Jump to content

statsman

Full Members
  • Posts

    2661
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by statsman

  1. 4 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

    Are you surprised?

    I'm not.  Not one bit.

    No. I knew if we played them in CS in 2024, they’d make a big deal about the 25th anniversary. We should have pushed to play it in Austin, for the stadium’s 100th anniversary, but we just try too hard to be good sports. 
     
     

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  2. 4 hours ago, Vertigo said:

    I look forward to the new wave of trolls hitting the board. That was always the most fun part.

    I’m looking forward to the new wave of SEC trolls finding this board, settling in, and then interacting with our old B12 trolls. 
     
    “What? Why are you posting about the OSU Cowboys? Nobody gives a shit about them! Whoo-Pig sooey!”

    • Like 1
    • Haha 2
  3. 3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

    Here's the thing....I don't believe the official Israeli line here.  I think that it's more likely that the IDF was doing something pretty close to EXACTLY what they were supposed to be doing, and that the fallout that we've seen (criticism and such) is acceptable "collateral damage" for Israel.

    Israel got what it wanted: pretty much a full shutdown to aid to Gaza, which will necessarily force all Gazans to flee, completing Israel's goal of total ethnic cleansing.

    And what did it cost Israel?  The careers of two officers that it threw under the bus.  And a stern talking-to by Biden.  That's a no-brainer calculus.  Israel just won that battle, soundly.

    Funny. Iran feels the same way about the USS Vincennes shooting down a plane full of civilians. 
     
    The US also killed an innocent family of ten with a drone strike, in a screwed up retaliation at ISIS, two years ago. 
     
    Mistakes happen. They’re awful. Decent nations acknowledge them (Russia, on the other hand, still claims to not be at fault for shooting down the Dutch 777 or the Korean passenger plane)

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

    That's fine, and I'm sure there are a dozen legitimate reasons (or no reason, play who you want to play), but "they only allotted our fans 6,000 tickets" is a super weird reason to cite.

    It’s just one of several boxes to check or not check. 
     
    When Texas was in the same conference, the answer to the question, “Why does Texas play home and away every year with Baylor, TCU, TT, Rice, UH and SMU?” was “Because Texas has to”. 
     
    That answer is gone. Now, the question is “Why would Texas schedule any of those schools? What does Texas get out of it?”

    I’m struggling to think of a reason…

  5. 11 minutes ago, 'stache said:

    Are you seriously suggesting that Baylor and Tech should be required to allot half their stadium for UT fans? That's not how it works, the closest thing is to move those games to neutral NFL sites.

    No. Baylor (a school 90 minutes from Austin, and 90 minutes from DFW) and TT have stadiums that only hold about 50k. Texas needs at least 40k tickets. 
     
    “that’s not how it works” because that’s how it never worked before. TT fans could be all kinds of asses in Lubbock, because Texas was required to play there every other year. These are “rivalries” created because of geographic convenience for scheduling over 100 years ago. If Hardin Simmons joined the SWC instead of Baylor, we would have been schlepping out to Abilene every other year. 
     
    A proposal for a new realignment was offered upthread. Texas isn’t agreeing to anything like that unless its needs are met, or it is forced to.

     Ticket availability isn’t a good reason? Well, what is a good reason for TT and Texas, or Texas and TCU to play every year? 

  6. There’s a little more. Texas is a “big dog”,…that had its state elected leaders tell it when it could move conferences and who it had to take with it (leaving the B12 was a fluke of timing- Texas legislature being out of session, media contract winding down, Texas Ex as governor). 
     
    Texas is a “big dog”,…that was in a conference led by haters. Which makes sense, because most of the members hated and resented Texas. 
     
    Back to the above proposal- Al mentions that revenue could be split unevenly. OK, there is one more problem- UT is done playing games in state, where it is only allotted 6,000 seats for fans (when it could easily sell 40,000 seats to Longhorn fans). 

  7. 23 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    But those schools can't really do anything to Texas in this model either.  That's part of the genius of getting away from conferences.

    As a fan of a smaller brand school that's historically been part of the bigger leagues, I can say that most of us don't have a problem with schools like Texas, Ohio State, etc making more money than we do.  They have more fans, draw bigger ratings, etc.  Is this not America? Are we not a capitalist society?  

    What pisses us off is schools that aren't any different than us getting massive pay days and being part of the club because they hooked up with the oddly benevolent financial juggernauts 150 years ago.  It's Purdue, Northwestern, Indiana, Mississippi State, etc getting to roll around in piles of cash that were generated by others that chaps our ass.

    I think you have to realize that Northwestern, Vandy, etc. understand that they get a benefit from the bell cows doing well. ISU was in a similar position, in the Big 8, which used to be nicknamed “The Big 2 and Little 6”. ISU understood that it benefited from OU and NU doing great. 
     
    The SWC, and to a similar extent, the PAC were different. Those conferences were configured where the big schools (Texas, TAMU) considered the little schools’ locations their recruiting territory, breeding resentment at the little schools. Baylor fans, for example, resent Texas in a way foreign to ISU fans feelings about OU. Texas recruits Waco, and when Texas is doing well, Waco stores sell more Texas stuff than Baylor stuff. The small SWC schools have a shared interest in Texas being down. In the SWC, this manifested in the conference being OK with massive cheating, leaving it to the NCAA to clean up. 
     
    A similar dynamic resulted in the Big 12. ISU may not have resented Texas, but Baylor, TCU and TT sure did. ISU and OSU certainly saw the opportunity to take advantage of with Texas down, circling those dates on the schedule. 
     
    I’m sure some is Texas’ fault, primarily for allowing itself to falter, but the larger point remains- Northwestern doesn’t hate Michigan and Mississippi State doesn’t hate Alabama the way the Left Behinds hate Texas. 

  8. The Israeli drone team that killed seven aid workers lacked the evidence to order the strikes and twice violated the military’s operating rules, an Israeli military investigation found
    https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/israel-to-allow-more-aid-into-gaza-after-biden-warning-over-u-s-support-49bc42e4?st=v362sr2qxf4viiw&reflink=share_mobilewebshare
     
    I know the description doesn’t match the link title. They haven’t updated the link title yet. 

  9. 12 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

    If a minority party leaves a coalition then it can force early elections by calling for a vote of no confidence, but they don’t always want to do that. If they don’t call for a vote of no confidence then the government can continue as a minority government. If they win a vote of no confidence then usually you’ll get a caretaker government appointed until there is a fresh election. 

    Thanks. Then, I’m guessing a nation typically won’t have that happen in an active war. 

  10. I don’t believe this is CR, because I’m asking a procedural question, not a political one -

    In a parliamentary system, I know they have elections on a schedule, and that the coalition government can call early elections (only done when polls show opportune times). If a coalition breaks because a minority party makes a break from it, does that require a fresh general election?

  11. 54 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Ummmmm....yeah.  They were pretty damned successful in their ethnic cleansing: they killed 6 million jews, and made it so inhospitable that even after the war, remaining jews wanted to GTFO.  That's why....and follow me here....campaigns intended to drive out a people, using all manner of techniques but definitely including brutal violence, are fucking criminal.

    Ok. I’ve just seen it, all my life, described as “attempted genocide” of the Jews. 

  12. Israel’s problem isn’t solved by pushing Palestinians away. They are Iran’s proxies. Hamas has missiles because Iran supplies them (and to Hezbollah). 
     
    Since we’re talking about Senitics here, can I ask about semantics? If driving a people away is “genocide”, can we then say that Germany (and most of Europe, and the Arab world of the mid 20th century) were successful in their genocide? Since they drove almost all of the Jews away?

×
×
  • Create New...