GAME05

Finished putting together my workout routine, which of course is absolutely a work-related activity and therefore no problem to use the printer and laminator at work to put together. An entire day is dedicated to stretches. After years of recognizing I lean forward when I walk, I believe it's called anterior pelvic tilt. Basically, your hips point down instead of flat. Threw in some fixes for forward head lean while I was at it. Next is the hard part.......doing it on the regular.

Lamar Jackson also turned down 3-years at $44M/year fully guaranteed. Jets better be ready to pony up $46/year if they're going to trade for him, at least. Meanwhile Rodgers will count $15M against the Jets' cap and they can prorate the remainder over four years. And maybe the Jets just have a philosophy where they don't want the QB to take up that much of the cap space.

If it goes on long enough Rodgers will start chirping about MLF and Murphy and talking about broken promises and so forth. If he were in a GB uniform again he'd only divide the whole locker room plus as soon as Love has a bad game the fans would be in an uproar. Rodgers back in GB for the sake of spite just isn't any realistic option at all.

It had been noted that there was a big meeting between Rodgers and the Packers right after the regular season ended. So it's surprising Rodgers would have been taken aback that the team was exploring trades. What the heck else would they have talked about at the initial meeting? Plus it only makes sense the Jets would want old Packer guys regardless of Rodgers just for the sake of having guys Hackett is comfortable coaching and fit his scheme.

What most amazing with all of this is through page after page of Packers discussion, this may very well be the first Love-pun that's been made (at least to my recollection).

How much leverage do the Packers even have? What's to keep the Jets from saying "We'll give you a 7th rounder and you'll like it"? Rodgers can't be suddenly traded anywhere else or he'll threaten retirement as well as make the Packers' front office look awful if he wanted to. Pre-announcement the Packers could have had wiggle room by telling the Jets that Rodgers was fine going to the Raiders, too, so pony up the draft picks. But now it seems like the the only alternative is he holds out until he's traded. Or I guess maybe the holdup is the Packers would certainly prefer a post-June 1 trade to save themselves some money.

Rodgers has an odd way of being somewhat polarizing to both sides, from not getting a Corona shot to doing hippie stuff. But that most all of the negativity toward him really only started up last year I just chalk up to fans preparing themselves for him to leave. Like when you first break up with a girl, all of a sudden she's actually the W-- of Babylon, but you're really only saying it to make it easier. I'm excited to see Love play and I think he'll be a decent QB going forward. He's got some accuracy issues but otherwise makes the right reads, goes through his progressions and isn't scared in the pocket. Been a good while since we've had the excitement of wondering what a new QB can do.

But since it cost us a first-rounder to get Rodgers in the first place, if we only get a first-rounder back in return, than we wouldn't have profited at all from the investment.

Well, the Jets could always trade for Lamar Jackson.

I recognize the need for a safety but don't understand the desire for one in the 1st. It's the offense that's the bigger issue. Either Rodgers needs another playmaker for a last SB run or Love needs another receiver to develop with him. Safety just seems like a 2nd or even 3rd round issue.

Nah, it'd be like drafting Zach Greinke. Fans would love him. Sit him down with your PR lady and work out how to make his personality seem quirky and weird to the fans. Though it's seeming like he'll be the last of the tier-1 QBs taken. Apparently the guy from Florida looked great, so it'll be curious what teams think of such a high ceiling but also needing to sit maybe two seasons.

Makes me think there's an episode of "Adrian Monk plays in the NFL" which was sorely missing from the series. I presume at some point during camp one of his teammates is going to shove milk at him just to see how he reacts.

I'd imagine agents must really bang their heads against a wall when one quick, stupid decision suddenly costs their client a couple million bucks by getting knocked down in the draft like he'll be.

I heavily lean toward Rodgers coming back next season and I wonder how that might effect the team's drafting strategy. If you're figuring one more year of Rodgers do you draft a TE which may be the biggest need, but it's a position which usually takes a couple years before they get a handle on things? WRs have their own acclimation period but they tend to contribute more their first year. I think one of those TEs is something of a Marcedes Lewis clone and just maybe might fall to later in the 2nd. It'd be odd, but I wouldn't be upset with two TEs in the first two rounds.

There's no way I'd ever have the self-confidence nor the job skills to go on a vacation after getting laid off.

When it comes to football players both professional and semi-pro NCAA there's two or three posters here whose knowledge eclipses any journalism site. You're going to love this place come draft-time.

>“They are done with Rodgers,” McGinn said, citing his own instincts, his knowledge of the league, and “discussions with someone who [has] first-hand knowledge” So basically the source is his butt. "Someone with firsthand knowledge" could well be Jordan Love's girlfriend. >"McGinn predicts that, if Rodgers does insist on returning, he’ll be the backup to Love." Yeah that totally makes sense. A year after the Packers give Rodgers an extension with cap hits which really hurt even if he were to retire, they've just done a 180 after his good-not-great season to the degree that they'd bench a HoFer out of spite. This is all Twitter-level "journalism".

I think I've solved for my savings issue. I will self-direct in an IRA and then eventually transfer that into the 401k. It seems to be the best way of using the taxed-once retirement plans while also best taking advantage of the early-withdrawal benefit I have. I'll just have to be mindful of the $23,000 401k individual contribution limit.

The more I think about it, the more I will indeed go the IRA route and really up the 401k. I need about another $1,000 per month to supplement my pension, so even a 100k 401k would be able to do that. That would get me to my current salary, though that's still just 'getting-by' money. And it's not like I can't still have an emergency fund personal savings. I got into this job really late in life, myself, and so I'll only be getting about 65% of a full pension and medical. But the nature of law enforcement work is such that I don't want to be doing it when I'm older. Hoping for my state to change LEO retirement to 25 years which would help. Or some sort of "please retire" lump offer since my Division doesn't really want LEOs in the first place (I'm not a typical County or Municipal officer).

The expectation right now is to retire at 55. It's when I hit the next five-year tier and it only goes up about $30/month for each additional year unless I worked to 60 (I won't, or at least not as an LEO). So my main concern is supplementing my income between 55 and when social security benefits kick in because my pension alone won't be enough to live on. Right now my crypto and some % of stocks are in a regular, taxable account. The thought is moving them both entirely to an IRA which I then couldn't touch until 62. And then my age 55-62 income would be pension+401k. I currently contribute to my 401k, but I'd have to significantly up it beyond the matching amount to meet my income needs. Before this "you can withdraw early" news it was going to be pension+personal savings. Also the current plan is to move to Belize when I retire, and that country has no capital gains taxes. I still couldn't withdraw a personal IRA early because of US taxes, but that may otherwise make a difference especially in terms of using income from dividend payments and not paying taxes on those after I get there.

More of a personal finance question but it relates and I'm curious the thoughts on the matter: I learned recently that I have a work benefit where I can withdraw my 401k early, at retirement, without incurring the early-withdrawal penalty. I've been doing personal savings outside of an IRA since I'll not only be homeless at retirement (live in work housing, though I expect to rent for a while after retiring), but my pension won't be enough to live off of, especially without social security benefits kicking in yet (which'll likely be pushed back soon enough, too). But learning this, all of a sudden what I'm thinking is that I could put all my personal savings (and crypto) into an IRA because I'd have the 401k money. Likely up that contribution, too. That way my savings will be subject to taxes once instead of yearly capital gains taxes. And then 401k+pension would (hopefully) be enough for the seven years between retirement and 62 (yes I could work longer but that's probably another post). The downsides to this, at least that I can see, is that I'm a better investor than the mutual fund company. But maybe/probably not so much considering capital gains taxes. I'm also more subject to the value of the 401k plummeting due to a market crash right before retirement, whereas via personal investing I can mitigate that risk. Investing completely within IRAs seems like the smartest way to go, but I still wonder if there's considerations I'm not thinking of. Especially since I can't dump a bunch of money in an IRA and just change my mind and remove it.

With limited exceptions, men shouldn't wear shorts. Why don't more men care how they present themselves anymore?

A new bank I have wants $7 per month for paper and maintenance fees. Ridiculous.

Even though it was in Texas, surprisingly, no.

Comments I've gotten from campers with Starlink RV is that it usually works just fine but it'll totally drop out now and again. So not necessarily a perfect solution if you're camping but also remote working. I decided not to get the home Starlink version. I have 3mb now and there would still be a lag if I wanted to do online gaming since it's still satellite, and surprisingly I can usually find a workable stream for sports despite the slow internet. So the $500 box and $100/mo price for Starlink becomes too much for little improvement.