N/A

How many weeks is the season? When will it end?

True Detective airing again. I want to get HBO for a month or two after both those series finish another season.

When does it start? And how long does it last? I will probably get HBO a month after it finishes then watch all of season on demand.

I think so. Someone stated Jaguars would have better pick because Titans would have better division record, but I think with multiple teams tying, those kind of things are excluded.

I agree.

What if Titans win last game.

How do tied teams rotate? If say 4 teams tie does it go like this #1 (4th in 2nd), #2 (1st in 2nd), #3 (2nd in 2nd) #4 (3rd in 2nd)...repeat that pattern in other rounds? If so, assuming no block buster trade for #1 that the Titans could get, picking #2 is probably better considering Tampa Bay would take a QB. I doubt the Titans could get a great trade at #1 this year, and removing the risk of the Titans taking a QB at #1 would be easier on fans until the draft, so I like the Titans staying at #2.

When comparing Mettenberger to other rookies you have to discount his results a lot. He is making line adjustments and changing plays. Those other rookies are not doing that. That gives Mettenberger an unfair advantage when comparing him to them. By making those adjustments he is putting his offense in the best situation to do well. That amplifies his results compared to them simply going out and running whatever play is called and a lineman making adjustments. What you should really do is compare Mettenberger to the 7 or 8 QBs in the NFL who also do those things, then, since the rookies are not, then compare how Mettenberger compares to those real peers of him to the other rookies. When you do that Mettenberger is probably average to below against the other top 8 QBs who do those things. Then when you bring that ranking back to his rookies peers, his average to below makes 2 or 3 of the rookies better than him now.

What a joke. If you remove all of his TD passes and any pass over 15 yards, he is the worst rookie QB by far. Quit being so bias.

Getting young players experience will help a lot and if this team drafts a productive pass rusher or two, and signs one or two free agent guards who are even average, it could easily turn into one of those 4-12 type teams that flip flops into a 10-6 type team.

If you really thought I was seriously praising Locker in the short, sarcastic phrase, "Told you so", you are either dim witted or you hastily grabbed a three worded straw to simply attack another poster. Which is it?

I thought you were a bright person, and sincere but based on how the above unfolded, I have to question both. You wrote the above, and when I read it, I had no idea to what you were referring, because I cannot recall ever liking Locker and seeing any real potential in him, but who knows with the emotions of games, even a rare entertainment of decent play by Locker might have evoked a positive post or two by me. So I simply asked to see it. You replied implying that you did not have it handy but assured me I made it. Then I kindly asked again to see it, because I had no clue what it was because it made no sense to me. Finally, not in this thread by the way, you "bumped" the thread to which I made the post. It was a thread celebrating some game by Locker by another poster. You only bumped the thread, not a quote or any reference to my post, so I had to dig through all of its many pages to find a simple three word post by me stating "Told you so." Think about that. "Told you so." I would guess that is the shortest post I have ever made, not only on this board but any board to which I have ever posted - I would think most readers would agree I tend to use way too many words in my posts - not too few. Also, I think most would also think I am pretty sarcastic, to such a degree that many readers are not sure what I really mean when I post things - for example, many people have repeatedly opined that my positive posts on Mettenberger were some kind of an act or farce (they were not) and the same is true for many topics of mine where people think I am just playing around in my posts. So with that kind of atmosphere around my posts, you really thought my simple three word post, "Told you so" was me seriously being behind Locker? And if you did realize it was me being sarcastic (which I would have to assume you would - again your many posts indicate that you are a bright person), then that leaves your sincerity to be questioned. So, why are you trying to put words in my mouth that I did not state. Perhaps we all should now conclude that you are not to be trusted, and are looking to create turmoil for other posters, just like many of those, you have listed as being on your official ignore list in your signature do (even though you often reply to their posts as if you do read them, by the way.) For reference here is a quote from my lone post in a multi page pro-Locker thread (again started by another poster, with the following being my only comment - I searched through it and found only that one at least) that Jamalisms thinks was me backing Locker: Do I have to put smiley faces on posts like this??

Again, please post the link. I recall being in the chat room making jokes about how much the team was hiding Locker - he did not break 150 yards in either of the first two games as I recall. Also, in the second, which was against Houston, while he had some moments in that game, I was aghast at how badly he missed a wide open Kenny Britt on such an easy short throw that likely would have won the game had he thrown it well. So I can think of no "I told you so" previous posts I would have made to reference, so I suspect that if I really used those words, I was perhaps being sarcastic. Please link it.

Post link please. I do not recall ever having a favorable view of Locker - seems alien to me, so I would like to see what I posted to which you are referring above.

On the flip side, what if Whitehurst does play well. Under that scenario, the longer it takes to make the switch, the more incompetent it would make the coaching staff look. For example, if this goes on for 8 weeks, and then whoever plays plays well, then the HC needs to be questioned about what took so long. Imagine if Locker plays 8 weeks, and the team is 2-6, then Whitehurst/Mettenberger play well, the defense gets better under a new system, and with favorable schedule the team ends 6-2. It will probably be forgotten, and I think the HC should stay, but at the same time, I think he should be required to thoroughly explain why it took 8 weeks, and likely cost the team a playoff spot to make the change.