Good lord Datone. Tape that ankle up before practice.
On Thursday, defensive end Datone Jones reinjured the ankle that sidelined him for Games 6-8. He's questionable, as are linebackers Nick Perry (shoulder) and Jayrone Elliott (hamstring) and cornerback Jarrett Bush (groin).
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...283564311.html
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Wes Hodkiewicz @WesHod 3m3 minutes ago
The Packers added CB Davon House (illness) to the injury report. He's still probable to play against #Vikings
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Weird, these added injury reports. Does this mean, perhaps, that some guys have been banged up for awhile, and the team sees this as an opportunity to rest some guys because of the level of competition?Originally Posted by pbmax
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Maybe. Or he could just have the flu.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
it looks as if Floyd and Khalil are both questionable for the game on Sunday. I expect they'll probably try to trot them both out there but both missed practice yesterday with knees. Not a good sign for Minny.
What does the graph have to do with the Purple Queens?
Packers are great, Vikings are better than the Saints and Falcons over the long haul.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
The two threads within the thread collide: House was out with an illness. It may have been a GI bug and not the flu.
Harlan, are you trying to say that the graph is flawed because it compares seasons with 10, 12, and 14 games alongside seasons with 16? You may have a point.
I'm saying the graph is strange and hard to interpret because it is not giving year-by-year information at all. What it shows in any year is a measure of the total historical performance up until that time. To the extent that there is anything interesting, it would just be the final, total value for each team. It tells you that Packers and Bears have had the most total success. But since they've been around so long compared to other franchises, it doesn't even say they have been particularly good teams.
(They did integration of a meaningful plot of data. Do first derivative to get back, get back, get back to where you once belonged.)
The graph is stupid. By implication pbmax is stupid. I'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
if we don't fall into the classic trap game (coming off a big win and looking past a poor opponent to another big game) we might hang fifty on them. they have to remember records mean nothing in rivalry games.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote