Big Blue Huddle

That is indeed odd, very odd. 

This is the week to replicate the second half of the Cards game.

2-2 through after 4 is more than palatable after playing Dallas and the Niners.

Quote from: MightyGiants on September 26, 2023, 07:34:34 PMhttps://x.com/ProFootballTalk/status/1706811857653080574?s=20

'requesting'

Jeez, when's the last time he made a pass in the league?

Stated it clearly in the summer.

I didn't like bringing him back.

He's offered nothing through six weeks. Maybe the front office/higher management get enamoured with a player and state they wish them to stick around.

I'd be surprised if that's the case but maybe there's a chance. He's ultimately proven to not be "dependable" 

Edit - I meant 3 weeks.

Why is RGIII wearing his Grandma's glasses 

Good point, DB.

I generally play an RB at the Flex position anyway but yeah, if an injury occurs I'm in a slight pickle.

This is the roster I drafted in a ten man league last night. It was rated the 3rd best in our league - any thoughts?

QB Allen
Ekler
Pollard
Ridley
Metcalf
Evan Engram
Stevenson
Gano
Eagles D

Bench
Purdy
Charbonnet
Dalvin Cook
Bradin Cooks
Toney
Njoku

I picked 5th out of ten, I was also had a few beers during the day but I'm not too disappointed how it turned out.

Happy with locking him up. I didn't want to give up on him just yet.

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 20, 2023, 03:59:00 PMCharges dropped, I hope there is a way Baldwin can sue the prosecutor because he was badly mistreated by them.

Whilst my criminal justice experience is limited to the England and Wales, I suspect US prosecutors are protected by immunity for recourse against charging decision.

Best wishes, Jim.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on February 07, 2023, 07:10:11 PMExcellent analysis, Ed.

Obviously, we don't know the precise differences between US and English law, but obviously the prosecutor's office believes there is a criminal case here.

One thing I read in a couple articles is that Baldwin may not have taken the various gun training sessions this project had very seriously. Ie, he was on the phone, not present, distracted, goofing off, etc during these sessions. If true, I have no idea if this makes him any more guilty of manslaughter, but I can't imagine sworn testimony saying that was the case is going to be helpful to him as far as the jury's opinion goes.

The bottom para is interesting, Dave. Thanks for that.

Would certainly point toward him not doing everything he should in order to not be guilty of negligence (through either an act or omission).

I think Breaking Bad changed how we view TV shows.

It's remarkable television.

I've been thinking about this a little bit today. If this was in England it could be classed as Gross Negligent Manslaughter (I'm an Associate Professor of Criminal Justice and Procedure so have an interest in this stuff)

This is the test and my (simplistic) initial thoughts are in bold:

In order to prove the offence, the prosecution must therefore establish the following elements:

a) The defendant owed a duty of care to the deceased; - I read earlier that he was a producer, so I think this can be satisfied.

b) By a negligent act or omission the defendant was in breach of the duty which he owed to the deceased; This is tricky, it would need to be proven on a balance of probabilities (i.e. 51% or higher) that he didn't do his due diligence re: the gun. Not checking would be negligent but if the court were not satisfied by that, they could find that not checking was an omission (if it's standard practice to check it's not loaded. Of course, someone might have to sign off that the gun is fine and safe - either way, that could be an omission). 

c) The negligent act or omission was a cause of the death; Yes, this is the case

d) The negligence, which was a cause of the death, amounts to gross negligence and is therefore a crime; again, I think this is the case.

If this was the English legal system, I don't think it would get very fair, perhaps Gross Negligence Manslaughter (there's a few versions of manslaughter here).

But I don't know anything about your legal definitions/tests.

Will follow this very sad case with interest

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 01, 2023, 04:22:31 PMI'm comfortable calling this Daniel Jones' best game ever as a pro. I know there are a few other games (the Saints game last year, the Skins game his rookie year) that are up for debate, but those were early regular season games when the stakes were pretty low. I thought he played a terrific game today in a huge spot. He threw the ball well for the most part with a very respectable YPA, he had zero turnovers, and he ran like a beast. Great stuff. Might have upped the AAV of his next deal by a few million or so today.

I disagree with the Saints game. He played well for 8 mins of the 4th and was excellent for OT.

Tonight, he was excellent for a complete game. Couple of early dodgy throws but a minor quibble.

I was really impressed with him tonight. And massively happy for him.