By signing Nick Foles, the Jaguars are making the same mistake all over again

The Jaguars did it again. They outbid themselves for another mediocre quarterback. Last year it was Blake Bortles. This year, it’s Nick Foles.

Foles will reportedly sign a four-year, $88 million deal, including $50.2 million in guarantees, when free agency officially opens on Wednesday. This comes one year after the team gave Bortles a three-year, $54 million extension. To make room for Foles’ contract, the Jaguars will cut Bortles and eat $16.5 million in dead money. Jacksonville is using A LOT of its cap space on the quarterback position and it’s difficult to even say that they’ve made a major upgrade.


Let’s just ignore the early part of Foles career and focus on the last two seasons, which is when he really earned that contract. Since 2017, Bortles has a higher yards-per-attempt (6.9 to 6.2), a near-identical adjusted net yards per attempt, which factors in touchdowns, interceptions and sacks, (6.48 to 6.49) and has rushed for 687 yards and three touchdowns compared to Foles’ 20 rush yards.

Jacksonville just forked over $50 million in guarantees for a marginal upgrade over this…

Embedded video

Steven Ruiz


Blake Bortles’ game against the Chiefs was basically a blooper reel.

1,068 people are talking about this

Foles is a better quarterback — in that, he can actually throw a football — but he’s not significantly better than Bortles is. When factoring in the money, you could make the argument that the Jaguars are worse off at the quarterback position now than they were 24 hours ago. Foles and Bortles will account for at least $30 million in cap space next season. That’s $30 million on maybe the least enviable QB situation in the league!

One of the biggest knocks against Bortles — and certainly one I’ve pointed out — is that his limited skill-set forced the Jaguars coaching staff to dumb down their offense in order for him to have even a modicum of success. Well, nothing will change now that Foles is coming aboard. The Eagles had to do the same thing when he played over the last two seasons, as I wrote a few weeks back

Not much was asked of the Eagles backup; head coach Doug Pederson ensured that his throws didn’t have to go that far. Only Cody Kessler and Jeff Driskel averaged fewer air-yards-per-completion — which measures how far the actual throw goes instead of the total yardage of the completion with yard after the catch. On throws aimed more than five yards downfield, Foles’ passer rating dropped to 79.9, which ranked 33rd in the league, according to Sports Info Solutions. And nearly half of Foles’ passing yards in 2018 (652 of 1,413) came on 0/1-step drops, screens and RPO’s, per SIS. Those are the kind of throws — which don’t require complex reads — we typically associate with college-style offenses.

New offensive coordinator John DeFilippo worked on the Eagles staff when Foles led the team to the Super Bowl, so he’ll know how to get the best out of Foles, but the best of Foles is hardly better (if at all) than what Bortles has given the Jags over the last two years. And Bortles did it with a battered supporting cast.

We know the Jaguars overpaid for Foles. No rational person will argue against that. The better question is why did they feel the need to overpay for him? Who else was bidding for Nick Foles? Every team outside of Miami seems to have its starting QB already on the roster, and those that don’t will likely address that need in the draft. Just like with the Bortles extension, NO TEAM would have paid the price the Jaguars did. Jacksonville was bidding against itself to overpay a below average starter — a year after making the same mistake.

UPDATE: Here’s is why the Jaguars overpaid for Foles when no other team would, per NFL Media’s Mike Garafolo…

Embedded video

Mike Garafolo


Why did the pay so much for Nick Foles if there were no other big bidders? We discussed here.

139 people are talking about this

Essentially, the Jaguars gave him more money so he’d get more respect in the locker room. Yeah.  

General manager Dave Caldwell has had a tremendous amount of team-building resources at his disposal during his half-decade in charge of the team, including five top-five draft picks and hundreds of millions in cap space to spend in free agency. The return has been one 10-6 season. Somehow, he kept his job this offseason. You’d think he’d learn from past mistakes, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

In the first post of our NFL Moneyball series, we looked at how well teams spent their money during the 2018 season based on production and market prices. The Jaguars ranked dead last in our spending efficiency metric. Decisions like the one to give a career backup $50 million in guarantees are a major reason why.

Ketamine for depression: the highs and lows

Long used as an anaesthetic and analgesic, most people familiar with ketamine know of it for this purpose. Others know it as a party drug that can give users an out-of-body experience, leaving them completely disconnected from reality. Less well known is its growing off-label use in the USA for depression, in many cases when other options have been exhausted.

David Feifel, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, was one of the first clinicians to use ketamine off-label to treat depression at UCDS’s Center for Advanced Treatment of Mood and Anxiety Disorders, which he recently founded. “Currently approved medications for depression all have about the same, very limited efficacy. A large percentage of patients with depression do not get an adequate level of relief from these antidepressants even when they have tried several different ones and even when other drugs known to augment their effects are added to them”, Feifel tells The Lancet Psychiatry. “The stagnation in current antidepressant medication on the one hand, and the tremendous number of treatment-resistant patients, has propelled me to explore truly novel treatments like ketamine.”

Compelling published study results and case reports exist of patients’ depression—in some cases deeply entrenched depression that has lasted months or even years—alleviating within hours of use of ketamine. However, critics have warned that the drug has not been studied sufficiently (at least outside clinical trials), and also emphasised the cost. Patients can pay more than $1000 per session for treatment that must usually be repeated several times. That cost is rarely covered by the patient’s medical insurance.

The balance between prescribing ketamine off-label to patients with depression (who have exhausted other options) against making all patients wait until ketamine or a derivative is licensed for depression is the key ethical dilemma, says Dominic Sisti, an assistant professor in the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA. “I don’t think patients who have exhausted all options should have to wait, but I worry that off-label use is not being properly monitored”, says Sisti. “If patients are fully competent and informed, they should have the right to access ketamine—but we have to be sure they understand it is basically an experimental treatment. This is a vulnerable patient population.”

Another criticism is that patients who have exhausted treatment options might be willing to try anything. “This implies that patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) may be so desperate for relief that their ability to perform an appropriate calculation of the risks and benefits of trying ketamine is impaired. This insinuation infuriates many TRD patients in my experience”, says Feifel. “The other assumption is an implicit one that somehow using ketamine for depression is highly risky or fraught with many side effects. Both are simply wrong.”

Advocates of ketamine use in depression are excited because it has a different mechanism of action to standard antidepressants, which affect signalling by monoamine neurotransmitters such as serotonin, noradrenaline, or dopamine. Ketamine is thought to act by blocking N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors in the brain, which interact with the aminoacid neurotransmitter glutamate. The resultant chemical changes in the brain caused by ketamine are not yet fully understood, but could involve ketamine-induced gene expression and signalling cascades that act long after the drug has been eliminated from the body. Meanwhile, critics say that the adverse effects of the drug, including the emergence reactions (hallucinations, dreams, and out-of-body experiences) sought after by recreational users, need further study before long-term use of ketamine can be approved for depression. Feifel states that he has patients who have been receiving ketamine treatments every 2–4 weeks for long periods, some for around 3 years, and has not yet seen any safety issues arise.

Pharmaceutical companies are entering this exciting arena by attempting to develop new drugs based on ketamine without similar side-effects. Naurex, situated in Evanston, IL, USA, recently reported results from a phase 2 study of its drug GLYX-13, which reduced depression in around half of the 400 patients in the study without any psychotic side-effects. The drug is given by injection once every 1–2 weeks, and should enter phase 3 trials later in 2015. Other pharmaceutical companies are developing drugs with other modes of administration. Johnson & Johnson (New Brunswick, NJ, USA) are developing a nasal spray containing a ketamine derivative, Crecicor (Baltimore, MD, USA) is developing a once-daily oral pill, and Naurex is also developing an oral version of GLYX-13. However, Feifel dismisses the notion that the dissociative so-called trip induced by ketamine is actually an important negative side-effect. “I have not had a single patient discontinue treatment due to the dissociative psychedelic experience”, he explains. “Although I have had a couple patients have unpleasant ‘trips’, it’s exceedingly rare, usually dose related, and very transitory due to ketamine’s rapid metabolism.” Feifel says that, more often than not, patients find the trip to be positive, or even spiritual, and believe it is an important component of the antidepressant effect they experience afterwards. “There is no doubt the dissociative effect represents a logistical issue, requiring monitoring—and this should be addressed in any approval given for ketamine”, he adds.

In the UK, ketamine has been used in two clinical trials for treating depression. Rupert McShane is the lead consultant for the local electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) service based at Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. His clinic took part in a UK National Institute for Health Research study (REDKITE) in which ketamine was administered for TRD in a series of 28 cases. These patients were largely referred by secondary care psychiatrists, but some contacted McShane’s team following advertising or after reading about the study on the internet. Some patients had been actively looking for somewhere where they could receive ketamine treatment.

“Our team used one of the beds in the recovery bay of the ECT suite to administer ketamine during sessions where other patients—not those receiving ketamine infusions—were receiving ECT”, explains McShane. “This had the advantage of having a team present which is familiar with treating resistant depression, and also an anaesthetist. Despite evidence of the efficacy of ECT, many patients are unwilling to try it. Thus, ketamine or similar compounds may have a role in those who would otherwise have had ECT.”

McShane adds that his team is “exploring what options there may be for providing a ketamine service for people with treatment resistant depression”. He explains that intravenous infusions seemed to clearly establish whether someone was a responder or not. “Our experience was that a second infusion was necessary in order to be able to decide whether someone was a responder, but if they have not responded by then, then they will not respond to further infusions at the same dose”, explains McShane. “Its effect in those people who respond is dramatic. However, it is hardly surprising that a single dose does not usually have an enduring effect—one would not expect that of a single dose of any antidepressant.” He adds, however, that “a few people seem to have much more prolonged responses—for several months. So far, the only way we know of to create a sustained effect in someone who has a brief response is to give it repeatedly, and also through co-prescription of conventional antidepressants which may also prolong the effect. I cannot see a future in which we will not be harnessing the use of ketamine in some way.”

In terms of the safety profile of ketamine, McShane believes that adverse effects of long-term ketamine use on the bladder, which have been reported in people who misuse it recreationally, are strongly dose and frequency related, and have not occurred in the context of medical use. “The dissociative side-effects are clearly dose related. Some patients will get benefit from ketamine at doses which do not cause them, but there is likely to be a trade-off”, he explains. “Ketamine is safe enough, and there has been so much experience of it, that it is on the WHO essential drugs list. Tolerance may develop, especially if used very frequently, but this would only be problematic if ad libitum use was proposed. Routes such as intranasal, oral, intramuscular, and sublingual all have potential advantages and disadvantages in this regard. Yet whether alternative related compounds will have real safety advantages over ketamine would require formal study: it will be expensive to show that, for a dose of equivalent efficacy, their long-term safety is as good as ketamine.”

Sisti cautions that any clinicians giving ketamine for depression should be fully trained in ketamine administration. “Many are but some may not be”, he says. “Clinics should be outfitted with appropriate emergency equipment, and staff trained on its use. The FDA should set up a voluntary reporting system to track outcomes or adverse events so that some data can be gathered in the field on the safety and efficacy of ketamine for depression.”

Feifel says that it is not for him, but for his patients to decide where the balance of risks and benefits lies in trying ketamine to treat their depression. “I live in a different world from my patients and each one of them in turn lives in a different world from each other”, he explains. “We each place a different value on things, have different priorities, have differing notions of what makes life worthwhile but most importantly, unlike many of the people who come to see me, I am not experiencing the perpetual misery that makes every waking moment a struggle not to end my life. So it is much easier for me to place more weight on the unlikely negative possibilities of a treatment than the more likely potential benefits —this is the trap pundits who decry this off-label use are falling into. One could make a compelling argument that it’s unethical to withhold ketamine treatments from someone who has chronic, severe treatment resistant depression. But I know this from the patients who tell me they would not be in this world right now if it were not for the ketamine.”

Feifel concludes that it is straightforward to talk to TRD patients about ketamine. “I tell them all the relevant information. The efficacy rates, time to onset of benefits, duration limitations, alternatives, lack of insurance coverage, and other information. My job is to make sure they understand the parameters of the treatment, not to decide whether they should do it.”


Article source: thelancet


Silkroad – Online Pharmacy | Overseas best cheap pharmacy

Silkroad – Online Pharmacy is world’s number one awarded best online pharmacy in community forums in the list of top online pharmacies over all the internet.

Silkroad Pharmacy is a worldwide online drug store that offers its clients a demonstrated, trusted wellspring of value meds and services.

Silkroad Pharmacy offers an advantageous, private, moderate option to traditional drug stores and other exorbitant online administrations. We empower patients with transportation issues, restricted access to quality medicinal mind and security needs to have their prescriptions securely conveyed straightforwardly to their entryway, without the bother and time obligation of going to a specialist’s office.

Our drug store is in strict consistency with FDA regulations for transportation service for individual utilization. The Singularly European Union affirmed items are given to you. Just after your appeal has been endorsed by the specialist, your solution will be charged to your Mastercard. We will deliver your request by enrolled mail to the location given by you.

On the off chance that, for reasons unknown, you don’t meet all requirements for the treatment that you are asking for, any exhortation you get will be for nothing out of pocket. Our services make it easier for you to to get your required drug at your home without leaving your comforts.
We see ourselves as another choice, not a trade for conventional health awareness and customary restorative examinations. In this way, we urge you to illuminate your specialist on the off chance that you utilize any new pharmaceutical so your specialist can screen your help.

We likewise urge you to peruse and see all item data, does, conceivable symptoms and contraindications of the medicine your utilization. For this, the web can be an incredible wellspring of data, gave you utilize proficient connections.

Our motive is to provide services that can provide secure transactions, without losing your comfort at any place.