gehringer_2

Tigers probably are not the only team trying to get better defensively and today that also means younger players. I wonder if we will see anything new in training regimes used by middle infielders in particular, to try maintain fielding capability. But guys don't seem to mind if they 'outgrow' playing SS if they are having success hitting the long ball!

No, not the rider, the horse! Not a good year for Bob Baffert https://www.espn.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/32804838/bob-baffert-trained-thoroughbred-medina-spirit-2021-kentucky-derby-winner-dies-collapsing-post-workout

Not sure what you are asking. McCarthy is big and fast, like any 5 star would be. But he doesn't have anything like the 'skill' hype around him Henson had (yet) and Harbaugh has kept his light pretty well shaded beyond his ability to run RPO. He has one big throw completion out of a total career of only 27. OTOH, Henson had played enough to demonstrate the arm talent that had everyone drooling. If he had been able to think the game as well as he could make the throws, he might be vying with Brady for GOAT. In that sense the analogy is sort of unfair to McCarthy. He may read come to read defenses and manage an offense just fine - we don't know yet, he hasn't been given the chance. And the comparison of McNamara to Brady is also off in that Brady never dealt with doubts that he had the physical attributes to be a top pro style QB. In fact he is the prototypical physical specimen, he simply hadn't learned how to be one until he got to NE. So beyond having a possibly gifted guy nipping at this heels, like a lot QBs do (like you hope you have recruited well enough to always have) beyond that the parallel gets a little forced.

Hope DeKeyser had a good skate today.

It's not a terrible analogy, but there are significant differences. JJ is clearly talented, but we've never seen him make one of the impossible Elway-esque throws that Henson and only a few guys that have ever played in the NFL could make. So the draw to Henson was much stronger - physically he really was a freak as a thrower. Of course it wasn't till he played that exposed that he wasn't all that good a QB. For all we know JJ may actually be a good QB. Harbaugh has made sure to never play him enough for that discussion to get serious.

you have it right there. It's not easy to fill 3 hrs everyday when you don't do interviews and your average caller is terrible.

Gonna be a sad day for his cow.

Just ask: "How many murders are committed with automobiles in the US in a year as compared to handguns" and the issue frames itself easily. The simple way to put it is that >99.9% of vehicle deaths in the US are accidental. Probably 95% of gun deaths are intentional - though I wouldn't be surprised if the 5% accidental guess it too low, it is sadly not all that unusual for people do kill themselves by accident with their own guns. It is not logically conceivable to remove the possibility of accidental death in the real world, though we work toward that aim constantly. Conversely, not only is It is easy to imagine a world with out significant gun violence, I can, amazingly, simply look beyond the border and see any number of them!

If we were horse trading over abortion law, I'd go in a different direction. My opening position would be a national DNA database, so the father of every one of those children carried to term could be identified and required to be financially responsible for it until it was 18. Put that on the books and watch the demand for abortions in the US go to zero.

So I am curious, what do they accept as 'proof'?

That is true. OTOH, I don't know if we should judge and/or project all politics by the current weird state we are in. It wasn't always like this, it may not always be like this. For instance will the children of this generation of gun owners add their parents guns to their own collections when mom and dad go into assisted living, or will they have them destroyed because they have no interest in them? Buddha and I just came to different conclusions about whether the US is a regressing Culture or not. Whichever is true it probably won't stay the same as it is now.

That's true but not quite what I was trying to say. What I meant was more along the line that if the black on black crime happening in the US were black on middle class white, it wouldn't be happening and if that included gun control, then gun control would have happened.

✔️

At least I don't think this year's field is very controversial. It could be moreso in retrospect if both Georgia and Bama lose their semi.

marriage has collapsed in the US among lower socio-economic groups among both blacks and whites. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-marriage-divide-how-and-why-working-class-families-are-more-fragile-today

Haha - I thought your answer was going to be that if were middle class folk being shot in Chicago something would have changed be now - so I'll toss it out there anyway since you were going in a slightly different direction. I question how many of the middle American addicts created by prescription would ever have gone down that road had they been prescribed 800mg caplets of Motrin for whatever immediate ailment took them to their script happy doctors. Yes there had been a general economic turn down out in the sub/sub urban US but I have trouble envisioning the majority of these people would have sought out opiates on the black market. That would be a ton of cultural inhibition to overcome, at least until already addicted. I think without the boot strap of easy prescriptions those looking to deaden their mental pain would have been far more likely to have turned to alcohol. Now whether that would have killed as many as opiates in the end is still a fair question. And if it had been alcohol it would have been all that much harder to discern it happening as well. I've been hoping for data to start emerging that the legalization of marijauna in so many places is having some positive impact on the rate of addition to harder things, and/or the economics of the black drug markets, but haven't yet.

at the risk of igniting an old debate, Bryce Young has Doug Flutie written all over him.

when you live in a logic free zone, these things just flow right by.

has there ever been a party in any democratic country anywhere whose politics actually helped to kill their own members (other than in a war)? Is there any precedent to this in the short history of democracy?

I still don't know how much you can hang the double TO on Campbell when Glenn was screaming for it. You either trust your head coordinator or you don't.

well, dollars are fungible. That's like saying the state lottery money 'all goes to schools.' In the final analysis any organization has one pot of money.

don't you think this gets a little nutty though? OK, lets say the 'responsible' gun owners agree to a law that any gun in a house with a minor has be kept in a safe or at minimum with a trigger lock - then how much good is that gun against the home invader coming in the window? It's seems you can't secure guns and still have guns available for the purposes that people say they want them for. Doesn't that argue that getting rid of them (handguns that is) is probably the better course? That the collective security of a less armed society improves everyone's quality of life more efficiently? And maybe it takes 30 yrs to get the numbers low enough the get to where they want to be. So what. I'd still love to be able to leave that legacy to my grandchildren, or even my great grandchildren.

The conventional wisdom on the history is that banning opiates and cocaine was a response to their increasing use in the middle classes - such as was depicted contemporaneously in Doyle's Sherlock Holmes and O'Neill's Long Day's Journey into Night, but in retrospect I wonder if the problem was ever as bad or the solution as effective as touted.

Correct - a natural* political outcome when commuters have more political clout than the affected locals. *natural in the sense of political decisions easy to defend as simply 'serving the larger constituency' despite the obviously disparate racial impact.

The problem is that there is a perfectly sound counter argument, which is that there are plenty of places in the US with plenty of guns and little murder (at least the 'normal' crime kind - again keeping the mayhem events in their own class). That is why it is so easy to get derailed. In a huge sense you are absolutely correct, remove the guns and we don't need to worry about the complexities underlying why they are being used. But OTOH, if you have people on the gun side actually serious about trying to solve the issues around their use, I'm not going to complain about getting to anything that helps keep more kids alive.