Jump to content

Fico

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    922
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fico

  1. This is not going to happen. Rent growth will just “normalize,” which it already has to extent, from the insane growth rates of the previous several years. All of those places you listed are still exploding with population growth and will continue to do so. Leander/Georgetown/Kyle are all in the top 10 fastest growing metros over 50K nationally, with New Braunfels at 13. There also hasn’t been any new construction starts in the past 12-months and probably won’t be any of significance for another 12. Construction costs are still high and Capital is too expensive to pencil… not to mention land Sellers have not fully readjusted their pricing expectations. That is going to create a lag in supply in market dealing with significant pop and job growth. I would argue there is clearly not enough housing, of all types, being built in the metro. It is one of the largest concerns for the chamber and opportunity Austin. The job growth is going to continue to be very strong in central Texas and people need a place to live. We are still at 150+ new residents a day (births/death, in-migration/out-migration)
  2. That’s also not how the annuity works. It starts out less and increases, annually, over time. You also have to account for taxes, annually, and future taxes (ann unknown) and time value of money. In Texas I believe your take home if you chose the lump sum would be just under $500mm, including the 24% federal tax on lottery winnings, which would then be subject to 37% income tax the following year. So you would have north of $300mm (if you received 0% return in the interim) after paying taxes. Take the lump sum. If you manage to go broke at least you were L.I.V.I.N.
  3. 218 yds last game rounded up to the nearest 10 for JB. Hope it's even more next week.
  4. I hope you choke on the dick you are eating
  5. Now do the Balkans. I could spend the rest of my life studying those 2 regions and still only scratch the surface.
  6. ^^^ Lol… wtf
  7. Unless it was boot left, will take Lewis on that play
  8. Lol… Drops and the interior OL are the biggest factors on determining this teams success. 4 drops in limited offensive snaps is horrendous. Can QE be better? Absolutely. But if our guards can keep interior pressure/stunts from running up the gut and our pass catchers can put together a game without multiple drops, we will crush every team on the schedule.
  9. I hope they can keep Moreland and Swindell for home baseball games.
  10. Don't forget to pour one out for Michelle Beadle and Sam Ponder.
  11. The football team might not have but the non-rev sports might disagree. I will miss baseball on LHN.
  12. Sark confirmed holding Baxter out on LHN.
  13. It does run deeper, all the way to the OL.
  14. The offensive game plan rees rolled out didn't look like he wanted Milroe coached up either.
  15. Tulsa has 3 turnovers including a pic 6. That said, ou has 300 yds of offense already.
  16. From IT as of yesterday 2025s visiting: Dakorien Moore, WR, Duncanville (Texas) High – *LSU verbal On3 Industry Ranking: No. 9 (5-star) Andrew Marsh, WR, Fulshear (Texas) Jordan On3 Industry Ranking: No. 16 (4-star) Marcus Harris, WR, Santa Ana (Calif.) Mater Dei On3 Industry Ranking: No. 43 Taz Williams, WR, Red Oak (Texas) On3 Industry Ranking: No. 269 Michael Fasusi, OT, Lewisville (Texas) High On3 Industry Ranking: No. 18 (4-star) Jonte Newman, OT, Cypress (Texas) Bridgeland On3 Industry Ranking: No. 273 (4-star) Tyler Thomas, OT, Dickinson (Texas) High –*Maybe On3 Industry Ranking: N/R Anthony Williams, LB/EDGE, Manvel (Texas) Shadow Creek On3 Industry Ranking: N/R Cobey Sellers, CB, Manvel (Texas) Shadow Creek On3 Industry Ranking: No. 165 (4-star) Xavier Skowron, ATH, Texas City (Texas) High On3 Industry Ranking: N/R
  17. Nobody is blaming the right side of the line dufus. And you can beat your left hand play design all you want... that isn't where the play was designed or ever going.
  18. I wouldn't even say the play call is cute...it is a simple play.... like Day 1 install simple and targeting our supposed best run blockers (Campbell and Jones). This should have been an easy conversion. In any instance, the #1 rule in blocking anyone, is nobody crosses your face. If AD or Helm would have literally took one step right, or, in Helm's case, stood still this play works.
  19. Not if we are playing anyone better than Rice. There literally isn't a faster path to the RB with the ball for that LB.
  20. Because a Rice player sucks and is slow to react isn't justification for a play design. Any competent LB in that position would be untouched to the ball carrier trough the B gap (a LB's dream) if the play was designed to go left. Again, that is one aspect of the play design, although a large one. We also would not be combo-ing on the backside (right-side) if this was designed to go left. And LOL to whoever mentioned the shadow on the far left side in the last screen shot. The ball has been snapped and that guy is not in the frame... he is irrelevant in the play. AD sucked on this play and made a poor/lazy effort. Helm also blocked air (Bank's back)... the fact is two players made lazy or bonehead plays on the backside of the play and the defender who should have had the lowest probability of making the play did, in fact, make the play.
  21. But its not as combo every coach in America would want because you would have an unblocked MLB (#11) crashing down
  22. On the left side our 1 on 1 is with an extra blocking surface and WR to help. I don't feel like that is a winning combo for us. Additionally, if it was to got to to the left somebody would be combo-ing to that LB #11.... no one is. And if the play was designed to go left... then AD definitively should have been getting a body on someone (Helm as well). You can clearly see the gap on the right between Sanders and the Campbell/Jones combo block. Brook's first steps create a left flow creating angles for the combo block(s) and an angle for the running lane in the C gap on the right side. We wouldn't combo the backside LB and leave the middle guy unblocked.... that is a waste of a body, especially in short yardage.
  23. AD need to take one step to the right at the snap and his "block" would have been sufficient. He is back side, and really only has a rule of not letting the end man cross his face. It was a piss poor effort. Helm should have also been able to get a hand on this guy. The play should be starting left and bending back right between Sanders kickout block and the combo on the right side. Backside penetration should have never killed this play. Even if AD doesn't make contact and simply steps right at the snap he is literally in the way enough for this play to gain a first down.
  24. "Spy" also doesn't mean someone just sitting 3-5 yards off the LOS. It really means "chain puller" someone that forces Milroe to make a decision and quick. Typically that will be an off the ball player that lets traffic clear, and/or allows Milroe to make a move eliminating a side/option. Then it is downhill from there. Point being, Ant, and whoever else, can and will be playing an attacking upfield role as a "spy." Additionally, I suspect we will play a decent amount of zone - eyes on the QB and presents challenges of timing and accuracy for a QB who isn't know to excel at either.
×
×
  • Create New...