Jump to content

Goredho

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    7231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Goredho

  1. 10 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

    If you want good to great journalism, you are gonna have to pay for it. I work in the industry -- have for 17 years. Every single one of those years, ad revenue has declined. Newspapers and magazines are withering away. Internet-only model has yet to make much money. Thousands of journalists and copy editors are out of work, and copy editor are important, because they caught the typos we often make when under the gun, and when typos slip in, idiots will cite them as proof the story was written by a moron and thus fake news.

    Sadly, sending a reporter out to some shithole in Arizona to investigate a mining travesty is not free. There is no magic money tree we can just pluck the green from to dispatch somebody out there for a week or two or more. Sadly, city hall, state capital, county politics and court reporters aren't willing to work pro bono 40 hours a week. They have needs, like things to eat and places to sleep. 

    More and more, we are forced by these realities to give the public what they want -- trash. Socialite garbage. Sex scandals with no bearing on any of us by the parties involved. Celebrity shite. 

    And those of you who bitch the most about "the media" are very often the same ones who cut and paste articles from behind paywalls. Those paywalls are there for a reason, and that reason is that journalists need food and shelter. 

    tl;dr Fuck you, pay me.  

     

    Here’s my lunch money.  I get what you are saying, and it’s why I lay the blame on Joe Citizen.  They won’t pay for real journalism when they can set up a twitter list giving them only “news” that’s comfortable to consume.  I.e. that reinforces their beliefs, tells them they are right and avoids topics that might disrupt that.

    If you want to make money in media, you are far better off pandering to a demographic’s biases than you are in providing thought provoking journalism.

    My family owned a couple dozen newspapers in small Texas towns up until the early 90’s when they sold out.  My grandfather built them up and my father and uncles ran them into their 40s/50s before cashing out.  They took the notion of journalistic integrity very seriously.  I wish they were still around today to get their opinions about the current state of news and journalism.

  2. 3 hours ago, MAGS® said:

    Per the rules, it was targeting.  There needs to be exceptions to the rule however.  I'm trying to imagine how else to make that tackle from that angle and speed and not be considered targeting.  Wasn't BJ a good foot taller than that runner?   

    Go Gata roll!

  3. Who gets your game balls?  Here are mine:

    Gary Johnson:  Played in beast mode, especially in the 2nd half.  I now think he truly hates QBs and RBs rather than generally kinda doesn’t like many of them.

    The offensive line:  Decent enough pass protection and a good push run blocking.  Everyone on offense looked better because these guys did a decent job.  I now think you generally kinda don’t like DLs and LBs instead of wishing you could all just be friends and have a sleepover.  One nice thing about offensive ineptitude due to a shitty OL — every facet of the offense improves by orders of magnitude when the line becomes unshitty.

    Sam Ehlinger:  Played well in a big game with no major mistakes.  Several big throws and runs to score or keep drives alive.  I loved seeing him dance around when pressure came then throw it away when nothing materialized instead of forcing something stupid.  Big step up in on-the-field intelligence and maturity.

    Caden Stearns:  Dude, you almost blocked a kick, picked it up and took it for a TD in one fluid blur of athleticism.  As it is, your block and Wheeler’s TD killed USC’s spirit and made the game non-competitive.  Only weakness:  ball scooping skills.

    BJ Foster:  Not sure about your overall game, but you fucking killed a deity with your +3 vorpal helmet of doom, and that’s worthy of recognition.

    Lil’Jordan & CJ:  They played well.  Hmm, is ‘well‘ really the bar for a game ball?  I dunno, but these guys did good.

    The Team:  They got down early and could have folded, but they gathered themselves and convincingly beat the shit out of USC in prime time.  If the defense can play that well consistently, we will be in every game.  If the OL plays that well consistently, our offense will be good enough to win most of those close games against better opponents.  Last night’s team was what we thought we’d see coming out of fall camp.

    The Coaches:  For all intents and purposes, you took an underachieving 0-2 team surrounded with negativity and got them prepared to beat a ranked team.  The defense was very good after the first 2-3 drives.  The offensive play calling looked much better with the OL not tripping over their dicks or the QB being a chaos-monkey and throwing the ball up for grabs.

    Good win, I hope what we saw last night is more indicative of where the team is than the first two games.

    • Like 4
  4. 31 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

    I just had to write this post to tip my cap Texas fans, students and Alumni. You may have come up a few points ahead on the scoreboard Saturday night...


     

     

    It was more than a few, Chip.

    • Like 1
  5. 20 hours ago, Mole said:

    "Enemy of the people" goes way too far, but...

    Good and even middling journalism is a great check on the government. Journalism-like organizations that simply serve as propaganda and disinformation campaigns for those in power are really bad for us. Probably the most notable offender is Breitbart, but there are many on "both sides." Likewise, journalism-like organizations that wave shiny things around and try to manufacture controversy are also bad for us. This includes all the screaming heads on cable news as well as things like overwrought hurricane coverage. Jon Stewart was right when he told Crossfire that they were hurting America. Trying to draw a distinction between "opinion" and "news" becomes meaningless when the lines are so blurred and oftentimes the opinion is the news.

     In short, the fourth estate is failing the country as much as Trump and Congress are. Rather than having journalism-like people who chase the victimhood status high ground, we need journalists who seek the truth. 

    Good post here, and I don't disagree.  I do think it says as much about the Joe citizen than it does the news organizations.  Given the choice between factual news and editorials trumpeting their existing views, Joe chooses to consume the latter overwhelmingly.  Youtube, podcasts, blogs, etc... make it very competitive to get Joe's attention for news.  I think this is a spot where capitalism starts to break down.  For a news organization to turn a profit, they have to offer up non-news that tell Joe he's right and trigger dopamine centers in his brain.  There could easily have been a 'Dirty Money' episode on the modern news business.   Its one reason why I try to consume NPR more than other sources.

    That said, the people I see posting about Fake News the most, either here or on FB, twitter, whatever, are the biggest consumers I know of slanted, editorial journalism as 'news'.  They rail against the fake news while consuming nothing but... fake news...
     

    19 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

    Russia, Russia, Russia, Manafort, Trump tweets, Russia, impeachment, Russia, 25th Amendment, Trump tweets, Russia, Russia.

    You know there is actual news that they could report on. If you believe in AGW or like the environment, Trump is gutting the EPA. Might want to report on that. Trade war's kind of a thing. Economy is real news. There are a thousand real issues where it would benefit the public discussion to cover them. 

    I really just want the news. I don't want any of their opinions. I watch Fox and Friends sometimes and when they opinionate it is fucking godawful cringeworthy idiocy. 

    ... like this fucking guy.  Russia hacking/attempts to hack 27 states election infrastructure in 2016 is a fact.  Trump's failure to condemn it or issue an edict to defend ourselves in this arena is a fact.  Russia's attempt to influence our hearts/minds through social media is a fact.  Raising awareness about it so that we can consider what we are consuming is a public service.  The campaign chairman of the President being a paid agent of foreign interests and pleading guilty to associated felonies is a fact.  The schism between this President and the justice department and intelligence community regarding Russia, unlike any I've seen in any President dating back to Regan, is a fact.

    These are all facts, newsworthy and the public has a need-to-know about them.   You just don't like them, Joe.

    If you've got examples of fake news, not simply factual topics you don't like being discussed, post them.  Otherwise, you're just a fucking Trumpkin parroting the phrases uttered by your owner.

  6. So this is an overlap of a post elsewhere, but probably worthy of its own thread.

    Trump keeps railing on journalists, the media and free press as "the enemy of the people".  Do you agree with him?  If so, why?  I would appreciate your inclusion of any references to journalistic works as examples of the free press acting as the enemy of the people so I can consider what has brought you to this opinion.

    I personally believe in the need for a free press.  I believe the enemy of the people is government and big business operating unfettered and without scrutiny.  I believe journalists serve as a check against that. Here are some examples of journalistic works that lead me to believe this.  They clearly show examples of either government or business gone awry and the critical public need to know.  Without a free press, they would have simply been allowed to happen and continue.  There are certainly more examples like this which I hope others would post here as well.

    Example 1:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/watergate/part1.html
     

    Quote

    "Five Held in Plot to Bug Democratic Offices Here," said the headline at the bottom of page one in the Washington Post on Sunday, June 18, 1972. The story reported that a team of burglars had been arrested inside the offices of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate office complex in Washington.

    So began the chain of events that would convulse Washington for two years, lead to the first resignation of a U.S. president and change American politics forever.

    The story intrigued two young reporters on The Post's staff, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward who were called in to work on the story. As Woodward's notes show, he learned from police sources that the men came from Miami, wore surgical gloves and carried thousands of dollars in cash. It was, said one source, "a professional type operation."

    The next day, Woodward and Bernstein joined up for the first of many revelatory stories. "GOP Security Aide Among Those Arrested," reported that burglar James McCord was on the payroll of President Nixon's reelection committee.
     


    Example 2: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/kennecott-hides-potential-for-deadly-tailings-disaster-in-magna-utah-by-gabriel-caplett/

    Quote

    The Salt Lake Tribune is reporting that Kennecott Utah Copper Corp. has concealed, since 1988, the potential for an earthquake-caused major tailings disaster in Magna, Utah.  The tailings impoundment is located north of Magna and stores an estimated 1 billion tons of fine mine wastes.  In 1993, the company conducted a “risk assessment” to determine if full containment of the impoundment would be more expensive than legal costs associated with property damage and citizen deaths.  

     

    The Tribune has published a 1997 confidential memo, written by Ray D. Gardner, former Chief Legal Officer for Kennecott, that is critical of the company’s handling of the potential tailings disaster:  “Prior management’s decisions to disregard and conceal legal advice, forego public notice, attempt to establish a residential buffer surreptitiously, collude with the State Engineer to withhold the KL studies from the public, and restrict the distribution of the Reduction Study, collectively and individually, give the appearance of a conspiracy to cover-up a profound threat to public safety.”


    Example 3: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/denied/
     

    Quote

    Over a decade ago, the officials arbitrarily decided what percentage of students should get special education services — 8.5 percent — and since then they have forced school districts to comply by strictly auditing those serving too many kids.

    Their efforts, which started in 2004 but have never been publicly announced or explained, have saved the Texas Education Agency billions of dollars but denied vital supports to children with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, epilepsy, mental illnesses, speech impediments, traumatic brain injuries, even blindness and deafness, a Houston Chronicle investigation has found.

    Texas is the only state that has ever set a target for special education enrollment, records show.

    It has been remarkably effective.

    In the years since its implementation, the rate of Texas kids receiving special education has plummeted from near the national average of 13 percent to the lowest in the country — by far.

    In 2015, for the first time, it fell to exactly 8.5 percent.

    If Texas provided services at the same rate as the rest of the U.S., 250,000 more kids would be getting critical services such as therapy, counseling and one-on-one tutoring.


    So man up (or Bama Chick up) for your beliefs and defend them.  Whether you think the press is the enemy of the people or a critical cornerstone of democracy, show the world what evidence has led you to that conclusion.

  7. Also, that Houston Chronicle “Denied” expose is exactly why a free press is necessary and good.  The problem of special ed in Texas only came to light because of it.  The positive change that appears to be happening is because journalism, the free press and mainstream media exists and worked.

    A free press is not the enemy of the people.  A government operating in a vacuum of scrutiny is the enemy of the people.  A free press is a critical check against a government that strays from serving the people.

    • Like 2
  8. 15 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

    The state continuously puts us (districts) in a bad spot on serving kids with special needs. It’s not only the lack of funding, it’s the nasty audits you would get as punishment if you actually attempted provide services to “too many kids”. Districts that went over that 8.5% mark got shit on with audit after audit that took more time and resources away from students.

    The response from districts was typically to serve dyslexic students through 504 instead of special education. Works great if your school has a great CALT and the kid is functioning high enough to attend a gen-ed class instead of a SPED class. Has always worked well for my school because we have two CALTs on campus, one of which only serves kids that aren’t in special ed. Most schools....not so much. 

    But, things are looking better on that front already as we have gotten the go ahead to put more of the severe dyslexic kids in special education if that’s what they truly need. No thanks to TEA, the SBOE, and the Texas legislature. They never gave a damn about the kids and I’m happy the parents on here that got screwed are informed enough to point the blame in the right direction.

     

    Yeah, we actually had a teacher pull us aside, pointed us to the chronicle expose and told us this is what we were up against.  I have no complaints with Texas teachers, many went above and beyond what they were required to do to attempt to help our kids. This is at a strategic level above the school districts.  I’m glad things are getting better for kids and professionals in the educational trenches.

    • Like 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

     

     

    My daughter was denied dyslexia services in 2nd grade because she was too intelligent even though her decoding rate was only 2%. We were in private school at the time but you get evaluated and get services from the public school district. Since we had no other options, we hired a private CALT tutor. in two years she was above grade level in reading. It was $1600/month. Well worth it but you’re fucked if you can’t afford it and have to rely on the school district. We ended up going to public school in 5th grade and discovered there were a dozen dyslexic kids out of 90 in 5th grade. We figured our daughter didn’t make the cut earlier because of the cap on kids that get services.

    I guarantee your daughter didn't make the cut earlier because of that cap.  What we saw happen was that kids basically get ranked according to functional impairment.  Kids with the most impairment are at the top, those with the least are at the bottom.  If your kid have such impairment that they they are in the 8.5% at the top of the list, they get services.  If your kids don't have that level of functional impairment and fall below that line of 8.5% of students, they are ass out.  The process you will navigate to get your kids the services that your doctors are recommending will make collecting on an insurance claim seem like a wonderful experience in comparison.  Every road block imaginable will be thrown in your way to deter you and get you to give up.

  10. Lets just keep this fucking thread pinned to the top of this board.  I've got two kids with special needs, and the stance on special education described in the linked articles is in large part  why we moved our family out of state.  After 2 years of fighting with Leander ISD to get our kids the services they needed and being, well, denied, we moved out of state.  After 4 weeks of observation, we met with officials at our new out-of-state school to come up with an educational plan for our kids.  We braced for a fight.  Immediately, before we ever asked for anything, they offered 4x the hours of occupational therapy and other services that Leander ISD ever offered us after 2 years of fighting.

    On the bright side, it looks like the problem is being corrected.  Too late for my kids, and only through an act of the federal government vs a crisis of republican conscience, but its a good thing for kids in Texas.

    imgur


    Anyway, Texas republicans need to go fuck themselves with that nasty barbed dildo from "SE7EN".  At least those not ideologically aligned with Joe Strauss, which seems like all there is any more.  Texas has the 10th largest economy in the world and its booming.  Stop fucking nickel-and-diming education.  If you undermine public schools and make the opportunities of a decent education a privilege only the wealthy class can afford, you're basically telling your constituents that their children need to "eat educational cake".  Here's to you assholes losing your heads -- politically or physically -- whatever it takes.

    From 
    https://www.houstonchronicle.com/denied/1/ in 2016:

    Quote

    Over a decade ago, the officials arbitrarily decided what percentage of students should get special education services — 8.5 percent — and since then they have forced school districts to comply by strictly auditing those serving too many kids.

    Their efforts, which started in 2004 but have never been publicly announced or explained, have saved the Texas Education Agency billions of dollars but denied vital supports to children with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, epilepsy, mental illnesses, speech impediments, traumatic brain injuries, even blindness and deafness, a Houston Chronicle investigation has found.

    More than a dozen teachers and administrators from across the state told the Chronicle they have delayed or denied special education to disabled students in order to stay below the 8.5 percent benchmark. They revealed a variety of methods, from putting kids into a cheaper alternative program known as "Section 504" to persuading parents to pull their children out of public school altogether.


    Texas is the only state that has ever set a target for special education enrollment, records show.

    It has been remarkably effective.

    In the years since its implementation, the rate of Texas kids receiving special education has plummeted from near the national average of 13 percent to the lowest in the country — by far.

    In 2015, for the first time, it fell to exactly 8.5 percent.

    If Texas provided services at the same rate as the rest of the U.S., 250,000 more kids would be getting critical services such as therapy, counseling and one-on-one tutoring.

    Spokesmen for numerous school districts, including Humble, Houston and Tyler, said they have not denied special ed to any children with disabilities. Several said their rates had declined because they had used early intervention programs to reduce the number of disabled kids.

    Education experts told the Chronicle that there is no evidence that the instructional techniques being used in Texas — which are in classrooms nationwide — lower special education percentages.

    A Dallas ISD spokeswoman defended that district's low percentage by noting it "falls within the Texas state acceptable range of 0%-8.5%."

    After receiving a list of the Chronicle's findings, a U.S. Department of Education spokeswoman said her office would look into the Texas policy.

    "It is important that states carry out their responsibilities under the law to ensure that all children who are suspected of having a disability are evaluated in a timely manner to determine eligibility for special education and related services," said the spokeswoman, Dorie Nolt. "Once we have more information from state officials, we will determine if further actions are necessary."

    From https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-21/texas-saved-billions-cutting-special-education-now-the-bill-comes-due this past august:

     

    Quote

    U.S. officials ruled that both the state and local districts in Texas had violated the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, a federal law that requires all students who qualify receive special education services.

    Since IDEA’s passage in 1975, educational opportunities afforded American children with conditions including autism, dyslexia and cerebral palsy have changed profoundly. Rather than being isolated, more than 60 percent of them spend over 80 percent of their time in general-education classrooms, receiving specialized assistance while integrated into the broader school environment.

    Lindsay Jones, the chief policy and advocacy officer for the National Center on Learning Disabilities, or NCLD, called the move to deprive vulnerable students of necessary services “absolutely the largest-scale violation” of the law since its passage in 1975.

    By one TEA estimate, the level of enrollment before 2004 indicates that as many as 200,000 students who should be getting special education services are not. Additionally, by one estimate more than 150,000 students who have since left may have gone unserved.

    As the 2018-19 school year starts, the TEA is under orders from Washington to ensure that districts find, evaluate and provide services to eligible students currently enrolled, and offer compensatory services to those who missed out. State officials and disability rights advocates say that’s going to require unorthodox searches, including looking for young adults in mental hospitals and correctional facilities, two populations studies have shown to have higher-than-average rates of undiagnosed learning disabilities. 

     

    • Like 2
  11. 1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

    Back off, man -- salty women of a certain age are within MY dominion.  I'm married to one, and I may need to start dating another.

    The problem is, if Bama Chick and my wife ever got together, I'm pretty sure that it would quickly devolve into them becoming fast friends and making fun of me.  My fantasies never really play out right.

    Come on, Brisket, just think -- double the pegging!  #YouToo.

  12. On 9/12/2018 at 6:17 PM, Bama Chick said:

    Dana Loesch is pure fucking evil.

    I hope she shoots herself in her face while cleaning her hot pink lady gun.

    But doesn’t die. And has to spend the rest of her miserable life in horrible pain with a disfigured face that’s such a horror it makes little children point at her and say mean things about her.

    I wish nothing but the worst for her and everyone she loves.

    Just in case no one has told you — you’re an intardnet BBS 10.

  13. 3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    To add on to my Javanka theory:  the op-ed came immediately following the weekend of the McCain funeral which Javanka attended. 

    Those speeches probably hit really close to home for both of them.  They saw what leadership looks like and were embarrassed to the point it inspired them to speak out against Trumpism, but not formally.

    The NYT wouldn’t publish that op-ed if it came from one low level staffer.  It came from someone with well established rapport with the NYT high up in the administration.  

    If you’ve read the Woodward book, you can see Jared pretty much runs shit behind the scenes.  He has put the kibosh on much of the outlandish shit the administration wanted to do and has the most influence in Trump’s inner circle, plus he is a democrat.

    However, there were likely multiple motives in the op-ed too.

    I've been considering picking up Woodward's book.  To make a clarification, I don't think it was a low-level staffer that presented the op/ed to the NYT.  I totally agree it would have to be a really big, plausible fish for them to run it.  So it would have to be someone like Javanka that presented it to them.

    I just don't think the author/presenter is really part of some group of people in the administration whose motives are to protect America from the President.  If they were, and they were really seeking to protect America from Trump, the absolute last thing they would do is draw attention to themselves and others working towards the same goal.  There is still no good answer for why an anonymous protector of the Republic would go out of their way to damage their and others ability to 1) stay anonymous and 2) protect the Republic.

    I could easily see the real motive being to help create the context where a wrongfully besieged President has the rightful justification to carry out a political purge of those seeking to undermine his presidency.  But that's speculation on my part tainted by my own internal reaction to the op/ed -- that a group in the government actively undermining the President is on par with the damage Trump himself is inflicting on America.  I know many others that would love nothing more than to see Trump leave office that reacted to the op/ed in the same way I did.

    Anyway, would it really be unimaginable that Ivanka would deliver a story to the NYT and play a role to help Daddy triumph over the swamp creatures trying to tear him down and derail his good work?

    • Like 1
  14. 1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    It’s a sound theory and plausible but I doubt it.  If it was to inspire a purge, he would have begun firing people by now.  Firing people isn’t Trump’s MO anymore.  He just bitches relentlessly.

    The NYT would’ve likely seen through the charade if it was a plant or hoax. 

    *shrugs*. We’ll see if a purging happens at some point.  Im not really convinced my hypothetical scenario is correct, but I am very convinced that op/ed wasn’t really penned by some high level staffer involved in a shadow resistence within the government.  It would be contrary to their self-interest on about 20 different levels.

    So until someone can offer a plausible motive, I have to view the op/ed with skepticism.  Your spidey sense is tingling, too, or you wouldn’t be speculating it has to be Javanka because they would have the best chance of surviving the risk involved.

    45 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

    You're thinking Trump is more like House of Cards but he's much more like Veep.

    1.  I could be right about the op/ed being a plant and wrong about who planted it and what their motivations are.

    2. Trump is a survivor devoid of morals who shows some creativity in media manipulation.  Americans of all ideologies have underestimated him to their peril.

    3. Hey, Vlad, I’ve got this problem, and I’d like to get your advice...

  15. 4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    After reading the Woodward book, I’m starting to the the Anonymous NYT author is Javanka. 

    The author(s) would have to be someone that could risk getting caught without any real consequences.

     Jared and Ivanka are the only ones that fit that profile and they pretty much hate everyone in the White House. 

    I am really starting to believe the op/ed was a plant. The author didn't say anything negative about Trump that wasn't already out there.  What was new/shocking was the revelation of a collective within the government working to actively subvert the President.  A deep-state by any other name.  This revelation was laced with trigger words and phrases for the Trump base like 'resistance' and 'deep state' and fits the narrative of Trump being victimized by those that don't want to see him MAGA.  And Trump has only very tepidly attempted to discredit the op/ed's validity or control perception in its wake.  Contrast that to how he has rallied people to attack the assertions of Woodward's book.  His MO is to attack, deny and discredit vehemently until he has no other option.  But not so much here.

    The more I consider the op/ed, the more a question keeps popping up in my head:  If the President is such a danger to America that you as a senior staff member would work behind the scenes to thwart his intentions, why on earth would you publicize that?  Putting the governmental 'resistance' into the spotlight only alerts and embarrasses the President to act.  It makes you or others working similarly more likely to be discovered and replaced by someone supportive of the President.  It makes your efforts to protect America much less likely to succeed.  So why do it?  I can't think of any good, logical answer for that.

    I believe it more likely that the op/ed was carefully crafted for some other purpose and planted with the NYT by someone who could plausibly have authored it.  The question then becomes what could the op/ed's other purpose of be?  Lets return to the big reveal of the piece.  Who could benefit from the belief that there is a real, no-shit shadow-state in the government that is working against the President, sabotaging his efforts to lead and effectively undermining his election?  

    Donald J Trump

    If that shadow-state is real, or enough people believe it to be so, then he would be justified in dismantling it.  Expect to see that notion reinforced and acted upon at some point.  Expect it be used as the basis for Trump to carry out a political purge.  Expect it to be used to target people like Sessions, Rosenstein and anyone else who doesn't completely kowtow to Trump's authority.  Expect it to be used in an attempt to end Mueller's investigation.

    That scenario is at least logical.  Diabolical, but logical.

    Sandlot3.jpg
    3o7qDEq2bMbcbPRQ2c.gif

    • Like 6
  16. 3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Top row seems to be offense, so Collin.

    He just doesn't seem to be much of a football player, or hasn't been taught to be one.

    CJ will get drafted in round 3 or 4 and become a top 10 receiver in the NFL within 3 years.  The NFL pundits will be shocked he’s that good and wonder why he wasn’t dominant at Texas.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...