Running With Daboll

You don't need a link to know what the pecking order is in Buffalo. At the top of the list is JOSH ALLEN. If Diggs thinks that he is indispensable, he only needs to revisit his experience in Minnesota.

It can all be traced to FEAR and IGNORANCE (our national cancers), metastasizing at an accelerated rate.

If you get there, who is your "preferred" SB opponent?

Sorry, I don't converse with individuals that refuse to acknowledge the truth.

Please tell me that you don't believe your own Bullchit.

Whatever you say...ZEALOT .

I'm not here to bicker with you, but to say that "you were just asking me a question", is a deflection, and has a whiff of passive aggressiveness to it. Did you REALLY think that I might know McVay personally, or did you ask me that question as a way of making a point? If you agree to my opening statement, then we clearly have a difference of opinion. Knowing someone personally is not a requirement for liking or disliking them, contrary to what you might think. I'm sure that there are myriad people that you have never met personally, yet you have an opinion about them, one way or another. You stated that "you judge people based on their actions" (paraphrase). Well, there are plenty of people out there in public exhibiting all kinds of behaviors, I need not know them personally to form an opinion based on those behaviors. I can't believe that I even have to explain this. As for the "vibe" part of this, is a catch all word for the feeling most get when they are sizing somebody up, for better or worse. We all do it, consciously or otherwise. Where I do agree with you is when you added that you wouldn't have some close friends if you concluded that your first instinct was the correct one, which I alluded to in my previous post. Hopefully, this will put this issue to bed. I think we can move beyond this now, especially since there's really nothing left to be said about it. Thanks.

Death by excessive intercourse is the way every man should check out.

Yeah, I love Thibs, but he's still a rook. He's made considerable progress this year, and he could wind up being near the same level as Parsons, but he's still got some learning to do. Still, I hope he finds his way to Hurts at least a few times tonight. Doesn't need to sack him, just rattle him if he can. Sure wish 56 in his prime could be out there for this one, that dude brought joy to my heart.

So, knowing someone "personally" is a requirement for not liking somebody? C'mon, tell me that you don't get a feeling, or a "vibe" from each and every person you have ever seen in your life, be it personally or from a distance. We all have our preferences, and when someone doesn't meet our criteria for them, the tendency is to be put off by them, it's instinctual. Now, that's not to say that we should write people off just based on an initial feeling, but that first instinct is what most of us base our opinions on, if you are being honest with yourself. I don't need to know him personally to recognize that he reminds me a lot of John Gruden, who I can't stand either. I don't like his demeanor, and I think he has a high level of arrogance that he tries to disguise with his intensity. I can't recall the clip of him I that saw last year, but it showed him being (what I believe) to be his "true" self, mocking another team in a very sophomoric and frankly immature way. It wasn't a good look, and it was something that you can't forget. But none of my dislike for the guy has to do with what generation he was born into, that's just ridiculous. With all that said, I didn't say that he was universally unlikable, I just said that I DON'T LIKE HIM. You are free to like him, hate him, or anything in between. I'm not saying that you have to agree with me.

By the way, it's not just that we are opposing fans, we also have completely opposite political ideologies as well, yet we have managed to find a common bond. Our microcosm proves that it can be done, no matter how large the scale.

LOL. Um, it's kind of a long story. Let's just say that we share a common experience beyond this forum. Oh, and I almost forgot: FARK THE EAGLES!

That's great, you've done a nice job raising them. As it is with many so-called "taboo" aspects of life, preventing people from exposure to things will ultimately lead to an in-appropriation and perversion of it. The key, (as with your kids), is to allow for a reasonable exposure, then let them decide the level of interest they have. This applies to just about anything, not just guns. Your son is essentially bored with them because he doesn't find them all that big a deal. But when you restrict people from things and behaviors, you wind up with a perverse and sometimes morbid curiosity that could lead to anti-social behavior.

Looks like some folks here need a foot extraction from their oral region. LOL.

LOL. Broad brush comments like this leave no room whatsoever for open mindedness. How can you possibly make a blanket statement like this? Yeah, I know, you were "generalizing", right? This is how misunderstanding and division get their footholds. And I don't even like McVay, but it's certainly not because he's a "millennial".

Glad we are on the same page on this one bro. The majority of gun owners in this country are of the responsible type, so those people (including you and I) shouldn't have any issues with any safeguards that the government might implement in terms of purchasing or owning firearms. With sufficient safeguards in place, human massacres won't be happening with as much frequency as they are now. And no, gun legislation won't stop every mass shooting, but if even just ONE life is potentially saved by common sense measures, then it would be worth it. This crazy chit has got to stop, or at least be minimized.

LOL, I'm not. And please refrain from telling me how I should be thinking. Been thinking for myself for many a decade, I don't need anyone's help.

I am a gun owner, and I am also for common sense gun control legislation. Also, I am not afraid of the big bad government "coming for my gun". That's all I'm going to say about this topic.

I like that idea.

Yup, I'd much rather they draft a couple of nice prospects, and maybe go after a lower tiered guy like Gabe Davis in the off season.

Agree about the K, but not the D. The kicker slot has already been eliminated from the Yahoo Daily format, and I don't miss it at all. However, drafting or streaming defenses can really make a significant difference on a weekly basis, I kind of enjoy the challenge of picking the right ones. Whereas with kickers, it's so much more left to chance. Gotta keep the TE slot though, kind of ridiculous to eliminate that position imo.

You're essentially repeating what I said. I think Geno's services will be needed, but I don't think there will be many options for him. His best bet is not to overestimate his own value. He doesn't necessarily have to jump at the first offer, but he certainly can't be expecting to be paid like a top shelf QB is.

If the Eagles win, they'll probably win by a larger margin than the Giants would, but either way I'm "expecting" a nasty game. The heart is pounding a bit quicker the closer we get to Saturday night.

Eagles 35, Giants 19? OK, I guess that's settled then, they probably shouldn't even bother playing the game at this point.

Makes sense to me, they would essentially still be gaining draft capital, it just depends on what they can get for Fields. They might not get the same value for Fields than they would if they traded away the #1 pick, but as long as the return is reasonable, then it should work.