beanfigger

In regards to the conversation about The Flash and Arrow, these are two of the shows I have binged since I started doing that a couple months ago. I am now through two seasons of Arrow and one season of The Flash (I actually watched this one first).

The Flash is a far superior show. A lot has to do with the fact that they actually cast actors instead of athleticism/pretty faces for the most part, unlike Arrow. The actor who plays Detective Joe is outstanding, and I really like the rest of the supporting cast, aside from Joe's daughter. Even Felicity is better in her cameos in this show compared to her role in Arrow. That's a credit to the writers as well as the cast.

Many times in Arrow, a character has an emotional outburst followed by much, much pouting that seems to come out of nowhere. The motivations for the actions and emotions of the characters is really under thought and underplayed. It is held together by stunts and a complicated soap opera of backstory and connections that seems to somehow work. It is getting old quickly, though.

49 minutes ago, ravensdan said:

In the midst of daredevil season 2. This is such a great show and season 2 not disappointing. 

Just finished it today. Excellent.

Certainly not my "favorite", but I will never forget when someone started a Shiancoe thread during his 15 minutes with us, and the first sentence he posted was, "Does this guy eat with a fork?!?!" It's burned in my brain because I still can't figure out what that meant.

If we have the draft McShay just mocked (Buckner 1st, Spence 2nd), then I'd expect a real title run because it'll prove anything's possible and going our way.

Don't know about our record. Looking at the opponents, it seems many we think will be tough end up weak, and many that are supposed to be easy wins turn into surprise contenders. One thing I will say, I LOVE the travel (or lack there of) this season compared to last. Those early west coast double dips killed us last year. This year, only one trip outside the Eastern time zone. That's much better.

Because of that, I predict that we at least find our stride and consistency earlier this year.

1 hour ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

And Warner Bros won't get rid of him because even if the movie sucks it's going to make a ton of money at the box office solely cause Batman is there. 

 

There is actual anxiety about this at the studio level. Sure, it seems safe to say that it will be a hit, and I have absolutely no doubt it goes big on opening weekend, but there is a gigantic, ten-movie DC comic universe schedule over the next half decade or so that really needs this movie to do well. People are talking about RT scores, but the Cinemascore from opening weekend will likely be a bigger key in how much of a drop off the following weekends have and how long of a run the film makes in theaters. I think it will be fine, and overseas markets will be great, but it's understandably leaving execs with high anxiety because of the stakes. Heads will roll if this bombs even a little.

Just because the conversation recently got me thinking, here's how I rank superhero movies I've seen:

The Top Shelf: Dark Knight, Winter Soldier

Excellent: Spider-Man 1&2, Iron Man, Batman & Batman Returns, X-Men First Class & Days of Future Past & X2, Avengers, Guardians of Galaxy

Great: Superman 1&2, Batman Begins, X-Men, Deadpool, Iron Man 3

Good: Captain America, Hulk & Incredible Hulk, Daredevil, Batman Forever, Thor, Wolverine, Avengers 2, Ant-Man

Average: Dark Knight Rises, Amazing Spiderman, Iron Man 2

Below Average: Thor 2, Man of Steel, Spiderman 3, Fantastic Four Silver Surfer

Trash: Amazing Spiderman 2, Superman Returns, X-Men Origins & Last Stand, Batman and Robin, Elecktra, Catwoman, Fantastic Four

Those are all the ones I can remember well enough to rank.

1 hour ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

I'm just tired of people trashing DC but loving Marvel. Marvel has its good films 

winter soldier

iron man

avengers

Avengers 2(so now my caps start work)

Guardians

 

and that's it!!! Rest of the other movies are either boring, useless, or stupid. And none of them hold a candle to The Dark Knight. 

 

I want DC to do well. But Zach Snyder poisons everything he touches

I don't know anything about people "trashing DC". I know many, including me, have been pretty down on recent Superman movies, but most Batman films get a ton of love. The same could be said about their TV series.

When you list the Marvel movies that you like, are you saying you don't like any Spider-Man or X-men movies?

2 hours ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

Now at 42%. I think it goes into the 50s or 60s since a ton of fans who hated man of steel like it. 

I have friends who join me in attempting to guess these things from trailers. My guess was 61, so just barely "fresh".

23 hours ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

Here's to hoping Batman v. Superman is actually as good as the early reviews indicate

The early RT reviews have it at 29% fresh.

6 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

I think theres incentive for the Browns to deal him. $9m in cap space and the opportunity to draft additional players who actually have the potential to make an impact for the team when they actually will be relevant.

As it stands now, Thomas, while still a dominant player, can be as dominant as he wants.... its not going to contribute to winning. And I think they realize that with the rebuild theyre going into. And by the time that rebuild process is in the next phase of trying to compete Thomas' contract will be over, much older, and not the same player.

If they can move him now it makes more sense to do so than to keep him. I would say, there's almost no incentive to keeping him other than to mentor younger lineman who are going to be a part of that next phase.... but ive never really placed a whole lot of value into that mentor idea especially when a team is garbage.

For them, it's all about acquiring assets that can contribute to a winning program in 2-3 years. So, anyone thats on the current roster that isnt likely to be a part of that future plan - the FO will view their value as the draft picks they can get in exchange for them. 

I don't disagree with what you said, just the conclusion you draw from it. If Joe Thomas gets shopped around for real, there is no way the best offer they get is one or two late-round picks. I'm saying if we want him, we'd have to offer more. And if in some oddity we were the only team offering and all we offered was a 4th and a 6th, I don't think that provides enough incentive for them to make the move. They don't need the cap space. In fact, if they dump all their remaining big contracts like that, they might have a tough time reaching the minimum. His contract is a complete non-issue from their side of things.

52 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Our window is realistically about 6 years, you could be more optimistic and think flacco is playing at a high level for 8 more years but this is being realistic.. 

 

Joe Thomas probably has another strong 3 or 4 years left. Worth every penny for a safe player at a high valued position. He will play his butt off because he wants to win before his career ends. It gives us security and let's us draft freely in the first 2 rounds and we can move on with no concerns about LT. I wouldn't give 6th overall but I'd give a 2017 first in a heartbeat, with Joe thomas, the FA acquisitions and essentially 3 first round rookies with perriman returning and the 35th overall pick, our 2017 first could be quite low because it shouldn't surprise anyone if we make a strong playoff run with that roster. Worth it to strap ourselves because we are dangerously close to win now mode, it would be nice to enter our "win now window" rrady to compete at a high level with key pieces in place, rather than enter this window saying "we desperately need to fill this hole before were ready".

This is my thinking on the matter, as well.

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Many factors come into play here.

1. If I were the Ravens, I'd offer a second. Why? Because LT is one of the biggest "needs" on the team, and the price the Ravens would have to pay is obviously going to be steeper than most other teams making offers, given that we play in the same division. For a team like the Ravens to pry away an All-Pro LT from a division rival, it would certainly take a top 40 pick.

However, that price isn't the same for every team. A trade to the NFC would probably cost less. 

2. Teams have to deal with his contract. Its not just a sure thing that another team would be able to restructure his contract. He's got 3 years left at a reasonable rate, and a team would have to take on his cap number as is if that's the case, which isn't terrible, but also isn't easy for a team like the Ravens. Extending a 32 year old player with 3 years left on his deal wouldn't make a ton of sense.

Sounds like we're on the same page. We're pretending to be Ozzie in this thread, so obviously we're talking about what the Ravens should offer.

Also, the Richardson thing isn't so much setting the standard for what we should offer as it does for what they would accept. There is little to no reason for the Browns to just give away their best player. If we are really playing the game of pretending to be a GM who wants to actually make this trade, then we need to consider it from their side. He's not a locker room cancer, and he isn't chewing up so much cap that they can't do anything else to improve. The only reason they'd give him up is if they really feel like the return improves them significantly. Late round picks do not accomplish that, in my opinion.

3 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

No, and yes.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if a team were actually willing to give up a first rounder for Thomas right now, he wouldn't be a Brown anymore.

I'm more or less just shooting down comparing the two, since they are two gigantically different situations.

When I mentioned it initially, I was less comparing the players than I was stating what the Browns took in a recent trade. They were able to get a first for a guy most likely cut in the not-so-distant future. I doubt that was the first offer they got for him.

I saw you said you would offer a second, and that doesn't seem too unreasonable. I'm just saying the people claiming all they should be looking for is two third-day picks for him, if they were Ozzie, would probably get their pay docked for wasting time while on the clock. The Browns wouldn't even wait for the sentence to end before hanging up the phone.

4 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

There was also about a decade in age difference AND several million dollars in salary difference there. Not the best comparison.

Are you trying to say Trent Richardson was worth the first rounder and Joe Thomas isn't?

Trent Richardson went for a first round pick, and people are saying a late 3rd for Thomas? A 4th and a 6th? A 4th and a bunch of our next players?

Is Madden this easy? Maybe I should try and play that game. Fantasy life is fun.

If we were willing to go to $8M for KO, and the offer came to exchange our first rounder for Thomas and maybe a 3rd or 4th from them (why not just try to own every single 4th rounder this year?), then it would be hard for me to see the downside. That's the type of deal I think works.

13 hours ago, rmw10 said:

The bracket game is strong this year... so far.

If we just pretend that the Midwest section doesn't exist, I only have one game wrong this far.

Only one in my pool to pick Yale! Hopefully, they win Saturday, as well.

He cut himself. He's the only one to blame.

I'm not the biggest Hill fan. I stayed a few times last year that he was getting overrated here a lot, and this move is something that doesn't surprise me at all.

However, I still think this move alone affects us negatively at the moment. Do we have some big move coming? Who know, but I'm less comfortable with our DB situation than I was yesterday. Just look at how injuries there killed us two years ago when we could have been legit championship contenders. Hill was better than just depth, but I guess we aren't as uncomfortable in the FO after this move than I am.

Growing up in DE, there really is no true "home" teams to root for. Typically, we just default to the Philly teams, and that's what I did for every sport not football. For some reason, I could never become an Eagles fan (guess there's only so much punishment a guy can take), so I became a fan of football as a whole. I was, however, a huge Jerry Rice fan.

Baltimore is sort of the second home team city for DE (both the Phillies and Orioles were listed in bold in the local paper), so when the Ravens came I immediately began following them.

I'd say I became a full-on "fan" when Rice retired. That's when the Ravens moved up to first priority on my football list.

We've almost picked up as many "W's" this offseason as we did last season (Watson, Weddle, Wallace).

If we stuck to the 80/20 rule, I wonder if re-signing Givens would have worked out. I said before it looked like he was developing a connection with our QB before the injury.

I'm gonna just hope Wallace has a real career resurgence with us, and he shows the past couple years were symptoms of the systems and QBs he was playing with. I'll say again, though, I like the effort and what we're trying to accomplish.

10 minutes ago, 1/28/01 said:

Yes, we need to give Flacco ample time and get him some protection.  When given a ton of time, hes pretty darn good.  When given average to no time, he underthrows every deep ball and makes boneheaded plays.  PLEASE GO OLINE FOR THE ENTIRE DRAFT!!!!  Ha!  I dont want to get a lump in my throat on every deep ball to Wallace and/or Perriman.

Couldn't resist, could you? Under throws "every" deep ball with "average" time, though? Don't even think Flacco was mentioned to draw that comment.