Jump to content

Monster

Full Members
  • Posts

    532
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Monster

  1. 5 minutes ago, slorch said:

    It is not a red herring with regard to discussing our society as a whole.  The increasingly pervasive mentality of permissiveness is fucking us up.

    To think everyone in 'society' will react the same way to physical punishment is simple-minded.   Just like it'd be simple-minded for me to think that giving kids a lot of love and attention during their developmental years, and patiently explaining how and why their mistakes are harmful, will magically turn 100% of children into productive, happy adults.    

    My question is this--if spanking is such a great disciplinary tool, why would a parent ever stop spanking his/her kids?  Why not keep spanking them as young adults?  Why don't bosses spank their employees when they fuck up at their jobs?  

       

  2. 19 minutes ago, slorch said:

    I spanked both of my boys. I expect that they will spank their kids. Bring this discussion up with anyone who works in elementary education.  By high school, it's a much tougher row to hoe...

    Gets tougher when they aren't half your size and are big enough to defend themselves from a beating, I'd guess.

    Most effective discipline my parents ever doled out was when i stole a candy bar from a convenience store.  I wasn't allowed to play basketball on the school team for 2 weeks.  Longest two weeks of my preteen life.    Never stole another candy bar.     Try taking away privileges.   That's what you do when they're older and you can't manhandle them anymore, right?

    • Like 2
  3. 5 hours ago, formermav43 said:

    The logic of this argument would apply to any form of discipline.

    This is false.   You do realize there are 'forms of discipline' that don't involve physically striking a someone, right?   

    But if beating your kids is the only way you know how to teach a lesson, then hammer away!   And when your kids become adults and move out and stop returning your phone calls, and never come to visit, you can just pour another glass of whiskey and mutter about ingratitude until you pass out every night.      I would suggest you arrange a cleaning service once a week, or some other weekly visitation, because if you don't, and you do inevitably die embittered and alone--it's going to be two or three weeks before anybody finds your rotting corpse on the couch.    

    • Like 1
  4. 41 minutes ago, Mileslong said:


    Look UCF isn’t going to force anyone to do anything anymore than the Colorado School of Mines is. They will expand the playoffs when it makes fiscal sense for them not because of some no name school with a shitty schedule.

    Except this isn't about lowly UCF and their 'shitty schedule'.   it's about the 85+ universities with division I football programs, that UCF represents.  And it's about a 'playoff' system that grants huge money prizes and national advertising opportunities to its secretly selected participants. 

    I guess we will see if it makes fiscal sense to exclude 85-90 universities from those cash rewards and advertising opportunities.    I would guess, having lived in 'murica for some time, that there might be one or two powerful alumni/administrators, within the landscape of 85-90 colleges and universities, who might not like being locked outside gates in perpetuity.   

    • Like 1
  5. 30 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

    Somebody would.  Clemson's SOS is 49 and UCF's is 98.  With Clemson's schedule they would be playing a team almost every week better than what they are now.  And that's the point.  That schedule takes a toll.  It's not about one team, one matchup that would beat them, it's the entire schedule that does it.

    UCF beat Temple by 12, Navy by 11 and Memphis by 1. NC State, Syracuse, Boston College and hell, even aggy are better than those teams.  

    UCF beat Pittsburgh by 31 points.  Pittsburgh is going to play in the ACC championship game.  That's as direct a comparison as you can get.  

    The idea that UCF could never survive a P5 schedule filled with teams like NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Syracuse...well, let's look it.   Your toughest games (this year) are against Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Boston College....you beat Pittsburgh by 31 points.   Are Boston College and Syracuse THAT much better than Cincinnati and South Florida?   Where does the 'grind' part of an ACC schedule kick in?  Duke?   Wake Forest?  Georgia Tech?  (They are trying to schedule as many ACC teams as they can, to prove this exact point...but the NC game got PPD)  

    Would UCF go undefeated in the big 10/big 12/SEC?   No chance.   

    Could this year's UCF go undefeated in the ACC (If they swapped in for Clemson)?   It could happen.  

    • Like 1
  6. If UCF has Clemson's schedule, who is going to give them a loss?  Who in the ACC (Power 5!) conference gives UCF a loss this year?     

    Reminder: UCF already beat Pittsburgh by 31 points this year.   Pittsburgh is 6-1 in the ACC.  

     

     

    • Like 1
  7. On 11/9/2018 at 9:44 PM, Xminus6 said:

     

      Reveal hidden contents

    What was really the point of all their hauntings? I thought the one with Nell being her own ghost was clever. But why was Luke's the bricked-in wall guy? The dad didn't really have a ghost, the wife was just in his imagination. Were they being haunted because the mother wanted them back in the house "safe"? If so, all of their hauntings just seemed pretty random. 

     

    This was my reaction as well.  In the end, the 'hauntings' seemed like they were thrown in there to break up the Theater-esque monlogues and sibling arguments.  Like, someone wrote a family drama for the stage, then said, lets add ghosts and turn it into  a 8 hour tv show.    Pretty successful as a drama, but as a fan of horror--thought it was cliched and slapped together.  (Our scene is stalling...let's bang on the walls!)

    Also agree with the guy who said he thought the young dad character was a demon at the start.

  8. 4 hours ago, rickyspub said:

    The farce is that we act like G5 football is somehow similar to P5 football. I am not sure what rationale the P5 has for not going ahead and separating off into its own division. I would think the additional media money would offset the loss of one home game...oh wait, I forgot, the SEC and most of the ACC would lose 2-3 home games each year because they invest a quarter of their schedule in playing G5s and FCS teams. 

    You really need 4 divisions if you want to properly represent where college football is right now.

    1. SEC (As long as their deal with ESPN lasts)

    2. Traditional power schools in the other P5 conferences (teams that can qualify with 1 loss...Texas, OU, Ohio St, etc)

    3. P5 conference schools without 'tradition' (the other 30 teams that are auto-disqualified with 1 loss...WV, Wash St., etc)

    4. G5 and everybody else who will never, ever, ever be allowed a chance.

     

    • Like 1
  9. Will they get an invitation to ESPN's super secret three game tournament?  No they will not.

    Will UCF prove to everyone that 80% of teams in division I football are excluded now and forever from ESPN's 'playoff'?  Yes they will.

    Does excluding 80% of a league delegitimize your three game invitational tourny as an actual vehicle to crown a national champion?  Absolutely. 

    ESPN's tournament will, however, crown the best team out of the 15-25 teams with 'traditional programs', large viewerships, and.or business ties to their network.

    But no, UCF will not be invited to play in ESPN's tournament this year, or any year.  

    Sorry, other 85 Universities, your football programs don't matter. 

    • Like 2
  10. 8 minutes ago, SDG said:

    LSU's non-con consist of Miami (good), SE LA, LA Tech, and Rice. They have 2 loses and sit one spot ahead of Wazzu... 

    And if you swap out Miami for a 9th conference game....then you're OOC is SE LA, LA tech, and Rice.

  11. 2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

    Remember that call because you probably won't hear Fowler say that it wasn't targeting because the ball carrier lowered his head into the line of fire again anytime soon. 

    Yeah, was wondering how they'd rule that.  Defensive guy definitely lowed his head, but so did the runner.

  12. Texas vs Iowa St might've been in the prime time ABC slot if not for the uh...thing.

    I'd be highly entertained if this game pulled a huge viewership and the longhorn network accidentally proved UCF is a big enough tv draw to get them into a playoff.   I don't honestly think any of that will happen, but the potential for it pleases me.

  13. 2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

    Tough run for a first down by Warren, Herbie and Fowler give only begrudging respect. 

    I'm really surprised they gave them this prime time slot.  Maybe they are checking to see how many people will actually watch UCF?

    If they get good numbers, maybe UCF gets a little more consideration.   Of course they have to win the game...

  14. It'll be interesting to hear how ESPN/commentators deal with the fact that UCF looks really, really good.  It is against their business interests for UCF to be good, so I expect them to post a lot of graphs and charts devaluing UCF's season.  

    But it's also their prime time game, so...pissing all over UCF would look pretty weird.

    If it stays like this, second half commentary will be interesting.

×
×
  • Create New...