain that one where we go 43-13 against CIN, beat NE, then go 9-6 against KC. Inconsistency and poor playcalling is probably key here.
Well and KC's D is way better than Cincy/NE. The Chiefs also dominate the time of possesion. The one thing to realize is that Flacco had hot streaks with Cameron and Caldwell. He just had his hot streak with Caldwell in the playoffs.
Flacco was way more aware and generally better in the pocket starting Week 16. He did throw some odd passes, but I remember he threw passes that were on the verge of interception early in the season even when he was on fire - his odd passes here weren't dangerous, the worst that could've happened was an incompletion. I wouldn't be surprised if eating dirt in the Denver game was the wake up call he needed. I doubt during the regular season, even if there was a gaping hole in the defense as big as the safeties in Denver, he would have the pocket and field awareness to even call it, considering they almost ran a running play there. I'm not saying "took advantage of safeties = 120 million" at all, I'm saying that it's clear from subtleties that he's improved drastically with the change in the OC.
You're probably right that he's improved in those areas due to coaching, but it's all very minor improvements. He's just making a few smarter decisions and then taking advantage of thsoe safties.
I really think they wanted to shoot young. I forgot to mention the point where they're possibly starting cheap and young to develop for the 2014 season
a) probably because they still don't know if victor cruz will resign with them
b) Brady also has a ton of money as is, i doubt he cares
c) yeah yeah we'll see a few years down the line. If he ends up being this god qb that I may appear to be hyping (nah I'm thinking somewhere in the Eli Manning area in terms of receivers) then sure it's not overpaying, if he ends up underperforming then they're definitely not going to allow him to make that much. The Ravens front office is plenty smart and I doubt they would ever not remind him of how much his play went back and forth throughout his career
Hence, "Flacco we saw is the Flacco we'll get"That's their plan I guess. My fundumental objection to that is I think teams should always try to keep winning with your group. I think it's smarter since you've got continuity, and maxing out talent even as guys get older, but it's also a way better product as a fan.
Vic's definitely staying, he just signed Jay Z, you think HOV's gonna hook him up with a deal in Tampa Bay? Nah he's keeping him right up in NY
Well the thing is, if he's good enough for this contract, those big cap hits could cripple them, and if he starts to regress or something then what if he says, 'go ahead and cut me and start over?' I see those scenarios as almost more likely than him keeping his same mindset and just readjusting his deal no negotiating at all.
Just to flash the numbers in the media's face, probably? It didn't help that everyone started to suck his dick (pissed me off because I've always liked him as a qb, just because he's dull) when he got hot later on, and they always shat on him... even though he's broken a fair number of (bullshit) records that the media hypes and he's the best qb we've had. Now we know he can run a successful offense, at the very least
Happens every year with teams who win the super bowl. One or two guys get way overrated. Look at the money Ellerbe got from Miami, that's crazy cash.
I think he had a lot of good play with really bad decisions cropping up. He choked in the playoffs, but this wasn't the 20-3 game he had against the Pats in 2004Thinking of that game makes me sad.
To be fair, we never had any "elite" receivers on our team to begin with... I think most people outside of Torrey Smith and TEs on our receivers are generally expendable because they're not particularly phenomenal or anything. Smith is fast and reliable, although he's not elite.
Well Smith and Boldin are both really good at what they do, how many guys are better deep than Smith? And then how many guys are better at carving up defenses in the short range/red zone than Boldin?
I think "gut wrenching" is the worst word to use, but that's because many people I know are Ravens fans from Baltimore. But yeah I can generally agree to that part - I still think it should've been us that went to that Super Bowl, but it was also definitely the wrong time for usHey if they make the super bowl in 2011 then in 2012 it's the Patriots with a revenge game. Totally different outlook for both teams right?
-
For now there's one thing I noticed, there's no button to see what previous names of users are. I don't know if that's intentional or not Not trying to complain about the new stuff or anything, just trying to help if I can.
Some of the new features are much smoother I can already tell, I don't really like the way quotes work now though.
-
Wow I fucking hate the new SF. But really.Well we're fucked lol. We only had a puncher's chance at advancing past the first round and now it's basically nil. All the amnesty talk is interesting though, and I have to agree that using it on Kobe would work our perfectly for all parties. He'd have a full year off to rehab and not have to worry about carrying the franchise. Also, if we do resign Howard, it gives the rest of the team a chance to build chemistry and sign better players with the MLE and Bi-annual excetpion that would open up if the Lakers do amnesty him. It sounds so fucking bizarre to be talking about amnestying Kobe and it's the best choice...
I am all of the sad.
The one thing I don't know about amnesty, does it work like waiving someone where everybody gets a chance to pick him up on his current contract and if he clears that he can be resigned by his original team? Or does he just instantly become a FA?
If it's the latter, the Lakers really should do it. Saves 30 million, and let's Kobe get all his money. Plus since he's injured it's not AS bad from a PR standpoint. Only ignorrant fans would be angry.
honestly though I'm so used to the Golden State Warriors sucking that I'm...pleasantly shocked they're in the playoffs this year.
So from a Warriors perspective would you guys rather be the #2 seed and get banged up San Antonio, or get Memphis/Denver?
I'm a Rockets and Lakers fan, thinking San Antonio is a good team to play and I think the Rockets can beat the Grizzilies after seeing them lose last second last night.(When they didn't have Chandler Parsons their second leading scorer)
-
I saw that on sportscenter. That sounds so shitty for the rookie haha
-
It is a fact that Japan was discussing peace talks as early as January of 1945, and that completely identical terms were available months prior to the bombing save for the Emperor retaining his position
What's meant by the Emperor retaining his position? Usually if your country is surrendering to a nation that really doesn't like you then your life can't really go on the same.
Most damningly, the fact that many of you seem completely unaware of the existence of these other surrender terms even nearly seventy years after the events have transpired is proof enough of the public's ignorance.
Sorry I can't know everything on earth like your royal highness. We are all fools, except esau of isaacu the almighty!
It was anything but set in stone. Truman was the commander in chief of the armed forces. He could have accepted the terms right when he took office if he so desired it. He was under no oath or obligation to seek unconditional surrender other than what he himself wished. Whether he felt he needed to satisfy the American people in his decision is of no bearing whatsoever. Every single one of the people tried and executed for war crimes could have claimed the exact same sentiment. Were those put to death in the Auschwitz trials somehow not war criminals because they were just doing what they were told?
You can't compare anybody from the Auschwitz trials to Truman. That's fucking crazy. They brought violence to the jews and murdered millions. America had stayed neutral in the war and was bombed by Japan. You cannot treat this situation by itself. Truman would be a war criminal if Japan was ready to put their guns down, but they hadn't done anything besides talk.(And their talking didn't get through to America apparently) These were two nations at war with each other and their had been tons of casualties on both sides. You seem to think all the Japanese soldiers were begging for mercy as Americans fired away. US victory was inevitable, but so were more deaths. I don't think it was as simple as banging out some generic treaty conditions and keeping the emperor happy.
-
I'm arguing that Huff is a better deal than Reed because they are comparable at their current state. If I cannot convince you then you may as well not even reply to this.
Ok, Huff's cheaper than Reed. But here's where I think Baltimore screwed up, they've got about 5M free in cap space right now. Just for the draft.(And there's gotta be NFL loopholes to draft guys right?) Why not pay that extra 3M for Reed? They've also signed a guy named David Reed for over a million a year the next two seasons. Who is David Reed? I just think they've flubbed a lot of those signings and who they've let walk.
lol yeah but one part of that D retired, the rest cost about 20-21 million that we did not have to retain. I don't think you understand this either. We still have some of the corners that made major plays in the playoffs too, Corey Graham ring a bell?
I'm trying to say that Baltimore is going to be worse this year. when guys retire and get big offers, you get worse. What it sounds like you're saying is that their defense can be just as good or better than it was last year because they were so injury plagued. And that's a ridiculous argument from my perspective.
Huff was cut because he demanded 7 million or something despite not being a legend. Not because he was bad. The rest were free agents, save Spears; he was just cheap.
Well Huff's smart for at least trying to get money while he can cause in a couple years he'll be straight outta the league!
You're missing the point and I am sorry I ever got into a discussion with you. The play summed up his season pretty well, just because people will remember his season for his Super Bowl victory doesn't mean the play is any less of an indicator.
So you're telling me that all Ed Reed was worth in 2012 was some highlights for the teams he played against? In my opinion Reed had a bad season by his standards, but he was one of the only guys healthy all year and still made a big and positive contribution in my mind.
Or somehow something about the Ravens playing fucked up down the line. Lots of ugly wins and borderline games. I'd blame Cameron but we'll see in 2013.
So Flacco was completely held back by Cameron even though he was on pace for 5000 yards early on in the year when Cam was calling the plays? Flacco just started the year off hot. I'd say Flacco would have a good chance to throw for over 4000 yards but he no longer has his leader receiver in each of the last three years.
Don't make it sound like it's the Ravens fault.
I get that a lot of these guys had to go. It happens to every team, I just think they should've done everything they can do to keep Boldin and Reed.
He said he's going to restructure it in a couple years in almost every article written about this anyway
You're kidding me right? NFL players restructure all the time. Manning's willing to restructure for Cruz and Brady's willing to restructure to keep players. Three or so years down the line when his cap hit goes to ~30 million he has to restructure.
Eli says he'll restructure but he hasn't actually done it. Brady also got way more guaranteed money when he restructured so it wasn't all a negative. If Flacco does restructure he's gonna have tons of leverage. He could say, instead of 34 million that year give me 22 million guaranteed. They're going to be overpaying for Flacco at some point, and they're not making any splashes in FA this year with his light cap hit.
Overall it's just a laughable example of splurging on a SB QB in my opinion.
Why let him hit the open market when he's willing to restructure down the line
Because if you start off paying him less you'll end up paying him less when he restructures.
Not "tossed away", receivers didn't catch them despite good passes.
Oh I see. I agree with your point overall that Flacco had a great offseason. I just think that's as good as/better than he'll ever be.
Because the Ravens want to keep him?
Well the Ravens would've rather given him a 3 year deal I'm sure. Teams always want to give a shorter deal. Flacco's side would've been the one going for those high paying later years right? Just seems bizarre that you could sign a guy who has already committed to restructuring. Why not just restructure right now if it's so set in stone?
Because a QB is harder to replace with a draft or free agency (especially this draft) as compared to a linemen or receivers? Especially a qb who likes to win games.
Well it's just that they obviously overpaid to me. They would've kept everyone if they thought the money worked.
Also got 3 touchdowns, and isn't used to playing in freezing cold temperatures in mile high. Nor is he used to a team that is actually competent. He's from the AFC West after all.
I think for Peyton Manning standard's(And in Manning's mind) that's a bad game regardless. When you're one of the best quarterbacks ever you don't get bonus points in anyone's mind for 3 TD's, correct? It's just become expected with him, rightly or wrongly.
Either way, I forget the down when he threw the pick, but either way, every drive up to that point ended in a punt, and I doubt his would've been any different in the end. I was arguing against the "crucial" part. He did screw up, yes.
Well you're correct, there's no guarantee they win if he doesn't throw that pick, I just think it definitely made sure they lost it.
I'm definitely not saying that Flacco will be within a Top 20 or 30 quality qb compared to Brady. His career appears to be following more of an Eli Manning trajectory than any top-rated qb. Our core is strong, which is why I'm not worried about the 2012 season (which sums up why I can so boldly compare Huff to Reed for 2013 and neglect the losses of Boldin and every other guy).
I don't know, I just don't have the some faith in those Raven back ups as you. The Giants' team with Eli was crushed after the whole Plaxico thing, and never got up to elite level until JPP turned into an elite player.
More or less why I'm arguing that Flacco was pretty much worth the money. 5 straight games (I guess I won't count the Bengals now) with lots of great games sprinkled throughout the season. I think a poor offensive coordinator could be the reason he played so sloppily against teams like the Texans, Chargers, or Chiefs.
Well guys have bad games, and he caught the Texans at the worst possible time. That was the best game they played all year. I just don't believe Flacco is consistent enough, he's a great deep thrower, but he seemed like he struggled against teams who could protect the deep ball well and didn't just forfeit the middle to his tight ends.
I also firmly believed that in 2012 if two other plays did this right then either a) Flacco gets his ring sooner or b) he'd have two straight rings by now. Or he'd at least make a Super Bowl appearance and a ring a year later. Basically, I think the 2012 AFCCG a year back summed up what is wrong with Flacco's games at times; other players fuck up the plays. But often times, it's the playcalling.
I don't think that Baltimore team could've beaten the Giants. But that's beside the point. That was just generally a bad game for Baltimore, gut wrenching.
-
So, to you the lives of Japanese civilians are less valuable than those of American soldiers? Please correct me if this interpretation of your words is wrong, but if it isn't, then that statement of yours is quite racist.
No, it's not racist at all. If you're elected PRESIDENT you'd better care more about the lives of the people who elected you than the people you're at WAR with. As much as you can talk about keeping people alive, this was a goddamn war. Nuking someone probably makes Truman morally wrong in this situation. By no means makes him a war criminal. And it was definitely a statement to Japan and the rest of the world saying, "America, fuck yeah!" But did that not carry an amount of positive weight? Nobody on the face of the earth wants a nuclear war, and after that if you got in any conflict it became a real possibility. War was now worse than it had ever been.
There's being a bad leader of a nation and just being a bad human. The nukes didn't avoid any necessity. It wasn't like if Truman didn't sign off on the atomic bombings a bloody ground war was the only other choice. It was the alternate plan at the time, but that doesn't mean it was one or the other, and it certainly doesn't automatically justify vaporizing several thousand non-combatants.
Here's a fun fact: A couple dozen American POWs died in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Which means now you move from the ideal that Americans are worth more than Japanese to simply a numbers game of Americans too.
Ok, more than 25 POWs would have died. And you can't act like Japan would've just rolled over to America, they were still engaged in the war even if they did have a low morale. You're also talking like you were inside the oval office when this was going on. We're both talking purely on speculation.
Also: I didn't know we were talking about if Truman was a bad human or not. Before we get back onto the main topic, I just want to say Amanda Bynes is a way worse human than Truman ever was.
Why? The Japanese navy was defeated. Air superiority had been gained. The defeat of Japan was a matter of time, it's not like the US military force was in any immediate danger without a single military strike.
The expedience was a matter of beating the Russians, and little else.
It was a matter of time and more battles would still have had to be fought. If they hadn't quit despite the begging of Japanese like you claim, what in your eyes would make them stop until total control of all of Japan?
-
Is Skyward Sword good? I never played it.
Why do people underrate Twilight Princess? I really liked that game. I'm no hardcore Zelda fan but it was a good game to me and took lots of the aspects of the old games, blended them with a darkness they hadn't had before, and put it all in a much prettier graphic system.
Also you could play as a fucking wolf.
-
Interesting question. Ultimately I say no. With the disclaimer that smart people can disagree on this topic.
The line of thought that Japan really wanted to make peace long before the nukes went off is kind of chilling. It's too bad that's even believable, but the US gov. did fucked up shit. That's obviously what they should have done if they could, but it seems like a story too good to be actually true in a lot of regards. I can believe the translation difficulties, but it doesn't seem like any type of government would be like, 'we'll totally blow them off and go ahead and bomb them.' But I can imagine the US not caring about high level language of the Japanese. They obviously didn't like them.
What about the American government being flat out criminals for the internment camps? They imprisoned their own citizens, that's as fucked up as it gets.
Stalin should have hanged for killing 30 million christians as opposed to hitler killing 6 million jews but nobody cares about that since the media was mostly run by jews and the soviets that were in power were also most likely jews.
I don't think you can make a statement like that about jewish people.
Yes he is a terrible human being for saving countless American lives by preventing a full scale invasion of Japan. They airdropped warning to Japanese citizens before the nukes, which the Japanese government did everything in their power to discredit/destroy. The Japanese were also excellent fighters who would dig in and fight to the last man standing, and a full scale invasion would have probably been a bloodbath.
The Japanese conquest of the Pacific/ Asia was very brutal. They killed, looted, and raped freely among the Asian peoples they conquered; and also tortured American s to death in POW camps. If they didn't want to face the full power of a nation the size of America, they shouldn't have bombed pearl harbor.
These are good points. If you're a president should who's at war with Japan should you really prioritize those people's lives while jeopardizing your own people's life? That could easily be described as bad leadership.
Japanese had really pissed off Americans. That's another point I agree with, you can't just look at an isolated situation like this.
Killing hundreds of thousands of civilians is okay because the government of the soil they're standing on committed other atrocities?
That's a good point, makes me think.
Best counter to that is my point of Truman being a bad president or leader of his people if he cares more about Japanese than American's. If 100 random people or 5 of your friends had to die who would you choose? And if your friends had elected you to be their spokesperson and be a leader and protector what would you do?
War Criminals is generally something only the winners get to label the losers as. Or in the case of a third party labeling winners as war criminals, it's still those in power labeling those with less power. You wouldn't have had nuremberg trials if the Germans won. Not even like 20 to 50 years later if they grew a conscience in the meantime. Similarly, Truman was just a guy who made a choice that either saved American lives or didn't, and either thought he was saving American lives or wanted to prove something to Russia, and either way isn't a war criminal.
I agree with most of this.
I would like to suggest to everybody who thinks murders of innocents (for whatever reasons they were committed) can be considered justifiable, to simply imagine some of the victims being their relatives or friends. The end doesn't justify the means, and I doubt that Truman's end was really noble as some people think. To politicians, wars are just games like Fire Emblem is to us.
I disagree with most of this. Truman's alternative was supposedly invading Japan with groud forces and having less casualties on their side but Americans would have died. And I don't think you can just generalize politicians like that and start talking like you're Ozzy Osbourne. They may have not given two shits about Japanese but they most likely cared about their own soldiers some amount.
-
I don't know if we even watch the same games anymore
You cannot convince me that Michael Huff is comparable to Reed. And all I've said about Reed is facts. He was a leader, he did start every game, and he had more tackles and interceptions than Huff.
What is your point here? They didn't overlap, yes, but we had Suggs for the second half of the season roughly whereas we didn't have Lewis for that half. This means that our defense didn't change that much. Lewis wasn't exactly playing at his prime the first half, and he wouldn't exactly continue to produce his numbers going on; triceps injury now means much more later.
I'm just saying that they had Suggs for a large portion of last season. He's not going to impact them like a new acquisition.
I'm opting for the point that our defense is better in 2013 than it could've been. Current situation; we lose many players and gain many others. Hypothetical previous situation; we kept our previous players and did not sign any new ones. I'd take the current situation over the previous situation, because our inconsistent, middle-of-the-road defense given many injuries and inconsistent play got us to the playoffs. Our defense in 2013, on paper, looks way better than our defense in 2012 because we have these young guys that are at their prime and aren't injury prone.
I'd stick with the D that shut out Tom Brady in the second half of a playoff game. Even without his #1 guy, that's impressive to me. They also stumped the 49ers in the first half and made a crucial stand at the 5 yd line.
No, for real, I don't know how you're not getting it. Our defense is old. They were plagued with injuries and went from really good to actually pretty bad. The only reason some people (Kruger) were good is because they had someone really good (Suggs) to complement them. This was obvious in watching the games; Kruger was unable to really pull off any sacks until Suggs came onto the field. You really love to look at your numbers, but frankly the numbers don't tell as much as a game-by-game numbers and the context in which those numbers were pulled from; you say Ed Reed had good numbers all you want this season but that moment he got hurdled summed up his play this year.
They were old, but those were some old guys I'd take on my team. Dumervil is very good, but after that it's a bunch of journeymen and cuts.(Dumervil is a cut, but it was a weird situation and dumb by Denver)
You can't just say, This play really summed up Ed Reed's season! You know what people are gonna forget this season? Knowshawn Moreno hurdling Ed Reed, I'd ALREADY forgotten it! You know what they will remember?? Ed Reed winning the title in his hometown!
Here's this for statistics; Huff missed 18 tackles in 3 years, Reed missed 21 in 2012 alone. Source. Cite interceptions and the fact that people will not throw in fear of Ed Reed all you want, but if this guy whiffs tackles he should be getting, and whiffs a whole lot of them, then you become a liability and you are not doing your job as safety correctly. Missing 21 tackles as effectively the last line of defense for a team is awful for one year.
Ok, Reed missed a ton of tackles, I get that. But if you really think MICHAEL HUFF is going to be better then you're in for a surprise. Ed Reed isn't really in the game for the run game, that was Pollard's strong point.(Not that Pollard's played like Polamalu)
Flacco was also playing with a pretty good rookie and veteran runningback (Pierce and Rice). Adding to this, Flacco plays on a team that cares about winning more than stats; Flacco was rested during most of the Bengals game. To throw your stats argument at you, the rate Flacco was going not only early in the season (before injuries), he was going to hit 5000 yards; the way he was going in the Bengals game at the end, he could've broken 4000 but was rested. Stats are a blind way of cuing someone who hasn't watched games into things, but I happen to support a team that doesn't buy too heavily into those.
There have been a lot of guys who are in the class you say Flacco is in that have had RBs of Rice's quality who have thrown for 4000.
He was going to throw for 5,000 yards... then reality/law of averages kicked in.
I didn't see that game against Cincinati, but he was 4-8 for 34 yards. Maybe he gets the yardage he needs, 4 yards per attempt doesn't scream great game.
I don't know if you read articles; just because they're headlined "Flacco making 120.6 million over six years" doesn't mean you've captured the full picture. Most people that bring that up to me ignore that a) his cap hit is low this year and modest for the next couple years (14-15 million i think? Much less than most quarterbacks) b) it says in almost every article I've read around the time this deal happened that Flacco himself stated he will restructure later on if he must..
A) it doesn't matter because they cut and traded half their team
B) I don't know if you can really judge that until 3 or 4 years when Flacco actually has to go, hmmm do I want 34 million or 13 million next year? Maybe he's a good guy who really will take the paycut, but I don't know if anyone knows for sure.
And what's the point of a 120 million contract if you're gonna miss out on 80 million of it? If this was any other industry everyone would be screaming SCAM!
Is he worth 120 million? Yes, for now. What are we going to do?
Let him hit the open market. Who's going to pay MORE than 120 mill?
Don't bring up this "football is a team game" crap, many of his throws that should not have been missed were tossed away.
Wouldn't want the secret out that QBs aren't all that matters would we? What do you mean by "tossed away?"
This dude knows exactly what he's doing; he capitalized on Rahim Moore doing almost nothing to cover Jacoby.
"he capitalized on Rahim Moore doing almost nothing to cover Jacoby."
Are you kidding me? 120 million because "he capitalized on Rahim Moore doing almost nothing to cover Jacoby." GOAT because: "he capitalized on Rahim Moore doing almost nothing to cover Jacoby."
I apologize if that's taken as a flame...
Hate to be a homer but if he doesn't perform worth his money, then that's what restructuring is for. They have taken this in mind during his deal.
If they do restructure then it's just dumb to me that you'd even do this because "Respect."
But it would be a smart move form a money standpoint I guess because 6 million this year is a steal, and 15m or so the next couple is fine. But I don't know why he couldn't of just signed a 3 year 40 million dollar contract instead.
You bring this up, yet you ignore the fact that this applied to almost every single player that left the team. It's much easier to replace a lineman, safety, or receiver, it's not easy to replace a quarterback that has been with the team 5 years and has produced results. And is still young.
Right. So why go against your whole philosophy of the offseason when it comes to the QB?
*sigh*
I don't know if you even watch some of these games, but special teams handed their team two touchdowns. Take out Jacoby's touchdown and Manning's pick, then we take out our special team's difficulties. Then it's still tied. Torrey Smith nailed two touchdowns because the Safety's couldn't catch up to him, and Jacoby got a touchdown because the Safeties were complacent and couldn't cover in time. His second pick was in overtime, and given how our defense was able to hold Manning to three touchdowns at that point, I think it can be argued that it ended the game faster.
Ok, let me rephrase how bad Manning played: His team had two kick returns for TDs and he still lost it at home.
It's funny, because only when the favored team screws up is when the unfavored team wins. Not because the unfavored team is actually competent.
I think whenever your QB throws an interception in overtime it's deemed a screwup, especially the way Manning did it. That was a terrible pass.
Not all situations are the same. Pats recycle Brady constantly and he got 5 SB appearances with 3 wins. Eli is still playing for the Giants and they got two rings in the decade (against the same team). I don't understand your point.
Well Brady made his first super bowl appearance 12 years ago and the average life of an NFL player is what, like 4 years? So I think the longevity of the team makes that a gray area, but I see your point. Keep a good core and coach and everything will figure itself out. The other difference between Baltimore and New England is that Tom Brady is much better than Flacco.
As for the Giants, those SB teams had lots of the same players. Different receivers,(The 2011 team really had better WRs) and JPP had emerged since Strahan's retirement. Aside from that the differences were very minor, Mathias Kiwanuka had emerged as a defensive player I guess. Same exact scheme and more than good enough personal to pull it off again.
They never got rid of an aging defense. They didn't have as many problems in the Super Bowl because they weren't all benched on injury. This isn't even Ray Lewis' first injury that put him out of a bunch of games. Reed has gone to hell and back with injuries and thus he's not nearly as effective anymore. This goes back to the point with consistency and not talent.
Well I just meant they got healthy. The experience helped in the playoffs, they never panicked. Deer antler spray and no Cam Cameron, that's the difference between the regular season Ravens and postseason Ravens.
-
He consumes your despondency.
-
Now age this guy a couple years and give him some injuries and make him injury prone, then make him slow and actually not even able to make plays. ie, Reed now. Have you seen him play? Dude misses tackles like nothing else. I can't help but remember this serving as a decent summary of his 2012 season.
Well I was describing current Ed Reed. I'm not even saying Ed Reed is a great safety anymore. I'm just saying he's still way better than Michael Huff. The guy started all 16 games an produced fine numbers for a championship team he was a leader on.
Lewis dropped down a little bit during the 49ers game, mind you, and now you're saying our defense was not too bad without Suggs (and by extension, Kruger) and Lewis. In which case, we've improved our defense from Pollard, Reed, and Ellerbe to Spears/Canty/Dumervil/Suggs.
Ok. But you've got to include Lewis in that mix because his injury and Suggs' didn't really overlap too much. It's inevitable the Ravens are going to get worse on D this year.
Brees never hit a 4000 season until he was taken off the cameron, and the Saints in general. I think the Flacco we saw from the Giants game onwards is the Flacco we've gotten.
Well you've got to factor in the fact that Drew Brees was playing with the best running back in football in San Diego without many offensive weapons aside from Antonio Gates and then in NO he got one of the most pass happy offenses with tons of weapons. It's like when Steve Nash went from Dallas to Phoenix, we knew he was good, just not that good.
As for 120 mill, it's 120.6/6 (average 20.1). Exactly .1 more than Brees. I think it's extremely obvious it was more of a respect thing because the league seems to enjoy shitting on his accomplishments, and I think after a couple years of being able to prove yourself despite everything holding you back you deserve something to that extent. He has said himself that he will restructure. He's not a fucking idiot, just dull.
All I know is that if I could get $120 M over 6 years and all I had to do was verbally reassure people I may restructure I'd do it pretty quickly... Don't know why else you'd sign a 120 million dollar contract unless you were at least a little bit interested in making 120 million dollars.
Also: Bad teams pay guys for what they've done and not what they do. My favorite baseball team did this when they were making runs in the playoffs. They've lost 106 and 107 games each of the last two seasons.
Broncos and 49ers are a bad defense? Right... yet he outplayed a Broncos hot off an 11-win streak (Peyton Manning chokes in the playoffs my ass - Manning was pretty good that whole game, can't say the same about Brady). Arguably the Broncos were the hardest game of the playoffs.
Manning threw two crucial picks. Without those interceptions the Broncos win.
Ray Lewis was out for much of the regular season, Kruger was fucking terrible until the playoffs, Pollard barely did anything aside from some big hits here and there, and Reed was not anywhere near worth his paycheck. Ellerbe is good, but three of those players had a total price tag of close to 20 million! We got Canty, Spears, and Dumervil for a total of slightly more than half of that. Let's not add Boldin to the mix; then we get more like 26-27 million. And we also forget that there's still the draft to fill some holes.
Cycling in replacements for a championship team just doesn't seem smart to me.(A championship team that was also very successful the past 4 or 5 seasons) Ask Mark Cuban how it went for him.
If we ever meet the Texans in the playoffs, hopefully Arian Foster won't be with them.
You won't need to worry about H-town if Foster isn't healthy.
Read through this thread; lots of calls of "Cam Cameron is an idiot + the defense is too damn old." We got rid of those problems. Now we're AFC North bottom feeders.
No the Ravens got rid of those problems and became SB champions. Now they're getting rid of cornerstone players on a championship team.
Here's what I don't understand. Why the FUCK didn't they resign Pollard? That guy is like the anti-Patriot charm. Plus they knew they were letting Reed go, and BP is a journeyman, so you can always let him go next offseason. I mean this draft is loaded with o-linemen and defensive backs, but still, 2 ILBs, 2 safeties and future defensive backs, etc. is a lot to ask from the draft THIS year...
-
So you're actually saying you'd rather have a FS that whiffs tackles and can't go very fast anymore than someone who's at least 4 years younger and costs 3 million less in cap space for the year? I'm not sure why people talk down on the Ravens for Ed Reed, he (along with our entire defense) has been struggling all year.
Yes, I'd rather have a free safety who made 12 more solo tackles and had twice as many interceptions as the other one while playing on a better defense. Yes I'd rather have the guy who's played in countless playoff games. Yes I'd rather have the guy other QBs HAVE to be afraid of.
Baltimore's D wasn't too bad considering they had some really big injuries to Suggs and Lewis. They ranked middle of the pack in terms of pass yards, but they gave up the second fewest TDs. The guys the Ravens lost were some of the few guys who played every game, and Lewis played like a monster in some of those playoff games.
Flacco will most likely make those strides. He's pulled out four straight playoff games, some effective play in a Bengals game (mind you, he was taken out of the first quarter), and an ass whooping of the Giants in his last six games of the season. He had a hell of a game against the Redskins despite the loss, beat down the Patriots early on in the year and eked out a win against some generally pretty talented teams (alongside a curbstomp of the Bengals). There's no way someone who can pull off all of the things he has is the same Flacco that was playing with the Texans, and I think the root of the problem is something the entire league was talking down on us for years; Cam Cameron.
That's a good point I'd never considered, Cam Cameron is one of the worst offensive coordinators ever. He's so mind numbingly bad. He had LT in his prime and went with Phil Rivers in the playoffs, I hate that guy. That being said, teams are gonna be able to adjust to the new ravens' offensive sets.
Proved he can play anywhere, especially in Mile High under ridiculous cold and in Gilette under major winds (taking away his deep ball). In fact, the only reason we didn't hit the AFC Championship a year ago is because Lee Evans dropped a game winning TD pass and Cundiff missed a chip shot! This dude has outplayed Brady 3 times straight and was the core of the team during the Super Bowl.
Flacco's showed up for every big game lately, I get that, but he's still not 120 M money. He's never thrown for 4,000 yards!
But I've decided that we are not going to win this war. People wanted Cam Cameron fired? All of a sudden Flacco's receivers bail him out, because Caldwell definitely doesn't play to his strengths. People say that Flacco is dull? Would you rather have Big Ben? People say Flacco needs to prove himself? Having as great a playoff run as Joe Montana and still gets labeled a below average to average qb.
It's a team game dude. There's 10 other players out there.(Flacco still had an awesome playoffs, but you can't overlook the fact he played some bad defenses in the AFC playoffs, and New England's best corner was hurt, and then played a San Francisco team vulnerable to the long ball)
Flacco only takes a 6.8 million cap hit this year and then says htat he'll restructure the backload of his contract in a couple years? Welp, he's actually overpaid, what a greedy bastard, killing this team. But Boldin, Ellerbe, and Kruger are actually taking a bigger cap hit than the center of our offense? OUR TEAM IS FUCKED!!!!
Ok, forgive me but why is this dude gonna restructure his contract to lose those 3 years he makes about 30 mill per year? Who wouldn't want that money? And we've got no idea if Baltimore's competing for a championship at that time so it might not be a 'championship or money' type of choice.
People say our defense is too old and injury prone? Well they all retire and now our team is gone. We got to the playoffs without our defense playing 100%, and now all of a sudden we have an improved defense (although we could definitely use a Strong Safety, some linebackers and some fucking special teamers because there are so many points in the Broncos game that should not have happened, plus the 49ers passed the 50 on their kickoff return) and guess what? We're bottom feeders of the AFC North.
I don't understand how the defense is improved with Michael Huff, Chris Canty, and Dumervil. They lost both inside linebackers, both safeties, and a pass rusher. Canty and Dummervil fix the pass rush, but neither of those guys are exactly great against the run.
Let the season speak. I have faith but they've addressed so many issues we've had prior that I don't even know why we're getting this crap for doing exactly what people said is holding our team back.
Who said anything is holding back the Ravens? They just won the super bowl!
I almost opened my post with this, but I'll just paste it here:
As for the rest - I don't know about Dolphins vs Indy, it could go either way because of Andrew Luck. But they will definitely mutilate the Chargers. Browns and Steelers are going to get beat by the Dolphins (Steelers are a maybe, Big Ben needs to stay healthy), but lol Panthers and Buccs. If the Saints address their defense then they won't be able to easily take that. But lol Jets, maybe one win against Pats (at home), and maybe one win against the Bills gives them a 4-2 record in the division, then 5 wins stated above with 2 maybes gives them a nice 10-6. Perfect for AFC Playoffs!
Dolphins have a shot now!!! Because forreal fuck that whole division.
YES. I'm so glad somebody buys my Dolphins theory!! I think the NFL schedule is messed up though, Miami can get 9 or 10 wins pretty easily but they're not even good. That's why there's so much turnover at the bottom of the playoffs, it's just whoever gets an easy schedule and stays healthy. You know how hard it would be for St. Louis to make the playoffs? Last season they were 7-8-1 but we would all agree they've got no chance when a 7-9 Miami team does.(Even though they did improve in free agency)
-
Sorry my replies are so random and spread out.
Well the thing about Huff - and I looked it up because I was unsure myself - he was cut for costing too much. Same reason we didn't bother with people like Kruger and Ellerbe and ultimately traded Boldin. It was unavoidable given the salary cap situation and the fact that half of our team went free agent after the super bowl ended. Pretty much, the decision was "2 million this year for Huff who is effective or 5 million for Reed who isn't so hot anymore?" Ed Reed couldn't even fill Ed Reed's shoes anymore lol
As a fan of teams that have lost to the Ravens in the playoffs the last couple of years, I'm really happy they brought in Michael Huff. I'll just say that.
I do think some people on the Ravens are gonna have to make major strides. Including Joe Flacco. Joe Flacco has put up pretty average numbers the last couple of years, I'm as anti Joe Flacco's 120 million deal as you can be.
As for reliable wide receivers, I have some faith that Jones will be there at the most random times to throw an F-bomb to. He won't be out there making big plays though, but we have a couple of other Wide Receivers that we can train + there's still the draft. But our management, while they're obviously going to attempt to make another super bowl this year (yeah, fat chance as great as it would be), they're more thinking in the long term and overpaying for dudes that either haven't proven themselves or are faaaaaaaaaar past their prime just isn't worth it. I really don't know what the Ravens will look like come this fall to be honest, and I think I shouldn't really positively speculate because it'll probably lead to disappointment. But I'm pretty hopeful, and I can't really get mad at anyone for thinking the worst because we did let go of a bunch of people. But hey, it was either Boldin or a defense.
Yeah that sounds right. I'm also as anti getting rid of Anquan Boldin from a Ravens standpoint.
Yeah I agree... Pats are getting weaker, Steelers are more or less crushed, and nobody else in the AFC is very notable at all. Colts, Broncos, Bengals, Pats, Texans, and Ravens pretty much have the conference locked up next year just like last year based on free agency and playoffs.
The only teams I could see sneaking in are the Dolphins, or Steelers. I say the 'Phins because they were 7-9 last year going just 2-4 against the AFC east. This year, I did some digging, and they play the NFC South,(Falcons at home, giving them 3 winnable games) AFC North,(they can pick up 2 wins there) and then they play other second place division team Indianapolis and San Diego. So with 4 wins in the division, 2 against the NFC South, 2 against the AFC north and 1 against one of those 2nd placer teams they can grab 9 wins which might get them in.
Also: The Dolphins are really young and are only going to get better right?
Sucks that I'm following the AFC more than the NFC, the NFC sounds so much more exciting, progressive, and most of all consistent. :(
Yes. haha
How 'bout dem Lions? I have a feeling we're getting a wildcard/last playoff spot this year. I think if we can improve the secondary and pick up an OT or two in the draft, we should be golden. Reggie Bush definitely isn't in his prime anymore, but he's one of those guys that the defense has to pay attention and know where he is at all times or he'll burn you. And as a compliment to Megatron, I think we'll do much better this year. I'm predicting 9 wins
Reggie Bush is only 28, I think he's a really good pickup. The Lions just have to play some defense. They're a lot like the 2007-2009 Texans who never made the playoffs because they couldn't field a defense.(I know the Lions made it a couple years ago, but it a one and done)
Main offseason storyline to me is that it looks like there's only gonna be one wildcard spot available for teams outside the NFC West because Seattle and San Fran were so good last year and have only gotten better with the offseason.(And they had first year starters at QB)
I think each division is going to be very competitive as a result.
-
Those may both be true at times, not least in my case, with how I hate having body hair in the way it manifests for me (moderately widespread, thick and fast-growing), enough to wear some form of long-sleeved shirt or trousers basically all year, but is it accurate to assume we were always that way? If so, have our reasons for being that way always been the same? And if we prefer to keep our physical secrets to the highest degree possible, why don't we all wear burqas?
Because #1, generic person X isn't as protective of things as generic person Y. And 2 because that's uncomfortable and it's mainly genitals that people cover up. I think of it as like, you'll tell anyone your name or what your favorite color is, but you won't always tell them your true feelings towards them. Your face would be your name and your private areas are those mushy feelings/emotions.
-
Yeah a lot of people have been comparing it to Michael Bush or that Redskins QB injuries. It was a watershed moment for me though, even though it is painful, I'll always remember who's house I was at/what was happening when I witnessed it
Yeah, I agree.
That and Trey Burke's shot were the to IT moments of the tournament. Though Ware's injury was much bigger moment because BONE CAME OUT!
NBA injury tonight, Danilo Gallinari. That really hurts Denver. I thought they had a chance to make some real noise this year in the west.
-
Ok, clothes were invented and became socially accepted for mainly good reasons. Fast forward thousands of years...
#1 People are obsessed with physical appearance. People care more about physical appearance than emotional/mental shit much of the time.
#2 People typically don't want anybody knowing their secrets and it's the same with their most intimate physical parts. Those are your physical secrets so to speak.
So if you see where I'm going with this, it basically mirrors our mental and emotional barrier towards telling people our true emotions. Furthering on this, who do people get naked around? Love interests. And then who do we tell our secrets to? Love interests.
That's my theory right now on April 4th 10:50 pm. Just thought of it so it's not really permanent.
-
On my monitor, I can't see it at all on blue skies and I can just hardly make out a sliver of text on the SF background. But it is nowhere near legible.
-
I really liked Tom Hardy and Nick Nolte's acting jobs in Warrior. But I felt like the rest of the actors, producers, director and writer were like, let's waste great actors' talent with a real pile of shit.
tom hardy was still a badass though
Does Serenes Forest love Macklemore?
in Far from the Forest...
Posted
His other stuff is a little underrated in my mind. And thrift shop is overrated. Thought the rest of his suck would suck and he'd just be one hit guy, but he's at least OK