TBayXXXVII

Got it, so you and Biles are douche's. That's all we needed to clarify. Thanks. We're done now?

Wow! That's next gen incompetence right there. Like I said before, you need stop because no one has ever been more wrong on any topic, ever. #1 "Sports" and "Women's Sports"? There's a women's and men's division already, you can't make them more inclusive unless you allow men to play in women's sports and women to play in men's. #2 Gaines said suggested to have a trans category. Biles apparently agrees with her. I don't think it's a stupid idea, I just don't think it'll work because of... a) biological women will not want to compete against biological men and 2) there wouldn't be enough representation in each sport. If I grant you that I am an idiot, then what does make you... AS: 1) Gaines and Biles agree that men shouldn't be allowed in sports. 2) Gaines and Biles agree that a possible solution would be to make them their own category. 3) Gaines was an actual victim (men playing in women's sports were NOT). 4) Other biological women were and are, actual victims, not the men playing in women's sports). So, Biles and Gaines agree.. Biles calls out Gaines and acts like a douche, and you agree with her. So, what's that make you and Biles?

She literally said it, and I quoted it "finding a way to make sports inclusive". The only way to make it more inclusive than it already is, is to make the rule and/or law, to lock it in as 'legal'. How is that NOT saying she's ok with men in sports?

I quoted her, I got it right. Also, Gaines said the same thing. What Biles did, as I also quoted, shows she's ok with men in women's sports. Maybe you need to take a Hooked on Phonics class. Biles was being a douche because she needs to virtue signal. Why? I don't know, but that's all it was. I see no problem with Gaines calling her out as a douche. She's right for doing so. It's probably in your best interest to stop acting like Biles (douche), and stop with YOUR "obsession" with Gaines. You're on the losing side.

LOL, well, she kinda had to because she was the only one acting like a child... Gaines was perfectly fine. You would be wrong then. If someone says "finding a way to make sports inclusive OR creating a new avenue", it means that while a separate category is acceptable, so is including them. "Include"... "Inclusive". I mean, it's right there.

I thought you said Biles only apologized for her personal attacks on Gaines, and not her stance on trans athletes. Gaines here, is talking about Biles' stance on trans athletes (to wit, Biles did NOT apologize for).

He wasn't even all that good in Philly. In his best fantasy season, he only played 12 games and he was RB20 at 14 fpg. His best full season was 2022 when he played all 17 games and finished as RB22 (in terms of fpg at 12.7), total points-wise, he was RB15. He's most likely a mid-to-low tier RB3, at best.

I sent the link to the article you posted to a friend who is a Phillies fan. He said that reminds him of when he was at a game after Mickey Moniak was called up. It was the 2021 season, as it was coming to a close, he's not getting any hits only getting 1 AB a game at the time. The kid strikes out and his batting average drops below .100 (yes, .100). Some dude is trashing the kid and said something to the effect of "I can't believe they gave you $6M". A guy, right next to my friend yelled over to him (just 2 rows and 5 seats away), "How much have you made in the major leagues"? That other dude tells him to pizz off. The guy next to my friend and starts laughing, leans over to my friend and said that Mickey was his nephew. Pulled out his wallet and showed him some pictures. My friend says the kid's uncle was a really nice dude. But that's the right way to handle the situation.

In what scoring system is that? There was 9, if you count Joe Milton and Garoppolo who only played in 1 game.

If I were Volpe's dad, I'd sit there and laugh out loud while my kid is one of only 20,000 people to ever play in MLB, and this dope is telling my kid that he stinks.

Two? They only drafted two. Are you saying that Allen is "good"? Is he even going to make the team? If he does, I don't think you'll have to worry about Etienne, because I don't think all 4 of those guys are going to be on the team.

If you're in a 1 QB league, very few QB's are worth drafting. Well, it depends on where you think the drop off or value is. Meaning, at what point is the difference nominal? Last year, 12 QB's averaged over 17 fpg. If you don't think there's a draftable difference between 15 and 18 point guys and view them all as streamers, then only 7 QB's averaged 19 fpg. The number increases to 10 QB's if you reduce the range to 17 instead of 18. So, if you're in a 12-team league and you don't have a top 6 (20 or more fpg), there's not really much of a point in drafting a QB. In 2023, there were only 4 (the next 10 had a maximum gap of 1.8 fpg). Obviously, the top 5/10/15 change every year and the we don't know the results ahead of time. For that reason, we draft QB's in the hope that find one of those top end guys. Let's say the top end "draftable" QB is at 19 fpg. FFToday's QB projections only has 4 QB's hitting that number (323 total points - standard scoring). ESPN has 6. One website I looked at, has 5... yes, all 5 are the same: Allen, Burrow, Jackson, Hurts, and Daniels (Mahomes was #6 on ESPN). Between #7 (Mayfield) & #17 (Lawrence), ESPN is projecting a 1.8 fpg difference. Between #6 (Mayfield) & #15 (Herbert), FFToday is projecting a 1.9 fpg difference. Between #6 (Mayfield) & #21 (Tua), a website I looked at is projecting a 2.2 fpg difference. All 3 of those sources seem to agree that Young will be around 15 fpg. What's "Draftable" to you?

At quick glance, I'm thinking this might be cherry picking. I looked at the box scores of his last 7 games, and I'm not seeing anything that stands out. I don't have a Fantasy Pros account, but their preview of QB plays over 20, 30, 40, and 50 yards... Young didn't rank in the top 8 of any of those categories.

Gotchya. I never had a dog, so I never had to deal with that. My brother has, and on a couple occasions I needed to bring them to the vet, but they were all pure bred Boxers and absolutely looked it, so my guess is that's why they never asked me what breed they were and why I never offered the information. Makes sense though.

Seems reasonable. Thanks. Probably couldn't hurt to know for training purposes. I'm guessing breed and how quick or susceptible to training they are, may go hand-in-hand.

Something I heard today on the fantasy sports channel (I think it was Jeff Mans), is that he thinks that Jeanty may be in contention with Bowers, for the most targets on the team. Last year, between Ameer Abdullah, Sincere McCormick, Alexander Mattison, Zamir White tallied about 300 carries and totaled around 1100 yards (3.6 ypc). I don't see why with 220 carries, White can't average 4.0 (at worst). From that standpoint, you're looking at 880 yards. They never addressed the hole at WR, so lets say that Mans might be right. Lets give Jeanty 115 targets (Bowers had 153 last year), and 75 receptions while averaging 7 yards per reception. You're talking about a RB with 1400 yards and 75 receptions. That's 215 fantasy points without taking into account TD's. Last year, that would be RB19. Give him 10 TD's, now he's at RB7. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that he could be a top 5 RB.

Outside of wanting to breed or find a genetic history of illness, is there a reason to want to do this? I would also assume you'd want this before purchasing the dog... no? Just curious as this is something that I would not even consider doing.

It's almost as if the guns themselves aren't the problem... but the people obtaining them through illegal means.

Nope.

Yes, mental torture is worse than physical. I thought this was already known. They actively create victims. That's a huge problem. Then, they pander to them and blame someone else. Meanwhile, they never actually fix the problem... they just move the goalposts.

...and that's where you lose. Just stop dude. You're already wrong... you've double downed, you've triple downed, just end it. I'm going to stop your bleeding for you.

To HIM, not gay people. You said it was a slight to gay people as she was "homophobic". That's where you're wrong. You trying a bait and switch here? LOL LOL, the new Rick Roll ="@TimHauck"

Not against gay people, no. The comment only has to do with Olbermann, not gay people.

I just said it wasn't a slight against gay people.

That’s certainly a take.