header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Rankings ... ugh

 (Read 84318 times)

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72142
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #756 on: July 23, 2023, 07:02:32 PM »
Is that from last year?  The Dawgs start off with a bunch of pastries.

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11253
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #757 on: July 23, 2023, 07:02:44 PM »
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37789
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #758 on: July 23, 2023, 07:50:22 PM »
How do you rank Fro's rants in this thread?
pot stirring
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18940
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #759 on: July 23, 2023, 08:12:24 PM »

The photos for 4 and 6 are reversed.  Good job, Barstool!
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37789
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #760 on: July 23, 2023, 09:07:28 PM »
The Worst States Driving The Climate Crisis

5. Mississippi
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 21.0 metric tons (16th highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: +2.0% (11th largest increase)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 15.6 MWh (10th highest)
> Electricity production: 10.0% from renewable sources (18th lowest)
> Recycling rate: 17% (2nd lowest)

4. Arkansas
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 21.5 metric tons (15th highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: +10.2% (5th largest increase)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 15.2 MWh (11th highest)
> Electricity production: 10.5% from renewable sources (20th lowest)
> Recycling rate: 28% (9th lowest)

3. Louisiana
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 41.8 metric tons (5th highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: +5.0% (7th largest increase)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 19.1 MWh (3rd highest)
> Electricity production: 3.3% from renewable sources (3rd lowest)
> Recycling rate: 26% (6th lowest)


2. North Dakota
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 74.8 metric tons (2nd highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: -1.3% (32nd largest decline)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 28.7 MWh (the highest)
> Electricity production: 38.1% from renewable sources (12th highest)
> Recycling rate: 33% (17th lowest)


1. Wyoming
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 101.9 metric tons (the highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: -7.8% (7th largest decline)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 26.4 MWh (2nd highest)
> Electricity production: 16.1% from renewable sources (23rd highest)
> Recycling rate: 33% (17th lowest)



https://247wallst.com/special-report/2022/09/15/the-worst-states-driving-the-climate-crisis/11/
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18940
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #761 on: July 23, 2023, 09:14:00 PM »
All the scholarly ones, I see.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

MarqHusker

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5517
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #762 on: July 23, 2023, 09:19:15 PM »
The Worst States Driving The Climate Crisis

5. Mississippi
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 21.0 metric tons (16th highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: +2.0% (11th largest increase)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 15.6 MWh (10th highest)
> Electricity production: 10.0% from renewable sources (18th lowest)
> Recycling rate: 17% (2nd lowest)

4. Arkansas
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 21.5 metric tons (15th highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: +10.2% (5th largest increase)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 15.2 MWh (11th highest)
> Electricity production: 10.5% from renewable sources (20th lowest)
> Recycling rate: 28% (9th lowest)

3. Louisiana
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 41.8 metric tons (5th highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: +5.0% (7th largest increase)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 19.1 MWh (3rd highest)
> Electricity production: 3.3% from renewable sources (3rd lowest)
> Recycling rate: 26% (6th lowest)


2. North Dakota
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 74.8 metric tons (2nd highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: -1.3% (32nd largest decline)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 28.7 MWh (the highest)
> Electricity production: 38.1% from renewable sources (12th highest)
> Recycling rate: 33% (17th lowest)


1. Wyoming
> Annual per capita carbon emissions: 101.9 metric tons (the highest)
> 5-yr. change in total carbon emissions: -7.8% (7th largest decline)
> Total annual per capita electricity consumption: 26.4 MWh (2nd highest)
> Electricity production: 16.1% from renewable sources (23rd highest)
> Recycling rate: 33% (17th lowest)



https://247wallst.com/special-report/2022/09/15/the-worst-states-driving-the-climate-crisis/11/
Now do China and India.

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37789
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #763 on: July 23, 2023, 09:23:58 PM »
or Russia and Saudi?
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72142
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #764 on: July 23, 2023, 09:27:38 PM »
All the scholarly ones, I see.
Basically energy producers, Wyoming is by far the largest coal producer.  ND, shale oil, LA refineries...

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37789
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #765 on: July 23, 2023, 09:45:35 PM »
scholarly???

like what states?

Florida or Arizona or Oklahoma or Nebraska?
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72142
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #766 on: July 24, 2023, 06:36:59 AM »
It has nohing to do with scholarship at all of course ...

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72142
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #767 on: July 24, 2023, 07:32:27 AM »
ts.com/college/georgia/longformarticle/college-footballs-richest-recruiting-states-ranked-213112055/#2199800

The surprise to me is seeing Virginia in the top group.  Texas and Florida lead.

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11253
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #768 on: July 24, 2023, 08:47:07 AM »
A couple of glaring omissions. 

1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7877
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #769 on: July 24, 2023, 09:26:07 AM »
Why?
Because it’s basically standings for teams currently in FBS. It’s dry and not notable. 
 
And being triggered by standings to demand the particular sort of segregation you can’t let go of is funny to me. 

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.