rfl wrote:

zn wrote:
Rams announce they have signed OT Garrett Reynolds; probable third tackle.

Third? I didn’t know we had a 2nd.

And the guy plays better at OG. So we sign him for #3 OT? I can’t help but think that he’ll be mainly at OG.

I wonder if this suggests that we are close on Joe B.

And of course we need to see the $ he signed for.

They don’t have a #2.

But they don’t have to sign these guys in order of prestige.

They need some depth. This guy has experience, Boudreau knows him, he fits, he’s cheap (probably).

I’m excited that Foles is committed to remaining himself. And that he wants to get to know his teammates.

Because that’s what it is about.

Cheesecake.

I make the best cheesecake there is on the planet, as far as I know. Really. I am expected to bring a cheesecake to every single family event, and if I don’t, I catch hell. Seriously. I honestly like my chances of winning at the California State Fair. So I am entering this year because there is apparently actual money involved at the state level. I won $15 at the the county fair which means I broke even. The judges told me to go to State with it because one can actually get money for winning, plus some corporation may pay for the recipe and slap it on their product. Cream cheese, for example. So what the hell. My kids have been entering various artworks for a few years at the fair, and my wife insisted everyone in the family should enter something, so she made her excellent chocolate cake (which won Best of Division for cakes), and I made my excellent cheesecake, and now we’re supposed to go pro, or something. Anyway.

I think Life of Pi hinges on the island. The entire book is set up in the author’s note with the promise that “I have a story that will make you believe in god.”

All of Part One, set in India, is about developing Pi’s credibility for telling the story on the lifeboat with Richard Parker in Part Two. Plus it establishes Pi’s love of religion, and his opinion that theists and atheists are brothers because they both go as far as reason will take them, and then they have to take a leap of faith (to believe in god, or to believe there is no god). He criticizes agnostics because they won’t take a leap of faith.

So then the reader goes along with Pi’s story. Then when he’s talking to the Japanese shipping representatives, they don’t believe him, and ask him for a different story. He tells the other version. Students always hit the ceiling at this point, and go berserk in class. They always want to know which version is true.

Neither version adds up, though. That’s the problem. And Martel does that deliberately. There is evidence both for and against each version of the story. And the Island is the crux of the question. So the reader has to take a leap of faith either way.

Pi asks the Japanese men – since it doesn’t matter to the shipping company either way – which version they prefer, and they say they prefer the story with the animals. Pi says, “So it goes with God.”

Which I interpret to mean that basically since there cannot be absolute conclusive evidence that god exists or god does not exist, that Pi is saying that the rational thing to do is believe in god because that’s the “better story.”

As for Richard Parker, in the “atheist” version of the story, he is Pi’s “madness,” or will to survive at any cost. It’s no accident that Richard Parker is anthropomorphized with a human name, and that Pi takes on similarities to RP throughout the book (like the way he eats and kills). They are driven closer and closer throughout the book, and once Pi hits Mexico and no longer needs that killer instinct to survive, RP disappears into the jungle.

I have not seen the movie, so I have nothing to say about that. Except I’ve heard it isn’t good, and as with all movies, crap gets moved around and modified, and people who have read the book hate the movie. As usual.

zn wrote:

Zooey wrote:
In the mean time, I can avoid taking a stand on the trade until the time at which I can judge it in hindsight while claiming I was right all along.

You should post on message boards. Sounds like you are just right for them.

I’m thinking about doing just that.

Man, I think I could dominate.

zn wrote:

Zooey wrote:
what cap usage can actually be ascribed to this trade.

Depends on what you mean by that. They gained 13 M. Actually more like 11+ M because they also took on Foles’s cap hit. Is it possible to figure out which specific players they got or will get with that money? I doubt that’s possible. But in the end, when you tally it all up, they will have had 11 M more in cap space than if he had stayed. Is that decisive? I doubt it. Because along with taking on Foles’s 1+ M contract, they also took on his upcoming free agency. Right now starting qbs up for their 2nd contract get around 19 M. So either they don’t like Foles or that, more or less, is what they will have to pay to keep him.

.

I understand there is really no way to figure this out.

But I can keep the whole matter under investigation in the media, various congressional sub-committees, and in the courts for a year or two. In the mean time, I can avoid taking a stand on the trade until the time at which I can judge it in hindsight while claiming I was right all along.

Winnbrad wrote:

Zooey wrote:
Just in terms of positional preference, I would prefer a veteran center over a veteran guard.

But I don’t know anything about Wiz or Blalock.

It is scary, though, how eager the Raiders were to move on from Wisniewski.

Yeah. The scuttlebutt is the Raiders felt like Wiz wasn’t gonna become the “elite” center they wanted. They said he regressed last year. Plus, the Raiders had a crap load of cap space, and Hudson was available.

So a perfect storm I guess.

Wiz is gonna end up somewhere, and right now Seattle wants him, bad. That bugs me. I don’t want Seattle to get him. I want their O-line to stink.

The Rams will have to pay him more than Seattle to get him. Seattle has to be a more desirable destination that St. Louis right now, so I don’t see the Rams getting him.

I wondered that about Bradford, too. If he had a good year with the Rams, what does his next contract look like? Too expensive, for too long?

But what would the market bear? I wouldn’t think anybody would want to lock him up without playing time incentives being a big part of the deal. I dunno.

Just in terms of positional preference, I would prefer a veteran center over a veteran guard.

But I don’t know anything about Wiz or Blalock.

It is scary, though, how eager the Raiders were to move on from Wisniewski.

How does anybody know how proactive the Rams were? How do we know they didn’t contact the Browns?

I think I read somewhere that Foles is not much of a vocal leader, either.

A few of us were talking about Thomas 2 or 3 weeks ago. I think he’s been souring on the Rams for a while. He can’t talk to Kroenke, and he’s not liking the stadium/LA/move stuff, and he posted the day before Bradford’s trade that he had a source he trusted inside the building tell him there was nothing going on with Foles.

He isn’t happy.

Yes.

BTW, I see Jake Locker is retiring. That’s a surprise. He came out after Bradford.

So…is Dunbar gone? Is/was he a FA? I don’t recall seeing his name this off-season.

rfl wrote:

Guys, I’m getting old. But I do watch pre-season games. And I don’t really remember this Keenum guy. If a die hard Ram fan doesn’t remember him at all … does that mean he’s pretty forgettable?

I think they picked him up during the season, after Hill got hurt.

wv wrote:

Do they not know Bradford is not allowed
to have weapons.

w
v

He can have a RB.

It’s WRs he can’t have. And – not that I follow Philly closely – but I understand they have been clearing the roster of receiving threats.