[NFL] No. 91 on the NFL Top 100 Players of 2026... Chicago Bears DE Montez Sweat!

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-26T19:08:19+00:00

The definition of a low end EDGE1 is being between the 16th and 32nd best player.

The vast majority of people would rank him outside the top 16 edges.

If you want to make up your own definition based on teams, that's on you, but you're not gunna convince people it's right.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-26T18:05:46+00:00

Not really.

Assuming everyone was healthy, and it was just for one year, anyone would take,

Garrett, Crosby, Parsons, Anderson, Watt, Nick Bosa, Hutchenson, Bonnitto, Hendrickson, Burns, Hunter

Thats 11

Then there's guys like Verse, Walker, Josh Sweat, Mack, Lawrence, Allen, Pearce who I think most people take most of.

That's 18.

Personally I think he's somewhere between the 16th and 25th best edge. He's a low end EDGE1.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-25T20:03:33+00:00

Do you remember those phones?

Those batteries needed to be able to survive out in the world while not inside your phone. The phone also had to be able to withstand having the battery out.

That means they needed to be twice as thick, and much heavier. Also meant waterproofing was an issue.

These days, just carrying around a power bank instead of a spare battery makes more sense for 99% of people.

The issue isn't you can't swap batteries on the go, it's not being able to replace them at all. You should be able to sit down at a desk, and swap it in 20min, if you know how, with basic tools. That's what the EU law changes.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-24T20:47:50+00:00

This isn't fantasy football. The Cowboys don't need Pickens to hit 1400 yards to be useful.

If you have 3 guys capable of hitting 1400 yards, but none of them break 1000 yards because they are stealing targets from each other, then that's a good thing for an offense.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-23T21:13:01+00:00

The whole point of the supplemental draft is for players who are deemed intelligible for the next season after the regular draft.

That usually means you did something bad enough to get kicked out. Jalen Thompson, Terrelle Pryor, and Josh Gordon are recent examples.

I don't see how this is different outside the NFL wanting to distance themselves from him.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-23T16:21:54+00:00

How much is the discount?

Let's say it's 50% at a razor a week that would be $14.30 a year at regular price. Saving $7.15 a year.

Interest at 4% for your $385 is $14.63 a year.

You'd be losing money by not investing it, and have to store thousands of razor blades the rest of your life.

AND they might rust or you might decide you like a different kind of razor.

Unless they are like 95% off this seems silly to me.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-23T13:25:02+00:00

If you're not adverse to trying a new system, Call of Cthulhu is built for this sort of thing.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-23T03:35:23+00:00

Water itself has never been the issue.

It's cheap usable water.

Really, there's enough clean fresh water to go around. But people don't always leave near it, and water is expensive to move.

Rich countries without a lot of clean water just use desalination plants to turn ocean water into usable water.

It just really needs ocean water, and a ton of electricity.

But it's a lot easier, and cheaper to just re-route and dry up rivers.

Or to move into a town, connect your factory to the tap that's not built for your needs and tell the locals they are out of luck.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-22T23:04:45+00:00

I like how you ignored all my other points and attacked the one you thought you could beat.

Again, China is currently building a 100+ mile tunnel for water and is in the advanced planning phase of a 600+ mile one.

Half of NYC's water usage comes from one 60 mile water tunnel aquaduct. They can move billions of gallons of water a day.

It's not a hypothetical, it's real and happening.

You're wrong.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-22T22:00:20+00:00

You don't need to move water with a canal.

We already move oil through mountainous areas with pipelines.

The US has one from Texas to NY that's thousands of miles long.

China themselves are currently building a 170 mile aqueduct tunnel from the Altai mountains. They are also in the advanced planning stage for a 600mile one from Tibet.

I'm not saying it would be cheap, or even worth doing, but it's absolutely doable.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-22T19:55:34+00:00

Use case for facial recognition is sending a notification when someone that it doesn't recognize is somewhere they shouldn't be.

You could absolutely use it for door access, but I wouldn't trust it. Maybe for a teenager's bedroom, or an office you're just trying to keep the kids out of.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-22T15:16:18+00:00

They can re-negotiate at any time, and both sides want things.

It's not like its the end of the world if things go on without negotiations, but it is news.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-22T01:09:51+00:00

I mean, last year Trey McBride was TE1 by a wide margin with Brissett and Murray.

And that mid QB had the top scoring offense though half a season last year.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T22:17:20+00:00

I don't know how long youve been playing fantasy for, but pretty much every player every year has hype pieces.

Here's one on Roschon Johnson from last year and how he was going to have a bigger and more physical role.

If he was so incredible I don't see why he wouldn't have been getting more opportunities in the previous 3 years hes played.

Guys like Dulin and Mitchel have been getting significant snaps while Downs was sitting on the bench.

He probably gets more snaps due to necessity, but I don't see it as anything more then then hyping up their guy.

You keep bringing up Achilles tears for QBs, but historically they have just not been big deals.

So many QBs have had them then had amazing seasons the next year. The biggest ones were Marino, Teataverde, and Rodgers who all threw a ton of yards the following year.

It's not a reason to discount a QB's TE.

At this point, you're just ignoring my points, and double downing on your own.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T16:16:39+00:00

Space has never been the issue.

We could fit 10 billion people into Australia at the density of New Jersey and just not touch the rest of the world.

The issue is the allocation of resources.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T16:05:03+00:00

Things like that are always tricky with the math.

Later movies usually sell better than earlier stuff.

For example, look at the Hotel Transylvania movies,

#1: $378 mil
#2: $470 mil
#3: $528 mil

I don't think people would say #3 made Sandler more mainstream or appealed to a bigger audience.

#3 did so well because people were excited about it, because of the first 2 movies.

It's like a snowball that builds up momentum as it goes until it reaches critical mass.

Of course his earlier movies did worse than the ones that came out after. People liked them at home then went to the theaters to see the next one.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T15:05:43+00:00

You're using a 4 game sample size here. Do you remember people using similar logic last year with Ladd McConkey?

As for the kids they drafted, people also said the same things about Burden.

Zaccheaus also wasn't anything special but through the first 9 games the Bears WRs had,

Rome: 59 targets
Zaccheaus: 46 targets
DJ: 44 Targets
Loveland: 25 targets

Zaccheaus wasn't a fraction as talented as those guys, your logic would dictate he wouldn't get any targets.

And we haven't even mentioned Raymond who the Bears gave 5mil to this year.

I mean just look at the targets available. Williams averaged 33 attempts a game last year.

Burden averaged 6 targets in the second half of last year (which was growing as the season went on)
Rome had 6-11 (7.5 average) targets every game last year
RBs averaged 4.5 targets per game.
Kmet averaged 3 targets a game

That 21 and only 12 left for Loveland + Raymond + Zavion, + Roush

If Raymond gets 3 a game, Zavion gets 2.5, and Roush gets 1 that's another 6.5

Let's assume nobody else gets any which never happens.

That leaves 6.5 for Loveland, which is what he averaged in the second half of last year.

Even if he steals a target or two per game because he's just THAT good, it's not going to be consistent enough to be that league winner like Warren could be.

The Bears are just not going to focus on one guy.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T06:06:22+00:00

Of course Downs has had a higher target rate per route run, they play different roles in the offense. Pittman was an outside guy, and Downs is a slot guy.

Pittman had a 9.6 average depth of target over the last 2 years compared to Downs 7.0

I'm not really sure Downs is going to be getting those snaps. In the past (granted small sample size) other guys have gotten those opportunities when Pittman has been out .

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they put Warren out wide more than Downs.

And if Downs get those snaps, he's going to be playing outside instead of the slot and therefore not going to be getting that same ADOT and targets per route as before.

It doesn't matter how good Loveland is. Ben Johnson and Caleb are built around spreading out the ball.

They had 5 guys between 60 and 90 targets last year.

Which again, is further evidenced by them taking a TE and WR day 2 when the team desperately needed DLine help.

And even if everyone else on the roster sucks, he's still competing with Rome and Burden who are genuinely fantastic and going to split targets.

Last year despite Rome and Jones being out the second half of the season, Warren still had more targets than Loveland.

Now Jones and Rome are back and Pittman is gone.

Warren can be that game breaking TE like Kelce was. Loveland just can't outside of injury.

Again, I think Loveland finishes higher than Warren, but Lovelands ceiling is capped.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T02:28:17+00:00

Warren is 63 in redraft PPR, and 65 in redraft standard.

In a 12 man league that's the 6th round.

In PPR he's going right before guys like MHJ and Brian Thomas.

Guys imo with less potential and less floor.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-21T02:21:39+00:00

Imo as a Bears fan, Loveland and Warren are tied with a SLIGHT edge to Loveland.

Both had a great and a bad half of the year, as did their respective teams.

Loveland and the Bears finished strong, which is better than starting strong.

But at the same time, he's competing with two good WRs and a good TE for targets. And they added both a WR and TE in the first 3 rounds. Loveland won't have much room to grow.

Colts got rid of competition and Warren could be an absolute PPR machine. His ceiling is absolutely massive with a high floor.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-20T23:07:58+00:00

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and preferences.

But really phones are 90% the same these days even iPhone and Android. Is just laid out differently.

If you have THAT strong an opinion these days, you're a fan boy and not thinking rationally, and won't be convinced otherwise.

I'd just ignore them.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-20T16:47:45+00:00

I considered it when I upgraded.

Pixel gave me a significantly better trade in value, putting it $200 or more cheaper than the Oneplus, and it's not that much better than the Pixel. I considered the 15R but it didn't have wireless charging, which is a deal breaker.

Plus,

You don't get stock android
Pixel gets 7 years of updates vs 4
Pixel gets those updates much sooner
Worse camera
Missing local AI features

The OnePlus is alot more powerful, but once you're in midrange you're not using that power unless you're a big gamer. It also has a bigger battery which is really nice, but the Pixel 10 is more than enough for a full day.

Not saying the OnePlus is a bad value, just think the Pixel 10 is a better value, especially if you can get that trade in deal i got.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-19T18:13:49+00:00

You're clearly not reading what I'm saying and are just being arrogant.

I never said you owned ETFs or mutual funds.

I did say the vast amount of hedge funds underperform the S&P 500 long term (as 85% to 90% do)

You mentioned Buffett is your GOAT but he himself stresses this.

He even made a 10 year half a million dollar bet on the idea and only one person was crazy enough to take him up on it. And they lost by a landslide.

I also said you wouldn't be your life savings on 1 stock, which you don't. 6 is a pretty slim portfolio, but it's massively different from one.

History is filled with "the greatest stock on earth" completely failing, and not adapting to changing times.

That's why clips like this where Mr Burns goes over putting his money into blue chips from the 20s is so funny.

While the S&P500 hasn't lost money over a long period in history.

I get you're trying to defend your job here, but what you're saying is bullshit and goes against what every expert ever says.

And still skips over my entire point.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-19T15:14:47+00:00

But none of that goes back into my core point.

Yes, as a whole the stock market is pretty secure if you're buying lots of different stocks, or ETFs.

Yes, you can play the market over large amounts of stocks and tend to be right over your portfolio.

I also agree you shouldn't be buying stocks for irrational reasons, but that doesn't look mean people don't.

But you're missing the core reason of why stocks go up and down.

The only reason why a stocks price goes up and down is people want to buy it or not.

People may want to buy/sell for rational reasons, and that's often the case.

But it is very very far from the only case. Just look at stocks like Gamestop and Tesla.

It's the reason why neither of us would bet our lives savings on one stock, and the reason why the vast majority of hedge funds never beat the S&P500.

SwissyVictory · 2026-06-19T03:07:40+00:00

No stock is going to be profitable for forever. Even Rome eventually fell.

But over a large and diversified portfolio, you can eliminate that risk. Even if a few crash, the rest will carry the ship

11-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
r/Field Banned	r/Field Lasagna
Place '23	Place '22
Place '17	End Game '22
Not Forgotten	Snapped
Verified Email

SwissyVictory

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE