DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads

The pace of AI development is so rapid that even many of the engineers and researchers building these systems are uncertain about where the technology will ultimately lead. That is both fascinating and, at times, a little unsettling.

When it comes to evaluating athletic performance and physical potential, AI is likely to become increasingly accurate as more data becomes available. In some ways, it resembles the development of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving technology: the more real-world information that is collected and processed, the better the predictions become.

By combining decades of medical research, sports science, biomechanics, genetics, injury history, performance analytics, and historical player development data, AI can already provide insights that would have been impossible to generate just a few years ago. As these systems continue to improve, they may uncover patterns and relationships that human evaluators simply cannot detect on their own.

In American football, with the exception of the quarterback position to some extent, success is often driven by measurable physical traits such as reaction time, explosiveness, strength, speed, agility, body mechanics, and endurance. These are areas where AI can be particularly effective because they can be quantified and compared across thousands of players and historical examples.

The more difficult challenge is evaluating qualities such as leadership, motivation, resilience, competitiveness, emotional intelligence, work ethic, adaptability, and the ability to process information under pressure. While AI is becoming increasingly capable of identifying behavioral patterns through interviews, game film, biometric data, and psychological assessments, these human characteristics remain harder to measure with complete accuracy.

Another area where AI may dramatically impact professional sports is injury prediction and player longevity. By analyzing biomechanics, workload, recovery patterns, medical history, and even sleep and nutrition data, future systems may help organizations better understand which players are likely to remain productive over long periods and which players carry elevated risk.

As AI tools become widely available, future General Managers will likely have access to very similar information and analytical models. The competitive advantage may no longer come from who has access to the most data, but from who asks the best questions and interprets the information most effectively.

The real challenge for future front offices may be less about identifying talent and more about building cohesive organizations. Bringing together individuals from different social, cultural, religious, educational, and economic backgrounds into a unified team environment is a problem that remains deeply human. AI can provide recommendations, probabilities, and insights, but leadership, communication, trust-building, and culture creation may remain the areas where exceptional executives separate themselves from the rest.

Rather than replacing General Managers entirely, AI is more likely to become an extraordinarily powerful decision-support tool. The organizations that learn how to combine advanced AI systems with strong human leadership may ultimately gain the greatest competitive advantage.


The Watson trade remains one of the most fascinating case studies in modern NFL decision-making.

What stands out to me is that organizations can have access to elite education, experienced executives, extensive scouting departments, advanced analytics, and virtually unlimited resources, yet still make decisions that carry enormous long-term consequences.

One of the risks for any leadership group is becoming too confident in its own conclusions. When decision-makers become convinced they have identified a unique opportunity, there is a danger that warning signs, alternative viewpoints, and second-order consequences receive less attention than they deserve.

Looking back, it is fair to wonder whether the focus was placed too heavily on the potential upside while not enough weight was given to the broader risks surrounding the move. That is not necessarily a failure of intelligence or preparation. Sometimes it is a failure to step back and see the entire picture.

This is where AI may eventually provide value. An AI system has no ego, no reputation to protect, and no emotional attachment to a particular outcome. It can continuously challenge assumptions, present counterarguments, and highlight risks that decision-makers may prefer to discount.

That said, AI can only provide information. Human leaders still have to decide whether they are willing to listen to it. The greatest danger may not be a lack of data or analytical capability, but overconfidence and an unwillingness to question one’s own assumptions.

The lesson from cases like this may be that successful leadership is not simply about being smart. It is about remaining humble enough to recognize when you might be missing part of the bigger picture.

My conclusions might seem far fetched to the short sighted and willfully oblivious. But I've laid out the logic multiple times and you keep ignoring it.

You keep talking about some generic "war." I'm talking about not allowing unaccounted for HEU.

I'd consider the ones using children suicide bombers and IEDs the terrorists. Or the governments holding mass executions and carrying out chemical attacks on their own citizens.

Do I like everything Israel or the US does? Of course not. But at the same time, we're not chanting Death to Iran en masse. Hamas was literally abducting and killing civilians on purpose. There's a difference, even if I don't like the overly high tolerance for collateral damage, either.

I don't try to make it sound simple. I admit the complexity and multitude of factors.

I don't particularly concern myself with how other people see things. I believe in doing the right things over the convenient things regardless of external pressure. That's not to say others aren't entitled to their views, but if those views seem wrong, I will say so. If the view makes sense, I take it into consideration.

I'm not saying we are Captain America and the good guys. I'm saying I think we should try to be the good guys. It is complicated.

Yes, I think everyone should get rid of their nuclear arsenals. But, I don't think that will actually happen.

I'm not justifying "the war." Daily dealing with terrorists for decades has made the Israelis less than ideally discriminant.

What I'm saying is more HEU is bad. HEU and terrorists in proximity is worse. Someone should make sure those things stay separate. If no one else will, it looks like it's up to us. Unfortunately, Trump is making a mess of it.

I don't claim to just know things. I present my reasoned thoughts with the disclaimer that I know that I don't know everything. At the same time, I will point out things that you claim to know that are factually incorrect.

I agree that while some do it's not nearly enough. I'm speaking in regards to Graham Platner. He is no more fit to hold public office than trump is.

Buh-bye division title.

WASHINGTON—In what is being hailed as a landmark deal, on Saturday the Islamic Republic of Iran agreed to cease all hostilities with the US in exchange for never having to talk to Vice President JD Vance again.

Under terms of the agreement, Vance must remain out of the Iranians’ earshot for a minimum of 30 years, with his exact location subject to periodic inspections.

“All the bombs we dropped on those crazy bastards couldn’t do what the sound of JD’s voice did,” Donald J. Trump said. “I’m thinking of sending him to Cuba next.”

The agreement drew strong praise from a range of Washington insiders, including Second Lady Usha Vance, who asked, “How do I get that deal?”

Andy Borowitz

I think in general knowledge was power. With pretty much all knowledge at our finger tips I think reasoning will be more powerful. All the knowledge in the world means nothing if you don't know what to do with it.

I'll watch some of it. I never really got into outdoor soccer. Too slow paced for me. I used to enjoy indoor soccer, Cleveland Crunch and all that.

Milk, that was hilarious. You mention some stuff that I feel are knocks on SS as starter, good reasons these are. Maybe another day. Not in 2026.

Trump's allies have another plan to pay 'weaponization' victims

WASHINGTON, June 12 (Reuters) - While the Justice Department has said it hasabandoned plans for President Donald Trump's ⁠proposed $1.8 billion "weaponization" fund, some of his allies are shifting focus to a different way to make payouts to his supporters, including those who took part in the January 6, 2021, riot on the U.S. Capitol.

The most viable path, according to Trump allies and legal ⁠experts, may involve compensating these loyalists under a 1946 law called the Federal Tort Claims Act. That measure lets people file administrative claims - and subsequent lawsuits - against the U.S. government for alleged wrongdoing, which can then be settled out of court.

"At my ‌level, the fund is dead," Stanley Woodward, the third-ranking official at the Justice Department, said in an interview with Reuters. "If somebody wants to submit a claim against the government and sue us, they can still do that."

The Republican president repeatedly has expressed support for federal payouts to supporters whom he has portrayed as being targeted by a "weaponized" U.S. government under his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden.

But the "anti-weaponization" fund, crafted as part of a legal settlement between Trump and the Justice Department to resolve his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over allegedly mishandling his tax records, was put on hold amid fierce opposition from Republicans in Congress. Trump critics derided it as a slush fund to reward supporters with taxpayer money.

Hundreds of people who were prosecuted after taking ​part in the Capitol attack, which was a failed bid by Trump supporters to prevent Congress from certifying his 2020 election loss to Biden, already have filed claims, and at ⁠least 10 have sued the government for damages - so far with little response.

The strategy has long been in the ⁠works. Conservative lawyers debated the plan during a previously unreported strategy session at the 2024 Republican National Convention, according to longtime Trump ally Michael Caputo, who attended the meeting.

Other payout options are still being explored, according to Caputo, who helped lead "anti-weaponization" efforts in Trump's 2024 election campaign and ⁠filed ‌the first known claim under the now-abandoned "weaponization" fund.

"I've heard no indication that they've slowed down on trying to get victims paid," Caputo said, adding that administration officials have told him to "watch this space."

Caputo, who served as a Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson during Trump's first term, asked acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for $2.7 million in "restitution" over investigations by the Biden administration and former special counsel Robert Mueller.

"It's the most logistically feasible method," said Patrick Jaicomo, a senior attorney at the libertarian legal group Institute for Justice who specializes in Federal Tort Claims Act cases. "The government would have a ⁠lot of flexibility."

Trump's repeated support for compensating supporters he paints as victims of "weaponization" has raised the question of what avenue he may now pursue to make ​such payments.

Asked if there are alternative plans to provide such compensation, the White House pointed to previous ‌comments by Trump and Blanche that the weaponization fund would not go forward.

"We have no additional announcements at this time and any speculation about potential future actions is just that - speculation," a White House official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. "President Trump ⁠remains committed to addressing Biden-era weaponization."

A Justice Department official, ​speaking on condition of anonymity, said there is no effort to encourage people to submit these claims.

'PEOPLE SHOULD BE COMPENSATED'

Trump has accused the Biden administration and other political opponents of improperly using law enforcement, intelligence and regulatory agencies to target him and his allies. Critics have said these efforts were legally justified by actual or suspected wrongdoing by Trump and others.

Trump, for instance, gave executive clemency to his supporters who were prosecuted for their roles in the January 6 riot.

"The people were destroyed by dirty cops and by weaponization," Trump said on NBC's "Meet the Press" program aired on Sunday. "Many of those people should be compensated."

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham in a social media post backed the idea of pursuing ⁠payouts through the Federal Tort Claims Act, prompting the Justice Department's Woodward to respond with what looked like an endorsement in a since-deleted post.

"We're working on it," ​Woodward wrote.

Woodward later told Reuters he was trying to send a message that people who believe they were victims of government abuse continue to have a path for compensation even without the $1.8 billion fund.

FROM FRINGE IDEA TO MAINSTREAM

Financially compensating Trump allies has moved from the political fringe closer to mainstream Republican strategy.

Caputo said he was involved in conversations about finding ways to pay victims of "weaponization" dating back to October 2023.

In 1956, Congress created a permanent Judgment Fund for paying settlements of lawsuits against the federal government.

Caputo said that allies of the president and conservative lawyers discussed using this fund for payouts under the Federal Tort Claims Act "ad ⁠nauseam" during the 2024 Republican National Convention. Attendees at these discussions opposed paying violent felons, including those who assaulted police officers, according to Caputo.

The attendees viewed the Judgment Fund as a "limitless" pot of money that would avoid the political hurdles of creating a new administrative fund, Caputo said, though they acknowledged these payouts could be controversial.

Some high-profile Trump allies already have received payouts under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Michael Flynn, who briefly served as Trump's national security adviser during his first term, received a $1.25 million settlement under the statute.

Attorney Peter Ticktin said his office is representing more than 400 people who took part in the Capitol riot who have submitted Federal Tort Claims Act claims. Ticktin said he hopes the government will settle the cases before they go to court, but has not been told of any plans to do so.

"We're asking for restitution in the millions of dollars," Ticktin said, adding that he trusts that ​Trump and the Justice Department will ensure that his clients get paid.

'A TRAVESTY'

The administrative process for a Federal Tort Claims Act claim begins when a person files a form, known as an SF-95, alleging government wrongdoing and ⁠demanding damages.

Claims typically must be filed within two years of the incident, but January 6 defendants are arguing that the alleged wrongdoing against them constitutes ongoing harm. It remains unclear how courts or the Justice Department will treat that interpretation.

If the government agrees to the amount requested, officials can authorize payment before a judge ​is assigned, Jaicomo said, meaning no judge would review the payment.

If the government does not settle, claimants can file a lawsuit, at which point a judge would begin overseeing the case. Ticktin ‌has already filed 10 lawsuits and said he plans to file hundreds more.

Rupa Bhattacharyya, a former Justice Department official who oversaw the compensation fund ​for victims of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, said department attorneys typically settle only when they face a high risk of losing at trial, though they retain broad discretion on settlements including in January 6 cases.

"That would be a travesty because these are very defensible lawsuits," said Bhattacharyya, who served under presidents of both parties. "It would violate the purpose and spirit of the judgment fund - but it is unlikely it would violate the text of the law."

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/wor...r-way-to-pay-039weaponization039-victims

Two teams, the Bengals and Ravens have legitimate QB's. The other two teams do not. Injuries can not be predicted. We can only make projections based on the facts at hand. What ifs and maybes won't change that.

Advantage? The two teams that have a QB.

Please give your link and sources to back up your assertions.

Patrick Mahomes leaps past Dak Prescott as NFL's highest-paid QB with record Chiefs extension worth $504.75M

Deal ties three-time Super Bowl champion to Kansas City through 2033 season

It seemed a bit, let's say, irregular over the past few years to see NFL quarterbacks who had never won or even played in a Super Bowl surpass Patrick Mahomes as the league's highest-paid quarterback.

That's changing starting in 2027.

On Wednesday, Mahomes vaulted over the entire quarterback pack in agreeing to a new contract with a two-year extension that is worth $504.75 million and ties him to the Kansas City Chiefs through the 2033 season. ESPN was first to report the news.

The deal is not yet signed but has been in the works for weeks between Mahomes' representatives at Equity Sports and Chiefs general manager Brett Veach and his team.

The extension means Mahomes now has a contract from 2026 to 2033 worth over half a billion dollars over eight seasons. That represents the first NFL contract to climb over the half-billion-dollar mark.

Mahomes can climb as high as $522.25 million if he meets incentives.

And this: When $239.05 million in new money kicks in starting in 2027, Mahomes will be averaging a reported $64 million per season.

That beats the $60 million per year on an annual average basis Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott gets as the NFL's current highest-paid quarterback.

And it certainly blows away the $45 million per year average Mahomes has been getting since signing his current contract in 2020.

Back then, Mahomes signed a 10-year contract worth $450 million. It made him the highest-paid quarterback in the NFL.

But in the ensuing years, players including Lamar Jackson, Justin Herbert, Brock Purdy, Tua Tagovailoa, Jared Goff, Trevor Lawrence, Josh Allen, Jordan Love and Prescott signed deals worth more on an annual average basis.

And you know how many Super Bowl championships all those higher-paid QBs boast?

Zero.

Mahomes has helped the Chiefs reach five Super Bowls. And they've won three.

That alone suggests Mahomes was underpaid while averaging $45 million per season. That, of course, can be debated because Mahomes hasn't exactly posted career statistics in recent years.

His annual passing yards have declined each of the last three seasons since he posted a career-high 5,250 passing yards in 2022.

But the statistics are affected by the talent level around him. The Chiefs have had offensive line issues and the wide receiver cast has been in flux and often inconsistent in recent years.

The important thing is whether the Chiefs believe Mahomes to be worthy of a raise. They've answered that question.

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/patr...-qb-record-chiefs-extension-worth-50475m

He will be missed.
It's the true end of the Joe & Joel era; and that's very saddening.

I've gotten it about 5 times today.

There are certainly a pretty good list of prospects to keep an eye on this year at the QB position. It appears this FO has set themselves up to make a move towards drafting a QB in the next draft. I'm more of an OSU fan than a college football fan overall but this year I plan to watch more college football with an eye on the top QB prospects specifically.

Mensah, Carr, Chambliss, Manning, Sayin and Mateer just off the top of my head. It's going to be an interesting time watching and waiting to see what the Browns do at the QB position.

"Mafia" "Don" picks his consigliere.

Former New Mexico AG says he was told to stand down in Epstein ranch probe

Former New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas first started looking into Epstein and the Zorro Ranch in 2019.

On desolate dry land, about 40 miles south of Santa Fe, New Mexico, sits a sprawling estate — mostly ignored by people passing by on the nearby highway.

The property, in the town of Stanley, is notorious for its former owner, the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who bought the property in 1993.

Now, the estate, known as Zorro Ranch, is back in the spotlight as state lawmakers probe Epstein’s alleged crimes at the home, what investigators may have missed and what federal authorities may have withheld.

The word “Zorro” appears nearly 14,000 times in files connected to Epstein released by the Department of Justice, but the land has never been searched by federal authorities, and unredacted files have not been turned over to the New Mexico Department of Justice for its ongoing investigation.

Federal investigators told New Mexico attorney general to stand down

Former New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas first started looking into Epstein and the Zorro Ranch in 2019.

Allegations of crimes committed at the property include rape, sexual assault of minors, forced births and eugenics, according to accounts from Epstein survivors, their diary entries, and from the millions of files released by the Department of Justice.

Months before Epstein was arrested in 2019, Balderas says he was well into building a state case and had just returned from interviewing an Epstein survivor when he received a call from the Southern District of New York.

"They were concerned that we were getting parallel interviews from the same survivors they were going to use in an aggressive prosecution as well,” Balderas told the Scripps News Group in April.

Balderas paused the state probe, saying federal officials had “the bigger hammer at the time.” In exchange, he says he was promised by then-Assistant U.S. Attorney Maureen Comey that the DOJ would share evidence about the case and allow Balderas to pursue state charges down the road.

That never happened and federal investigators never executed a search warrant on the property.

“I think that they absolutely impacted our case, and I don't think that they were forthright, and I don't they were operating in good faith," Balderas said.

Now, Balderas wishes he had continued to pursue the state case.

"We would have absolutely gone alone and bet on the case that we currently had at the time," Balderas said.

A buried tip

Around the same time Balderas was working the case, local radio host Eddy Aragon received an emailed tip from someone who claimed to have worked on the ranch, alleging the bodies of two foreign girls were buried “in the hills outside the Zorro.”

Aragon says he sent that tip to the FBI, and there was no follow-up.

A Scripps News search of the DOJ files shows the FBI didn't enter Aragon's report into the system until 2021 — two years after he submitted it.

"I don't think anybody investigated it,” Aragon said. “Would you think if we entered it three years later, like nothing was done?"

That tip never made it from the FBI’s desk in New York to Balderas’ office in New Mexico.

Balderas says he only learned about that email this year after Congress voted to release the so-called Epstein files.

“I’m very angry,” Balderas said. "They didn't meet the standard of what a good prosecution team should be working and collaborating with other partners.”

Epstein leased land from the state

The “hills outside the Zorro” mentioned in the allegation sent to Aragon could potentially refer to state land that Epstein leased from New Mexico, extending far beyond his estate’s property line.

That state-leased land would have fallen under Balderas’ jurisdiction to investigate.

Stephanie Garcia Richard oversees that land as New Mexico’s Commissioner of Public Lands. Her office initially discovered Aragon’s email in the released files.

"As soon as I saw that, my heart dropped," Garcia Richard said. “What if the allegations were true?”

When asked whether she had real concern that bodies could be buried on or near the Zorro Ranch property, Garcia Richard said the possibility exists.

"We do know there are missing individuals,” she said. “Those girls ... their bodies have not been recovered. So, you know, there is a potential there.”

The ranch was between 7,500 and 10,000 acres, but Epstein added a 1,200-acre buffer zone through a lease of land from the state. That additional land makes the search for those alleged buried bodies even more challenging. The 2023 sale of the property to former Texas state senator Don Huffines could make a future investigation even more challenging.

“There has been a long span between 2019 and today. We don't know the state of the, you know, the evidence now,” Garcia Richard said.

State lawmakers seek answers

Now, a group of New Mexico state lawmakers are seeking more answers on alleged crimes at the Zorro Ranch and what authorities may have missed.

Republican State Representative Andrea Reeb is among four lawmakers on the bipartisan Epstein “Truth Commission” formed earlier this year. She feels Balderas should have taken more action when he was probing the case.

“You hear, ‘Oh, well, we didn't have the charges or the statutes to charge what the feds could have charged,’ but we had criminal sexual penetration of a minor for all different ages; one of them carries 18 years in prison. We had, may not have had trafficking of humans or sex trafficking charges, but we had enough that we could have definitely gotten some serious jail time on Mr. Epstein.”

Reeb says she would have indicted the case had she been told by federal officials to pause it.

She doesn’t accuse Balderas of wrongdoing, but said it was a missed opportunity.

Balderas counters that belief.

“We were still building a case,” he said. “We were as transparent as we needed to be at that time.”

For its part, the “Truth Commission” announced Monday it will issue 14 subpoenas in connection with its probe. The subpoenas are not directed at specific individuals but target the Epstein Estate, as well as banks and other entities tied to Epstein or related investigations.

Whether the Commission, the New Mexico DOJ or the federal government will get true justice for survivors is still very much an open question. But for many, justice starts with getting more answers.

“I'm convinced that those answers are not in the documents that have been released,” Balderas said. “But they're in the millions of documents that are currently being withheld.”

https://www.abc15.com/us-news/crime...old-to-stand-down-in-epstein-ranch-probe

I am glad that they ruled that way.

He has a chance to resurrect his career. If he does all the right things and goes all in on rehab and tries to help others from falling into that addiction. Good for him.

It could also reshuffle the draft.

I looked today at the rankings from "Draft Buzz" of the QB class. Wow. Outside of Manning, Moore and Sayin. It was all over the place.

The college season will reset the order and Sorsby could be in the mix.

At this stage it is a waste of time because so much can happen.

All we can hope for is that this class has a good number of guys that will carry a first round grade.

There are no guarantees on who the Browns can select.

It would look just like another gerrymandered voting district on the map.

But men have created global empires before. In general it doesn't usually end well.

More Rodney.

"I am the age where food replaces sex.
So I put a mirror over the kitchen table."

Trump directs acting intelligence chief to cut staff amid criticism over Pulte pick

President Donald Trump is reportedly urging his new acting director of national intelligence, Bill Pulte, to start firing employees.

President Donald Trump is urging Bill Pulte, his new acting director of national intelligence, to reduce the size of the office amid criticism over his temporary appointment.

"I've heard that's way too high for way too long," Trump told reporters Friday aboard Air Force One. "If he cut, I wouldn't mind that."

Trump told the Wall Street Journal in an earlier interview Friday that he asked Pulte to start the process of firing employees of an office that has already faced significant cuts during the president's second term.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence oversees the nation’s 18 intelligence agencies and was created in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to improve information-sharing.

Trump’s decision to put Pulte in charge of that office has faced backlash on Capitol Hill, including from some Republicans, because Pulte has no known national security experience.

Pulte has also targeted the president's perceived political opponents in his other role leading the Federal Housing Finance Agency by making criminal referrals alleging insurance and mortgage fraud.

"Mr. Pulte has no national security expertise. None. We're not even sure if he's got a basic security clearance," said Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee. "This role is too important to be filled by a part-time, unqualified individual."

Trump praised Pulte on Friday, calling him "very talented." He also indicated that he is interviewing five other candidates to permanently replace Tulsi Gabbard, who resigned from the role following her husband’s cancer diagnosis.

"All people that do that kind of thing, and they're very respected people," Trump added, without naming any of the individuals under consideration.

At least for now, concerns over Pulte’s temporary appointment have delayed the renewal of a national security surveillance program that he would help administer. The Senate blocked an extension of the program Friday, but another vote is expected next week before it expires June 12.

Seven Republican senators joined nearly all Democrats in opposing a procedural vote to advance the short-term extension.

The tool is part of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and allows agencies like the CIA and FBI to collect communications from foreign targets without a warrant.

Critics have raised concerns that Americans’ communications are sometimes swept up in the process and are pushing for a warrant requirement when accessing those communications. Others argue such a requirement risks hamstringing law enforcement. Negotiations on reforms are expected to continue if a short-term extension is passed.

https://www.kcra.com/article/trump-acting-intelligence-chief-cut-staff-criticism-pulte-pick/71511426

Rounders:Final hand

Aw, using paid informants to gather information on right wing extremist groups has touched a nerve so badly they make it sound like a bad thing.