WhiteWonder

McD's app, BOGO any breakfast sammich. So around me that 2 sausage egg mcmuffins for $5. App also has free hashbrown with sammich. So another $5 roughly. Been that way for the past 2-3 years that I can recall.

fortunate to be 2-0 with a majority of my players not hitting their strides yet and only being 6th in points scored.

The string of adjectives you used to describe him at the start can also be used to describe many, many people in the world and it wouldn't have anything to do with "cognitive decline". I could describe a ton of posters on this board as being emotional messes, narcissistic, undereducated definitely, unable to absorb or tolerate many things.... Obviously he is an old man. But historically, he has had many of these qualities. He's always had an ego and been a narcissist for example. Sorry, but the notion of a cognitive decline thread just screams being hurt liberals who had the wool pulled over their eyes with Biden and now squition made a topic similar to what the conservatives here used to post about Joe. The difference is we could all see Biden's literal cognitive decline.... While what I am reading lately in this thread is just gripes that are easily filed under "we think he lies about stuff and embellishes things to make himself look good". (aka most politicians) so he "appears to be on a cocktail of medications"? and he "might have PTSD"? from?.... is that like all the TDS going around?

I still don't understand this thread title. Is this actually a topic about cognitive decline and health? Feeling that the guy is egotistical, not realistic, a liar, bombastic, even dumb has nothing to do with "cognitive decline". Cognitive decline is what we all saw from Joe Biden. Literally lost, unable to string sentences together without drifting off into la la land. I assume this is just liberals being upset that their media lied to them about how sharp and competent Biden was so now we have a topic about the mental health of Trump when in reality it's just a thread to biitch about a guy you don't like and redundant with every other Trump thread regarding policy and his administration.

I don't think football is dying because of it or anything, I just don't understand why it's allowed. So I guess I do not understand why that rule was changed. Or, like i've been saying, allow the defense to push a ball carrier backwards for negative yards instead of spotting the ball at the forward progress point. Just make it fair both ways, imo.

as far as i'm concerned, as soon as an offensive player starts pushing the ball carrier, the play should be dead there. So as soon as Barkley puts his hands on Hurts... done. Run a normal QB sneak. If you want to allow offensive players to push their guys forward then you need to allow defenders to stand up a running back, and drive him backwards 3-4 yards and he's not down until he goes down.

the offense gets forward progress when the D pushes a ball carrier backwards. Why should they also get forward progress when an offensive player pushes the ball carrier forward? that's the dumbest part of the play. Normally I am all for "if you don't like it, stop it" but it's never made sense to me that a ball carrier can be pushed forward once they got rid of the D being able to push a guy back... whenever that was implemented.

I don't blame you for going after Burrow. He was drafted after Allen/Jackson/Daniels and in some cases Hurts in my leagues and is the one QB I would have entertained picking in the 4th or 5th. I am just surprised at Fields as a qb2. I think he fit the mold of qb1 drafted by owners who waited and then backed him up with their choice of Dak/Goff/Love etc. basically someone with a higher floor, lower ceiling. A guy like Fields who can boom in fantasy on any given week, like he did in week 1, would always be on the bench of anyone who drafted one of those top 5 QBs. Though it is nice to hear someone be upset when you make a selection.

not even lantern flies want to be on long island

and you got both Burrow AND Hurts all in one! why would you back up an early QB with high risk, high reward guy like Fields? weird

immobility is a fair point.

So as far as game theory is concerned, yes, I would prefer a gun slinger when my defense is at least adequate. The idea being that if my gun slinger makes some mistakes, it may not kill us but the good shiit he does can win us the game single handedly, so to speak. You obviously always want a great defense if you can have it no matter what style QB you have. i just can't imagine wanting a turnover prone QB if I know my defense is bad. I would prefer a QB who is smart with the ball and sustains drives so that the other team gets fewer offensive possessions. The problem is Jake Browning is not Brett Favre (that we know of) and we also don't know if he will turn it over 3 times a game. I was thinking more about a Jameis type where we kind of do know that is his MO. again, no reason for me to defend Cousins but I don't think he was ever quite right last year coming off the injury. Of course we don't know if he is better or closer to his previous self right now but he is an extra year removed... 18-5 ratio before going down in 2023. Always had pretty solid turnover ratio aside from maybe 2022. As for Browning, he was also a 23 year old rookie who has 8 career starts to his name and never saw game action until 2023 right? So that plays as much into the experience thing as simply saying hes 29 years old and has been in the system.

Well first off, if your defense stinks, what good does putting them on the field 3 times via INT do? The best way to help a bad defense is to keep them off the field. Longer drives resulting in points. As for the leadership thing, I can understand the debate to say keep the guy whose been in the system and knows the players. I would think there is also a case to be made for a guy who has played in playoff games, winning one (sort of a fluke)... im not some big Kirk Cousins fan, i'm just speculating.

im not sure i'd be so quick to say what they have right now is as good as Cousins. Winston? yeah probably. Winston is a veteran backup you want who can just sling it and keep your pass game weapons happy. He will turn it over a bunch in the process. Likely no different than what we saw from Browing yesterday. Cousins I would say at least has the edge in veteran leadership. not that winston can't be a leader but Cousins will be smarter with the football. I don't know how they would make a trade work. I assume by giving the Falcons a ransom and asking them to pay a portion of his remaining contract. . I did kind of think that the Falcons didn't cut Cousins, partially for this very reason.

Lance Twiggs would probably be gutterboys porn name

Sure. I was just saying if someone in stacked at RB for whatever reason in a redraft and needs help at WR, TE etc... they may not be willing to allocate the FAB$ needed to acquire Judkins if he is somehow available.... and if they feel like they might need to save FAB for a WR or TE down the road, it can be risky to blow it all and have to rely on a trade. In a 12 team league, where Judkins was randomly available, I think someone is going 80%. but everyone knows their league and if you know you can flip him easily or flip a different RB on your roster, by all means.

I did roll the dice with Jeudy as a wr3/flex in one of my redraft leagues. Just wanted to do something different and Calvin Ridley was gone. I am recalling this from memory but I feel like the last time Flacco was slinging it in Cleveland, Njoku was a huge beneficiary. Tillmans big games last season were with Crab Legs? and Jeudy was not on the team Flacco's last go around, Amari Cooper was? So the guy who had seemingly the best chemistry with Flacco is still there and healthy and now the team has Fannin who may be a wild card if they try to increase his usage and deploy him in various ways (slot, out of the backfield)... so basically I regret my JJeudy selection in that league. He hopefully won't be needed at all when Rice is back.

he already should be in competitive leagues

if it's a keeper or dynasty league he's not available. if it's a redraft he shouldn't be available. if he is, probably a decent chunk of your budget, unless you don't need any RB help, then you don't need to bother making a bid because you won't get him at your tolerated price.

clearly I was not around most of the day since I had to guess/ask who. be more triggered

I’ll assume gutternuts or timhack?

I just buy and sell, I don’t mess with options or anything. I’ll do short term trades if a stock I already like is oversold and I have no issue selling 2 days after buying if it pops 10%. I’ll hold some things I like longer term like Fnma currently. I’ve traded AMD so many times since it was $12 I’ve lost count. Roku. Recently bought a bunch of United Health in my IRA around $275. Decent dividend for a stock with 100%+ upside. so for me, a lot of work was done about a month before the election and through February. April sucked but the rebound was quick and back to Jan levels and since then it’s just gone higher. idc who is in office but nothing I own is really down since they dropped biden like a bad habit. A few are a little stagnant but it’s really hard to complain. any of the older people on the board complaining that the sky is falling tariff market drop cost them so much (that they have not recovered) probably need to hire new wealth managers. And younger people with more risk tolerant portfolios would have to have some very bad stock picks.

. It’s a long time hobby. To be fair, the trading account isn’t up 400% overall, just in the past 1Y. It was down a bit before that as it struggled to recover from the shiit show that was second half of 2021 and all of 22. Started getting back on track in 23 but first half of 24 was a step backwards