TBayXXXVII

Understood, but in the post I was responding to, he claimed that Williams was already RB4 in his scoring system. That's why I asked what scoring system he used.

What's your scoring system? Is it a performance league? He's not a RB1 in my league (standard scoring/PPR).... Christian McCaffrey 297.1 Raheem Mostert 215.4 Travis Etienne Jr. 209.7 Alvin Kamara 188.1 Rachaad White 183.9 Joe Mixon 178 Brian Robinson Jr. 177 Derrick Henry 176.68 Josh Jacobs 175.1 Isiah PachecoQ 173.8 Tony Pollard 171.5 Bijan Robinson 171.2 Kyren Williams 169.7

2 TE's in the first. I'm not saying that's how I'd rank them, that's what I think will be the way most 1st rounds fall.

McCaffrey Jefferson* (pending QB situation) Chase Hill J. Taylor Bijan Robinson B. Hall Kelce St. Brown LaPorta AJ Brown Diggs I think the top of the second round features a lot of RB's like (in no particular order) K. Williams, Mixon, Etienne, R. White, Montgomery, etc...

This basically confirms why per capita isn't the important metric. Honestly, I think the use of the per capita metric favors Florida. If a higher percentage of Floridians are moving to California than Californian's going to Florida, implies that Florida is getting more red at an increasing rate while California is getting more blue at a slower rate.

When talking about population, percentage based on total is irrelevant, exact numbers are what's more important. Why? Because people vote based on exact numbers. Income, is also based on exact numbers. They're not based on the relationship to the whole. Florida's population increased and California's decreased, based on direct impact.

Don't you have to be "draftable", before you can be "droppable"? I'd like to see him go to a team with a good QB. Two teams that could be a good fit for him next year are the Chiefs and Chargers.

Didn't TCU get blown out last year?

According to this, Ohio St opened up as #1 in the CFB poll, but it was Georgia since Week 12. Georgia was #1 all year (now Michigan), in the AP poll and coaches poll... until now.

You're proof that the left is continually and aggressively moving further and further to the left... and many on that side don't see it, they just ride the wave and accept it. I don't think they'll notice it until they've gone full communist. Even then, they'll probably say something like "Well, it's a direction we need to move to at this point in time to achieve a balanced society" or some crap like that.

Yup. I think every liberal who defends democrat policies deserve ANY respect or benefit of the doubt. Every lib on this board has criticized Trump for things they CLAIM he did, while we have actual proof of Biden doing those things. Yet, you guys only care that Trump did it.

The kid table is that way -----> Go sit down and let the adults talk. We can't talk down to a 3rd grade level anymore, so we can't make you understand.

Wrong. Every "Trumper" is perfectly willing to send him up the river if all the Democrats are held equally accountable. Interesting that your side is willing to protect Trump isn't it? My guess is because their side is vastly involved.

I wish I lived in your fantasy world.

One of the best ways was for the Democrats in the House to not make a $1.9T Covid recovery bill include only $500B to go for Covid relief and $1.4T to cover liberal ventures such as gender studies in college, green energy research, and climate change research. Let's be honest shall we? The reason that Covid relief bill was written that high is because the Democrats wanted inflation to go up in case Trump won the election to help their case in 2024. If Biden had won (which he did), they'd just blame Trump's economy for the inflation (which they did).

It's funny how you picked that line when the headline of the article is: "The Federal Reserve claims the average American household is now a millionaire—but if you look closely, the middle class is going nowhere." From the line you take from the article and the headline put together, the only logical conclusion that could be made is that the rich are getting richer, the middle class is stagnant, and the poor are getting poorer. Interesting. See, here I thought Democrats were supposed to be on the side of the little guy and fight the big guy. Oh wait, the "Big Guy" is on your side. Ooops.

Earlier, you seemed to be saying that 90's was too young to understand what marriage was like. I believe his point, based on his point of view of the dating world, was more accurate of society than yours (and mine), is. I believe him thinking banning no fault divorce was more apropos to the younger generation and the future. We're older and in long term committed relationships with fellow X'ers (or older in your case????). Now, if I misunderstood your assessment from earlier on, my bad. No fault divorce is pretty much on par how the Conservatives deal with life/society, and it's why the leftists hate them for it. A ban on No fault divorce is a stance from, 'we know there will be some bad things, but we also believe that the good vastly outweighs the bad'. The left hates that because they live in a fantasy world where they think everything can be fixed by government. Getting rid of no fault divorce does more to remove the government from marriage and puts onus on the individual to be more responsible for themselves instead of using the government as a get out of jail free card. All conservatives should be for this... so should moderate democarats, libertarians and centrists. The only people who should be against this are the far left activists.

I think you just proved 90's point with this post, and backed up what I said earlier. Women aren't happier being wh0res because it's a net negative for them because men don't want wh0res. They don't want virgins either. There is a middle ground. The dating app generation is full of women who all target the same small percentage of men and it's the same jerk off's they keep banging. If the majority of women are looking for that, then by the time they're clock is about to expire, all the good men are gone and they end up settling. These are the most likely candidates for divorce. The thing is, this is the majority of younger women, not the minority. We are already experiencing a divorce rate that is over 50%, if the next generation or two are more likely to get divorced, you're looking at hitting 60 to 65% divorce rate. That's a horrific outlook especially when we know of all the statistics involving crime and poverty of kids in a single-parent household.

In today's America, a Feminist = Leftist. So, "I make the rules, and you follow them".

This is true. The feminists love to say that men are the biggest slut shamers, and of course the left picks the ball up and runs with it to tack it on to being misogynists when in fact, women are the biggest slut shamers.

LOL, puritan. I never said or even suggested that I think everyone should be virgins. I simply said that most people think a body count of 10+ by the age of 25 is too high. Just do some web searches on the topic. Also, I'm not slvt shaming anyone... in fact, I never mentioned any gender because it applies to both (yeah, I said "both"). I'm simply pointing out what's happening in society. I'm also on record as saying that marriage doesn't belong in the government's purview to begin with... which makes "no fault" a non-issue. It also removes the government from being involved in same-sex marriages as well.

I think many people here are looking at this with the wrong perspective. I agree with a few that said the "Why" is because kids raised in a 2-parent home are more likely to be successful that those in a 1-parent home. The reason why I think many here are looking at this from the wrong perspective is that you're too old. Most people here are my age an older and I think 90's is the target group of this no fault ban. People our age are past the somewhat past this point. I know a few here have said that have kids around 10 years old (give or take), and I think while you are a target group, you aren't the primary target, it's 90's. I think some of us/you, are too old to understand what's going on with the younger generation. The VAST majority of relationships are found online, not in person. When you can go from relationship to relationship with a swipe of your phone, you're more likely to do that. We're finding more and more girls and guys are with well over 10+ partners before they hit 25 years old. When you consider that people aren't getting married until 29/30, you're looking at a potential of 15+ partners. Willing to bet that most marriages that last, have much lower body counts.

LOL, no, you just choose to ignore them, that's all.

LOL, you beat me to it.