TBayXXXVII

The website tells you WHICH vehicles to buy (VIN #). Those vehicles, they're telling us, will not be affected by the tariffs. Tim's point was, if anything came from another country, it would be subject to the tariffs. Ford is telling people specifically that certain ones will not be... and they tell you exactly which ones. I'm not sure how being told exactly what vehicles to buy to avoid being upcharged because of tariffs, is "misleading".

Looks like you need to go to economics 095. From Ford American-Made Ford Vehicles The good news? Many Ford vehicles are built right here in the United States and will not be impacted by these new tariffs. Here are the American-assembled Ford models you’ll find at Westlie Ford: Ford F-150 – Built in Dearborn, MI and Claycomo, MO F-150 Lightning – Built in Dearborn, MI Ford Bronco – Built in Wayne, MI Ford Mustang – Built in Flat Rock, MI Ford Escape – Built in Louisville, KY Ford Explorer – Built in Chicago, IL Ford Expedition – Built in Louisville, KY Ford Ranger – Built in Wayne, MI Pro Tip: Want to check where your Ford was built? Look at the VIN. If it starts with a 1, 4, or 5, it was assembled in the United States and will not be affected by these import tariffs.

Why's that? They're made here. What imports are being affected? The vast majority of of Ford vehicles are made and assembled in the US... all of them, in North America. Outside of the very few made in Canada and Mexico, how would Ford be affected by the tariffs?

Why's that? You don't think there are automakers in the US making cars?

8.09 - WR Jordan Addison, MIN

I agree with you on IDP, but only because it's not done to the level where it's actually good. Using D/ST like the way leagues do to this day, is probably more lame than IDP's to the level which they are used. In IDP leagues, there's a lot of players that would go in the mid-to-late rounds. In D/ST leagues, they're drafted in either the last or second to last round. If people actually started IDP's like offensive players, for example: 2 DE's, 2 DT's, 3 OLB, 3 I/MLB, 3 CB's and 3 S's, with more equitable scoring, IDP's would be much more important. At that point though, fantasy football (w/IDP's), would become more like fantasy baseball. I think the vast majority like fantasy football because it's easy (the way it currently is). I don't think they actually want it to be intense.

You might be right. Hmmm... that may change things then. ETA: I think I take Robinson. With .5PPR, assuming people stay healthy, I don't envision Chase getting the target share or volume that separated him from the pack. I still think he could be WR1 this year, but I don't see 5 ppg advantage over #2.

If they fix him as a passer, he won't be a poor man's Lamar Jackson, Lamar Jackson will be a poor man's Justin Fields. Coming out of college, Jackson was a very bad passer, Fields was very good. Both needed coaching help. Jackson got it... Fields never did. I do agree with you on Jackson, which is why I said what I did, in that Fields could be better.

Yeah, knowing the picks could be a difference maker. I'm assuming that if he had Burrow, Robinson, and Chase, that he made it to the Championship game. So when he said later, I'm thinking pick 11 or 12 (maybe if lost in the semi's, 10th). Now, if he's talking about rounds like 3rd, 4th, 5th, something, then I keeping the guy with the latest round pick.

I think Fields has top 5 potential. Both Glenn and Engstrand came from Detroit... they both know Fields extremely well and when out and gave him a solid deal. I think they believe that they know how to maximize his potential. If they're right, he's a great QB to have. If they're wrong, I won't care too much because he'll definitely be the 2nd QB I take anyway.

Yeah, this is where I am at as well. I do think a caveat would be in the OP's case. It's a keeper league. I think I'd be inclined to keep a stud WR anyway. The determining factor would be what I know about my league mates.

You should tell her to google fellow TDS moron Jimmy Kimmel. I remember watching a video of him trying to convince 6(?) conservatives that the US should allow/grant citizenship to illegals, by using a guy in the military (clearly virtue signaling), who's "girlfriend", was having his baby, but at risk of being deported. One person asked if he married her, wouldn't that fix his problem. He said something to the effect of "No, it only allows for a path to get a green card, not citizenship". The guy replied with something like "Well, if you're not willing to commit to her, why should we?" They quickly moved off of that guy and went to someone else. The kicker was that the guy wasn't even white! So they couldn't call him racist! But, the point was made in there that marrying the person doesn't solve the issue.

7.04 - WR Jauan Jennings, SF

6.09 - WR Tetairoa McMillan, CAR

That's not going to have the affect they think it will.