Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: Mr. Matt on May 16, 2017, 04:03:27 PM
It all happened very fast Ed, it was like two-second play.

Also, maybe I should have included the wider view, because if he could've gotten to that weakside hole, there was a lot of room.

You can see Hankins beating his man too, though. DTs are really asked to do a lot in the Giants' scheme and those two guys were extraordinary together. I'm glad they got Tomlinson, he has big shoes to fill.

Yes. I saw the room. And yes, very big shoes to fill because teams are going to be testing that 3T.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great quickness by Snacks. Maybe it was a bad read also by Elliott not to go off the right side Double Team and that huge hole between the RT and TE with one defender to beat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks, guys. The feedback is much appreciated. We had 143 hits so far with no celebrity, so it's gaining in popularity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On this week's episode Bob, Brian, Rich and Ed discuss the 2017 NY Giants Draft Class and the Post Draft Free Agent signings.

http://tinyurl.com/BBH-NYGPostDraftWrapUp

Quote from: Mr. Matt on May 01, 2017, 03:25:37 PM
Ed, I would be interested in helping out if I can in any of a few ways: archiving good posts, selecting posts for re-posting as articles, or receiving and editing articles for use on the front page. I'd just need some assistance from you guys figuring out what your platform can do.

Let me discuss it with Rich and see how we think this may work and we'll get back to you later in the week. Thanks for volunteering!

Quote from: jimv on May 01, 2017, 01:06:28 PM
It's about the Japanese persecution of Christians in the 17th Century.

Why would not be recommended to someone not of strong catholic faith?

Quote from: jimv on May 01, 2017, 11:55:45 AM

I finished it.  I don't recommend it to anyone who is not a Catholic of strong faith; combination of Scorcese & the Jesuits.   (Outstanding acting,)

What's it about?

Quote from: Mr. Matt on May 01, 2017, 11:15:09 AM
If someone's post is primarily informational, the longer the better. I enjoy reading facts or analysis by many posters here.

There are also some posters whose writing style I find entertaining, so if I have free time that day I will read those long posts as well.

When posters find excellent articles and want to share them, or spend a long time compiling information on draft picks, or free agents, or a historical story, or X's and O's, I think that BBH should follow a policy of archiving those on the history and chalk talk and draft boards so that we can read them later on our own time. Topics fall off the main board relatively quickly, and more than I few times I've found myself scrolling through a few days later trying to find something I didn't have time to read when it was posted, but was interested in.

Would you be interested in following up with that?

Quote from: Hadron on May 01, 2017, 10:21:49 AM
I stopped drafting long posts because I felt people either didn't read'em, skimmed'em or took one line entirely out of context.

Yeah, Bob does that to me all the time. 

(kidding, Bob)

I would think that someone would want to know how many people may avoid their long post or just skim through it before deciding to put that much time and effort into their work.

Quote from: Bob In PA on May 01, 2017, 10:01:15 AM
I can't speak for the others, but in my mind this poll is not in any way a condemnation of long posts.  Bob

Of course not. Some long posts have excellent content. Just gauging the members and letting everyone read the sentiment. It's certainly not directed at JBG.

I added it, Chris. Thanks.

You can vote up to three items and guests can vote.

Comments?

Quote from: LennG on April 30, 2017, 12:42:37 PM
Ed

Don't get me wrong here, I wasn't trying to make light of the time and problems. We all know about the 2 sets of bathrooms, the back of the bus and many problems we probably never even thought of. BUT, I just found that they over did some of the 'facts'. As I said, I did some research and if you want to see a great interview with Ms Johnson, go to YouTube and put her name in. You will see she admits that some of what was portrayed 9in the movie was, well, not very accurate. AGAIN, not making light of any civil rights problems.

That was my only fault to a very good movie.

I spent some time working in Atlanta and Texas and that was in the 80's and 90's. I can't tell you how many times I heard someone make a comment off to the side about Yankee Jews and Niggers. I can imagine what went on in the workplace in the south before the Civil Rights Movement. I don't think they overdid it at all but I think they softened it. That's just my perspective. I certainly understand how it may have distracted you from what you enjoyed about the movie. You make a good point.

I liked that movie a lot. Lenn, I'm sure they took liberties in the script but think of where the setting was. You grew up in NY. Much different down there in that decade. Now they just whisper.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk