RedRamage

And then a stupid penalty after the play gives the Maulers good field position. 1:58 left.

Panther's with a huge TD strike that gets called back on a Facemask... ...then the facemask call gets over turned and the TD is good! Panther's with a 4pt lead, 2:04 left.

Panther's miss their FG, Maulers come back and get a FG. Maulers up by 3 with 3:15 left in the game.

Maulers try a fake on 4th and 1 mid field and the Panther's hold! Turn over on downs.

Pits ties it up in the top of the 4th qtr.

Anyone watching? Final minutes of 3rd quarter and Michigan with a 7 pt lead.

Now is the time to do it! There's a lot of hype and excitement all building up (which means the Lions will fall flat on their faces and piss us all off again).

The Lions are dragging you back in, aren't they??

You can't carry it forward... like if you're under the cap by $10M this year, you can't have an extra $10M next year. What you could do, I suppose, it restructure a current players deal. For example: Anzalone is due (in base salary): 2023: $1.2M 2024: $6M 2025: $6M I suppose in theory they could restructure it so his base salary is (again, using $10M in cap space as an example): 2023: $11.2M 2024: $1M 2025: $1M This would be kinda like moving $5M from this season to each of the next two, but there's a danger here. If Anzalone plays well in 2023 and you want him back for '24 and '25... he might hold out for more money saying that $1M is too little to play for. The team would argue that he's really getting $6M for '24, but that he just got paid upfront, but a selfish player might still say he's worth more and you better pay him... What's he got to lose? You already paid him $11M last year so he's sitting pretty and if he's really improved his play some team will pay him if the Lions get fed up and cut him (seeing as his cap hit would be so low). For the record, I don't think Anzalone would do that if he was in this situation, but he potentially could do it, which the team needs to take into consideration if they wanted to do something like this. It might be smarter to do this over a number of players... like move $1M from 2024 to 2023 for 10 different players.

I like it... but then I've always kinda liked that old school logo.

One super nice thing: The row my son and I were in was mostly empty, so he sat in seat 1 and I sat in seat 3 and we both and plenty of space to spread out a bit. That's one thing I hate about going to games is being packed in tight on both sides. Here it was no problem.

Pretty slim... They had the upper deck closed of course as well as the endzone sections. Even then I'd say maybe 1/3rd... 2/5ths of the lower bowl full? You can kind of see in my picture the stands on the opposite side. That's pretty much how it was in the whole lower bowl. That said the crowd definitely seemed into the game once the Panthers started putting up some points. Some good cheering and people paying attention. One odd thing... if you've watched any of the games on TV you see that they show Mike Pereira on TV when they're reviewing calls so you hear him while discussing with the on field refs. What I didn't know is they also play that on the scoreboard during the game and they pipe in Mike over the PA system so you hear and see it in the stadium. I kinda liked that.

I wouldn't be shocked if something like this happens, but I would seriously dislike it if it did. I mean I'd be thrilled with Jamo only getting 2-games, but I'd seriously be upset if it came because the Lions agreed to do Hard Knocks. That's straight up tampering with the game there. That's not quite on the level of the refs being on Jerry's Party Boat, but it's dang close. The rumor is that the Lions got the draft because they agreed to Hard Knocks last year. That I have no problem with. That's off the field stuff. That doesn't effect on field rules or players or whatever. But you don't trade favors for reduced suspensions.

I was at the game! Surprise Father's Day gift from my son. We had a lot of fun. The Panthers are NOT a good team, but fortunately no one in the USFL North is a good team so they did just enough to get into the playoffs. Not a single team in the north has even a .500 record, while no team in the south has a losing record. So the Maulers and the Panthers (both 4-6) will be in the playoffs will the Gamblers and Showboats (both 5-5) stay home. I'm not expecting the Panthers to do much... they lost both games to the Maulers this season. But who knows? Maybe they'll make a run. Their OL still sucks. They have no running game. They got only 84 yards on the ground and more than half of that (48) came from the QB on play-fakes where he ran instead of passing. Still, a win is a win and I'll take it! Their first win at Ford Field too. Playoff game is on Saturday, 8:00 in Canton, OH. Looks like it'll be on NBC.

YES PLEASE!! I loved it last year. Would love to see it again.

You are allowed to bet on any sports games, but only your not at any NFL facility or in hotel that's being paid for by the team, even if you're not attending any meetings or NFL/team related events... also team planes and buses are probably off limits. Oh, and you can never bet on NFL games, even if you're "off campus." Well, except when create special exceptions to those rules, then you can bet on NFL games. But only if you're not playing in the game. Look, I'm not trying to argue that Jaymo shouldn't be punished for breaking the rules. Ignorance of the rules isn't an excuse. But my goodness... the NFL is totally trying to have it's cake and eat it too. They are slicing and dicing the rules to make it look like they are taking a hard line on gambling while also giving the players freedom to gamble away and it makes a confusing mess. Now, logically I can parse this all out and it sorta/kinda/maybe makes sense. They don't want to make it look like players are playing hard or slacking to try and win or throw a game to satisfy their bets. I totally get that. I also get that the Pro-Bowl isn't really a "game" so, who cares? Let 'em bet. Here's what I don't get: If it's okay to bet on non-NFL games, why isn't it okay to bet on NFL games that the player isn't playing in? The obvious answer is that you don't want a player colluding with with a player from another team to bet on each other's games. That makes sense... so why can an NFL player bet on a MLB game? Couldn't an NFL player collude with a MLB player? And why is it okay for a player to bet only when he's "off campus?" If a player is sitting in the hotel restaurant the night before a road game and wants to bet on a NBA game, are you really saying that it's bad optics for the NFL if the player does that in the hotel restaurant, but it's no problem if he leaves the hotel, walks across the street, places the bet, then goes back into the hotel to finish dinner?

We can be a bad team with Lorenzen or we can be a worse team without Lorenzen and maybe get a diamond in the rough...

I think Scott Harris would say no... Stoudt in triple-A this year: SO 21, BB: 23 Hinds in double-A this year: SO: 88, BB: 10 Those do not appear to be Harris-type players. EDIT TO ADD: It's worth noting that last year across three minor league levels, Stoudt had 103 SO to just 32 BB, so perhaps he's just having a rough start to 2023? For completeness sake, Hinds' 2022 (also across 3 levels) season wasn't good: 135 SO to just 25 BB.

Si.com has this mock trade: I would probably do that mostly because I'm not expecting anything great from Okwara so for me this is really a 3rd round pick for Young. Obviously the big question mark here is if Young can stay healthy and I'd want some medical professional opinions on him from that stand point. But if the doctor's see positive potential I'd be willing to give a 3rd for the potential upside from him.

Yeah, Daytona seems like a weird place to move too... Seems a bit like the Lions threatening to leave Detroit in favor of Lansing.

I dunno if I'd say he's finished, but he's certainly tending downward. He peaked at 5.0 ypa in rushing in 2020, went down to 4.7 in 2021 and last year was 4.4. I would prefer his not go to the Bears because I think he can still be dangerous, just perhaps not as dangerous as a few years ago.

Not to get too off topic, but... VPNs aren't nearly nearly as big a deal as they make them out to be on the commercials. There are definitely some advantages to VPNs, but not quite to the extent that they say. As I mentioned above my example was super simplistic to illustrate how the VPN would have behaved in the case of betting online. Rather than try to explain it in my own words, just watch Tom Scott's video here. He does a very good job of explaining this:

That still may not work. Again, it depends on what the app is doing. I'll add the disclaimer here that I don't know how this apps/sites are pulling the data, so I'm only talking about what might be going on, not what actually is. A VPN is very good for preventing a remote site from pulling your location via IP address. For those who aren't nerdish (like me), here's a very simplistic example: I send a letter to someone in California and the stamp is cancelled by the post office with information about which post office cancelled it. The person in California receives my letter and sees the cancel stamp and knows my letter came from Michigan even if I don't put my return address on it. But I don't want that person to know I'm from Michigan, so I'll use a VPN. I'll take my letter and send it to a guy in Georgia, who takes my letter out of the envelope and sends it to the destination in California. Now the person in California thinks the letter came from Georgia. What a VPN is NOT good at is preventing location data from being sent to the end destination. For example, let's say that instead of me writing the letter, I dictate it to someone else. That person happens to include a message: "Dictated by Alfred in Michigan" at the end of the letter. I still send my letter through that guy in Georgia, but once it reaches California and it's read... well, it's obvious where the letter originally came from. So, the app might be appending location information (GPS, Cell Tower, Network IP) to any communication to the Sports Book. This could include information about the Network that the phone is connected to... and that information could include location data. As a final note, I suspect that many of these betting apps REQUIRE location services to be turned on for regulatory reasons. I seem to remember hearing disclaimers on the various ads like: "Must be in Michigan to place a bet" or something like that.

Not necessarily. It depends on how the location information was obtained. If the sportsbook's servers try to determine the location using the IP address of incoming communication, then a VPN would mask this. However, if the app was sending location data from the phone (either GPS or CellTower or Network Data) then it wouldn't matter if he was using a VPN or not.

Because the rule may not have been communicated clearly to players. New evidence seems to imply that many (most?) NFL players were not aware of the rule. Given the complexity of the rule (You are allowed to gamble, but not in certain geographical locations and certain times, also some gambling is never allowed) and the severity of the punishment associated with the rule (1/3 of a season suspension for some activities, potential life time ban for other activities) I think it's fair to say that this rule should be explained in detail to players, not just listed in the rule book. Now, for the record, the Lions I believe have said that they did communicate the rule to players. But if a significant portion of the NFL say they didn't know about and/or misunderstood the rule, then I think it's fair to question the communication.