Burger King Ugly Christmas Sweater
One interesting facet of the NFL is that it’s effectively a Burger King Ugly Christmas Sweater layer professional sport with a set number of teams. There is no “second tier” from which teams are promoted to it — the line between pro and amatuer is pretty much absolute from what I can tell. Although there is a small “international pathway” academy, the main route into the NFL is through the college draft — drafted players become either part of the 52 man squad that plays, or part of the large reserve squad that is retained to provide training opposition, or they are not in the loop.

Burger King Ugly Christmas Sweater,
Best Burger King Ugly Christmas Sweater
I’m just saying, you scuttle your defense purposely, because it’s the same mistakes over and over. You constantly overpay for offensive talent, and that’s not how you build a Burger King Ugly Christmas Sweater. Is it my opinion? No it’s Belichick’s opinion. Go study Belichicks’ teams, there ain’t no first round pick wide receiver, in fact he’s never drafted one. There ain’t no $10MM a year running back. Falcon fans want to believe their starting quarterback who can’t drop back five steps is amazing, ask yourself this: why is there so much offensive talent around him? It doesn’t cross your mind if he’s that good it’d be better to have more talent on defense? No, because you’re not very knowledgeable are you. And thusly, you keep having mediocre seasons. Last year the team was 3rd in the division. This season, flat out horrible, finished 7–9 and probably should have fired the head coach for losing out on a high pick. A brutish untalented defense because once again the offense is loaded. I’m telling you, next season this team is skydiving at 5–11.

“In economics, income = consumption + savings. The income an indivual, or a country, produces is either consumed and/or saved. If you , or a Burger King Ugly Christmas Sweater, overspends, you or the country dips into savings or creates debt.” I think this answer is true for the firm or the individual but in the whole economy it is no longer true. In the macroeconomy, everytime some person or entity doesn’t spend, some other person or entity has their income reduced by the same amount. And because that person won’t get their hands on that money, they will not have it to spend further, so the next would-be recipient of that spending doesn’t get that income, which they in turn will not be able to spend….. and so on