TBayXXXVII

In general, I'd agree with you, but we're talking about a guy who played with Aaron Rodgers and Pat Mahomes. Neither team kept him around for more than 3 years and on neither team was he a difference maker. He's a 30/500/3 guy on teams with elite QB's. He's a JAG. Allen isn't the passer that Rodgers and Mahomes are. He'll have less value and likely produce less, with a passer like Allen. Guys like MVS are a dime a dozen. No need to pay him $2M+ or even $4M+ when there's probably rookie contract guys who can give you that... either individually or collectively, where they do other things (i.e., punt/kick returns).

Yeah, right!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Risk/reward. Assuming health, I believe Wilson is in a situation where he has a legit shot to be the WR1 at season's end. Last year, CeeDee Lamb as WR1 with 403 (ppr), points coming off a 135 catch 1750 yard, 12 TD season. I don't think that will be the standard for this season (400+ points), I believe 350 to 380 will be the range where WR1 falls. Wilson could have a chance to post a 120/1500/15 season, which equates to 360 points and falls in the range noted. Now, will others fall in that range? Oh, I'm sure that could happen... but that makes all of them having a legit shot at being the WR1 at seasons end. How many? But that's enough to justify a first round pick. The question everyone needs to ask themselves is, how confident are they in the situation. Will Rodgers be close to 100% at the start of the season? Will he stay healthy? Will the two click on day 1? If a person likes the answers to those questions, then yes, he's worthy of a first round pick. Personally, I think falls in between those numbers and last years. I'd put him at 90, 1200, and 8. Based on last years numbers, that puts him at WR13. I'd be happier with him as a WR2 or my WR1 if I had 2 good RB's... or McCaffrey. Someone's opinion.

Wait, not long ago you said that MAGA is violent and gave a list of like 50 incidents over 4 years as "proof". If 12.5 incidents a year are "proof" to make a collective judgement, then I think everyone (blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics, democrats, and republicans), surpassed that requirement before January 7th this year. So what he's saying isn't wrong.

I'm right. Again, sorry you're stuck on stupid.

LOL, look at you pretending that you said something that you didn't say. There are moderate Republican's and moderate Democrats. That's not what you claimed you were. You said that you were a "moderate", period. That's not a thing. Sorry you're stuck on stupid.

Yup. Agreed. I think the situation for the NFL and fantasy are the same. The Steelers are taking a shot to see if coaching was the issue (I think there's merit to that stance), and for fantasy, if he does play, he could put up big numbers. He's probably worth 10+ points a week from just rushing. He's worth a stash with a last round or 2 draft pick.

Wilson, despite any production, is a head case. It's clear that's true because no team moves on from a franchise QB while he can still perform even if a cheaper option is available. Teams only move on from them if they're tired of the act. Whether Wilson is better at the QB position or not, I believe he's a one and done in Pittsburgh and if they can pull the plug on him at any point, they will. I think their plan at acquisition was to bring in Wilson as the starter and have a year to analyze and build up Fields if possible. If Fields progresses like they want, they give him a new deal and let Wilson walk. If not, I think they evaluate the drama that Wilson and the Mrs, brings and the production he yields before signing him long term. For fantasy... 1 QB league I don't waste a spot on Wilson, but I would on Fields because he has high end potential. Wilson's ceiling, I believe is a QB2. If I need him in a bye week, I'll go pick him up off waivers. 2 QB/Super flex league, I'm fine with Wilson as my QB2. Keeper/dynasty, I'm only rostering Fields.

Ok, I'll take your word for it. Trump felt that Viktor Bout was too high of a price to pay for Whelan. Apparently the communist party felt that to get Griner back, Bout was acceptable. So, if the Russians got Bout for Griner (which was too high of a cost for Whelan), how much did we pay to get Whelan back?

Well, you could try the whole story, but why would you do that. Who said I wasn't happy they're coming home? I'm just calling the administration a bunch of pieces of trash for prioritizing a pot head over them and thinking that a mass murderer was a fair price. Curious to see what we gave up here.

Libs pretending to have a "gotchya". How cute.

Considering they never said they were, I'm going to say no. They made it known that they were working on bringing Griner back. Why not say the same for the others if they were working on them as well?

What's horrible is that these two were there longer than they had to be. Amazing that a basketball player was a higher priority for this administration. I find that to be rather disgusting that a soldier had to wait 18 months longer than pot smoker. If the trade off for Griner was an arms dealer, what's the exchange for these two? If it's way less than The Merchant of Death, then one would have to ask "Why did it take so long to bring these two back if the price was cheaper?" If these two are worth more than Bout, what are we giving up? Nuclear war heads?

Yup

11 years!! Let's GO Mike!!

I was at game #2132 in Cleveland.

LOL I think he and I are on the same page as this simply being a discussion, not an argument or one saying you're wrong / I'm right.

Oh, I get that, I just think it's inevitable... not unbreakable.

For football, I agree... not baseball though.

I think that's fair, but I do think that with the knowledge we have with keeping yourself healthy, there's going to be people who are able to play 15 years or so, and produce the numbers Rice did because of the state of the game and the fact that they play 17 games and 18 sounds like it's on the horizon. Rice, for the bulk of his career, was a volume guy, not a big play guy. His first 5 seasons he was a "go out and I'll heave it down field to you" guy where he averaged like 18 yards per reception. His last 15 though, he only averaged 13.7. He was a big possession type guy, for that era, and they used him for that... that's partly why he was able to play for 20 years. That's the type of guy Mike Evans is, and he's at 15.3 yards per catch. Through his first 10 seasons, he's played in only 2 less games. CeeDee Lamb is also the same kind of receiver that Rice and was. He's at 13 ypr and through their first 66 games, Rice is only 400 yards ahead of him. Like with Evans, Lamb is 2+ years younger than Rice. Neither have to play into their 40's, like Rice did.

You keep pretending that's true. If I were you, trying to sit on a false pedestal, I'd do it too.

LOL, keep fighting the good fight sheep. Ironic how you say it's the right that just follows their leader.

LOL You're point is, my side good, your side bad... even though they're both the same (but I'm denying they're the same).

Fine... and Harris encouraged the riots by supporting donations to be raised so that the 2020 rioters can get bailed out. So, I'm not supposed to vote for Trump because he's a "pathetic little betch", but you can vote for Harris even though she supported violence against the citizens of the country. Got it. I'll hang up and listen for when you tell me why "it's (D)ifferent".

I think Rice's number can be beat, it's just a matter of durability. In his first 10 seasons, he had 13,275 yards. At the time, that was insane, but today it's not that amazing. Mike Evans is only 1600 behind that. If Evans plays 10 more seasons like Rice did, he'd have to average 1,122 yards a season to break the record (right now he's averaging 1,168). Over Rice's last 10 seasons, he averaged over 1,113 a season... if you pro-rate that over 17 games a season (by today's league). Note, Jerry Rice's 10th season, he was 32... last year, Evans' 10th season, he was 30. Both eras had their advantages and disadvantages... Rice in the 80's and early 90's had no free agency, so people didn't leave their teams... free agency didn't start until '93 (Rice's 9th season). Today, players have a more pass friendly system and an extra game. Will Evans pass him? I have no idea. I just think that Rice's record is more of a durability record than a production record at this point in time. If you told me that Mike Evans will play 11 more seasons, then I'll say there's a 50/50 chance he breaks Rice's record.