papasmurfbell

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=nfp-20110217_ranking_the_nfl_stadiums 14. M&T Bank Stadium (Baltimore Ravens) Seating Capacity: 71,008 Playing Surface: Sportexe Momentum Turf Opened: 1998 Located within walking distance from a really good time known as Inner Harbor, M&T Bank Stadium is the proud owner of a Vince Lombardi Trophy and home to one of the game’s all-time great linebackers in Ray Lewis(notes). However, despite qualifying for the playoffs seven times in the last 11 years, M&T has hosted only three postseason games in its existence, with two of them resulting in losses. M&T ranks in the middle of the pack because as far as I can tell, it doesn’t really stand out in any of the stadium ranking criteria categories. The building is nice, the fans are good, the location is above average and there is some historical significance, but not a whole lot. There’s not really anything else to say. 12. Soldier Field (Chicago Bears) Seating Capacity: 61,500 Playing Surface: A crappy combination of grass and mud. Opened: 1924 After undergoing a $365 million renovation that was completed in 2003, here are some of the things that were said about the new-look Soldier Field: “It looks like a UFO crash-landed on an ancient ruin.” “It’s like a fat man trying to wedge himself into a skinny man’s shorts.” The Chicago Tribune called it the “Monstrosity on the Midway.” You like the view? Still, Soldier gets bonus points for location (by the lake in the great city of Chicago), fans and historical significance. Think about it: This place has been around since 1924. That’s before the stock market crashed! Additional Bonus Points: After catching a game at Soldier, you’re within walking distance of Lou Malnati’s. Soldier Field is a disgrace now. This list is asinine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-hpSSFZGwg&feature=player_embedded#t=31s

There is no need for a black or white world. There is a happy medium where all sides can be happy.

I think it was about 3 yrs ago I wanted to send him to Zona. I think it was right before Harbs took over.

Yeah I would not put reed in that list. As a later pick in this last draft he has been very solid. I would only expect him to be better next yr. I do think the FO is gun shy about WR's. You are missing TT on your list. The past 2 drafts have been so WR laden you would have to be a dolt to miss. We drafted Reed and Smith. The have been pretty good with drafted players on O. I would say that Cousins is a bust. They should let that one go this season. Maybe Harewood can maximize that stud body if his.

http://www.carrollcountytimes.com/blogs/sports/ravens/ravens-david-reed-resolves-possession-of-marijuana-case-favorably/article_74cd0d86-3b94-11e0-8c3d-001cc4c03286.html That was quick and painless.

Hey I ran into it so I figured I would share.

Maybe the mediator was brought in on teh owners side to look like they are going through the motions. If they really wanted to get it done bring in an arbiter. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-18/marvin-miller-says-nfl-s-company-union-needs-to-play-offense-in-talks.html I think Marvin should keep his yap shut. It is not like he hasn't helped to ruin baseball forever.

Thunder If you notice the players you have us developing are basically on D. Gaither is the only offensive player and he was scheduled to be a 1st round player so it was not a huge reach. We are very poor at developing O talent. Even when we have it they don't let them play like Jason Brown and Casey Rabach. Maybe it is a fact that they are so use to not having talent on that side they stick with the devil you know. If in fact that is the case it is a defeatist attitude. This season they only really let their rookie TE's play when Todd went down. Dickson stumbled some but he should never have been thrown into the fire like that. He should have gotten touches far sooner. On D they find gems at LB all the time. They are so good at it. That is why I would never let a guy hold you hostage for a contact.

3 yrs ago we could have gotten a return on Heap. Now he is valueless. I think pass rushing DT should be added to your list.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/18/super-bowl-snafus-could-spark-sponsorship-revolt/ This was a total disaster of a SB.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/blog/2011/02/kindle_increases_workouts.html

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2011/02/16/coach-harbaugh-live-on-norris-davis-show/

I do think people will buck when they do that.

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=145273 So ESPN wants to do what the NFL is charging people on NFL.com for. Basically asI am reading this I see that for what we are paying jsut running the game on TV isn't enough. So I wonder if this pushes the NFL to pull their product onto the NFL network when the ESPN deal is done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve0dT49SyZk&feature=popt11us14

We have had those D's over the last decade. I think while shoring up the D to keep them solid you have to make the O go.

Of course you are not. Why would this shock anyone?

Well ultimately if the players get a smaller % then the cap will go down. This is also Al being senile.

No I don't think they have been rebuilding. They have been heavy in the the FA market. Birk is old and Jason Brown is young. As to the Pats I have said it before. After 2007 and running 18-0 and losing in the SB they have been revamping that D. They are super young but will be very good starting next yr I think. They traded off guys like Seymour, and let other old guys leave. They have picks til the cows come home because of all their moves. The Squeelers are a sustained group. They never hold onto guys who are expensive. They have always done that. They have 2 rings and 3 time placed in the SB in the last 7 or so yrs. Indy is a joke. Manning is overrated. If you want a stat machine he is your guy. If you want rings he isn't your guy. The won his D and running game won for him I think will be his one and only. Joe - I think is solid and can win a SB. I just don't think he is a super star. Rice - Is young now. By the time they fix the problems of this team I figure he will be old and either on his way out or they will hold onto him and wish for the best. Boldin - Not ours. He was drafted elsewhere so this is not a rebuilding move. I love him as a WR though. Maybe if Cam learns to use him. he can do much better. Oher - I think he is great. I still think he might be able to play LT. One yr of starting doesn't show me he is bad. Grubbs - We will see. I like him but he is not living up to that 1st round pick. Dickson - Love him. He should have seen the field far more this yr. Pitta - Solid #2 TE. Should have been on the field more. Ngata - He is amazing. Should have had his deal redone 3 yrs ago. Now I think he could be on his way out because he is to expensive now. Cody - Fat slob who will never be what so many think. Suggs - I do not know if he is a paycheck player yet. I lean that way. I would have traded him for big time picks. Foxworth - Not ours. He may not even be here next yr. Webb - He could be a stud. At the min he should be solid. Again as I have said before. The Pats and Squeelers have WON 50% of the rings and PLACED in 70% of the SB's since the Ravens went. During that time the Ravens only really has 1 time when they could have placed in 2008. I see the philosophy of how this team is run as wrongheaded.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/17/raiders-make-seymour-move-official/ And people say you can't swindle a team. Seymour's agent did. Oh BTW Ngata's deal just got that much more expensive.

No. You understand that it is a rebuilding process. Had they done this in the past then I think you would be ready for a major run.

Yeah this is a short term band-aid and an opening wound.

http://www.wpxi.com/news/26888091/detail.html

Well the players pushed and won the last time around. Their were several owners that were unhappy when the agreement was made. The union was ecstatic. So I would not paint the players are being put upon.