thundercleetz

That's fine, so your answer is NO, you would not take the top QB if available because we already signed Yanda to a long term deal. What does everyone else think?

We're talking about whether or not we would draft a QB if we had a top five pick. The left guard discussion can wait.

Sunk cost. Plans change. You have a shot at the top QB you evaluate him first then the rest of your team.

So Jared Goff out of Cal looks to be the top QB prospect. If we get a top pick and are in position to take the top QB prospect, do you take him? If we release Flacco, we would have a lot of dead money on the books for one year, but we would be rebuilding anyways. And the alternative is signing Flacco to renegotiated long-term deal. http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13841929/is-california-quarterback-jared-goff-next-aaron-rodgers-next-nfl-bust

Doesn't sound much different than the rumors of Michigan and Texas being interested in Harbaugh. I'm sure the USC boosters want a top name after the string of disasters they've had.

Compare us to the Steelers: they have also had a decline in their defense. They have less talent on defense than we do, but they seem to play competitively every week. I definitely think there is a coaching issue.

Happy birthday!!!!

I read the article and I'm still unsure what converting several supporters amounts to. I'm weary of taking voter pulse on Twitter and Facebook. Lead to some wrong predictions in 2014. The convention came close to having to decide the DNC candidate in '08. You could be right about momentum in the early stages, but I disagree for the time being. I think you're underestimating Hillary's support base. Going back to social media, I'm not sure the loud and passionate progressive voice we hear is necessarily representative of the Democratic voter base. I think Hillary captures a large moderate voter base, that wouldn't necessarily throw their support behind Bernie. I am very interested. Even though I do not support Sanders, I want to see Sanders and his grass roots campaign make some serious noise.

Ultimately the convention decides who the candidate is. For the Democrats, white states like Iowa, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Vermont are worthless. The presidential election is a predictable enough game: the election comes down to Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and throw North Carolina in there as well (and if the Republicans lose Florida it's over regardless). Until Sanders gains traction in the diverse, heavily populated states, Hillary is the candidate. While Sanders might have "won" the debate, Hillary did not bomb the debate by any means. The question is: did Sanders do enough to convert a Hillary voter? I don't think so. Even if Sanders won, it wasn't by much. Still early though, a lot could happen.

Another view on the debate: http://www.salon.com/2015/10/14/sorry_haters_hillary_clinton_won_the_democratic_debate/

I can see that with all the baggage Hillay has. Probably waiting for a firm answer on Biden before deciding to push O'Malley. Me personally, I don't care for O'Malley. And it has little to do with how he did as governor of MD (which I don't actually have a problem with). I think the thing with minority voter bases and Bernie is not whether they approve of him (probably still preferable to a Republican to many), but whether they approve of him enough to go out and vote. Minority voter bases historically have lower voter turnout rates, but turnout got much better with Obama's two campaigns. Hillary seems like a safe bet for the party in regards to building on Obama's success in voter turnout with minorities, and of course, women. Sanders is a risk in the sense of not only minority turnout, but for the moderate white voter in swing states. Not saying the moderate voter would automatically vote Republican, but might not turnout at all.

Anyone catch the debate the other night? I like Jim Webb a lot. Military experience but not hawkish, great education, voluntarily stepped away from Senate, seems like a moderate who's willing to approach the job from a common sense perspective. It is a shame the most moderate candidates (Webb, Chafee, Kasich) are buried in the polls and will not get a legitimate look. From a strategic perspective, I think Hillary did what she needed to do in the first debate to reaffirm her status as the Democratic front runner. Bernie didn't disappoint to his followers, but I will be interested to see if he gets any significant bump in the polls outside of less populated, demographically homogeneous states with white, progressive strongholds like Iowa, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, etc. I think Bernie is going to have a hard time connecting with the non-white voter bases, something Hillary connects with very well.

Bad timing for UMD, USC and SC will be open jobs, and Arkansas and Texas will possibly be open as well. Texas and USC are top five jobs in the country and will surely attract big names (Chip Kelly). If UMD wants to look south, the Memphis, Houston and SMU head coaches are solid prospects.

I actually turned the game off after they kicked the FG. I was disgusted they played for the FG instead of the TD. Didn't want to waste anymore of my time.

Steve Sarkisian is burning his bridges at USC. Doubt it would ever happen, but Coach Ken from Navy would be an interesting choice.

All our loses come down to red zone efficiency. Our inability to punch it into the end zone on our last drive has been our fall.

This game is way too long. Pathetic red zone offense. Harbaugh/Trestman appeared to be playing for the FG.

Cool reading on the topic if you're looking to kill some time: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multilingual_presidents_of_the_United_States

Speaking of Spanish, I had an interesting moment this week. I traveled to St. Louis for work. All the TSA announcements to the concourse were in English only. When I get back to BWI the announcements are in English and Spanish. Further, when I would travel to New Orleans announcements would be in English, Spanish and French. Just found all that interesting. I'm of the opinion that English and Spanish should be co-official languages of the country. It is stupid to ignore population and regional demographics. I took Latin in high school, which I don't regret because I had an awesome teacher, but I should have taken Spanish in addition. I remember Clinton said back in 2000 that he thought he was going to be the last president that didn't speak Spanish. In fact, he said it in response to Republicans at the time having success reaching Latino voters. Funny how times have changed in such a short period of time.

To build on Force's point, UMD wasn't competing in the ACC either. So it's better being bad in the B1G and hosting top fifteen teams and selling out to road crowds than being bad in the ACC in front of empty stadiums and getting bad recruits. In basketball UMD has already seen the reach of being in a national conference with its recruiting classes, and is now a legitimate national championship contender. To get better you have to play better competition. So I'm not just disagreeing with you, I'm saying you're wrong. As for the PSU "rivalry", who was UMD's rival in the ACC again? I seem to remember the "you're not our rival" chant being quite popular among UVA, Duke and UNC fans. Sure, rivalries take time to develop. But neither PSU nor Rutgers have true rivals like UVA, Duke, UNC and even WVU already had. UMD has a similar student body academically and demographically as PSU and Rutgers, and athletically the three schools heavily recruit the same midatlantic region.

Disagree with you 100%, Crav. Yes, money was a big part of the equation, but the school's AD was deep in the red. The ACC has some excellent academic schools, but outside of UNC and UVA, UMD did not have much in common with any of the other schools. The conference had compromised some of its academic values with recent expansion. I also think UMD was tired of being controlled by the Carolina schools who brought nothing to the table from a football standpoint, which is the ultimate money maker. Now UMD is in a conference mostly comprised of fellow large, public flagship, AAU universities. The Big Ten's Committee on Institutional Cooperation brings in millions of dollar's worth of research. As I said above, football is king. Outside of Clemson, FSU and maybe G-Tech, ACC football is weak from a brand perspective. Home attendance is no comparison. Fan base travel is weak to the northeast even for the schools I mentioned above. UMD has already sold out games against Michigan, OSU and MSU. And the PSU game in Baltimore might sellout. Terps also had a near sellout against Iowa last year, and I'm sure the Wisconsin game this year will have a good crowd. It had been ages since UMD had a sellout. Big Ten schools have an enormous alum presence in the northeast. The new practice facility doesn't happen if the Terps stay in the ACC. Crav, take a look at UMD's recent recruiting classes. They have been excellent. In the past, PSU would pick the midatlantic clean because they played in one of the top conferences. Now even Rutgers is fighting PSU and getting great recruits from the area. The PSU/UMD rivalry has enormous potential to be a national must watch. The two teams recruit the same areas, the two fan bases already hate each other because of Ravens/Steelers or Redskins/Eagles, and the campuses are within travel distance. Going back to the money, wait until the Big Ten's TV contract comes up for renegotiation within the next couple of years. Both the SEC and B1G timed the contracts perfectly where they will be able to negotiate an enormous deal for its schools. The rest of the conferences are locked in long term to network friendly deals, and will he left behind from a revenue perspective.

Well I was dead wrong. Edsall is likely to be fired after the OSU game. Only one year left on his original deal, his extension only has $500K guaranteed. Big move here for the Terps. Even bigger risk with Haskins.

@TDavenport_NFL: As a rookie in 2012, Givens set an NFL record got most consecutive games (5) w/a 50+ yd rec. His first was vs Richard Sherman. #Ravens @JohnBarchard: @TDavenport_NFL And it looked something like this https://t.co/6MB8pthdfh

@TDavenport_NFL: Random note on @Will_Fuller7 he went to same high school (Roman Catholic) as Marvin Harrison. Having a solid season so far for Notre Dame.

Vick rushed the throw. There was not much pressure but he did not set his feet. Granted the play was run to the right and Vick is a left handed QB and had to throw across body after the play action. If anything the play call was bad and didn't have a high chance of success given the factors.