SeaBass

Or we used our extra pick to make sure we got our guy. I hope the bad hands rap is overblown a bit though.

I heard both seconds.

That didn't take long. Let's go!

I like Olave but I'd rather the Packers stand pat if they're going to take a WR. I'm with RRB I feel like the Packers would take Burks over Olave. I'm also fine just waiting, Pickens is good, there are just so many decent WRs that I'd rather not spend a draft pick to move up. One exception but it's a scenario I don't think will happen. If the Packers are in a position to get both Burks and Olave I think it would be worth trading their 28th plus whatever other pick it would take to move up to 21 or 23 so they can make back to back picks. But I just don't think Gute is going to take 2 WR in the first round. Like others have said it wouldn't shock me if they waited until day 2 to pick a WR.

I'm legitimately not sure if Willson Contreras understands how baseball works. There's an article with comments from him claiming MLB's lack of consistency in punishing players for HBP. He seriously doesn't understand how no Brewers have been suspended while Cubs players have been suspended twice (and the manager once) in the last two seasons. Willson Contreras sees a lack of consistency in punishment for the Chicago Cubs-Milwaukee Brewers feud - United News Post Willson, dude, hitting a guy on purpose (or attempting to as they did against Brandon Woodruff last season) is against the rules. Non-intentional HBP are not. It's really that simple. It's funny how the Cubs keep trying to paint themselves as the victims when they're clearly the aggressors. Am I capable of understanding they want to send the Brewers a message by throwing at Cutch? Sure, fine, but it'd be great if they'd act like adults and not whine about it afterwards like they didn't just blatantly target a guy.

I'm legitimately not sure if Willson Contreras understands how baseball works. There's an article with comments from him claiming MLB's lack of consistency in punishing players for HBP. He seriously doesn't understand how no Brewers have been suspended while Cubs players have been suspended twice (and the manager once) in the last two seasons. Willson Contreras sees a lack of consistency in punishment for the Chicago Cubs-Milwaukee Brewers feud - United News Post Willson, dude, hitting a guy on purpose (or attempting to as they did against Brandon Woodruff last season) is against the rules. Non-intentional HBP are not. It's really that simple. It's funny how the Cubs keep trying to paint themselves as the victims when they're clearly the aggressors. Am I capable of understanding they want to send the Brewers a message by throwing at Cutch? Sure, fine, but it'd be great if they'd act like adults and not whine about it afterwards like they didn't just blatantly target a guy.

My favorite Uecker call is one I can't find anywhere, it's a Sixto Lezcano GS call, I think from opening day in '79 or '80? It might have even been a walk off. I was a little young to have experienced it live, I was 6 or 7 back then, but I have heard clips of it played many times. The awe and excitement in Uek's call is pure baseball goodness. If anyone knows what I'm referring to (like I said not sure of the date or if it was opening day) or has an audio clip that would be amazing. Edit: I found it.

My favorite Uecker call is one I can't find anywhere, it's a Sixto Lezcano GS call, I think from opening day in '79 or '80? It might have even been a walk off. I was a little young to have experienced it live, I was 6 or 7 back then, but I have heard clips of it played many times. The awe and excitement in Uek's call is pure baseball goodness. If anyone knows what I'm referring to (like I said not sure of the date or if it was opening day) or has an audio clip that would be amazing. Edit: I found it.

That is a classic and probably the best Hot Ones episode of all time.

I'm down to using a wallet that attaches to the back of my phone. Only things I bring with me are my driver's license and 2 credit cards. That's all that fits and it's all I need.

I agree with you, the pizza in Italy is too simple and didn't impress me much either. It was ok, I don't want to say it was bad, just not what I was hoping for. As a whole, the food in Italy didn't impress me, pasta included. I fully recognize that it's because I'm used to Americanized Italian food but sadly the fact remains. Where did you eat in Italy? I found Italian food incredibly rich and delicious...with dirt cheap local wines to boot. Daily, I'd venture to the Markets and grab cheese, fresh bread, produce...go grab a couple bottles of wine. LOL. I think I gained 15 pounds? I'm not a big wine guy, there was wine in abundance with all our meals and I drank it like everyone else but it's kind of wasted on me. I was with a church tour group so our guide would bring us to different restaurants most nights. They were family run places and they fed us well. I don't want to hate on them, the food was fine but I guess I had high expectations. I also don't like seafood in any form. We would typically get many courses with a dinner, so sometimes if there was something I really liked it was just a small portion and then the next course would be served. In these situations we really didn't order for ourselves, they'd just seat us and then start bringing us food. When we were left to find our own food for like lunches when out sightseeing we didn't have much luck with places we chose. We tried to find places with authentic food or sometimes it was just quick street food which was comparable to fast food quality. I don't want make it seem like everywhere we went was a letdown because it wasn't, but my general feeling was I expected a different experience. One day I literally went and had Chinese food because I wanted something different lol.

Sling's business model when it comes to local stations is different and has been from the beginning. They're more focused on the cable networks, local network availability varies depending on the region you're in, basically only available in major metropolitan areas and only FOX and/or NBC. If it were something that Sling used to offer and then cut back that would be a different story.

I agree with you, the pizza in Italy is too simple and didn't impress me much either. It was ok, I don't want to say it was bad, just not what I was hoping for. As a whole, the food in Italy didn't impress me, pasta included. I fully recognize that it's because I'm used to Americanized Italian food but sadly the fact remains.

DirectTV Stream is the only option and you get the privilege of paying $85 plus tax every month for it. Honestly, choosing between that and cable might be a horse apiece at that price.

I think there's a big difference between Bally's Sports channel being removed and people being denied access to their local ABC affiliate. Big, huge, gargantuan difference. ESPN, while not quite as influential as it once was, is still a pretty big deal as well.

I don't think YouTube TV is looking to get "rid" of those channels. These are normal negotiation tactics that pop up from time to time and I'm sure will be resolved by the deadline or shortly after. Great thing about streaming is the ability to jump from YouTube TV to Hulu or something else. Folks will stick with YouTube TV for a short time but if it gets to be longer they'll just move to a service that has what they want. YouTube TV has to know that a certain percentage of customers, once they move, will never bother to move back once their programming issue is resolved.

I don't think you're any less susceptible to equipment issues or technical difficulties with cable than using streaming services. So again, this falls short of being a relevant point to me.

I had good success using the conventional oven to reheat pizza. I think I did 400 degrees for like 6 - 8 minutes. That was back when I was single and getting two Domino's mediums for $12 (or whatever the deal was). I can confirm, I just reheated 4 day old Papa John's, 2 slices of pizza and 2 breadsticks in the oven. Around 7 minutes at 375 degrees on a baking sheet with aluminum foil so it doesn't make a mess. Tasted just like the day it was ordered.

All the tech savvy that's required is having an email address, a credit card and rudimentary knowledge of how to use the internet. It's really not an excuse (though obviously personal preference matters). Sure, if you don't have a smart tv you'd need to buy a Roku or other streaming device. That's not hard or expensive either. Plug the power brick in the wall and connect the Roku to your tv with an HDMI cable and you're done (exactly like that cable box you're probably using), rudimentary internet knowledge takes over from there. If you use more than one tv you'd need to buy a streaming device for each one, just like you need a cable box for each tv you use. Difference is buying a Roku is a one time sunk cost whereas the cable company charges you monthly in perpetuity to rent each cable box you have.

Plus an additional $10/mo for unlimited program storage, whereas with YouTube TV you can add unlimited programs to your library. Otherwise DTVS only gives you 20 hours of storage. The only thing you can't do with YouTube TV is download shows to watch while offline (such as on an airplane) and sound is only in 2.1 surround, not 5.1 or 7.1. 100% I'm not claiming it's better than YTTV and the price definitely isn't but it's the only streaming option that gets you all Brewers/Bucks games. I used it for 5 months during the Brewers season, quit in early September as the Brewers could coast to the playoffs (and made things a bit tense doing so as it turned out) then I had a family password sharing option to watch YTTV for free for the playoffs. Other than live sports I have zero use for any live TV streaming service, regular television programming holds no interest for me. So I have no need for extra DVR capabilities. The Bucks 82 game schedule isn't enough to justify paying for the service so I don't bother. They have enough national games where I can still watch a fair amount of games w/o RSN access. The 162 game MLB season makes it easier to justify the expense.

Good plan, except you can't watch Brewers games on mlbtv, in market that is. DirectTV Stream is $20 more than YouTubeTV, it might not have as full a lineup as YouTube's but does include Bally Sports Wisconsin and local channels. It seems to have the major cable networks including MLB Network too. It doesn't have NFL Network but honestly that doesn't feel as important as it might have been really few years ago when you could only watch Thursday night games there.

Very likely it was a third party seller. Wal-Mart's website is similar to Amazon/eBay where other people can sell their stuff, used or new, and set whatever price they want. I think it's just harder to spot on Wal-Mart's site. When Wal-Mart is the seller it will be for the retail (or sale) price.

Right and as recent as last year YouTube TV had Brewers games. This is the first season they don't. I don't think anyone that has chosen to cut the cord and chosen streaming is crashing into other people's conversations of why they still have cable and telling them they're wrong. The cable model still makes sense for people even if they just don't want to deal with learning how to navigate streaming television. My parents were clinging to cable as their bill kept going up and up, finally my dad told my mom, "Hey, we're going to try YouTube TV for a month and if it doesn't work out we can always go back to cable." My mom complained about YTTV for a couple weeks but once she got used to it she ended up liking it. Yes there were still compromises but staying with cable comes with compromises too. YTTVs unlimited DVR is probably a big factor, it just records everything, they don't need to worry about overlapping show times or being restricted to 2 simultaneous show recordings. It's easy now, their shows are just there when they want them, all of them. I swear I would visit them once a week and the gymnastics they needed to do just managing the rinky dink DVR the cable company provided them was so annoying I can only imagine what their day to day routine was like.

That's why I went the Amazon Fire Stick route for YTTV. Much less chance of Amazon being bullied by Google than Roku. I wouldn't bet on that. They've butted heads before, it's only within the last couple years that there have been official YouTube and YouTubeTV apps on Fire TV devices. The upside with Fire TV is that side loading options are available, meaning you can hack your device and download unofficial apps that let you use those services w/o Google really having any say over it.

If that is true, then the people with Roku TVs will not be happy... At least you can still plug something into an HDMI port. I don't think Roku charging for app downloads is something that will happen anytime soon but that's the direction it seems to be heading. It's all about the percentage of money Roku receives from customers that sign up for a subscription directly through the Roku app. That percentage is money Google agrees to pay Roku for those exact transactions, point being that Google is gaining a paying customer directly due to Roku making that app available. Roku can demand a fee for that and it's a huge factor in how they make money. Which is absolutely fair, it's just the comments they're making to the public are attempting to deflect blame from themselves and onto Google when they in fact actually do share the blame and are behaving heavily in their own self-interest. I don't expect this stalemate to last long but what do I know, I didn't think it would get this far either. It's just depressing that the same old cable model tactics are now rearing its head in the streaming world. Guess that shouldn't be a surprise either.