5wide

NFC South is serving a one-year ban from post-season play for allowing Jake Delhomme to masquerade as an NFL QB.

They ought to give us the rematch for free since we had to pay for a complete rip off.

:thumb: One point though, my fear with the Giants this season is if/when they get in situations where they have to pass. Their receiving group has stepped up and exceeded expectations. They're better than many expected heading into the season. That said, they still lack a big-time, go to playmaker and those are the type of guys you need when you're in situations where you have to pass and everyone knows it. The last two weeks, Eli and the passing game hasn't even been average in those situations... Overall, I'm not worried about the Giants. I believe they're still one of the top teams in the NFC. But, their lack of a big time WR is a valid concern and one that could ultimately be the difference in a legit shot at a Super Bowl or just another playoff appearance. Especially if the defense can't get it together. Sure, the secondary is banged up, but that's never been the bread and butter of this defense. The front seven isn't doing what is expected, nor required, of them for the team to be successful. If they don't get right, then the Giants are going to be in more situations where they're forced to pass with no stud on the outside to make that big play when they need it.

CO2 emissions have continued to rise, yet there has been no increase in the global temperature for 11 years. In fact, it has dropped. I agree with RM. I don't think there's any harm in believing it. There's no harm in believing 72 virgins await you in heaven if you blow up an infidel. The problems arise from the actions the beliefs lead to. There's an upcoming "climate change" conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. Here's some snippets from what the green gurus hope to accomplish... Page 18, Item 36 36. The new agreed post-2012 institutional arrangement and legal framework to be established for the implementation, monitoring, reporting and verification of the global cooperative action for mitigation, adaptation, technology and financing, should be set under the Convention. It should include a financial mechanism and a facilitative mechanism drawn up to facilitate the design, adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate, in order to assure the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention. Translation: One, America foots the bill (or a large percentage of it). Two, whatever is agreed upon takes precedence and is superior to our own Constitution, i.e., the rest of the world can dictate terms to us because this treaty would supersede our own Constitution. Page 18 & 19, Item 38 38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following: (a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate. (b) The Convention's financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts, including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, © a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions. © The Convention's facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; © a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange. Translation: America gives money to the rest of the world. And, since our one vote carries the same weight as, say, Zimbabwe, and since the treaty would supersed our Constitution, we would have to abide by this global "government" and law. Page 62, Item 36 36. All Parties, except for the least developed countries and small island developing States, shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol. Page 122, Item 17 17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:] (a) Compensate for damage to the LDC's (least developed countries) economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees: (b) Africa, in the context of environment justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures. Think about the ramifications of some of this language. We have to compensate LDC's for lost opportunities, resources, land, lives and dignity? Who determines what opportunities and dignity was loss? And, what the price tag for that is? In a world that by and large dislikes or hates the United States, how is it in our best interest to agree to something like this? Especially when these "environmentalists" are flying by the seat of their pants. It was all global warming until the warming stopped...now its climate change. They're just pushing an agenda when there's just as much evidence against them, if not more. And, the world is buying it. Seriously, I'm at a loss. I'm baffled by the stupidity of supposedly smart people. (I'm talking about political powers that be, especially in the United States, before anyone takes offense.) Are they not capable of rational thought? Or do they just love Al Gore that much? If Barack Obama and this democratic Congress gets us into this, we'll never get out and it will be the end of America as we know it. You cannot agree to something that supersedes our own law and puts us at the mercy of the rest of a world that hates us. Insane that its even possible.:idunno:

Cincinnati has an elite QB that gets better when the games are tight. In a QB-driven league, that's a huge difference.

Did he score more yesterday than his combined total for the season prior to last night's game? :lol: I can't complain. I'm 7-1 and I lost when my best player had a bye...it happens. I really wanted to stand alone with an 8 game win streak to open the season. :cry:

:thumb:

What other team can you watch with the possibility of seeing your future franchise QB holding a clipboard for 4 years? :lol:

USC is #4 because that's as high as they can be rated until one of the trio at the top loses a game. They're playing as good as or better than any team in college football right now. I think if Iowa is still undefeated after they play OSU on November 14, you could make a strong case that they should leapfrog the Trojans...they'll be undefated in the Big Ten with road wins at Happy Valley and Columbus and a home victory against Michigan. Whether it's a down year or not, that's a solid resume. A win at Ohio State would allow them to match SC's best win, and they'd be undefeated. At that point, I'd bump them above the Trojans. But, right now, I think USC is the better team, so I'd vote it that way.

Sometimes I'd almost rather not have two good options...it always seems like I pick the wrong guy when I'm in that situation. If I play the matchups, they defy logic. If I go with my gut, everything goes as expected. It's irritating.

I think you'll win if Portis doesn't score any TD's.

:thumb: I would add, just because it seems that Joseph is the corner in question when a big play happens, doesn't mean he's been worse. There are so many factors that come into play. They don't exist in a vacuum. Who are the WR's on the plays? It's possibly that Joseph is being asked to cover the opponent's best WR and best big play threat. It's also possible that the Bengals ask more of Joseph...they could roll coverage to Hall more often because they have more confidence in Joseph in straight man coverage. No way to know without becoming a film studier...I don't get paid enough to do that. :lol:

:thumb: I was sitting at home last night thinking, "I hope I didn't convince him to play Eli. I hope he stuck with his gut." :lol: I know the feeling though about going back and forth on a decision and the guy you sit always blows up. I hate that. If Miles Austin is going to step up and be a #1 WR, Romo should be a consistently big fantasy producer at QB. I'd stick with him as long as Austin and his WR's are giving him support.

I know the feeling GT. But, I had a feeling heading into this game that it was going to be one of those weeks where nothing goes my way...turns out I was wrong. Mark Sanchez exceeded my expectations. :lol: Beanie Wells scored 2 less points than all three of my backs. Antonio Bryant tied my WR's (Andre Johnson and Greg Jennings). :puke: Beanie Wells? Had he exceeded 2 points in a game this season? But, worse, Washington is done for the year and I don't know what's up with Andre Johnson.

Me too. It's the most annoying thing about fantasy football. That's why you don't want Brian Westbrook. :lol:

Climate control? The beginning of the end. I cannot believe... ... ...never mind.

Maybe that's because the temperature has been decreasing in recent years...the global temperature cycles up and down. That's why it's "climate change" now, instead of "global warming". Can't really call it warming when the temperature is dropping. Idiots. They're going to destroy us with this garbage.

:lol::lol: That was good. And funny. But, I disagree. Unfortunately, it's not just in Ace's world.

Then I'd definitely play Hightower. Who is Dallas playing? Atlanta? I'd go with Eli. That game against Arizona could be a high scoring affair.

Somehow I knew you'd point that out...I'm aware of it. But, there's no fun in being mad at a State Athletic Commission.

I don't know. An argument could be made for either. I'd probably play it safe and roll with Jackson. Boldin sometimes produces more than expected when he's supposedly less than 100%. The Skins have a good D, but with WR's one long TD catch is a good fantasy day and Jackson has the ability to score from anywhere. Not to mention he can strike in the return game. The Giants defense is banged up, so Breaston could have a big day if Boldin can't contribute. That's the other side of the coin. I'd go with DeSean.

And if you look at the numbers, Buffalo rates well against the pass and horrible against the run. With Delhomme struggling, I'd say Carolina will go heavy on the run again this week...just like last week against Tampa. There will be enough to go around for Williams and Stewart against the Bills.

Pierre Thomas and Jonathan Stewart for certain. I'd go with Eli over Romo...the Cardinals are 30th against the pass and 1st against the run. Finally, the decision between the other two is a coin toss. Hightower probably won't get a lot of yards, unless he catches a lot of passes, but he does get red zone carries so he's always a TD or two possibility. Choice is supposedly going to get worked into the offense more, and if he does, I like his value. But, I'm not sold that he will. What is the status of Felix Jones? If all three Dallas backs are healthy and playing today, I'd go with Hightower. If Jones is out, I might give Choice stronger consideration.

The good news is that both guys have agreed to a rematch and Dana said they'll make it happen ASAP. Better go for the KO Shogun...just beating the dog crap out of a guy for 5 rounds won't cut it.

I also don't understand how Forrest Griffin was given a decision victory over Rampage, while Shogun wasn't. Their strategies were essentially the same. The only difference is that Rampage had several good flurries where he landed some heavy shots and damaged Forrest. I don't recall Lyoto Machida ever damaging, or even threatening, Rua last night. All he did was stand there and take punishing kicks to the leg and the ribs. I haven't been this irritated with the UFC...ever. I never really liked Machida and, fair or not, I like him even less now. Other than two impressive KO wins, he's been one of the most boring fighters I've ever watched.