Jump to content

Hmmm

Full Members
  • Posts

    502
  • Joined

Posts posted by Hmmm

  1. I counted at least three times where Sam and Eagles didn't look like they were on the same page.  Not sure who's fault it was.  Check out Eagles and Whittington on this play:

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. Bijan made a play after catching a bubble screen (?) that was so subtle it broke some poor guys ankles who wasn't even close to touching him.  Would love to see that play again.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  3. 19 minutes ago, Bevo VIII said:

    I’ll always take the chance of being able to start near midfield over netting 5-10 yards and completely eliminating the other chance. We’re the only team I see consistently doing this as well. If you have other examples I’ll be glad to see them. But as far as I know we seem to do this more than any.

    I don't watch other teams and I'm not going to try and find examples of other teams doing this - it's not exactly highlight material.  

    I do know for a fact that some kickers are taught to kick it higher in the air in favor of distance hoping some idiot (maybe you) on the other team will not fair catch.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  4. Ideally, you wouldn't have a true freshman - A. Karic - backing up up your All American LT.  But after seeing his workout videos and highlights after his commitment, I have high hopes this guy is going to be special.  IIRC, he was an under-rated stud at the time of commit and maybe even a 3 star.  Really excited to see him break into the 2 deep and learn from the best.

    Found the training vids --- https://www.barkingcarnival.com/2019/7/30/20748192/2020-texas-ot-commitment-andrej-karic-has-ceiling-southlake-carroll-tackle-longhorns-football

    This guys moves so smooth.

  5. For some reason, I keep wanting to compare S. Rattler to Q. Ewers (neg away!).  I can't figure out exactly why but maybe it's because both QBs have generated a similar amount of buzz for both programs in recent years.  Maybe it's because both of them are pegged as Pro Style QBs without the 6-6 measurables.  Maybe it stems from me thinking Ewers was smaller than his high school listed 6-3 compared to Rattler's college listed 6-1. 

    Both have tremendous accuracy, a short delivery, timing, and the ability to make off-schedule plays (basing this off HS footage).  IMO, Ewers has the advantage of accuracy whereas Rattler has the advantage to be more of a dual threat.  Either way, I'd take Ewers all day, every day.  But, Rattler under Riley does scare me a bit.

  6. Just now, Captainant said:

    I'll need to find the study, but there was zero correlation between amount of training and frequency of complaints against officers for excessive force. Training is important for policing skills, but that's not what's gonna stop johnny neck stomper from doing what comes naturally

    Whatever study that was must have been very narrowly focus.  I don't need accountability at work to prevent me from being johnny neck stopmer.   I've had diversity training at work that has opened my minds to some things (unconscious bias). Having someone hold me accountable to supporting diversity would have absolutely no impact on me doing "what's right".  But yeah, I'd be open to reading whatever study it is you're referencing.

  7. 7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    For the trillionth time, training does not lead to better policing. There's an excellent study thats been posted and reposted here that demonstrates that with publicly available data. 

    The difference maker is actual accountability, currently an officer can act negligently and ultimately kill a citizen for nothing and see zero punishment aside from two weeks vacation. The same study demonstrated a strong correlation and offers a test case to show causation that actual oversight and consequences is what actually leads to better (read: less violent) policing. 

    Good point.  I would say it's fairly accurate and change your words to "training with better accountability can lead to better policing".  I believe training is an absolute necessary component to better policing.  So long as it's the right training which is very subjective.

  8. BT, do you believe any enforcement of law is necessary?  More specifically, do you believe the police are a necessary component to enforce the law?  If no then disregard the rest of post.

    Would you be in favor of re-allocating funds to procure state of the art body cams with high availability, network access, unable to turn off without supervisor approval (or high level authority outside the police force), and are automatically uploaded to a cloud?  

    If police are defunded, their essentials (weapons) will not align with the essentials you think they need (training), and we are not the bookkeepers.  That's my biggest concern with "defund the police".

  9. Feel free not to read.  Mods may want to delete.  I like how civilized this thread has been and very hesitant to post this.  Had no idea there was a conception of Blue vs Red stock.  It's from CNN so may require auto-ban.  I don't believe most of it but find it helpful to know what others think.  

    Spoiler

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/02/investing/joe-biden-stock-market-donald-trump/index.html

    The stock market thinks Joe Biden is going to beat Donald Trump

    New York (CNN Business) - The presidential election is only two months away and the stock market is soaring.

    In theory, that should bode well for President Trump since a bull market has historically benefited the incumbent. But Trump is trailing Democratic challenger Joe Biden in many head-to-head national polls.
    Although the market's sharp rebound since March could be viewed as a sign that investors expect the coronavirus-induced recession to be brief, you need to dig deeper and look at how the recovery is unfolding.
    It turns out a basket of stocks that could fare well in a Biden presidency have been outperforming the overall market — as well as a portfolio of stocks that might benefit from a second Trump term.

    Blue stocks vs red
    According to data from Strategas that was shared with CNN Business, a group of infrastructure, renewable energy, pro-globalization, health care and cannabis stocks are up more than 10% since early June.

    This so-called Biden or blue list includes companies like Granite Construction (GVA), Tesla (TSLA), First Solar (FSLR), chip giant Broadcom (AVGO) and the iShares MSCI Germany ETF (EWG), which owns several top German stocks.
    The bet is that these companies might thrive if Biden wins and pushes for the United States to rebuild highways and bridges, wean America off oil and restore fractured trade relations with China, Japan, Europe and other global economic leaders.

    Investors also seem to think that affordable health care and more relaxed laws regarding marijuana use could be in the cards if Biden is the next president. Along those lines, insurer Centene (CNC), hospital owner HCA (HCA) and Canadian cannabis firm Canopy Growth (CGC) are in the "blue" portfolio.
    Meanwhile, a group of oil and fossil fuel producers, big defense contractors and bank stocks tracked by Strategas that might do better under a second Trump term is down 9% in the past three months.
    Driller Transocean (RIG), coal miner Peabody (BTU), military suppliers Lockheed Martin (LMT) and Northrop Grumman (NOC), and Wall Street powerhouses Bank of America (BAC) and Morgan Stanley (MS) are part of this "red" basket.

    The Fed may matter more than the president
    This is no guarantee of a Biden win. The market (and many political pundits) notoriously underestimated and misjudged Trump's chances against Hillary Clinton in 2016.
    And it's only September — a lot can happen in the two months before the election. Trump could make a comeback in the polls after the debates. Positive news about possible Covid-19 vaccines could also benefit the incumbent.
    But other experts also think Wall Street is signaling that it expects Biden to win, and that this could be a good thing for the continued economic recovery.

    For one, there's historical precedent for Biden to stick with current Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, who has been praised for tackling the Covid-19 economic crisis by slashing interest rates to zero and launching several new lending programs.
    Biden's former boss, Barack Obama, stuck with George W. Bush's appointed Fed chair Ben Bernanke so that Bernanke could continue to manage the Fed's response to the 2008 global financial crisis. In other words, Obama chose continuity over partisanship.
    Trump could very well keep Powell for a second term. But the president has often lashed out at Powell on Twitter and in news conferences for not acting quickly enough to cut rates. He even bashed Powell for not slashing rates below zero, a risky move taken by Europe and Japan.

    That makes a reappointment of Powell under Trump less of a slam dunk.
    "There may be more risk of Powell being replaced under Trump than Biden. Trump was criticizing Powell even when the economy and market were both doing well," said Nela Richardson, an investment strategist with Edward Jones in an interview with CNN Business.
    "That's just one reason why the outcome of this election is not as cut and dry. Biden represents the precedent of Obama keeping Bernanke," Richardson added.
    Another market expert noted that the usual knee-jerk market reaction to White House politics (i.e. a Democrat is bad because they would raise taxes while a Republican will cut them) may not hold water in 2020.
    "We lean against the conventional thinking that Biden = tax hikes = bad for the market," said Katie Nixon, chief investment officer of Northern Trust Wealth Management, in a recent report.


    "There is more at play, and the calculus behind the totality of proposals is complicated, with the impact of tax increases potentially offset by a repairing of trade relationships around the world," Nixon added.

     

  10. 3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

    But it's just fucking maddening the the same people who yell the loudest about "not all Trumpers are racist!" and "not all cops are bad" holler "BLM is discredited because violence and this gal said 'reparations!'"  

    I'm not either of those but feel violence and reparations are disingenuous to the movement.  It's a valid point.  And no, not all people who support the BLM (including me) are acting in this manner.  And it's not just one gal who feels that way.  I feel these types of acts are creating division more than anything.  Same goes for the "other side", whatever you may paint them as.

  11. 3 hours ago, texifornia said:

    Omg it's almost football season

    *Easter egg: at :45 you can catch a piece of training gear that still has a Rutgers R on it

    Bijan shedding a hard tackle @1:35 like it's nothing.  Looks like it's against Adimora but hard to tell.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  12. If you've waited this long, might as well wait until the election is over.  I am very new to this so take that with a grain of salt.  

    I've wanted to ask opinions about election results and market for some time now, but fear it would get too political.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
  13. 4 hours ago, 52-80 said:

    We should start an ETF composed solely of FAANG+Microsoft, and charge 0.75% management fee

    Is there an easily trade-able ETF for international blue chips... the likes of Alibaba, ARM, Samsung, etc.  

    I know there are  ETFs for international indices but it would be cool to have one fully composed of blue chip international stocks.  

  14. 8 hours ago, texifornia said:

    WR content - Black and Smith

     

    nvm - delete post

    TIL i learned you can embed multiple IG vids.  for the olds, don't forget to click the arrow ">" to see Black vs Jamison.

  15. 1 hour ago, futureman said:

     so it’s not just the musicians who are unoriginal. 

    you'd be surprised by the amount of "musicians" who buy licensed beats and throw lyrics on top

    then there's top notch musicians entertainers who don't write any of their shit

  16. 1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

    Sure rage is predictable.  You can purposefully provoke people into rage, knowing what buttons to push.  The result is both predictable and unpredictable -- it's predictably violent/lashing out, but you're right, the direction of that lashing out is indeed unpredictable.

    And as for comparing humans to animals, there's not comparison -- we literally ARE animals.  All of us, regardless of race.  We have certain stimulus/response features that aren't particularly intellectual.  It's why beer ads feature women with big boobs.  That features isn't intended to appeal to or intellect.  

    Which all just takes me back to the only point I tried to make at the beginning: repeatedly treating people like shit will inevitably provoke a rage response, which will inevitably include violence/lashing out in some direction.  So, as a society, our best path is to work to make sure that our institutions and employees don't repeatedly treat people like shit.  Vabuckeye and I seemed to be making some progress on that discussion.

    I get where you're coming from.  I just think rage is more immediate.  Is there a word for where people gather around and their energy amps each other up to where it gets uncontrollable?  Because that's what I'm seeing and maybe that is rage.  But it's not immediate reaction, which I tend to think of rage.  And by immediate, I mean not premeditated.

  17. 12 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

    Humans are not better than that. We are still animals - I mean, we literally are. We react in consistent and predictable ways to certain stimuli. Rage is a human reaction and emotion. Again, for the dozenth time, it is irrational. That’s part of the definition of rage.
     

    I wouldn't say rage is predictable by any means.  How can you predict the irrational?  Maybe you're contesting that the result of rage is predictable, which I would argue, is still very unpredictable.  Comparing human to animals is well... short-sighted.  Also, very racist.

  18. 9 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

    I’m not certain I buy this.  The VAST majority of people don’t. Small subsets obviously do.  I think we are seeing 5% rage, and 95% nihilist  opportunists. 

    This is where I'm at.  Though, I might suggest better words than "nihilist opportunists" if I could think of a few.   Rage, as defined by many, is violent and uncontrollable anger.  I'd estimate more than 90% of this is controllable, premeditated anger.  If it weren't premeditated, there would be no planning at all.  And while the planning is minimal for the most part, there is still some sort of planning.

  19. 11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    I can get touchy-feely on you.  The solution is for the American people to "get right with the lord," metaphorically (and maybe actually).  We -- all of us, or at least a sizable majority of us -- have to 1) accept the fact that our institutions and systems of justice have produced shitty actions and outcomes for all, 2) those shitty actions and outcomes fall even more heavily on minority communities, and 3) we can no longer accept those shitty actions and outcomes for anyone, but we especially need to move to alleviate them with respect to the people who have had it the worst.

    Once we accept and agree on those TRUTHS, then the rest is just the "how," and even though that won't be easy, it will be a lot easier than the first part.

    We can't even agree, collectively, that there's major problems with how police do their job for us, nevermind agreeing on the fact that there's a lot of racism woven into that problem as well (cops are shitty to white people...they are EXTRA shitty to black people, pull them over more, etc. etc.).  If we can't even agree that something is a problem, then we'll damned well never agree on a solution (why solve something that isn't a problem?)

    Public sentiment has moved some in the right direction, so there's your glimmer of hope.  I just don't believe that the interests in power will ever let that gel into a real collective belief.

    I think the "how" is far more difficult than acknowledging the "truths" you speak of.  Most of BLM already accepts the truths.  Even a lot of city leadership accepts the truths.  The biggest problem from what I've seen is there is no unified, clear path with incremental steps to address the systematic issues.  Other than "defund the police" or "re-allocate funds".  It needs to be more clear than that with goals in mind.  Anyone at a large corporation is likely familiar with OKRs by now, and as much as I hate to say this, spelling it out in that form and fashion could be beneficial to setting a path and timeline to follow.  As we all know, things aren't getting fixed overnight or even in a few years.

    Also, I do wonder if it would help to acknowledge what little progress has been made; though I fully acknowledge this could appease the movement by throwing water on the fire.  It might help to point out success stories in local areas that we can implement elsewhere.

×
×
  • Create New...