1. A player may not harm the Shield or, through inaction, allow the Shield to come to harm.

That was a long journey with a disappointing end.

If you send things back multiple times at your OWN restaurant it gives the people you’re with the impression that the food is not good. The very people you are trying to impress.

The man failed miserably selling gambling, football, and steak.

He’s a perfect baseball announcer. I think he’s a little too dry for football.

Counterpoint:

and he (usually) calls a good game.

Can someone convince Skip Bayless to get hair plug treatments?

Graft versus Host disease is real my friends...

They wouldn’t do it. A film like that today just would not be “politically correct” or “socially responsible.” (choke, sorry it hurt to use those phrases)

Guy hitting .205 in High-A ball is worried about the wrong Mendoza.

There was a trial, and he essentially talked his way into a guilty verdict and a death row conviction. The evidence was strong, he essentially confessed in interviews and showed no remorse, and he laughed at the mother of one of his victims in court. Are we supposed to retry cases until we get a not guilty verdict?

Hey this time you actually mentioned the victims. That is a big improvement over previous. It is important to remember why the people you choose to give a voice to are rightfully on death row. You forgot to mention that the scumbag laughed during the mother’s victim impact statement during the penalty phase of his…

Yes, where the state punishes you accordingly for your crime of murder.

“The last thing CU football needs is another gash.”

Seems a lot like the landscaper in the northeast asking to cut grass year round.

It should be of zero concern to the employer what their employees can or can not afford to do with the money they are paid. The employee/employer relationship is a simple one that has one side paying the other side for a task to be completed. Again, these are employees NOT dependents. If the employee can’t live on…

After looking at the report Redford cited yesterday in his piece, I think he may have misinterpreted the vague language.