I've seen the Broncos' 2020 draft grade as either an A or an A+, but to quote Michael Scott, I completely forgot there was such a thing as an A++.
I don't know how I feel about draft-day grades. If you go on NFL.com every team received an A or a B except for one. You know a lot of these guys aren't going to work out, but for now, they are all future Pro Bowlers. I don't really follow college football so I don't know one way or the other. I had never heard most of these guys before they showed up as Bronco draft picks.
Maybe Jerry Jeudy will be up on the Broncos Ring of Fame in 20 years. Maybe he won't even be on the roster in 5 years. We don't really know for sure. I like that the Broncos are trying to improve the offensive skill positions. Maybe there's only so much an offensive line can do if the quarterback has nowhere to go with the ball. It's the highest pick (#15) they've ever spent on a wide receiver, and the first since Demaryius Thomas in 2010. He was unquestionably the best-ever first-round Broncos wide receiver, earning four Pro Bowl selections during his time in Denver. The other first-round receivers have been a little more spotty.
Ashley Lelie had a couple of good seasons in the Jake Plummer era after being drafted 19th overall in 2003, but didn't last long. Marcus Nash was picked 30th in 1998 and was one of the all-time Broncos draft busts. Ricky Nattiel was picked 27th in 1987 and hung around for several seasons, but really his only claim to fame was rounding out the Three Amigos. So here's hoping Jeudy follows in D.T.'s footsteps.
The Broncos picked KJ Hamler, another wide receiver, with the #46 overall pick. The Broncos have picked up some good wide receivers in the second round: Courtland Sutton (#40 in 2018), Eddie Royal (#42 in 2008), and Vance Johnson (#31 in 1985). But they've also had their fair share of misses: Cody Latimer (#54 in 2016), Darius Watts (#54 in 2004), and Orlando McDaniel (#50 in 1982). Based purely on pick position, Hamler could go either way.
I thought this year was a real alphabet soup of a draft. Check it out: Cushenberry....Ojemudia....Agim....Okwuegbunam...Strnad...Tuszka.
A lot of people seem to like the center, Lloyd Cushenberry, in round 3. Hopefully he pairs with last year's pick, Dalton Risner, in providing stability to the offensive line for years to come. The Broncos have had tough luck in that area for many years. They received high marks for LB Justin Strnad in the fifth and
G Netane Muti in the sixth because they would have been picked much higher if
not for their injuries. Well, that's the real problem with
injuries, isn't it? Sometimes you're never the same. I remember everyone
being super excited about drafting the injured Jake Butt a few years
ago because without the injury, he was like a first-round talent. But
that hasn't worked out so well because in three years he's played three games.
So we'll see. A year from now, we'll have a pretty good idea if the high marks were warranted.
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Wednesday, April 22, 2020
Conference Reactions
The 190th Annual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was earlier this month. My wife is a good example in that she pledged to stay off of Facebook for the weekend because she didn't want to see the reactions to everything. For some reason, I enjoy exploring social media to see what people are saying about conference. I guess I'm curious like a cat. That's why my friends call me Whiskers.
I'd like to address some of the negative reactions that I've run across regarding this conference.
In this time of trouble, many people were looking forward to General Conference to console their troubled hearts. However, many were disappointed to find out that the Church moved ahead with plans announced six months ago to center this conference around the bicentennial of the First Vision, instead of scrapping it and gearing everything towards our worries about COVID-19.
This attitude reminds me of the story in Matthew 26 when a woman used a precious ointment to anoint the Savior's head. She was criticized for using the ointment for such a purpose when it could have been sold and the proceeds given to the poor. Jesus corrected them by saying, "why trouble ye the woman?...for ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always." Even though there is a lot of uncertainty in the world right now, why shouldn't we take a weekend to commemorate the anniversary of what we believe to be the most significant world event of the past two centuries? There's only going to be one bicentennial. We'll see plenty more plagues in the years to come.
Some thought The The First Presidency and The Quorum of the Twelve showed poor leadership in a crisis situation. Apparently it would have been preferred for them to rewrite their talks on three weeks' notice to center around the novel coronavirus. I'm not sure how you get ten hours of material out of that, but apparently that's what some people wanted to hear. And what exactly were they supposed to say? Hey, we told you so? We told you to have at least a three-month supply of food, we told you to avoid unnecessary debt, we told you to live within your means. Maybe they should have just "played the hits" a la the Tabernacle Choir and re-ran old conference talks addressing the matter.
Many were offended that the Church moved ahead with other plans that had undoubtedly been in the works for months - the unveiling of a new symbol, the issuance of a proclamation, and the accompanying Hosanna Shout, apparently feeling that these actions were insensitive during a worldwide pandemic.
But it wasn't as if the church outright ignored the pandemic - President Nelson called for a worldwide fast for people of all faiths on Good Friday. Some scoffed at the notion that such an action would have any effect whatsoever on the current crisis. And on the surface, it doesn't seem like an earth-shattering solution to join with others in abstaining from food and drink for 24 hours. But isn't that what we're supposed to do in our own lives, when we're faced with problems that are beyond our mortal capacity to solve? To fast and to pray?
Again, I'm not exactly sure what people were expecting. I guess they were expecting President Nelson to get up and say, "Okay, here's what you need to do. Go wash yourself in the River Jordan seven times..."
I suspect what it's really all about is the Church's reserve fund - which everyone knows about thanks to "the whistleblower". They don't like that the Church has it, and apparently would like to see it spent on resolving the cornonavirus, because it's an emergency fund after all, and this is an emergency.
A fair response to all these criticisms is "hey, we're only a few weeks into this" - it's not as if this is something that has been going on for months on end. We don't know yet if the measures taken will have an effect and if things will moderate in the weeks to come. What kind of message would it send if the church just blew the whole chunk right now instead of waiting to see what happens? I'm sure that's part of the reason we're taught to have at least a short-term supply of our own...the church can't provide for everyone's needs every time we come to a bump in the road.
I for one, liked the church's controlled response - we should be concerned, we should take precautions, we should support the effort to control the spread, but there's no reason to panic. Isn't that the example we need? Calm down, relax, focus on the fact that we still have the gift of the restored gospel on the earth.
Some were disappointed that there was no earth-shattering announcement. Yes, another conference passed without any mention of ordaining women to the priesthood or a validation of same-sex relationships or a suspension of the law of tithing.
The proclamation on the restoration didn't reveal anything new, at least not to members of the church. But they aren't really hiding the ball anymore (if they ever were). Not only do we not wish to be referred to as Mormons anymore, but also, "We declare that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, organized on April 6, 1830, is Christ’s New Testament Church restored." I thought that was a pretty bold statement - hey, we aren't just another sect of Christianity...this here is the real thing.
I wonder if our church leaders get annoyed with church membership always expecting "a big announcement" and then being disappointed if there wasn't one, or it wasn't what we were expecting. I think it's okay to just have a general conference where there's nothing groundbreaking announced.
But in case you were too disappointed in everything that happened (or didn't happen) to notice, there was a big announcement.
Hey! We're building a temple in Dubai, per their request; and also, we're building one in MAINLAND CHINA.
I think that qualifies as "a big announcement".
I think the church's response to the pandemic can be summed up by a quote from Joseph Smith, Jr. himself:
"The Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done."
In other words, we're not done yet, folks....
I'd like to address some of the negative reactions that I've run across regarding this conference.
In this time of trouble, many people were looking forward to General Conference to console their troubled hearts. However, many were disappointed to find out that the Church moved ahead with plans announced six months ago to center this conference around the bicentennial of the First Vision, instead of scrapping it and gearing everything towards our worries about COVID-19.
This attitude reminds me of the story in Matthew 26 when a woman used a precious ointment to anoint the Savior's head. She was criticized for using the ointment for such a purpose when it could have been sold and the proceeds given to the poor. Jesus corrected them by saying, "why trouble ye the woman?...for ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always." Even though there is a lot of uncertainty in the world right now, why shouldn't we take a weekend to commemorate the anniversary of what we believe to be the most significant world event of the past two centuries? There's only going to be one bicentennial. We'll see plenty more plagues in the years to come.
Some thought The The First Presidency and The Quorum of the Twelve showed poor leadership in a crisis situation. Apparently it would have been preferred for them to rewrite their talks on three weeks' notice to center around the novel coronavirus. I'm not sure how you get ten hours of material out of that, but apparently that's what some people wanted to hear. And what exactly were they supposed to say? Hey, we told you so? We told you to have at least a three-month supply of food, we told you to avoid unnecessary debt, we told you to live within your means. Maybe they should have just "played the hits" a la the Tabernacle Choir and re-ran old conference talks addressing the matter.
Many were offended that the Church moved ahead with other plans that had undoubtedly been in the works for months - the unveiling of a new symbol, the issuance of a proclamation, and the accompanying Hosanna Shout, apparently feeling that these actions were insensitive during a worldwide pandemic.
But it wasn't as if the church outright ignored the pandemic - President Nelson called for a worldwide fast for people of all faiths on Good Friday. Some scoffed at the notion that such an action would have any effect whatsoever on the current crisis. And on the surface, it doesn't seem like an earth-shattering solution to join with others in abstaining from food and drink for 24 hours. But isn't that what we're supposed to do in our own lives, when we're faced with problems that are beyond our mortal capacity to solve? To fast and to pray?
Again, I'm not exactly sure what people were expecting. I guess they were expecting President Nelson to get up and say, "Okay, here's what you need to do. Go wash yourself in the River Jordan seven times..."
I suspect what it's really all about is the Church's reserve fund - which everyone knows about thanks to "the whistleblower". They don't like that the Church has it, and apparently would like to see it spent on resolving the cornonavirus, because it's an emergency fund after all, and this is an emergency.
A fair response to all these criticisms is "hey, we're only a few weeks into this" - it's not as if this is something that has been going on for months on end. We don't know yet if the measures taken will have an effect and if things will moderate in the weeks to come. What kind of message would it send if the church just blew the whole chunk right now instead of waiting to see what happens? I'm sure that's part of the reason we're taught to have at least a short-term supply of our own...the church can't provide for everyone's needs every time we come to a bump in the road.
I for one, liked the church's controlled response - we should be concerned, we should take precautions, we should support the effort to control the spread, but there's no reason to panic. Isn't that the example we need? Calm down, relax, focus on the fact that we still have the gift of the restored gospel on the earth.
Some were disappointed that there was no earth-shattering announcement. Yes, another conference passed without any mention of ordaining women to the priesthood or a validation of same-sex relationships or a suspension of the law of tithing.
The proclamation on the restoration didn't reveal anything new, at least not to members of the church. But they aren't really hiding the ball anymore (if they ever were). Not only do we not wish to be referred to as Mormons anymore, but also, "We declare that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, organized on April 6, 1830, is Christ’s New Testament Church restored." I thought that was a pretty bold statement - hey, we aren't just another sect of Christianity...this here is the real thing.
I wonder if our church leaders get annoyed with church membership always expecting "a big announcement" and then being disappointed if there wasn't one, or it wasn't what we were expecting. I think it's okay to just have a general conference where there's nothing groundbreaking announced.
But in case you were too disappointed in everything that happened (or didn't happen) to notice, there was a big announcement.
Hey! We're building a temple in Dubai, per their request; and also, we're building one in MAINLAND CHINA.
I think that qualifies as "a big announcement".
I think the church's response to the pandemic can be summed up by a quote from Joseph Smith, Jr. himself:
"The Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done."
In other words, we're not done yet, folks....
Friday, April 3, 2020
Domestic Travel Bucket List
I'm not very well traveled. I've never been outside the continental U.S. I didn't cross the Mississippi until I was 23 years old. I've never been further northeast than Charleston, WV. In my defense, I've lived in five states, been to both oceans, and been physically present within the boundaries of 28 of them. A couple of years ago I received a stipend for a work anniversary and so I had to go through a bunch of ideas and pick something. I wound up choosing Chicago, which turned out to be an excellent choice. But what about all the runners-up? Will I ever get to do those trips?
Anyways, here's my list of U.S. destinations:
Upstate New York. I actually sketched out an itinerary so basically the trip is already planned. Lots of church history sites so of course places like Palmyra and the Sacred Grove would be a priority, along with the Baseball Hall of Fame. Niagara Falls could be part of it. And the Finger Lakes! My wife was born in Binghamton. And Oneida seems like an interesting place. It would just be a lot of driving and spectacular scenery, is how I imagine it.
Nauvoo. I've actually been here once before. But it was more of a "passing through" thing when we were moving to North Carolina 18 years ago. We only stayed for a few hours - it was July, it was sweltering, and we had a two-year-old. So not the funnest time we've ever had. I'd like a chance to do it right someday - experience everything - Carthage Jail, the Temple, life on the Mississip, etc.
New York City. Also was on my short list for my stipend, but kind of chickened out. Chicago seemed less threatening and more affordable. But you can't go through life without having experienced The Big Apple. . . right? I'd want to go in the late summer so I could attend the U.S. Open at Flushing Meadows. I'm not a huge tennis fan or anything, but for some reason it calls out to me.
Olympic Peninsula. When I was a missionary I did get to take a day trip up through Port Angeles to Neah Bay, so technically I've been there already. It was amazing, but also it was January and I was wearing a shirt and tie. I didn't really get a full experience. I also did a lot of research on this area when I was making my trip selection. My dear wife (who served in the same mission) sort of pooh-poohed it, however.
Palm Beach County. Speaking of my wife pooh-poohing things, I've always wanted to visit some place where she grew up. We've been together for 22 years and I've never visited a single place from her childhood. Not one. She lived here from about sixth grade until she went to college, but her family moved and she's never been back. She insists there's nothing to see and nothing is the same. What is she hiding? I must find out.
San Francisco. Early fall is the best, I've read. I'd want to go see the giant trees and for some reason visually the Oakland Temple has always been one of my favorites. But I guess neither of those has anything specifically to do with San Francisco. Steep streets, history, and a golden bridge though.
Alaska. I've never been that interested in a Carribean cruise - they seem gross. But the Alaskan version intrigues me. They were doing an ad campaign several weeks ago and I was ready to go. Except for the paying for it part. I believe it's considerably more expensive than most cruises.
Ozarks. It looks amazing plus I have some family history interest in the region, so you could always justify a fun trip in the name of genealogical research! I'm not sure about Branson, though. What is that about?
Mt. Rushmore. We're getting down to the more doable portion of the list. It's only six hours from our house. I've always wanted to go. We really should be able to check this one off.
Grand Canyon. My wife really wants to go and take the kids. Also, something that should fit in the budget a little more easily. We could also hit Mesa Verde and Four Corners on the way.
So there you have it, my top 10 list, in no particular order. I could definitely come up with a few more to fill it out should we ever start crossing some of these off. Of course, maybe we will never go anywhere again due COVID-19 and we will all eventually die in our houses.
Anyways, here's my list of U.S. destinations:
Upstate New York. I actually sketched out an itinerary so basically the trip is already planned. Lots of church history sites so of course places like Palmyra and the Sacred Grove would be a priority, along with the Baseball Hall of Fame. Niagara Falls could be part of it. And the Finger Lakes! My wife was born in Binghamton. And Oneida seems like an interesting place. It would just be a lot of driving and spectacular scenery, is how I imagine it.
Nauvoo. I've actually been here once before. But it was more of a "passing through" thing when we were moving to North Carolina 18 years ago. We only stayed for a few hours - it was July, it was sweltering, and we had a two-year-old. So not the funnest time we've ever had. I'd like a chance to do it right someday - experience everything - Carthage Jail, the Temple, life on the Mississip, etc.
New York City. Also was on my short list for my stipend, but kind of chickened out. Chicago seemed less threatening and more affordable. But you can't go through life without having experienced The Big Apple. . . right? I'd want to go in the late summer so I could attend the U.S. Open at Flushing Meadows. I'm not a huge tennis fan or anything, but for some reason it calls out to me.
Olympic Peninsula. When I was a missionary I did get to take a day trip up through Port Angeles to Neah Bay, so technically I've been there already. It was amazing, but also it was January and I was wearing a shirt and tie. I didn't really get a full experience. I also did a lot of research on this area when I was making my trip selection. My dear wife (who served in the same mission) sort of pooh-poohed it, however.
Palm Beach County. Speaking of my wife pooh-poohing things, I've always wanted to visit some place where she grew up. We've been together for 22 years and I've never visited a single place from her childhood. Not one. She lived here from about sixth grade until she went to college, but her family moved and she's never been back. She insists there's nothing to see and nothing is the same. What is she hiding? I must find out.
San Francisco. Early fall is the best, I've read. I'd want to go see the giant trees and for some reason visually the Oakland Temple has always been one of my favorites. But I guess neither of those has anything specifically to do with San Francisco. Steep streets, history, and a golden bridge though.
Alaska. I've never been that interested in a Carribean cruise - they seem gross. But the Alaskan version intrigues me. They were doing an ad campaign several weeks ago and I was ready to go. Except for the paying for it part. I believe it's considerably more expensive than most cruises.
Ozarks. It looks amazing plus I have some family history interest in the region, so you could always justify a fun trip in the name of genealogical research! I'm not sure about Branson, though. What is that about?
Mt. Rushmore. We're getting down to the more doable portion of the list. It's only six hours from our house. I've always wanted to go. We really should be able to check this one off.
Grand Canyon. My wife really wants to go and take the kids. Also, something that should fit in the budget a little more easily. We could also hit Mesa Verde and Four Corners on the way.
So there you have it, my top 10 list, in no particular order. I could definitely come up with a few more to fill it out should we ever start crossing some of these off. Of course, maybe we will never go anywhere again due COVID-19 and we will all eventually die in our houses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)