-
Posts
7173 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by Thatguy
-
-
6 hours ago, Revolution512 said:
You said Muschamp flipped Melton over to defense. You were wrong.
Earl was recruited to play safety by Akina. Filler guy? He was a fantastic 400m guy with great instincts. Akina kept him away from LSU. You’re wrong again.
5 hours ago, Revolution512 said:I believe they even started him out at corner early on. I remember practice reports about him picking off lots of passes. Muschamp put him on the field once he saw him.
Lol. Who didn't get a super positive eval back in the MackBrownTexasFootball.com, orange slices era? Every report out of camp was "Chris Hall is greatly improved"and "Dan Buckner is dominating DBs in practice".
Geezus! When ET came they didn't know what they were going to do with him. You literally just said it yourself, "I believe they even started him out at corner early on". If Akina recruited him to play safety then why did they try him at corner? Because they had bigger, more highly ranked dudes that they recruited to play safety and thought there wasn't any room for him there. The "ATH" designation tells you exactly that. They tried him at corner. He wasn't good at corner so they changed him to safety. He was a 3 star recruit who Boom turned into a 1st rounder at the position HE played in college and that's no coincidence considering Boom himself was Blake Gideon before Blake Gideon.
Why are we arguing this anyway? You tried to discredit the guy as if he had a lockerroom full of 5 stars which is far far from reality. In 07 we gave up 32 to Central Florida, 41 to Kstate, 28 to OU, 35 to OSU, 25 to Nebraska, 43 to Tech, 38 to aggy, and 34 to ASU. The next year, with a brand new install, we only allowed 4 teams to score more than 21, and that includes Ohio State. In 09 only 3, and that includes a national championship game where it like 24-21 late with a QB who threw 4 picks.
Idgaf who you are that's solid coaching, and that's why the dude has a Paul Bunyan like cult following. To a lesser degree, Greg Robinson did the same thing taking over after Manny _iaz. You gonna "Well actually..." him too?
You
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Revolution512 said:
Muschamp was terrific at Texas. He definitely put the pieces in place and had a lot to work with.
A little revisionist history on some of these players.
In what world was Earl Thomas not supposed to play here? They raved about him the moment he got on campus. We heard a lot about him while redshirting.
Melton was already on defense prior to Muschamp’s arrival.
Revisionist history eh? Were you paying attention when I said players were lost and had no role? Melton was a rb in 05 and 06. He had 11 total tackles in 07 and was a guy who was just there, doomed to stand on the sideline and get some mop up duty. Boom came and 29 tackles, 10 TFLs, 4 sacks, 2 PBUs, and 1 forced fumble. His single season playing under Boom.
As far as ET is concerned, if you recall we grabbed 6 ft Safety Christian Scott who was in the Army All American game, and the year prior we had grabbed 6'2 safety James Henry who was in that year's Army All American game, as well as 4 star 6'2 Robert Joseph. ET was recruited as an athlete. He had no designation at that time. He was just supposed to be a filler guy. We were hearing he was more than his recruiting stars but that's a long way from the 14th overall pick in the draft.
-
1
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, TotallyLegit said:
I think this is my favorite play from his first tenure.
What's awesome about that play is if you go back and watch the game OSU ran that play to success earlier in the game. ET recognized it and jumped the route the second time they ran it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, TotallyLegit said:
Hold on a sec, wasn't Dylan Haines the Michael Taaffe before Michael Taaffe, and Blake Gideon was the Dylan Haines before Dylan Haines? As a white person, I demand you get our people's history right.
-
2
-
2
-
-
52 minutes ago, TOR said:
PK recruited monsters to fit his bend don't break, and dropped them into coverage.
BOOM is going to correct that error. Because Texas has monsters.
49 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:That was the most annoying thing about PK. I hated his bend don't break bs. Dropping them into coverage is how he found himself in the unemployment line. Sark has made no apologies and I'm sure it's because he got tired of the defensive garbage.
4 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:
I dont think PK’s MO was to drop ends into coverage any more than average. Orlando did that shit (i.e. Joseph Ossai).
Simmons was on a pitch count. but, on pass downs he rushed the passer over 90% of the time.As this smart dude named @JBJ we got roaming around this place alluded to, PK likes to run a tite front in his stack concept which has certain rules that activate the Jack end into dropping. A smart offensive coordinator could trigger that by choosing plays that force that drop with certain alignments and thereby take some pressure off his QB. Easy way to take Simmons out of the game.
-
1
-
1
-
-
-
50 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:
This is an outstanding post. He took a lot of misfits and made them stars.
Crazier than that. Boom had 15 dudes drafted that he either coached or recruited here. 3 1st rounders, 3 2nd rounders, 2 3rd rounders, 4 4th rounders, 1 5th rounders, 1 6th rounders, and 1 7th. In that time we had 4 offensive players drafted. Colt, Ship, Goodwin, and Swaim. 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, and 7th respectively. That began the dark ages. From the time that Boom's last dudes left in 13 until Sark got here we sent roughly the same amount to league on both sides of the ball as he did on one side of the ball in his short time here.
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, William Bludworth said:
The one thing I'll say about my aggy family is they are 2%ers. Very successful, but also very realistic. Hell, my cousin even said Miami would beat them, with my uncle chiming in he was right. They were talking about how they robbed ND of the win, and then Texas came off the top ropes. They said that's when it dawned on them they have played no one, and the one team they did destroyed them.
They just plainly stated there was no way they were winning a CFP game after having to make a miraculous comeback against a 4-win USCe team, barely escaped a 5-win Arky that Texas pummeled, beat a hapless Mizzou with a third string QB, beat a coachless LSU, and barely escaped against a 5-win Auburn.
They knew. We watched it together and it was brutal for both teams. Neither should have been in the CFP. Cristobal is so fucking bad. Elko is about to have to rebuild, which as far as I know he's never had to do before. We all just sat there laughing at how bad both teams are. I'm just glad they don't make excuses and shit. They're real people who don't live in fantasy land. Reed is worse than I remembered. I thought maybe it was a one-off against us because we're just better all around, but nope, he's dog shit. They better figure something out soon because they won't be making the CFP again in the next 3-4 years. They have to let Reed walk. Literally any QB on their roster has to be better than him. He's less than a scrub.
A couple things-
This just got me thinking that in some ways I admire aggy. I barely made it through the 2010's. I couldn't imagine having to dust off my pants and fill up the ole optimism jar every. single. year. Aggy has boundless energy, right up there with Cleveland Browns fans. You gotta admire the "there is always next year" mentality.
-
2
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:
Same here on all of the details. People shit on Gideon for having unreliable hands as a safety, but for getting the abysmal offensive performance in the first half that put us in a massive hole. We have up a fucking safety after handing it the ball off three yards deep in the EZ. We were in a 19 point hole before we decided to break the shut out and needed Jordan Shipley heroics on ST to start the comeback. We looked slow and uninterested while Tech was flying around looking a like an MNC contender. Don’t even get me started on how badly Orakpo was held all game.
Ah, the Big12 and not calling holding to equalize the games. I don't miss those days at all.
-
3
-
1
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, cmontexas said:
None of that would have even happened if Colt hadnt snapped the ball with like 30 seconds on the playclock before Ogbannaya's TD
Dude- We have some serious PTSD. The amount of detail all of us remember about that game is astounding. I'm old. I frequently get flustered and call my wife with my daughter's name. I can't remember what I did last week. But I remember that game like I watched it last night. I even remember where I was and what I did directly after(took a walk around the block to cool down).
The fact that all @lilMAC25 had to say is "Taafe woulda caught it" and everyone here immediately knew the exact play he was talking about is Crazy!
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 12/22/2025 at 11:19 AM, Codaxx said:
I dont really try to base this on a talent midget scale, but each to their own. I was hoping for a better game. Te 10he issue is th-12 for 109 yards in the 1st half, which was good. Bengals took a quick look and adjusted. The 2nd half was 10-18 for 151, 2 ints. Passer rating went from ~102 to ~44. That was always a question with Quinn. What happens when the script runs out? Can he limit turnovers? Hopefully, he learns from this game and looks better next week. Gets another chance vs a bad defense (Tampa Bay)
Game was decent. Quinn hits the TE and he fumbles. Comes back and throws an on target pass on a dig, db breaks on it, receiver tries to basket catch it which allows the db to reach around from behind him and get his hands on it. Deflected up in the air and intercepted. Cincy has all their weapons back, so they are scoring at will. Rookie QB. Down a few scores. Trying to make plays. That's all it was. He was fine when it wasn't obvious passing situations. It's easy to play defense when you are 3 scores up and know he has to throw.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, lilMAC25 said:
Taafe woulda caught it… just saying.
100%. Taafe doesn't drop that and we are in the title game! What a terrible night that was.
-
3
-
2
-
-
On 12/19/2025 at 9:32 AM, Nivek said:
I seem to recall K-State just running the same play over and over against WM's defense and only bothered to throw the ball 3 times that game. This feels like penny wise pound foolish.
On 12/19/2025 at 10:33 AM, lilMAC25 said:In 2010? When KSU Knew that all they had to do was wait for the Texas QB to throw it back to them?
Gilbert threw 5 INTs that game for fucks sake.
On 12/19/2025 at 10:57 AM, Nivek said:It takes some serious lack of awareness and reading comprehension to make that statement. Actually this response and that of @Dahobbs @lilMAC25 @USNALonghorn @texasdago represents the inability of our fans to be thoughtful at times. I stated I recall a game where Muschamp's failure to adapt in a game was jarring for me, and I am not certain that he will be an upgrade over PK. Now some of you are in a feedback loop projection and have decided that I said the problem with the 2010 team was not Mack and the offensive scheme that didn't fit the people on campus and the failure in GG's evaluation to fit the team. When all I said was that defense giving up on the same play over and over was bad.
Someone tried to excuse it as it was OK for the defense to quit because the offense was terrible, and I countered with that is part of the fucking job to not let that happen.
What happened in 2010 is we were thin at DT. I can't remember all the circumstances as to why it happened. Anyway, there was a stretch of games where we had to play Alex Okafor at DT, and at 260 he just couldn't hold up inside. It was a vicious circle where we couldn't score to force teams to throw so they just ran power and counter right at him all game until one popped. Also, you guys gotta remember Mack was a meddler. He wanted the recruits he wanted, so at times Boom's hands were tied. Anywho, people gotta remember he was only here for 3 years. Barely long enough to get rolling.
-
4
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, WinningIsHard said:
Defensive End
Brian Orakpo
Sam AchoNose Tackle
Roy Miller
Tackle
Lamarr Houston
Defensive End
Eddie Jones
Henry Melton
Outside LB
Rodrick MuckelroyMiddle LB
Rashad Bobino
Outside LB
Sergio Kindle
Keenan Robinson
Cornerback
Deon Beasley
Curtis BrowNFree Safety
Earl ThomasCornerback
Chykie Brown
Nickelback
Curtis Brown
Aaron Williamsthat 2008 defensive roster was pretty loaded, I don’t think the 2026 depth chart can compete.
First, the 09 defense was better than the 08 one. I feel like some of you guys are young so let us olds regale you with tales of Muschamp's prowess as a defensive coach.
Lamar Houston was a slow RB/LB from Colorado when he came to Texas. We tried him off the edge but when Boom came he recognized his power, put a lil weight on him and slid him inside to 3 tech where he would be a disruptor.
Henry Melton came to Texas as a 240lb goal line RB and we used him as such until Boom came and flipped him to his side of the ball and got him to the league as a big DE who could slide inside.
Sergio Kindle was a 5 star LB who couldn't play traditional LB because he was stupid. Boom put him at Jack end where he would go on to decapitate many a QB in his career.
Earl Thomas was a undersized 3 star recruit from Orange Texas who was never supposed to play here. He had decent speed but was undersized at 5'9-10. Boom got him and turned him into the best safety in the country, and next to Thomas was Michael Taafe..I mean Blake Gideon, the Michael Taafe before Michael Taafe.
People see the finished product with all these NFL players and don't realize that it was Boom's eye for talent that created that roster. They weren't all bunch of 5 stars. Guys were lost with no real role on the team. You had some real dummies like Chykie and Sergio.
-
6
-
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
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.
-
6
-
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.
-
2
-
1
-
-
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.
-
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.
-
6
-
2
-
-
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?
-
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?
-
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.
-
3
-
1
-
-
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......
QuoteWhite 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........
QuoteFor 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.....
QuoteI 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 thingsand then lastly this......
QuoteNo 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!
-
6
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
Charlie Kirk got ded, Erika Kirk grifts in place
in Cloak Room
Posted · Edited by Thatguy
Black folks are gonna take care of Nicki. Don't you worry bout that. Also, I read a comment that said what Nicki Minaj did is called Kanyekaze'ing. Brilliant