dmo_dlo

Never. That's the beauty of the situation for Gruden. He has all these first rounders and no need at QB that would tie his hands.

Saints weren't lucky, they deserved the win. And they would have won in overtime even if the kick was good.

They took two weeks to come up with fistfight excuse?! And when people ask for the body what are they gonna do, glue him back together?

Making such big deal over a fistfight!!

You are right, this is the philosophical underpinning of carbon tax. But this goes way beyond "carbon pollution", as those other societal costs such as health or ecosystem, when monetized, are much larger than the social cost of carbon or other prices put on carbon.

That's a great question, and not an easy one to answer. In an ideal world you want to account for all externalities, so if you're emitting in China you should pay for the death, asthma, or heart attack that you're causing in California too. Similarly, if you're emitting in New York, you should pay for the externalities you cause in Europe. However, for the health damage caused by burning fossil fuel, at least 90% (and I would say more than 95%) of externalities in the US are caused by American made pollution. So practically having a fair free market that accounts for externalities just in the US would still go a long long way.

The most effective solution for clean energy is relying on the free market, but not the type we have, but a truly free and fair market where you pay for the full cost of what you use. Right now when we run our car, we pay for the gas. But our driving also costs the society in terms of the adverse health effects it causes, in terms of its impact on the ecosystem and on the climate, all external costs that we do not pay for, at least not directly. Only when we account and pay for these externalities, will we have enough financial incentives to develop and implement clean energy sources.

LOL, this guy thinks a climatologist's job is to predict storms

When Winston claims that sex was consensual he has a claim to innocence. When this guy says it was consensual he's claiming stupidity, above being a rapist.

Let's see, falcons defense and the struggling QB who has lost his way. We all know how that story is about to play out as we have seen it a million times.

I'm not sure if this was ever an easy win. Bus had a 500+ yard offensive day. If anything, they were unlucky (and us opportunistic) with the two INTs.

Maybe this is where our luck takes a turn for the better ... Oh wait, the jinx police is going to be all over this!!

So apparently the forward rolling is OK if the original pass was a lateral. The strange thing is that the officials did not whistle the play dead, which means they put themselves in bind to reverse it only with indisputable evidence had the play been successful.

I agree that it looked forward. But I always find that laterals are very deceiving to the eye from the camera view unless you look at the camera at or about the line of throw. In any case, I'm glad we didn't have to find out if it was legal or not.

See this (though it has contradictory statements): https://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bucs/2018/10/15/even-if-desean-jackson-scored-on-the-final-play-it-wouldnt-have-counted/ Pro Football Talk said they contacted the NFL and were told "that Jackson could have picked up the loose ball at the end of the game and scored a touchdown. That's because the loose ball came on a backward pass, not a fumble." It certainly wasn't 2 yards forward. It might have been forward but it was to close to reverse the call on the field. Apparently it wouldn't be considered a fumble because it was a backward pass.