Re: Defense
Day of the Dawg
05/14/26 01:28 PM
I may be overly influenced by the memory of the defense getting picked apart by Carson Wentz at the end of the Vikings game. And don't forget how we got absolutely run over by the Jets. I would say that Schwartz's defense had a couple things happen that shouldn't happen to a defense of that caliber. It was a championship-caliber defense that let us down a couple times but, overall, was a special defense that was held back by an anemic offense. Even if they had come through for us in those two games, nothing significant would've been gained in terms of the season. The Jets only had 169 yards total offense in that game. The NOT So special teams are why the Browns lost that game giving up a kick return and a punt return for touchdowns in that game. That is why the special teams coach was fired. The only time the defense struggled was right after Maliek Collins got hurt in the 49ers, Titans, and Bears games. Then they seemed to find their selves again down the stretch vs the Bills, Steelers, and Bengals.
23
735
Read More
|
|
Re: I Thought Canada Was Going to be the 51'st State?
bonefish
05/14/26 12:31 PM
Greenland, no no I can't have it. They screwed me out of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Canada, I think I want it. Why not?
Cuba, oh I would like Cuba. Close Mar a large oo.
Venezuela mmm I love oil. Look Alcatraz can I have that?
What can I have my name on. How about passports?
Kim Jong Un what a swell guy. I wanna be Putin. Nap time.
2
73
Read More
|
|
Re: Our National Parks
Bull_Dawg
05/14/26 05:01 AM
Since when did protecting and funding federal lands and our national parks become a matter of "extremes"? People of all religions and all political viewpoints share equally in the enjoyment and reward of those lands and protecting them and preserving our natural wonders. Maintaining them have been continued and carried out by every president and administration for decades.
Now it's an extreme issue? Maybe you need to pause and ask yourself why it's now an extreme issue when it never was before? None of this is as complicated as you're trying to make it sound. I think even you know that. When an argument is based more on emotions and headlines and numbers without context than actual specifics, I consider that an extreme approach to a topic. (i.e, saying something happened because someone allegedly hates someone else and bringing up how one despises something.) You're the only one that said extreme issue in here. If gas prices rise to the point where many can't afford travel to parks or the economy craters because we defaulted on our national debt, are the parks still being shared equally? Most things aren't as simple as you try to make them. One might only understand a simplified version of something, but that doesn't make it the realistic version. There's more than one side to every story. I get the propensity for declaring every move Trump makes as horrible (many are), but it's just not that black and white. I'm not a fan of presupposition. I like to drill down to what the actual move is rather than just declaring it's horrible and evil because Trump did it (or someone claims some number means something.) It could be horrible. (It could be much ado about not all that much.) I'm trying to figure out the actual changes beneath the seeming histrionics. If someone gives an example of some irreplaceable natural feature being destroyed or horribly contaminated or even something meaningful being removed from a designation, I'll agree that's awful. If someone can give a non-biased cost/benefit analysis of the actual jobs being lost, I could form an opinion on how I felt about it. A biased article from an organization losing funding with a few surface numbers and inflammatory language doesn't actually tell me a whole lot. It does give me pause, so I ask questions and look for clarification. The next president, as he's leaving office, says your home and business and/or all shipping routes to and from are now in a national park and you have to leave and/or can no longer use the roads/water. Eminent domain, here's a lowball check. Nothing you can do about it. Are you okay with that? Or would you like the incoming president to take a look at whether that actually makes sense? (Not that I have faith in Trump/future politician actually being able to make a good decision there.) Allowing lame duck politicians to make irreversible decisions just seems like a horribly short sighted policy to me.
66
1,849
Read More
|
|
Re: Strength Of Schedule
IrishDawg42
05/13/26 06:09 PM
We live in a world of "What have you done for me lately", but we have arguably invested more in the QB room than any of those teams, signing Watson. To date, he has been the worst trade and sign player in the history of the league. However, the short history he has here is irrelevant to 2026. The one thing that Watson does care about is money. I don't think he will ever have enough and he wants another pay day. The only way he gets that is by winning the starting job this off season and balling out. If HE balls out, this team wins a lot of games, it's that simple. We know he has done it before, it just isn't something we know if he can ever do again.
Last words for me on this:
If Watson wins the job, I EXPECT that large turn around because of the investment. If Sanders wins the job, it is more likely that is because they have no future plans for Watson and would rather see where Sanders can progress before designing a way to get one of the QBs in 2027.
The second scenario, it's hard to call it a loss... If Shedeur progresses into a franchise guy, we win, we can use draft capital to continue a progressive build overall. If Sanders ceiling has already been hit(which is pretty low), then the Browns enter 2027 off season with a top 5 draft pick to go get the QB they covet. It will be a lot easier to move up from a top 5 than from a mid-teen on down...
FOR ME, worst case scenario is that Sanders is so bad this off season, Monken sees no other option than Watson. Watson plays just well enough to get 2nd in the division, no playoff, leaves in free agency and we have zero chance at a QB in the draft. I love winning 7 games over 4 games, but the way this team is built right now, all it needs is a QB. I would rather sacrifice this season to get one, if Sanders is incapable.
10
328
Read More
|
|
Re: Browns News 6.0
Day of the Dawg
05/12/26 02:56 PM
Being totally bluntly honest, I'm more surprised that he hasn't retired and is simply going on Reserve/PUP. Maybe the Browns are doing him a solid from a healthcare perspective as well by this designation as opposed to outright retiring? I am not sure the Browns can cut him, and he isn't going to retire until he isn't going to get paid any longer. Solid points, both. $6 million of his 2026 salary is guaranteed; 2025 was fully guaranteed.... and there is a LOT of Dead Cap pushed into Void Years from 2028 thru 2031. He will still represent $11.7million in Dead Cap in 2027, so he may spend the entire remainder of his contract on PUP. Keeping him on the roster allows the Browns to file for cap insurance relief for him being out.
356
35,687
Read More
|
|
Re: Iran War II
PitDAWG
05/11/26 04:56 PM
Trump Says Iran Ceasefire ‘On Life Support’ After Bragging He Has ‘The Best Plan Ever’ President Donald Trump said Monday that the ceasefire with Iran is not in a great place at the moment because he believes Iran’s proposals to end the war have been “unacceptable.” “It’s unbelievably weak,” Trump said of the ceasefire. “It’s on life support.” "Life support is not a good thing," he continued. "I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support where the doctor walks in and says, 'Sir, your loved one has approximately a 1% chance of living.’” Speaking before reporters and allies gathered in the Oval Office moments earlier, he boasted about his "plan" to end the war. “You know, a lot of people said, ‘Well, does he have a plan?' Yeah, of course I do have a plan. I have the best plan ever," Trump said. “I have a plan. It’s a very simple plan.” Trump then laid out his plan, which is no plan at all: “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.” https://www.huffpost.com/entry/late...3Q&brid=YWdncwGqwKmG8cReBnbkchAEu24r
124
4,861
Read More
|
|
Re: Republican Right Wing Nuts - Part ????
PitDAWG
05/11/26 02:24 PM
Trump Rejects New Iran Peace Offer as ‘Totally Unacceptable’ (Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump and Iran rejected each other’s latest peace proposals to end the 10-week conflict as the two sides struggle to maintain a fragile ceasefire. “I have just read the response from Iran’s so-called ‘Representatives,’” Trump said in a social media post. “I don’t like it — TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!” Iran offered to transfer some of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to a third country, but rejected the idea of dismantling its nuclear facilities, the Wall Street Journal reported earlier. Iran disputed the report, according to the country’s semi-official news agency Tasnim. It was unclear whether the exchange of proposals would offer a path to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Under its latest proposal, Iran would dilute some of its highly enriched uranium and have the rest sent to a third country, the WSJ said, citing people familiar with the response, but it also called for guarantees the transferred uranium would be returned if talks fail and ruled out dismantling its facilities. Iran’s semi-official news agency Tasnim said the WSJ’s reporting on proposals for handling nuclear material was “not true.” The statement emphasized Iran’s desire for an immediate end to the war, the release of its frozen assets, a lifting of US sanctions on oil sales, an end to the US blockade of the Gulf of Oman, and ultimately Iranian management of the strait. State-run IRIB News added that Tehran rejected Trump’s plan as tantamount to surrender and insisted the US must also pay war damages. Trump had proposed that Iran permit passage through the Strait of Hormuz and Washington end its blockade on Iranian ports in the next month, with nuclear talks to follow. Oil rose with the dollar after Trump rejected Iran’s latest proposal. Brent was up about 3.5% to above $104 a barrel, recovering some of last week’s losses. US equity-index futures edged lower as the standoff weighed on risk sentiment. Iran has been “playing games” with the US and other countries, Trump said in a social media post earlier Sunday. “They will be laughing no longer!” Trump and his advisers have repeatedly suggested the war is over, even while threatening to escalate attacks if Tehran does not agree to a peace deal. Trump is scheduled to travel to China this week despite the ongoing conflict. The president has said repeatedly that Iran must not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon and claimed as recently as last week that the country had already agreed to give up its nuclear ambitions. The president did not say in his social media post what the consequences, if any, of his dissatisfaction with Iran’s response would be. In recent weeks, Trump has appeared eager to draw a line under the conflict as he faces rising political pressure to bring down gasoline prices across the US ahead of the November midterm elections, when his fellow Republicans hope to hold on to control of Congress. The conflict has killed thousands of people across the Middle East and upended oil and gas markets, with soaring fuel prices piling pressure on governments and consumers worldwide. Here’s more related to the war: Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, warned it would take several months for the market to return to normal even if the Strait of Hormuz reopened immediately. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes that he would like to end US financial support for Israel’s military over the next decade. The US currently provides Israel with $3.8 billion a year in military assistance under a 10-year agreement originally negotiated by the Obama administration that lasts through 2028. Despite the ceasefire in place since April 8, a drone strike briefly set a cargo vessel ablaze off Qatar in the Persian Gulf, marking the latest shipping attack in the region. The United Arab Emirates and Kuwait both said they had intercepted hostile drones. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trum...r-as-totally-unacceptable-013346837.html
298
27,049
Read More
|
|
Re: Carson Schwesinger DROY
Ballpeen
05/11/26 11:17 AM
My apologies if this takes us off in a tangent...
But I would love to know the discussions that went into this pick. According to most on draft day, this guy was massively overdrafted, and supposedly not on any team's radar. For all we know, that could all be smoke... but I'd love to know what led Berry to draft a LB who walked on to his college team and had limited playing time before his late breakout season.
Notable players taken right after CS include Tyler Shough, the safety Seattle got, Treyveon Henderson (though we picked Judkins right before), Jayden Higgins and Luther Burden. I think Berry and staff were desperate for a linebacker with JOK's injury. Jihaad Campbell at LB taken late in the 1st round 31 overall. It would have been interesting to see who they would have selected if he was still on the board at 33. Was Carson their top linebacker on their board or was he 2nd. The fact they selected him 3 picks before they selected Judkins shows they feared waiting 3 picks they would possibly lose out on him. I agree. Carson was on the NFL radar.
26
1,714
Read More
|
|
Re: Bobby Cox and Ted Turner
bonefish
05/09/26 10:07 PM
Bobby was old school all the way.
His players loved him.
You were expected to conduct yourself like a professional.
No clubhouse music allowed. Wear headsets so you don't infringe on others. No kids in the locker room. Not all kids behave well.
Show up on time and play your ass off. Dress was sports coats and collared shirts.
He kept everything inside the locker room. And he supported his players like they were his own kids.
I will always remember him on the top step cheering his players on. He was all baseball.
Sad day in Braves land.
2
105
Read More
|
|
Re: Quarterback Defined
PitDAWG
05/09/26 02:35 PM
Since their current problem child QB is on the last year of his contract they are going to need someone to come in and fill that role on the roster.
314
23,504
Read More
|
|
|
|