I am certainly not the biggest Shula fan. Lord knows I have not been kind over the past couple of years. However, the last couple of games has given me hope for him as an OC in spite of the rage on this board. Two things stand out to me:
1) When Anderson steps into the game, the offense moves the ball more effectively immediately. He gets the ball out much quicker to the WRs for them to make the plays. This has been the source of my concern for Cam's maturation as this is the closest comparison of apples-to-apples that we can get. 2) Cam's passes were much improved this past game against NE. Both Olsen and Brown had outright bad drops that would have had kept drives alive (or even put points on the board) rather than stalling out. I don't see that pattern continuing with Olsen, and I am hopeful that Brown can return to a more sure-handed version of himself from last year. We don't have a dominant O-line, but I think we finally have enough to make a difference. If Shula can continue to do what he did the past couple of weeks where the players execute, I think the offense can be a pleasant surprise to many on this board.
Time and again this argument plays out in this forum and elsewhere Those typically aligning on the left open with this:
And those typically aligning on the right respond with this:
Which is correct? I would suggest looking over the economic landscape for the past century to see how things have played out. I get flack from purported intellectual giants on this board for "not understanding what you're talking about". I endorse the scientific method to the nth degree when it comes to truth. There's tons of theories for how reality"should be" in spite of reality is. Look in the horse's mouth if you wan't to know the truth and stop speculating/arguing about why it isn't turning out the way it "should".
Again... I understand that people vote for single issues. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter. Regardless of voting for Jeb or Hillary, the end result is the same due to the political posturing. Each have moved just enough to make sure that their donors (with all that overlap between the two of them) will never be compromised. Hence, they are even securing opposition votes to ensure that their records will show enough sway. If they can't secure those numbers, they simply don't vote. People that have jobs and don't want to immerse themselves in the purposeful quagmire that is DC won't know about how this game is played at our collective expenses. That is why following the money actually exposes one's true motivations. Hence, shared financiers make all the sense in the world if we're dealing with reality as opposed to obvious platitudes that serve as political platforms these days.