Jump to content

MuellerHorn

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    4464
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MuellerHorn

  1. His oncologist in attendance at the press conference said they removed the bladder even after successful treatment because there was a 50%+ change it would return; so he and his medical team decided to remove the bladder. Yep, that's one SOP when you remove one's entire bladder (radial cystectomy). With a "pseudo bladder," a new bladder (neobladder) is created with a piece of the small intestine. This "urinary diversion" allows urine produced by the kidneys to flow through a conduit into a new bladder, which is typically either: 1. connected to the urethra, which his allows for more natural urination. 2. flows into a bag that is on the stomach and needs to be emptied as urine collects. Otherwise, you typically connect to a urostomy through a stoma on the abdomen and connect it to a urine bag externally. When urine is produced, it flows into the bag immediately and then you drain the bag when it gets full enough.
  2. 100% true. The options this presents could be so fun. I'd love to see some creative double mug looks with Burke, Simmons, Hill, Spence, Moore, and Zina U/Vasek on obvious passing downs. You don't even need to commit to cover 0 and rush six, but there's credible threat with six outstanding options to sack the QB.
  3. Maybe he's a guy Texas decides we must land later on in the process. I agree, he appears to be the best DB on the board. However, as we know, high-quality safeties are available in the portal and Texas currently has a plethora of DB talent.
  4. Two recruiting notes (Tues. 7:50am CST): Gerry
  5. Fall Camp is 'Prove It' Time for a Number of Longhorns (Monday AM) - CJ Vogel More Livingstone love:
  6. The press conference is scheduled for 11am MT, so a little under an hour from now.
  7. Yeah, this was me assuming they'd offer him a deal compelling enough to make him stay. At his age and previous production, the one-year deal made sense. Although, he currently has his fourth-highest WAR (2.2) of his career, but it's his highest since 2016. Total wildcard whether or not they try to keep him. Edit: also, crazy enough, his current SO/BB (5.55) ratio is the best it has ever been.
  8. Hey, it can't be worse than Colt's routinely were...
  9. Man, spot on summary. The redeeming qualities are the "young af team" part and how much the starting pitching has improved. I hate to waste Chapman, as he's 37 and having a great year, but maybe that continues next season. They're going to have to buy/spend in the off season to take advantage of the current roster, though.
  10. Doesn't mean they're not good luck at Fenway. By all means, attend more!
  11. NFL talent Texas will face this season (Mon. 7:23am CST) - Gerry Well, Gerry not on board with double-digit picks for A&M like Elko keep spouting.
  12. Y'all boys were good luck. I don't care if it was a home series. 2 of 3 against the Dodgers is great!
  13. And Whitt is an exceptional blocker at the WR position. Moore is faster, but I don’t think he was better in any other category last season.
  14. Huh? Yale made the tournament in 2016, 2019, 2022, 2024, and 2025 and pulled off first-round upsets in two of those tournaments (2016, #5 Baylor; 2024, #4 Auburn). They've represented the Ivy League in one-third of the sample size you chose and you didn't even include them. Dafuq?
  15. Texas and the 2026 NFL Draft (Saturday 11:25 CST) - Gerry It'll be interesting to see how Taaffe tests. He's likely not exactly 6'0, 189 like he's listed, either. However, if he has another season like 2024, I think he'll at least be a fifth-round pick. Maybe Gerry views that as "late round," but I consider that to be sixth or seventh.
  16. Nope. He's a senior. Played in 11, 13, and 16 games, respectively, his first three seasons.
  17. Friday By Bobby Burton The president of the United States issued an executive order yesterday regarding the future of college sports. The main tenets included eliminating pay-for-play schemes, the future of student employment, Title IX guidance, saving non-revenue sports, and reducing long-term liability of the institutions. I’ll briefly hit on each of these topics below. But before I do, I want to say this: Executive orders are largely performative. What I mean by that is, the orders attempt to set direction for others, from the attorney general, to other members of the president’s cabinet. But they are not the rule of law. In other words, the president can’t unilaterally make the rules, not in the case of the NCAA. The president can’t waive a wand and make collectives illegal or grant anti-trust exemption to the NCAA. Only legislative bodies (i.e. congress) can do that. Then the courts rule on their legality. Here are the topics: - Pay-for-play: the executive does not call out collectives specifically, only that he wants any payments to athletes being purely for brand purposes. Well, pay-for-play has technically already been illegal in the NIL era. The collectives are paying athletes for their brand. So how this could effect NIL and the future of it is murky at best. - Student-employment: by addressing this, the EO seems to favor keeping students as non-employees. - Title IX guidance/non-revenue sports: the EO invokes the desire to keep US Olympic sports competitive as a primary basis for the importance of these two issues. Title IX will be tricky, but the importance of non-revenue sports has been more than adequately addressed in the House vs NCAA settlement. The EO just wants to make sure no scholarships or opportunities are diminished and the House Settlement handles that. - Long-term liability: this is where there could be real value extracted potentially by NCAA member schools IMO. If the NCAA does not have to worry about infringing on the rights of its players when enacting rules, they can rule with more of an iron fist without as much fear of student retribution via future lawsuits. Some equate this to the possibility of an anti-trust exemption. In all, the executive order is not a game-changer. It is just another piece of the puzzle we are all wading through to get to a final resolution, which in my mind, remains years away.
  18. Friday By Bobby Burton The president of the United States issued an executive order yesterday regarding the future of college sports. The main tenets included eliminating pay-for-play schemes, the future of student employment, Title IX guidance, saving non-revenue sports, and reducing long-term liability of the institutions. I’ll briefly hit on each of these topics below. But before I do, I want to say this: Executive orders are largely performative. What I mean by that is, the orders attempt to set direction for others, from the attorney general, to other members of the president’s cabinet. But they are not the rule of law. In other words, the president can’t unilaterally make the rules, not in the case of the NCAA. The president can’t waive a wand and make collectives illegal or grant anti-trust exemption to the NCAA. Only legislative bodies (i.e. congress) can do that. Then the courts rule on their legality. Here are the topics: - Pay-for-play: the executive does not call out collectives specifically, only that he wants any payments to athletes being purely for brand purposes. Well, pay-for-play has technically already been illegal in the NIL era. The collectives are paying athletes for their brand. So how this could effect NIL and the future of it is murky at best. - Student-employment: by addressing this, the EO seems to favor keeping students as non-employees. - Title IX guidance/non-revenue sports: the EO invokes the desire to keep US Olympic sports competitive as a primary basis for the importance of these two issues. Title IX will be tricky, but the importance of non-revenue sports has been more than adequately addressed in the House vs NCAA settlement. The EO just wants to make sure no scholarships or opportunities are diminished and the House Settlement handles that. - Long-term liability: this is where there could be real value extracted potentially by NCAA member schools IMO. If the NCAA does not have to worry about infringing on the rights of its players when enacting rules, they can rule with more of an iron fist without as much fear of student retribution via future lawsuits. Some equate this to the possibility of an anti-trust exemption. In all, the executive order is not a game-changer. It is just another piece of the puzzle we are all wading through to get to a final resolution, which in my mind, remains years away.
×
×
  • Create New...