Jump to content

Thatguy

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    7158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Thatguy

  1. 7 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

    I think the argument is that for some of these aggrieved white males, sure, they are lost to the other side making promisses, etc.

    But there are some who can be reasoned with and who can come around from the initial bloody nose with a little empathy and pep talk, who can be saved from the dark side.

    You seem to think there is not a messy middle ground where perhaps slighted people can feel safe in calling out a wound, maybe feeling sorry for themselves for a minute or two, but then taking a step back and weighing everything out on the balance and making a decision to move forward as non (or less) aggrieved. You seem to think all these white guys who carp about the changes they are facing are either all lost causes or actually have no right to those feelings. At least that's what it seems like based on your responses.

    I am trying to lead you to where you realize that just patting someone on the back and saying "sorry for your luck" isn't going to bring voters back to your side. I don't understand why you guys are acting like these situations are new. The right has been running the same playbook and it's worked against 3 generations of white folks for the last 45 years. 

    F rom 1980-1992The Dems were doing exactly what you are asking them to do now. They were listening to the little guy and his life problems. Meanwhile Reagan and Bush were talking about cutting social programs and being tough on blacks because Welfare Queens and Willy Horton. These were the voting maps in those three terms

    Screenshot(39).thumb.png.1855a08f46ecfa2c16bb23cb112054c5.png

    Screenshot(40).thumb.png.61d68ee1bd55b3eb5d26e743d1496466.png

     

     

    Screenshot(41).thumb.png.984cd2d5a8e5c9ecf05413dd7958cc27.png

    Completely Washed!!

    Its infuriating to watch you guys do this. You wanna believe so bad that people aren't what they are showing you they are. You ignore voting trends. You ignore what the country has been telling you for generations, and that is this. People just don't want anyone that doesn't look like them to have shit, and refuse to believe that someone, who doesn't look like them that DOES have shit, came about it honestly. That's why we are willing to cut programs that are helpful to us. That's why we don't want universal healthcare. That's why the blackest state in the union, Mississippi, is also the poorest. That's why we hate DEI programs. 

    These people aren't mad about their slot in life. They are mad that they are where they are and someone *insert ethnicity* got over undeservedly. That's why they are so easily manipulated. If you shipped out all the dirty ethnic people the country would vote for universal healthcare the next day. 

    I know this because I see it every day. Everytime someone asks me where I went to school there is a pause and facial expression when I say Texas. The next question is always what sport did I play. The faces they make hopping out of our clean A6 at the tailgate with my wife on my arm. I told the story of making my daughter cut grass when she was 13 because life lessons, only to be asked how much I charge for landscaping by a couple yoga pants wearing, walker-bys. The look they gave when I told them it was my house. Lol. Every ethnic person with even a modicum of success has been met with these same circumstances and understands what they mean, and that is why the Jacob Savage's that voted for Trump are pissed. Those people in Ohio talking shit about the Haitians driving by in the Lexus is a prime example of that.

    The rest of us have been getting the shaft our entire life too, but we are smart enough to understand it's not the fault of women and immigrants with HB1 visas. You have to already be the kind of person thinking what the right is saying to take the bate on that shit imo. You already have an idea and here comes a politician just reinforcing what you already feel. I wish I could believe those dudes just needed some empathy, but history has told me different. 

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 1
  2. 1 hour ago, JBJ said:

    I don't think the defense changes much personnel-wise. Biggest difference depends on what Odd structure he will want to run.  PK used a stack, usually a tite stack, Muschamp probably wants a Mint, which doesn't have to be terribly diferent.  However, Muschamp probably wants to swap structure without swapping personnel.

    Yeah, Georgia ran Mint a lot against us especially on running downs. For those that might want to dig into whar JBJ is talking about here is a video explaining the two. 

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 2
  3. 14 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

    I think the argument is, much like it does in your whole professional career, it helps people to get onboard with the new reality. Whereas if you were to take a more antagonstic tone of the just deal with it and glossing over the personal impact with a lack of implied care or empathy, it invites conflict.

    The point is to minimize conflict.

    That does nothing to solve the problem, which is the other side is giving them someone to blame for their perceived slights and promising to eradicate the problem. 

  4. 22 hours ago, CastHorn said:

    Has it been discussed how our current personnel translates to Muschamp’s scheme? What does he run nowadays? 

    Hard to say because he has been running Smart's defense, but when he was here we pretty much stayed in a 4-2-5(with a Jack LB). Some called it a 2-4-5 but whatever. He ran under/over fronts with a lot of single gap responsibilities so the front 7 could play fast and loose. On the edge we didn't believe in space. Contesting routes was the norm whether that be in zone or man. A lot of split field coverages triggered by alignment or personnel, where we would zone to one side and man on the other. He was pretty multiple. It looked exotic from the outside but had simple keys for the players. We played extremely fast on that side of the ball. It was a joy to watch the defense because they brought a hat every week. If you weren't around, go back and look at 08 and 09's scores. Best defenses we've had since I've been old enough to pay attention. Outside of a couple games, when teams we start they game getting the better of us we adjusted and shut that shit down. 

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 2
  5. 16 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

    Have you never had to deliver tought news to someone, a child, an employee, a player, that was coming from above you? Maybe you didn't completely agree with it or maybe you could see from their perspective how it wasn't fair and there was some tough breaks and bad news, but that decisions and strategy was set and the direction was final?

    I think that's the posture he's saying to take. Acknowledge/address that the situation sucks for them and have some empathy but, like, there's not a lot we can do about it and it ain't going back the way it was. We can take 15 minutes to mourn it but we have to move on and build a bridge and get over it.

    Or as Bezos famously said, "disagree and commit".

    I spent my whole professional career doing that so yes. The question is what is that going to do to fix the situation? Is that going to bring them back to our side? If the answer is no, what will it take to bring them back to our side? 

  6. 10 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    It is counterproductive. Recognizing something and accepting it as real (ie, not an act) is not validation. But you can’t really be credible to another person if you don’t take them in good faith and try to understand where they’re coming from. That’s very different from agreeing with them. 
    It’s not a great analogy but for example, I’ve spent a lot of time with homeless people. Some of them are very angry and blame a lot of people for their problems, including people who are trying to help them. The first step when you try to reach those people is just listen, nod their head, and indicate understanding. But you must not validate because that can enable their worst ideas and actually doesn’t help get to them. 

    and how do you think that is going to help? 

  7. 1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    If this means that it was something I thought was worth talking about, indeed that’s why I wrote that.

    No. That’s not what that means, which is only what it says- if I personally were a millennial male who was denied opportunity, I would be bitter about it, and I have to imagine a subset of those people (ie “a few”) were radicalized by the experience.  Thank you for a close read, however:

    That is not my worldview or anything like it, so let me make this clear:

    - I very much do blame our current situation on affluent white progressives for abandoning majoritarian middle class economic interests in favor of narrow social issues and reinforcing their own economic security and social status. 

    - I have NEVER proposed giving back goddamn inch on anything, particularly when it comes to opening up opportunities in the workplace. 

    - I spent a good bit of my career working on this stuff, which is why I’m trying to be thoughtful about how we could have done more and better. 
     

    Hope that helps. As for the screed at the bottom, it’s got nothing to do with me, what I think, what I said, or what I do, but if it made you feel better to get it out, I’m glad. 

     

    Brother, blaming progressives for helping minorities in favor of white men is a thinly veiled way of blaming minorities. We minorities are very adept at reading dog whistles. This is why I hate responding to these kinds of posts. Then the accusations of someone trying to play the victim come out when I could give a fuck, I'm getting mine regardless. 

    What did you say? 

    "- I very much do blame our current situation on affluent white progressives for abandoning majoritarian middle class economic interests in favor of narrow social issues and reinforcing their own economic security and social status."

    As wildcat above pointed out, that wasn't how it went down. The abandonment of the "working man" was a direct response to getting washed 3 presidential races in a row while trying to run on a "working man and strong unions" based platform, while Reagan was running on cutting taxes for the rich and trickle down. Thats how we got a conservative Democrat in office that would famously say in a State of The Union Address that "The Era of Big Government is over". A democratic president that would sign the 94 crime bill, NAFTA, Glass-Steagall Reform, and push for China to join the WTO. All Republican agendas. 

    This was long before blue-haired progressives and trans people. But go ahead and tell us how it was about "narrow social issues", as you called it. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
  8. 10 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    I should hope so. I repeatedly said it did.

    My viewpoint “started” because what the author of the essay described aligns with my (and others who also posted) first hand experience as an older person watching/involved in the hiring/promotion/layoff process while we tried to correct historical underrepresentation of women and minorities. I questioned how much we accomplished at the time because it seemed like the people benefitting were already mostly products of extraordinary privilege and it had zero impact on the power structures involved, but I really hadn’t thought about the cost or negative impact in generational terms. 

    Indeed, so I’m not sure what it has to do with what I posted. It would be asinine to suggest that diversity efforts are the primary reason millennials or even millennial males struggle, and it would also be inconsistent with hundreds or perhaps thousands of observations on the labor economy I’ve posted here and in previous incarnations of this community over the last 20+ years.

    I’m not sure what you think my worldview is. That’s why I asked about my angle. 

    Shortly after posting the OP you then posted this. 

    On 12/19/2025 at 5:43 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

    Ok, but taken at face value what do you think? 
    Look there is a lot about this essay I find very silly. But the reason why it resonated with me was because it aligns with my first hand experience and direct visibility to what was happening, which is what 956 saw as well and describes above. 

    If I was a millennial male who was denied opportunities exclusively on the basis of my race and/or gender I would be pretty bitter and pretty cynical also, and I have to think it drove a few people straight into the arms of the American right wing or whoever wanted to pursue that grievance. 

    This where you were trying to drive the conversation and we could all see it coming. Based on your experience, which is statistically incorrect across the entirety of the workforce. You suggested that white Millennial males are being pushed toward MAGA because minority groups are getting jobs, despite multiple people on this thread trying to steer you away from that. 

    You go on to say this......

    Quote

    White men, out of the box, have one really big advantage: if they interact with police they almost certainly won’t die. That’s a very big deal and I don’t want to minimize it. 
    But otherwise, the vast majority of white men under 45 are just as fucked as everyone else and the vast majority of them will struggle all their lives and not amount to shit. 

    and this........

    Quote

    For somebody under 45? Nah. If you take away the ~5% with money and family connections and they are just as fucked as everyone else.  
    It’s nice not to get shot, tho. That’s not nothing. 

    and this.....

    Quote

    I think that is the intention. That’s one of the reasons it disturbs me. The other reason, which is far more troubling, is the truth it contains, because real grievance is much more powerful in politics than the confected variety. 
     

    Look at this thread. Multiple people are copping to the fact that yeah, millennial men probably were discriminated against en masse in certain fields for about a decade exclusively based on their race and gender, but most are kind of brushing them off as  “mediocre white men.”


    But since the vast majority of all people in the workforce and population are pretty mediocre, what y’all are really saying is that it’s fine for an individual to have their opportunities limited because of their race and gender if it squares up the  ledgers of representation grievances. That’s a real political problem for progressives, among other things

    and then lastly this......

    Quote

    No offense to anybody but this thread is pretty much what I expected and it’s disheartening.
    This board is a pretty representative sample of mainstream progressive discourse, and this essay has proven to be a really interesting Rorschach test. My hope was that some class consciousness had crept back into this part of the left as we head into the next cycle, but the reaction here and other mainstream-left spaces to this demonstrates to me that class consciousness is still mainly symbolic if it exists at all, and nominal racial representation still trumps everything. Older affluent progressives (ie Mainstream white democrats) are still struggling to find empathy with voters they need to win. It’s troubling.

     

    This pretty much paints your worldview that progressives pushing diversity in the workplace are responsible for the current political climate, and we need to slide backwards in order to "win back" the white male vote. 

    As a member of a minority group, I would politely like to tell you to fuck all the way off with that bullshit. We've put nothing but centrist in the white house for decades and the right is still unhappy. They won't be happy until they claw back ALL the rights of everyone who is NOT a white male. That's a no go in my household my guy. White men already control almost everything, and when those white men die off a new crop of them will replace them. It just so happens that these current white men won't let go of the fucking rope. Quit blaming minorities and diversity. Look around you. The fucking president is 79 years old. The previous guy was 80 years old. Jerry Jones is 8 fucking 3. Buffet, Penske, Rady, Miller, Cole, Greenberg, etc etc. My fucking next door neighbor is in his 70's, has a brand new black on black suburban, bought his wife a new 5 series BMW, AND has a 911 tucked away in his garage. This motherfucker is still out there working and trying to live like he is 30. All across the country old ass white motherfuckers are holding onto their positions instead being put to pasture. Behind them is us. Waiting for them to die the fuck off so we can finally ascend. It's a log jam, and has very little to do with fucking minorities. Geezus fucking kr-I-st, let's placate more to the demographic that has everything. That will solve the problem. Let's get back to the days of minorities only being housekeepers and racial fucking covenants. Fuck yeah!

    • Hook 'Em 6
    • Fuck You 1
  9. 1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    I have no idea what this means. What’s my angle?

    Look man, I haven't commented on this subject much because I like to let the whites argue amongst themselves on topics like this. It's pretty obvious that the whole reason you brought this forth is because this resonated with you. Your whole viewpoint started based on feelings and not facts, and feelings is almost always a terrible way to form an opinion. The reason Millennials are getting squeezed out is far more complex. Most of it is because the olds aren't leaving. The workforce is getting older so not as many spots. Another is white male university enrollment has been steadily declining for years. I can go on but you get the picture. Bottom line is statistical analysis of demographics in the workplace across different genres doesn't support your worldview. The numbers have changed a little but far exceed the representation in population. 

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  10. 1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

    Ignore the reply where I noted that it very much depends on what the firm does/specializes in.  Different practices often have different ethnic mixes of the candidates who are interested in that practice.  Zero racism by the hiring firm necessary, the pool of M&A candidates is gonna be a lot whiter than the pool of family law or even litigation candidates.

    Yeah like immigration law. I'm sure @sheeeit can guess what the demographic would be there. 

  11. 1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    No, because it was sloppy argumentation. You didn’t read the piece before you reacted, and then compensated by putting thoughts and motivations into the minds of people you don’t know, and then proposed a truly bizarre counterfactual scenario that involved me taking a position I wouldn’t. 
    We’ve interacted enough that you know I try to give as good as I get, which is what I did then, too. That’s why i dismissed it that way. 

    Even if someone didn't read the article, we can see your angle through your what you've personally written. I am pretty sure that's where @wildcat09 is coming from.

  12. 13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

    Isn't he just jumping on a job now before a new head coach comes in and brings his own OC?  Then the carousel has stopped and Lindsey is unemployed. 

    This is not an "oof," this is smart of him. 

     

    12 minutes ago, South Austin said:

    Not a good look, but in all fairness, he probably knows there's a good chance the new HC will hire his own staff, so he's jumping on what might be the best job available instead of waiting to see how the shitshow of Michigan's head coaching search shakes out.

    I was more talking about the difference in money, but I looked and he wasn't being paid that much so y'all are right. A lot of Blue blood coordinators are making well over a million dollars. Shoot, Michigan's Wink Martindale is making 2.3 million. PK 1.8. It would be awful to have to take a third of your previous salary. 

  13. On 12/19/2025 at 5:09 PM, Brisketexan said:

    But back to whiny white guys, by far the biggest factors crushing them are (1) women have entered the work force, and not just in "women's jobs" like teaching and nursing, but in all manner of professional fields, and (2) women are smart and have an aptitude for the very things that make one successful academically and professionally.  E.g., women are much less likely to spend formative educational years in their parents' basement playing COD 12 hours a day.  Once we allowed women to compete....they started kicking our asses, and it ain't getting any better for those of us equipped with a dingus.

    As much as there are strong retrograde impulses in society and government right now, that genie is never going back in the bottle.  Get used to it, white guys.  Want to do better?  Then BE better.  You know, the meritocracy you love to shout about, the key first step is "have some fucking merit."

    20 years ago I might've skimmed over this and rolled my eyes. But after raising a Gen Z daughter I can see the differences in how young women spend their day vs young men and wholeheartedly agree with this. I have never seen my daughter pick up a controller for a Playstation or Xbox. She last played Minecraft and Roblox. Her downtime is spent on more mentally stimulating activities. It's a 180 to her male cousins. At 17-18, all the young women in her circle are already locked in on which colleges they are going to. The boys? Not so much. It is truly eye-opening, and speaks to exactly what you are talking about here. In 4-7 years these women will be emerging from higher learning and entering the workforce in droves. It's not stopping any time soon. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  14. On 12/20/2025 at 6:30 PM, aggie08 said:

    I qualify as a millennial (about to cross 40), and I'm pretty comfortable admitting that some of my career advancements have come, in part, to me being a tall, relatively handsome, socially competent white dude. Mechanical Engineer FWIW.

    If we're throwing around isolated anecdotes.

    We all knew it was Mechanical Engineering.......Aggie

    • Haha 1
  15. 57 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

     

    Y'all turned the ball over like 12 times, but it's the team not playing's fault that you lost. Rent fuckin free! I imagine an aggy saying that a sip paid Tyrone to fuck his wife and ruin his marriage. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  16. 6 minutes ago, TOR said:

    Waddle was just out there to cash a game check, 0 effort and not interested.

    Yeah, you saw that on the first couple throws that went his way. He don't give a fuck. He is not being evaluated. He knows his job is secure. This is why I hate bringing guys in at the end of the season when a team is out of contention. The vets are just out there dogging it. I mean, over in the Cleveland game Josh Allen only had to throw for 130 yards and no TDs. Cleveland let Cook run for over 7 yards a pop and over 100 yards in the first half. Just not giving a fuck. Only one out there trying was Garrett because of the sack record. Bills scored 23 points without Allen throwing OR running for a TD. Bills had 3 TDs on the ground. Just rolling out the red carpet. That shit makes it hard to watch the NFL. 

    • Like 2
  17. 21 minutes ago, ztejas said:

    Cincy's D is ass but he threw for 8.5 YPA and put 21 points on the board. I thought all of his throws that I saw looked great, frankly. He missed one down the sideline and both picks were reasonable balls and decisions. He didn't take a sack all day. He showed some pretty good mobility/athleticism. He looked like an NFL player.

    That said - the question for him is what does it look like when he's getting hit and pass-pro is breaking down. We already knew he's great with time to throw. It's his toughness and pocket-presence that he will need to display if he wants to stick around and/or compete for a starting job. 

    Also, if you are going to have a QB like Ewers, you have to commit to protecting him both in roster management and playcalling. We should be chipping ends and calling heavier protection on blitz downs. Miami did a lot of the right things with that today the team just didn't give a fuck. I get that a fully healthy Cincy with Burrow back at the helm is a tough cover but they flat out gave up. Cincy was doing whatever they wanted on the ground and through the air. 

  18. 6 minutes ago, ztejas said:

    Cincy's D is ass but he threw for 8.5 YPA and put 21 points on the board. I thought all of his throws that I saw looked great, frankly. He missed one down the sideline and both picks were reasonable balls and decisions. He didn't take a sack all day. He showed some pretty good mobility/athleticism. He looked like an NFL player.

    That said - the question for him is what does it look like when he's getting hit and pass-pro is breaking down. We already knew he's great with time to throw. It's his toughness and pocket-presence that he will need to display if he wants to stick around and/or compete for a starting job. 

    The 50/50 down the sideline to Waddle was a red light throw. First, Waddle is smaller than most NFL corners. Second, he didn't give a fuck. Don't throw that ball. Lastly, coach whatever the fuck your name is. Quinn Ewers isn't the QB sneak guy. What are you doing there? This isn't Josh Allen. Let your RB pick that up. That's like putting your kicker in at RB. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Rage+1 1
  19. 4 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

    Why? We beat them in football, the sport that actually matters for talking shit. I have only encountered two teams that talk shit about women's sports... Nebraska fans for volleyball and OU fans for softball and I just laugh at them both when they do.

    That's because aggy doesn't win shit. Now that they have the "I was at every game for the last 10 years" folks are gonna be crawling out the woodwork. Have fun with that. My wife just said they are going to be insufferable. She is correct. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
×
×
  • Create New...