Need a ranking of the rankings you dislike.1. Preseason
(Rankings fascinate me to no end)
Phillip Rivers?
Most passing yards on third down in fourth quarter career by an ACC QB.
6. Any rankings that automatically have 10 SEC teams in the Top 10 solely because they're SECYou pretend as if the SEC isn't the top conference in recruitiing by far, every year, national champions, in draft picks, high draft picks, and pro bowlers.
He said "solely because they are SEC", not because they have some good teams. And he said, as a quip, a ranking that has ten SEC teams in the top ten. I don't think any of us here would take such a national ranking seriously, nor should we. Clearly, it's hyperbole to suggest that by simply being in the SEC, a team will get a favorable ranking boost that otherwise is unwarranted.Softball and baseball are like this year in and year out.
Softball and baseball are like this year in and year out.Two different things here, seasonal polls by the AP or whatever versus some committee seeding teams for a playoff. I doubt the latter provided that justification.
Some years ago, the twice-beaten Gopher softball team was top-6 in all rankings going into the NCAA Tournament. The committee rewarded them by sending them to Tuscaloosa as the 3 seed in their regional. The justification was that Bama was SEC.
Two different things here, seasonal polls by the AP or whatever versus some committee seeding teams for a playoff. I doubt the latter provided that justification.All of the computer based rankings also had the Gophers in the same range, and they were still dispatched to Bama as the #3.
All of the computer based rankings also had the Gophers in the same range, and they were still dispatched to Bama as the #3.And the rational provided was that Bama was in the SEC?
And the rational provided was that Bama was in the SEC?Yup. The chair of the committee was grilled at length by the host of the selection show after the bracket was revealed. The only coherent excuse in the subsequent word salad was that Bama was SEC and Minnesota was not.
Softball and baseball are like this year in and year out.In softball, the B1G isn't a "P5" conference.
Some years ago, the twice-beaten Gopher softball team was top-6 in all rankings going into the NCAA Tournament. The committee rewarded them by sending them to Tuscaloosa as the 3 seed in their regional. The justification was that Bama was SEC.
All of the computer based rankings also had the Gophers in the same range, and they were still dispatched to Bama as the #3.They were the number two, not the number three. As far as I’m seeing, it was the difference between the last regional hosting spot at the first number two.
Your favorite network has randomly ranked the top 75 QBs in the 2000s.The whole network voted? Wow!
1. Baker Mayfield
2. Cam Newton
3. Vince Young
4. Tim Tebow
5. Joe Burrow.....they say Newton, Young, and Burrow had the best individual seasons, but Mayfield the best career.
6. Deshaun Watson
7. Kyler Murray
8. Lamar Jackson
9. Marcus Mariota
10. Robert Griffin III
.
Discuss.
I can also understand being mad that you put up an extremely nice record and didn’t get rewarded.For sure.
The whole network voted? Wow!I agree with Mayfield at the top. I think he's underrated. He had 2 of the best seasons ever. 2! One is special enough.
(This was one guy‘s ranking. He’s a very self-aware guy. He basically says this is subjective and understands that this exists because his bosses like rankings, and sometimes it’s fun to rank things)
I'm gonna say this here and not the obits thread:Jim Brown is certainly in the NFL RB GOAT discussion, but agree with you, not in the COLLEGE goat RB discussion.
it annoys me that ESPN 150 ranked Jim Brown #1 college RB ever. Jim Brown wasn't JIM BROWN in 1956. Sorry, that's revisionist history.
2 different OU backs had better seasons than him. It's not like he finished 2nd to Hornung for the Heisman, he finished 5th.
And even look at the draft that year: he was the 6th pick and the 3rd RB taken.
.
He was obviously physically gifted, but you could rank him #1 if he:
a - had especially better statistical season(s) than anybody else
b - was thought of as the best in the context of a season
c - maybe lacked volume, but was the surefire #1 pick (or something like that)
.
He didn't do any of those.
Here's the thing: you could kind of maybe argue him being the best player in 1956, but it would require some arguing.
That being said, there's no argument that he was the best COLLEGE RB of all-time, sorry.
.
RIP, Mr. Brown.
Your favorite network has randomly ranked the top 75 QBs in the 2000s.LOL.
1. Baker Mayfield
2. Cam Newton
3. Vince Young
4. Tim Tebow
5. Joe Burrow.....they say Newton, Young, and Burrow had the best individual seasons, but Mayfield the best career.
6. Deshaun Watson
7. Kyler Murray
8. Lamar Jackson
9. Marcus Mariota
10. Robert Griffin III
.
Discuss.
Vince Young.yeah, he really was an incredible player.
End of story.
Your favorite network has randomly ranked the top 75 QBs in the 2000s.speaking of Joe Burrow....
5. Joe Burrow.....they say Newton, Young, and Burrow had the best individual seasons, but Mayfield the best career.
speaking of Joe Burrow....Oops.
https://twitter.com/_MLFootball/status/1660118859804823554?s=20
yeah, he really was an incredible player.Could have played at a high level at almost any position on the field. Incredible is almost an understatement here.
speaking of Joe Burrow....Is that not called "motivation"? We know how UM would poke and barb players. In learning how he operated in his 6 years at Florida, I read this and think he's wanting to light a fire under this kid, not just woefully being wrong about his ability level.
https://twitter.com/_MLFootball/status/1660118859804823554?s=20
Could have played at a high level at almost any position on the field. Incredible is almost an understatement here.Not bad for a guy that was benched in 2004, before figuring it out in the 2nd half vs OKSt that year.
Could have played at a high level at almost any position on the field. Incredible is almost an understatement here.Which makes Jeff Fisher's treatment of him in the League even more disgraceful than it already was.
Not bad for a guy that was benched in 2004, before figuring it out in the 2nd half vs OKSt that year.Back then most UT fans were wanting to see him at WR. That would have been stupid.
I think these "writers" are fairly clever at getting clicks in the off season, I suspect it's a bit of an art, and that is what they are paid to do. Rankings is a good way to attract controversy, and controversy sells. Somewhere I saw a "news" item about top ten beaches by "Dr. Beach". OK, I guess, the funny thing is this list comes out every year, as if the top ten has totally changed from last year. (I didn't open the item.)A reminder that they produce a product to meet a demand. If the demand dries up, they’ll produce other products (which most like producing more anyway).
One kind of list or ranking I would like is something like "best X you never heard of" on a local basis, like best Q or Cubans or whatever, in some hideaway off the beaten. That could help because I probably had never heard of the place.
I'd trust folks around here a lot more than ESPN to "rank" players, but really, I just have a list ot top dudes at some position and don't get too bothered about ranking them. They were all fantastic, just enjoy that.
Which makes Jeff Fisher's treatment of him in the League even more disgraceful than it already was.Jeff Fisher was the biggest clown hack mediocre coach this side of Wayne Fontes. Only difference is he turned a fluke super bowl run with Steve McNair and Eddie George into a 20+ year NFL head coaching career. No idea how that moron lasted as long as he did in the NFL.
Back then most UT fans were wanting to see him at WR. That would have been stupid.would have made a pro-bowl NFL TE
As for the benching, well, that's called motivation.
Back then most UT fans were wanting to see him at WR. That would have been stupid.
As for the benching, well, that's called motivation.
Huh? Not a single UT fan I know wanted to see him play WR. That was all an invention of the mediots trying to stir up shit, or the racist portions of rival fan bases implying he wasn't smart enough to play QB. UT fans loved him at QB, and once he finally worked the wrinkles out of his game (you can also read that as, once Mack Brown finally let Vince be Vince), he disproved all of the mediots and the racists, too.The good UT fans like yourself, Burny, and Hooky said at the time it would be nuts to take the ball away from your best player. I remember you guys posting about this.
The good UT fans like yourself, Burny, and Hooky said at the time it would be nuts to take the ball away from your best player. I remember you guys posting about this.Casual fans didn't care one way or the other. Like I said, the "Vince Young to WR" was an invention entirely of the mediots, and also a common message board talking point of racists in our rivals' fan bases. The aggies actually nicknamed him "Radio" and commonly used that slur on their message boards. Really upstanding folks, those guys...
The media and casual fans did not take that position at all.
Anyway, I certainly agree with the overall point that Vince Young was an extremely talented guy, and I loved watching him play football. I'll always cherish the 2005 season, but can't help but think about "what might have been" if he'd returned for his senior season.I'm sure he does as well. Doesn't ever have to play for that windbag Jeff Fisher. Probably winds up going #1 or #2 in the next draft and plays for Oakland or Detroit. Nevermind. Lol.
speaking of Joe Burrow....Joe Burrow is a really odd case. A friend worked for the team his first year, and he apparently looked alike a career backup that first year.
https://twitter.com/_MLFootball/status/1660118859804823554?s=20
I'm too lazy to Google it but didn't the Texas coaches say they basically stopped trying to coach him?Yup pretty much.
it may look like a burger, but it's not a burgerYeah, my reaction initially, and then I though "SO WHAT?". I'm going to try it next time we go. I usually get their brisket plate. It's the first brisket I've ever had that was not dry and coarse, I had learned to avoid it.
Duke?UCLA?
it may look like a burger, but it's not a burgerCorrect.
https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=best-value-colleges (https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=best-value-colleges)I chuckled at this characterization of UGA students:
it may look like a burger, but it's not a burgerhttps://twitter.com/SPAMbrand/status/848580859586375680
you could call it a burger if there was a ground beef patty in there someplace and the chopped brisket was a "topping"You wouldn't mesh the ground beef and the brisket?
but it's a chopped brisket sammich
I'd rather have that than a burger
You wouldn't mesh the ground beef and the brisket?I will sometimes grind fresh brisket into my burger blend. But a smoked brisket isn't a burger. Shredded smoked brisket can be a burger topping, but it's not a burger. And you don't mix smoked brisket into fresh ground beef to make a brisket/burger mesh.
I will sometimes grind fresh brisket into my burger blend. But a smoked brisket isn't a burger. Shredded smoked brisket can be a burger topping, but it's not a burger. And you don't mix smoked brisket into fresh ground beef to make a brisket/burger mesh.I think you could mix in some brisket and it'll be okay as you cook the burger for a few min. As long as you have some fatty bits, of course.
grinding raw brisket with tallow to make a ground beef patty is a burgerI'd eat it all. :96:
cooking, smoking. and/or BBQing the brisket before hand and adding to raw burger probably isn't going to win many contests
I know what that is!!!
when compiling a list of the best burgers, a crab cake on a hamburger bun isn't a burger
popular in HawaiiThanks to American servicemen who brought it there.
Brisket, short ribs and ribeye makes for an excellent grind.I stick with brisket and chuck. The idea of grinding a beautiful ribeye instead of dropping it on the grill in pure form seems like disrespecting it...
The All American Brisket Cheeseburger - House Ground & Smoked Brisket Burger. Dressed with American Cheese, Switch Special Sauce, and Pickles.now, that's a burger
(https://i.imgur.com/6njUDMk.jpg)
http://www.stilesswitchbbq.com/daily-specials
now, that's a burgerIt is the Thursday special and now I know where I'm going for lunch today.
I stick with brisket and chuck. The idea of grinding a beautiful ribeye instead of dropping it on the grill in pure form seems like disrespecting it...I'm pretty sure I've stated my unpopular opinion before, but I don't like grilled ribeye. Just too fatty, and they don't cook long enough to render that fat. I find the texture to be... well... disgusting.
I stick with brisket and chuck. The idea of grinding a beautiful ribeye instead of dropping it on the grill in pure form seems like disrespecting it...This is my feeling as well. Whenever I go to a restaurant and they explained that they have ground up a nice cut of meat, it’s just like “why?”
I stick with brisket and chuck. The idea of grinding a beautiful ribeye instead of dropping it on the grill in pure form seems like disrespecting it...I'd rather eat a great burger than eat a ribeye steak, so it doesn't bother me at all.
I'm pretty sure I've stated my unpopular opinion before, but I don't like grilled ribeye. Just too fatty, and they don't cook long enough to render that fat. I find the texture to be... well... disgusting.This.
Consequently, I think putting it in a hamburger grind is an excellent use for it.
The All American Brisket Cheeseburger - House Ground & Smoked Brisket Burger. Dressed with American Cheese, Switch Special Sauce, and Pickles.
(https://i.imgur.com/6njUDMk.jpg)
http://www.stilesswitchbbq.com/daily-specials
Looks really delicious, but seems like it's a little bit over-dressed with that sauce. With the amount of fat in ground brisket, it should be MORE than juicy enough w/o that...Yeah that looks like too much sauce to me, too. The burger itself is delicious, I can attest.
Well we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. Ribeye is, to me, the best steak cut.I'm good with that.
But even beyond that, ribeye is expensive as hell. It's expensive as hell because it's flavorful but it's already tender enough to cook med-rare. I find things like short rib and chuck are MORE flavorful than ribeye but they're not tender unless they're slow-cooked--or if you grind them.
I feel like throwing ribeye into a burger blend is just trying to make it unnecessarily fancy. And I'm a fancy fella in the kitchen, but it just doesn't make sense to me.
All I can say is I'm happy when my wife and I were making the menu last night, we've got burgers on it.Agreed.
And that will be with my blend of chuck and the brisket point.
I take the Amazing Ribs advice to heart that if you're grinding meat, you can't serve it medium rare or even medium... It's gotta be cooked through. But chuck + brisket point has more than enough fat that you can cook a burger to IT of 150 and it is still just oozing juice.
(https://media.tenor.com/jTKDchcLtrcAAAAd/walter-white-walter-crying.gif)
On the very rare occasion that I actually grill a ribeye, it goes to well.
I'm good with that.Not a fan of sous vide on ribeye. I prefer a high heat grill.
On the very rare occasion that I actually grill a ribeye, it goes to well. It's the only way to render the fat. I've not tried sous vide. Maybe that would help?
I really like flat irons for flavor.Yep. My favorite cut.
The Most Popular Cuts Of Steak Ranked Worst To Best (tastingtable.com) (https://www.tastingtable.com/804375/the-most-popular-cuts-of-steak-ranked-worst-to-best/)
my ribeye won't be cooked thru and neither will my burgerIf you're ever out this way, I'll challenge you to taste test my burger cooked to 150*.
I like it pink!
I like coleslaw as a sideI like it on a pulled pork burger.
Save the blue cheese for the hot wings.Starting around 10 years ago, all of the winning "best burger" competitions were won by bleu cheese burgers, so it became a whole big thing.
on the sideNot in my experiences.
The pulled pork in Carolina nearly always came with slaw.
on the side
Not in my experiences.
Yeah, they put it directly on the sandwich. I have to ask them to leave it off. Pulled pork is delicious on its own, it doesn't need to be sauced with that vinegary shit they use, and it doesn't need cole slaw all over it.I like it plain and with slaw. The thing is, if they serve it on the side, you get to choose what to do. No need to make the choice for us and plop it on before serving it.
The vinagery stuff is usually termed eastern Carolina style. I first encountered it in Chapel Hill and thought it weird indeed. I got used to it, and then grew to like it, something akin to Cincy "chili". Is it my favorite? Not really, but I like variation so getting every so often is good.Yeah I'm sure it's regional, but most places I've been to throughout the SE that serve pulled pork, sauce it.
Yeah I'm sure it's regional, but most places I've been to throughout the SE that serve pulled pork, sauce it.Interesting. I’ve consumed a fair amount of barbecue in the southeast, I don’t often have the slaw right on the sandwich.
It's just so unnecessary. When I make pulled pork I catch the drippings from the meat as it cooks, and then I strain those drippings and recombine a portion of it with the meat when I'm pulling it. Keeps it so moist and delicious, bursting with its own flavor. It's just worlds better than the version where it gets sauced.
It's just so unnecessary. When I make pulled pork I catch the drippings from the meat as it cooks, and then I strain those drippings and recombine a portion of it with the meat when I'm pulling it. Keeps it so moist and delicious, bursting with its own flavor. It's just worlds better than the version where it gets sauced.dude, some folks put ketchup on things
The best BBQ is going to have an acid component. Without it, still good, but a bit too bland for me.Exactly.
Yeah I'm sure it's regional, but most places I've been to throughout the SE that serve pulled pork, sauce it.It's not a sauce. When you have the finished product, you can grab a handful of it and it's just well-flavored meat, not saucy or heavily dripping. It's moist and finely-shredded. It clumps.
It's just so unnecessary. When I make pulled pork I catch the drippings from the meat as it cooks, and then I strain those drippings and recombine a portion of it with the meat when I'm pulling it. Keeps it so moist and delicious, bursting with its own flavor. It's just worlds better than the version where it gets sauced.
Which Carolina uses the mustard-based sauce?South Carolina. Lots of Germans - achtung baby
I'm not a huge fan, but it's good as a change-up sometimes.
Which Carolina uses the mustard-based sauce?SC, though most places have a few options.
I'm not a huge fan, but it's good as a change-up sometimes.
There is a chain both here and in Cincy called "City BBQ" which is pretty decent, and the sauce and the slaw both come as a side. I don't put slaw on the sandwich because it cools the meat down. They have four main kinds of sauces at City. We went pretty often in Cincy. The Cincy main BBQ place is Montgomery Ribs, which is not bad, very chique now, but slathered with the red sauce. They have one on the river which has some nice views.City B plops it on there too.
I don't know the point of a sandwich without some sort of pickled vegetable on it.fine, but I've never seen pickles piled that high on a sammich
I'm fine with a breakfast burger if the egg is left off of it.:67:
Breakfast Burgers Are a Thing, and These Are the Most Tempting in America (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/foodnews/breakfast-burgers-are-a-thing-and-these-are-the-most-tempting-in-america/ss-AAOiu2s?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=7ae3b8080b6f44ed802c675c172a8832&ei=17)
I'm fine with a breakfast burger if the egg is left off of it.We have to band together!
Breakfast Burgers Are a Thing, and These Are the Most Tempting in America (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/foodnews/breakfast-burgers-are-a-thing-and-these-are-the-most-tempting-in-america/ss-AAOiu2s?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=7ae3b8080b6f44ed802c675c172a8832&ei=17)
I don't know the point of a sandwich without some sort of pickled vegetable on it.I don't understand why anything needs to be pickled.
I don't understand why anything needs to be pickled.That's a pretty wide range of foods. But whatever, everyone likes and hates something. I've been thinking a lot about the range of tastes out there. I don't particularly care for sweet foods. My wife isn't nearly as into spiciness as I am. That said, BBQ is usually pretty rich and pairs extremely well with something crunchy and acidic. A good sandwich is going to hit a bunch of your senses. A good slaw hits the crunchy, acidic, creamy, sweet, and cool all in once, so I'm a fan.
Pickles, I guess.
I find pickled and fermented things gross.
A good sandwich is going to hit a bunch of your senses. A good slaw hits the crunchy, acidic, creamy, sweet, and cool all in once, so I'm a fan.Winner,winner chicken dinner,there are so many different things you can do customize one just with the bread,one could also include a burger in there. Mentioned years ago in one of these threads about this Old Deli around me that had this marvelous Submarine Sammich. Seemed like they stopped in every European Capital and brought back the best cured/smoked/fresh meats & cheeses plus all the trappings olives,pickles,relish,dressings,salsas and such. I'm slobbering like a St Bernard just thinking about it. If I knew I had one day left - my choice would be to wold down as many of those as possible
A list.Well if they deliver I'll get the sink ready
The Most Delicious Cheap Sandwich in Every State (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/recipes/the-most-delicious-cheap-sandwich-in-every-state/ss-AA10tTdB?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=98c811531fff4671ab64872f44f96855&ei=39#image=1)
Iowa: New Pioneer Food Co-opThat sounds gross. This doesn't.
Iowa City At New Pioneer, Cashew on a Hot Tin Roof ($8.99) is made with sourdough bread slathered with a spicy jalapeno cashew cheese. Both are made in-house. It's topped with onions, peppers, tomatoes, and spinach — all organic. They offer gluten-free breads and have carved out a real name for great vegan and vegetarian food in cow country.
_____________________________________
nope, not buying it
now I don't trust the source
I'd go $10 for a REALLY good sandwich somewhere, but that's about it.That's what they cost at Subway now.
That sounds gross. This doesn't.
Nebraska: Banhwich Café
Lincoln
At Banhwich Café (https://www.banhwichcafe.com/), order the Spicy Thai Chicken (Ga Thai) for $6.75 made of shredded chicken or fried tofu served up with its in-house Thai cilantro sauce in a traditional Vietnamese-style sandwich topped with aioli, cucumbers, pickled daikon, and finely shredded carrots and jalapeños on either a fresh baguette or croissant, or in lettuce wraps for the carb watchers.
Tunisian tuna sandwich box. The sandwich comes with capers, preserved lemon, potato, hard-boiled egg, onion, tomato, and spicy harissa sauce on a demi-baguette along with a fruit cup, a signature cookie and a bag of chips for $19.25.I wouldn't eat that if you paid me $19.
Cheap?
I'm guessing you've had more expensive lunchesI have, no doubt, but it wasn't sandwiches. The most expensive one I had, probably, had menus without prices on it for everyone except our friend (who is a really good friend). He told me later it was over a thousand euros, for four.
Heck, these days a BBQ lunch for two with tea or soft drinks can hit $80 pretty quick.They get you on the combos. Start adding extra meats, sides, a little banana pudding and it hits you.
lunches have been expensive IMO for a while.We don't go out too often, but when we do, it's generally for lunch at a place we can get to by boat.
I skipped a lot of lunches back when I was hourly and working plenty of overtime
the past 20 years I many times had microwave popcorn and a coke in the breakroom for about a dollar
I've saved enough on lunches to be able to retire at 59 1/2
They get you on the combos. Start adding extra meats, sides, a little banana pudding and it hits you.I actually much prefer buying by the pound. On the platter they might be providing more variety but they're invariably providing less food per $. That's an ages-old restaurant trick, we did the same thing at our restaurant 30 years ago.
Key is to split the big platters between 2 or 3. There’s the money. (Assuming they do platters and not just by the pound. Then they got all your money)
The real problem is that brisket at a decent place is now $30-$34 per pound and one beef rib tips in at almost $40.Jesus. I guess that's why it's smart to just do it at home lol...
Jesus. I guess that's why it's smart to just do it at home lol...No kidding!
Brisket taquitos on the menu tonight.
I actually much prefer buying by the pound. On the platter they might be providing more variety but they're invariably providing less food per $. That's an ages-old restaurant trick, we did the same thing at our restaurant 30 years ago.Hmm. That’s probably true, but I might not care?
The real problem is that brisket at a decent place is now $30-$34 per pound and one beef rib tips in at almost $40.
Jesus. I guess that's why it's smart to just do it at home lol...Absolutely. It's insane. Raw prices for brisket have gone up maybe $2 - $3 per lb on average over the time period. Cooked product prices have gone up from maybe $18/lb to over $30/lb. Some places like Franklin have just about doubled in the finished good price.
Brisket taquitos on the menu tonight.
Hmm. That’s probably true, but I might not care?It would definitely be cheaper. Only limitation would be, how granular you can purchase. Everybody will sell in 1/2 lb increments but there's a smaller subset that'll allow 1/4 lb increments.
When I get BBQ, I actively want variety. And there’s little chance I won’t eat enough, so even if the dollar per pound doesn’t align, I’m possibly more satisfied.
Unless, in theory, assembling an ah la carte platter is cheaper.
It would definitely be cheaper. Only limitation would be, how granular you can purchase. Everybody will sell in 1/2 lb increments but there's a smaller subset that'll allow 1/4 lb increments.Hmm. Looking at a place I used to live, that almost worked, save for the brisket platter up charge. Will take that forward.
fox-bros_westside-menu_03UPDATED PRICING (foxbrosbbq.com) (http://www.foxbrosbbq.com/downloads/fox-bros_westside_menu-food.pdf)Is there a brisket up charge?
Classic combo is $22 for 2 meats and 2 sides. It fills me up.
Absolutely. It's insane. Raw prices for brisket have gone up maybe $2 - $3 per lb on average over the time period. Cooked product prices have gone up from maybe $18/lb to over $30/lb. Some places like Franklin have just about doubled in the finished good price.Yeah, that's ridiculous. Admittedly any brisket you buy is going to have at least a pound of fat trimmed off, and then the difference on BBQ between raw weight and cooked weight is significant (I think it loses close to 50% of its weight when cooked), so cooked prices should probably come close to doubling. But that's just a psychotic increase for cooked brisket.
Is there a brisket up charge?There is at almost every place I've been or heard about.
I wouldn't eat that if you paid me $19.Ya I dunno something about Tunisia and fresh refrigerated fish doesn't seem to click
Yeah, that one wouldn't appeal to me either. A good burger to me has balance, much like a fine wine.https://youtu.be/7PJYGjDeTRM
Not on the classic combo, that is what I usually order, pulled pork and brisket and Brunswick stew and tots. Or slaw. If we both get beer, it's going over $50 obviously, my wife likes "sweet tea".https://youtu.be/hp_pTnQeQiA
it's Wednesday, and happy hourWatch out for Covid.
I'm headed to the pub for some brews & wings
Watch out for Covid.Fearless stopped getting the vaccination shots years ago, he should be fine.
I'm surprised that 70, 80, or 90 didn't win. All of those go through territory that has really poor driving conditions for more time than 95 does.95 has a ton of New England to FL traffic with the snowbirds. Slow reaction time and all that. 75 isn't great either.
I-4 in FL is probably like LA for recruiting - high-up on the per-capita rankings. Too short to be among the volume leaders.We do not use I-4. It's nuts.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/350303755_656753233022142_486333055051858262_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=iZyuJiW7oEsAX_EOOiw&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfD920KNyRlhTi7HX--D8yjn6jwJIkQvVpulXBLQrvIZ1w&oe=6481F6E2)
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/350303755_656753233022142_486333055051858262_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=iZyuJiW7oEsAX_EOOiw&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfD920KNyRlhTi7HX--D8yjn6jwJIkQvVpulXBLQrvIZ1w&oe=6481F6E2)If the top 2 schools in budget are only profitting like $2 million, that tells me this isn't really a goal. This is a list of schools that simply didn't find anything to spend their money on, like new mats for the gymnastics team or were under the food budget because there were 12 fewer walk-ons overall or something like that.
If the top 2 schools in budget are only profitting like $2 million, that tells me this isn't really a goal. This is a list of schools that simply didn't find anything to spend their money on, like new mats for the gymnastics team or were under the food budget because there were 12 fewer walk-ons overall or something like that.this is not showing profits
The figures appear to be incorrect, or perhaps refer to some other method of accounting.I pulled it from FB so it's got to be correct
This doesn't look correct for Texas, currently the LHN is paying about $5M/year to the academic side.Can you let him win something against the Horns,sheesh
this is not showing profitsProfits they're giving to the central campus budget...same thing. Money they're willing to part with. Just a judgement call. Doesn't change the point.
read the graph
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/350855099_811253110047070_8490533083037355287_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=xHoXQuWSuuUAX98Ncyf&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfArDb-8PmHJe6iIPc4IJsNR5HqevkavP6HEWHqWvwi6dA&oe=6481DFC7)This list looks a lot like my album collection.
A list like that has become meaningless since the transfer portal. You'd have to edit it to say "signed and kept..."Spot on.
A&M's "best class of all-time" isn't much of anything anymore.
This list looks a lot like my album collection.I had 9 of them
Literally "meaningless"??? Or perhaps the significance of the list has become lessened due to transfers?Yep, and it describes that list. It no longer matters with the portal.
Meaningless to me means "without any meaning or relevance" ...
I had 9 of themThose are mostly a few years before my time, but I do own two of them, and I have a third on the way on new vinyl as soon as it's done with the remastered pressing.
Those are mostly a few years before my time, but I do own two of them, and I have a third on the way on new vinyl as soon as it's done with the remastered pressing.they were a bit before my time as well, I was 10 and not buying them as they were released
Yep, and it describes that list. It no longer matters with the portal.I don't think it's completely meaningless but I do think it's lost most of its meaning and I also think y'all are quibbling over trivialities in semantic distinction.
For example, my school picked up 3 former 4* QB's in the portal this year.
Where they were prior means nothing.
I don't think it's completely meaningless but I do think it's lost most of its meaning and I also think y'all are quibbling over trivialities in semantic distinction.Are you saying we are pedantic shitsticks?
Which, appears to be the entire point of message board forums so, carry on. :)
[img width=481.991 height=499.988]https://i.imgur.com/8VUM8VP.png[/img]Tier 5: Vanderbilt. Alone.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/352546447_1422398835246600_1071710724040256045_n.jpg?stp=cp6_dst-jpg&_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=8KD-cWMCHN8AX8rAKC-&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfDCHCna7Z5G1-RXRR5Tb0uldTmXYKpBWWzsWF66BGzHjw&oe=64851BAC)
I guess they didn't watch Suh vs McCoy?
Top 50 burger spots in the United States (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/foodnews/top-50-burger-spots-in-the-united-states/ss-AA1ciAUm?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=7d8bd1241ee642468c6af4a65225ef21&ei=4)Only ones I've been to:
Back on topic.
Only ones I've been to:
- Five Guys
- Deschutes Brewery Portland Public House
- The Counter Burger
Anyone been to Shake Shack or Hopdoddy? I have both local but have never been.
[img width=396.991 height=499.988]https://i.imgur.com/KeFxNL7.png[/img]I agree.
SEC players only, would be fun for a TE to win it, but I doubt it.
Only ones I've been to:Shake Shack is perfectly fine and too expensive.
- Five Guys
- Deschutes Brewery Portland Public House
- The Counter Burger
Anyone been to Shake Shack or Hopdoddy? I have both local but have never been.
Shake Shack is perfectly fine and too expensive.This.
Shake Shack is kind of weird to me, I really don't get their branding/positioning. The buildings themselves are modern and sort of upscale, but the food is much more fast food or fast casual. They're overly pricey for the category their food puts them in, it's like they're trying to compete with boutique/upscale joints but the food experience is closer to an ordinary fast food burger.Hmm... Interesting.
Shake Shack is more like a Five Guys than a McDonald's so that's where they should be competing, but the exterior and interior design plus pricing would put them up another level beyond that, but the food itself doesn't justify it. It's a Five Guys burger in a more upscale/trendier-looking setting, which is why I just don't really get their branding/ID.Got it. That's good context.
All that said, I just looked up their price for a basic burger and they're actually less than Five Guys by several dollars. A Five Guys burger is now $10.29, apparently? Wow. Sounds like I should be calling out Five Guys instead.
Oh and I agree In n Out should be considered in the straight bottom-rung fast food category alongside McDonald's and Wendy's and BK, and it's superior to all of those. I don't love it the way the InO Cultists worship it, but it's definitely better than most of its mainstream competitors.Yeah, a long time ago in some thread here I posted my treatise on In n Out. The cultists who make it out to be the best burger ever are misguided. And those who compare it to something like Five Guys are misgueded.
I guess In-n-Out is the tallest midget, but does that negate that it has the worst fries in the history of mankind?Yeah, the fries are terrible.
That said, as a Texan, I'm going to ask you... In n Out vs Whataburger? I've only had the latter once, and barely remember it. What's your opinion, and why?
I don't know how widely spread Farm Burger is, they have a few around here, same with Killer Burger. Both serve beer which sort of makes them not fast food. Farm Burger has a deal for $10 a pretty good burger and a beer (Narragansette).getting a beer with your burger is a game changer
getting a beer with your burger is a game changerDefinitely. If I'm actually going specifically to get a burger and I'm not just trying to get something fast for the kids to squeeze in between football practice, a band concert, or a soccer game, then I'm going to one of the local joints that serves good beer alongside a good burger.
100% grassfed, grass-finished beef with pasture-raised bacon, sunny side up egg, pepper jack cheese, salsa verdeif ya git that and a beer for $10, I suppose the fries are $8
Menu | Farm Burger (https://farmburger.com/menu/)
if ya git that and a beer for $10, I suppose the fries are $8They have good fries, I think. They aren't too pricey, $3. And they serve collards as well. We go here every couple weeks or so, the manager is a nice lady.
In&O is dead to me unless they open here.I had no clue Portillo's had expanded that widely. I was obviously elated when they opened their first location outside the Chicago metro and it was in Buena Park, CA...
Portillo's has the best chain burger and it's not close. It won't be long before they are nation-wide.
(https://i.imgur.com/WP91ff0.png)
I've never heard of Portillo's but would certainly give it a try if it ever came to Austin.There are some things that are very Chicago-specific to look for, if you have places local that specialize in Chicago foods.
BTW did anyone watch The Bear? Speaking of Chicago sandwiches. Season 2 coming out soon I think.Yeah, good show! Looking forward to Season 2.
There are some things that are very Chicago-specific to look for, if you have places local that specialize in Chicago foods.Yeah we've had some Chicago-specific eateries in the past, although they haven't seemed to make it for long.
I can't vouch for this place but it looks to be close to you: http://www.wiseguyschicago.com/menu1.html
The options to try would be:
- Italian Beef sandwich (preferable to order "wet" w/ hot giardinera instead of sweet peppers, cheese or no cheese per your preference)
- Maxwell Street Polish
- Chicago Dog
- Italian Sausage sandwich, or even the combo beef & sausage
I've never heard of Portillo's but would certainly give it a try if it ever came to Austin.There was one across the street from where we stayed in Orlando, so we tried it, it was OK. Didn't go back though.
If I order a Chicago Dog sans relish, pickle spear, and sport peppers, is it still a Chicago Dog? Because I loathe pickles and consider sport peppers to be pretty much a waste of time.It's a quasi-Chicago Dog then I guess.
Portillo's: 2 beefy cheddars (on croissant) w/ cheese friesFTFY.
Yeah we've had some Chicago-specific eateries in the past, although they haven't seemed to make it for long.No.
I've had Italian Beef for sure, and I do like it.
If I order a Chicago Dog sans relish, pickle spear, and sport peppers, is it still a Chicago Dog? Because I loathe pickles and consider sport peppers to be pretty much a waste of time.
No.
A Chicago dog must have all of the ingredients to be so.
A Depression dog has mustard, relish, onions and sport peppers.
A Maxwell Street Polish has Polish Sausage, grilled onions and mustard.
And don't ever mention ketchup. You will lose a kidney.
[img width=499.977 height=499.977]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyMtfPJWIAYwAWq?format=jpg&name=small[/img]Texas Tech?
Texas Tech?Yeah Tech isn't a sleeping giant. Maybe a sleeping prairie dog?
The only time they've mattered in the past 40 years took peak Mike Leach, and that was for 1 season. They're in bumfuck nowhere, get 5th pickings from TX recruits (after Texas, OU, A&M, and TCU at least). I have no idea what TTU has going for it.
I like dill relish, but it's scarce. I have no clue how people enjoy sweet pickles/relish.Vienna Beef Hot Dog Kit & 2 Lou's Pizzas | Tastes of Chicago
South Carolina won't be a giant any time soon, but I think they will be pretty good in 2023, like 9-3 or 8-4. Ish.Yeah, Carolina's peak was an East title in a very down year for the division and they have yet to lose fewer than 2 conf games in any season.
I think of a "giant" in CFB as a program that consistently wins ten games. plus.
Yeah, Carolina's peak was an East title in a very down year for the division and they have yet to lose fewer than 2 conf games in any season.That year was their peak?
If they couldn't do it with Spurrier in a down year for the conference, forget it.
That year was their peak?Well that year they at least WON something. The ensuing 11-2 trio of seasons didn't yield anything of substance.
Well that year they at least WON something. The ensuing 11-2 trio of seasons didn't yield anything of substance.Yeah, that was a weird one. Because that 2010 team was no doubt the worst of the four. But, as you pointed out, that was a bad SEC East, which allowed a 9-3 team (5-3 in conference) to win it. That team beat No. 1 Bama and then lost to UK.
My sleeping programs have been North Carolina, Washington, and Illinois. I've thought they all could get to 9 wins on average with the right coach and some aid from management. UW has a decent program as it is. UNC has an "OK" program.I'm not sure I buy it for Illinois. I suppose the argument is all the Chicago-area talent. But I'm not sure that talent identifies as living in "Illinois" as much as living in "Chicago".
Colorado will be interesting of course.
How often do y'all fix dogs at home? What do you buy and how do you heat'em?Not often. Occasionally we'll do "junk food night" with the kids and make chili dogs. Every once in a while we do "Chicago dogs" but not really since as Badge points out we're not sourcing Vienna Beef brand.
My wife doesn't like'em so for me it's rare.
I'm not sure I buy it for Illinois. I suppose the argument is all the Chicago-area talent. But I'm not sure that talent identifies as living in "Illinois" as much as living in "Chicago".Illinois is trying to be Wisconsin. 6 out of 11 of their coaches played (4) or coached (2) in Madison. Plus, more on the support staff.
I just don't necessarily buy that the in-state flagship will necessarily have any discernable "in-state" recruiting advantage over M, OSU, or ND if those programs come calling.
Which would of course mean that they may have a ceiling below "giant" level.
I don't expect Illinois to get there, merely to think that they "could" under the right conditions.Understood. I didn't think you were predicting they would do it.
I never got the sense that Chicago kids grew up dreaming of playing at Illinois. It's like two different states.Yep. And it wouldn't surprise me if the Chicago "power" HS football programs are largely private Catholic schools that can recruit, if there isn't a lot of ND propaganda going on.
My rationale really is that UI is the "flagship" in a populous state that must surely have some decent HS football around somewhere. Today it seems to be a complete afterthought even for 3 star folks. Find yourself an athletic QB who is slated to play safety at Ohio State and put him behind center and adapt your offense to suit.Bielema is not gonna do that. He's playing BarryBall with a Hayden Fry influence.
Blitz on every down from weird angles.
My sleeping programs have been North Carolina, Washington, and Illinois. I've thought they all could get to 9 wins on average with the right coach and some aid from management. UW has a decent program as it is. UNC has an "OK" program.I feel like the quality of Illinois talent isn’t THAT deep? It’s fine, but not super deep. And it’s touched on by a ton of programs. It’s like of Georgia had a 10th the talent and UGA had a 15th the brand value.
Colorado will be interesting of course.
I feel like the quality of Illinois talent isn’t THAT deep? It’s fine, but not super deep. And it’s touched on by a ton of programs. It’s like of Georgia had a 10th the talent and UGA had a 15th the brand value.Correct. There is some really high quality at the top, and then a drop. Here is a list of 4* and 5* players. After that it's all 3* or less.
My rationale really is that UI is the "flagship" in a populous state that must surely have some decent HS football around somewhere.Yeah... But I think people from Atlanta identify as Georgians. People from Cincinnati identify as Ohioans.
Yeah... But I think people from Atlanta identify as Georgians. People from Cincinnati identify as Ohioans.This.
People from Chicago don't identify with Illinois. They identify as Chicagoans.
This.100%. Always respond with "I'm from Chicago." I don't even say "the Midwest".
People ask where I'm from and I don't say Illinois. I say Chicago, and they might ask which part. Sox fan or Kubbs?
I'm sure you're the same way.
My rationale really is that UI is the "flagship" in a populous state that must surely have some decent HS football around somewhere. Today it seems to be a complete afterthought even for 3 star folks. Find yourself an athletic QB who is slated to play safety at Ohio State and put him behind center and adapt your offense to suit.Juice Williams?
Blitz on every down from weird angles.
Is this a legit place or just making shit up and tricking Phoenix people?
[img width=260.182 height=432]https://i.imgur.com/BwDACb8.jpg[/img]
It's right by my friend's house. Looks like it's a sliders place, not a full-sized burger joint. I always mean to try it, just haven't yet.
Obviously I haven't tried it, but the Vienna hot dog and Italian beef sandwich at least have the right description on the menu.I'd eat there based on that menu.
10 non-conference matchups the Georgia Bulldogs should schedule next (247sports.com) (https://247sports.com/college/georgia/longformarticle/10-non-conference-matchups-the-georgia-bulldogs-should-schedule--211520607/#2182934)so, what all good fans want..........
Another useless list, but Wisconsin is #3, which would be good. USC is #1, Penn State is #4, Michigan is #2. They have Washington in the mix which I'd like also. I'd throw in Virginia H&H, maybe Iowa?
so, what all good fans want..........
SEC vs B1G matchups!!!
yes, sir
Not so much a ranking as an ordered list, but here ya go:My house is directly beneath the projected path. People have asked if I am going to allow people to camp in my yard. I'm not interested unless the price is right. LOL
https://www.astronomy.com/observing/20-of-the-best-places-to-view-the-2024-great-north-american-eclipse/
My house is directly beneath the projected path. People have asked if I am going to allow people to camp in my yard. I'm not interested unless the price is right. LOLEverybody has a price!
I'd eat there based on that menu.That menu's got Ketchup on it
And this is part of the menu. Merktz on a burger is a Chicago thing. I've seen it in Wisconsin too.
[img width=263.998 height=499.997]https://i.imgur.com/lPegpFk.png[/img]
That menu's got Ketchup on itKetchup is fine. Ketchup on a Chicago Dog is not.
and have a rednecky good time. I'm looking forward to it.so white sox and Blue Ribbon then.Ya Buddy
Ketchup is fine. Ketchup on a Chicago Dog is not.
so white sox and Blue Ribbon then.Ya BuddyOh I'll still be drinking Celis and Live Oak, of course. I'm not a savage.
I thought that ketchup was verboten on all dogs, Chicago style or not?Ketchup only is acceptable if you're 3 years old.
I thought that ketchup was verboten on all dogs, Chicago style or not?In Chicago, yes. But outside Chicago, you do you. Just don't call it a Chicago Dog if ketchup is near.
In Chicago, yes. But outside Chicago, you do you. Just don't call it a Chicago Dog if ketchup is near.This is correct. No ketchup on a Chicago dog.
ketchup is for childrenThis is an over generalization, but has truth in it. I use almost no ketchup now, wasn't the case when I was 10.
Washington/Oregon so important they are listed twice!Did you miss a column?
This is an over generalization, but has truth in it. I use almost no ketchup now, wasn't the case when I was 10.Well if you don't put ketchup on a dog why put it in your beer? Some people's kids,sheesh
This is why beer tastes awful the first time most folks try it.
I would tend to rank that near the bottom ... just sayin' ...I've never had it, but can't imagine liking it.
Find Apartments for Rent and Rentals - Get Your Walk Score (https://www.walkscore.com/)well, when the GTI gets older and the clutch goes out......... you'll be doing more walkin
Another ranking, walk score. While this obviously is going to be variable depending, I personally think a fairly high score is important for a retirement location because as we age, walking becomes a primary form of exercise and getting out and about.
My wife and I do more than walk, but we walk quite a bit as well, and as we age, that could become the main thing for us.
well, when the GTI gets older and the clutch goes out......... you'll be doing more walkinYeah, we could manage without a car, renting one on occasion. Hopefully the clutch lasts a while ...
[img width=274.381 height=500]https://i.imgur.com/TVvioZl.png[/img]Games on the list involving B1G teams:
I've never had it, but can't imagine liking it.Oskar Blues is solid. Dale's Pale Ale is probably their most well-known, and is (like a pale ale should be) moderate strength and hoppiness, not unlike Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. I know you're not an IPA guy, and it's not an IPA, but it also isn't a German lager.
We do have an Oskar Blues brewery here in Austin, perhaps I'll try it someday.
Oskar Blues is solid. Dale's Pale Ale is probably their most well-known, and is (like a pale ale should be) moderate strength and hoppiness, not unlike Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. I know you're not an IPA guy, and it's not an IPA, but it also isn't a German lager.Oh yeah, I've been to the Oskar Blues brewery many times and agree it's solid. I was speaking specifically about that Oskar Blues mustard beer that I posted a picture of. I can't imagine liking it, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't try it if they had it available upon my next visit.
Their Mama's Little Yella Pils is also good, and that puts you more into traditional lager territory.
The Big Ten is not on the same level as the SEC - on the field.You just have to look at playoff record.
my opinion is that the SEC is some better at the topThat's about where I'm at too. Some folks, not us, like to dramaticize what probably are smaller differences. And of course UGA/Bama could fall off at some point, probably not that soon because of 'crootin'.
Georgia/Bama better than OSU/MU
and some better overall, top to bottom
but not as much as many others seem to think
I think, for me, a "good hot dog" is really about the toppings. Maybe some horrible turkey dog would overshadow them. I used to get the hot dog and Coke at Costco for $1,50 but my wife doesn't like their fast food so we usually don't stop though she tells me to go ahead, I don't.That was a good deal.
I figure they likely aren't good for me anyway.
Is Texas A&M the only major A&M left?Only one I know of, only one in FBS, but there could be some smaller schools that still have it.
Kansas State was the large land-grant school in Kansas, don't know if they were ever an A&M though.MSU was known as the Agricultural State College of Michigan back in the day. The Michigan State College and finally MSU.
There is no Georgia A&M except in fiction. There is an Alabama A&M.There was no Texas State when the movie "Necessary Roughness" was made in 1991.
A ranking of "best hotdogs" would be among the most useless of that ilk I think.Crowdsourcing rankings for food is among the best uses. Otherwise, you are deciding what to buy from the jingles you hear on television.
[img width=499.997 height=319.997]https://i.imgur.com/iTxJt8L.png[/img]
Holy Cross over Boston College?
Several of the "State" schools were formally "A&M" schools. Oklahoma State, New Mexico State, Utah State all come to mind, there are probably more.Oregon and Washington
it's the rose bowlOnly on one day per year. Every other day it looks like this:
The results are in, and the best ice cream shop in the United States resides in Omaha.There's a really good Chocolate Shop in West Lafayette.
There's a really good Chocolate Shop in West Lafayette.Speaking of chocolate...
Some of the most memorable (and unrememberable) times I've ever had in a Chocolate Shop.
Speaking of chocolate...That's awesome! Very inventive!
I hosted a dinner for friends some years back.
As I was preparing, some normal movie was playing on HBO.
We're all at the table enjoying my amazing cooking, when we all notice some interesting sounds from the TV.
A skin-e-max movie was playing, with some couple having fun with chocolate syrup in a shower.
We crack up laughing, talk, and the night is over.
One female friend from that night went out of town for awhile, and I took care of her dog (access to her house).
She gets back and hours after returning, sees the chocolate syrup bottles I set in her shower.
She said she almost died, because she couldn't breathe, from laughing so hard.
Chocolate.
“You would have to consume 100 times the amount of (grass-fed) ground beef to get the same amount of omega-3s as the similar portion of salmon,” Litchfield says. “So in the scheme of things, you can’t eat enough (grass-fed beef) to make a significant impact on your (omega-3) intake.”I'm willing to try.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/355366992_789663672588714_8713337686597819770_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=8FWmFG3wEHAAX-qwh2b&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfAbLSXPk75yZ6MdGSkWSWbIUHMEjfM7U_gRkLf9xEkpdA&oe=64A000E5)Several of these guys are like real-life video game outliers....Bo, obviously. Vick was too fast. Alstott just bulldozing dudes, Bavaro dragging guys down the field, etc.
Several of these guys are like real-life video game outliers....Bo, obviously. Vick was too fast. Alstott just bulldozing dudes, Bavaro dragging guys down the field, etc.Alstott wasn’t really a fullback though.
But its a blast to fish for pike on ice with tip ups.cause you can sit where it's warm with the game on the tube and sip your drink!
The main item for me making it "nicer" is leg room. We flew Turkish back from Istanbul, I could not discern any difference between them and Delta. They didn't serve pork, but that's rarely served by anyone.Ahh yeah. I have the same legroom concerns. Flying at 6'5" is not always pleasant.
Grouper, triple tail or triggerfish (the best) for me.Triple tail is delicious.
Triggers dine on crab, lobster, shrimp, scallops, etc. Of course they taste great!
Love grilled or poached salmon. Never liked Northern pike, tasted too weedy and are full of tiny bones that don't filet out. But its a blast to fish for pike on ice with tip ups. Favorite non-trout family fish for eating is walleye. Yellow perch maybe tastes slightly better but are kind of small.They know how to do Pike in Quebec start with cold clean lakes - like the water they brew with
They know how to do Pike in Quebec start with cold clean lakes - like the water they brew withThis!
Australia has too many things trying to kill you.Truth they have 5 of the top 10 the deadliest creatures on earth
Triple tail is delicious.I forgot to mention Cobia. That's excellent too. For my fish, I always use the side burner and the cast iron. Get a nice sear that way.
favorite fish is walleye. Not even close.
have you tried Cobia? Amazing. My new favorite salt, water fish. Wrapped in tinfoil after a white brush of olive oil, salt, and pepper to taste in 5 to 7 minutes on the grill.
Pike is actually very good eating but the challenges, the “Y” bone. When I’ve gone into northern Canada fly in fishing the guides up there or expert at removing the way bone and the pike is delicious if it’s done correctly.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/355366992_789663672588714_8713337686597819770_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=8FWmFG3wEHAAX-qwh2b&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfAbLSXPk75yZ6MdGSkWSWbIUHMEjfM7U_gRkLf9xEkpdA&oe=64A000E5)Psht.
[img width=487.998 height=499.988]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FzuNNDNXoAASac-?format=png&name=small[/img]NAU? How?
I don't even recognize the logo for number 26.Arizona
An A, with a polar bear walking in front of it?
Triple tail is delicious.I concur.
favorite fish is walleye. Not even close.
have you tried Cobia? Amazing. My new favorite salt, water fish. Wrapped in tinfoil after a white brush of olive oil, salt, and pepper to taste in 5 to 7 minutes on the grill.
Pike is actually very good eating but the challenges, the “Y” bone. When I’ve gone into northern Canada fly in fishing the guides up there or expert at removing the way bone and the pike is delicious if it’s done correctly.
I'd eat most of them. I'm definitely down with the Jucy Lucy from Matt's Bar in Minneapolis.Very true, and it kinda gets me when I see something like that.
I don't agree that some of them are burgers, though. At the very least, a burger needs to have one or more ground meat patties at its core. The Bulgogi Burger looks like a tasty sandwich, but it's just loose shaved grilled meat in the center. That's not a burger.
Very true, and it kinda gets me when I see something like that.
A burger is centered around a beef patty.
A turkey/chicken/shrimp/whatever burger is not a burger.
Those are turkey/chicken/shrimp/whatever burgers.
Most places call a Turkey Burger just that, same with fake meat burgers. These look like burgers, I'm OK calling them that, since the train has done run anyway.
It's a bit like the real meaning of terms like entree'.
Thousand Island dressing... blech.Save the Thousand Island for a reuben.
But I could do a patty melt, sub mustard for the salad dressing, add grilled jalapenos and bacon.
Russian dressing, yo.Something Russian you actually like! KIDDING 😂
Something Russian you actually like! KIDDING 😂You just made the list, pal.
Russian dressing, yo.That goes on a Reuben.
Save the Thousand Island for a reuben.
Russian dressing, yo.
That goes on a Reuben.You don't say...
You just made the list, pal.And I agree with her- as does most of humanity
For the record, I work with a Russian woman who is awesome. She loathes the current dictator for life and his policies and actions that are destroying her country and her people.
Yo.
And I agree with her- as does most of humanityIt's a good list to be on, depending on the list.
geez- now I have to work at getting off the list. 🥴
It's a good list to be on, depending on the list.I don’t want to be on Ute’s bad list. Rumor is- he’s got people everywhere.
I don’t want to be on Ute’s bad list. Rumor is- he’s got people everywhere.We all got guys everywhere.
We've had a lot of hamburger ranking talk, so...This should be called best authentic pizzas. Americanized pizza is far superior to this crap:
https://www.foodandwine.com/travel/best-pizza-places-us
This should be called best authentic pizzas. Americanized pizza is far superior to this crap:Italian beef with giardiniera. That's pizza.
I know it's authentic Italian and has good flavors or whatever, but no. Give me a pound of cheese and throw some meat on it, please. (https://i.imgur.com/dh89DgI.jpg)
This is gonna piss UTee off right out of the gate.Ketchup on a burger. Lulz. And pickles can go eff themselves.
Top 5 Burger Toppings, Ranked (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/cookingschool/top-5-burger-toppings-ranked/ar-AA1dga3O?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=07eb468910e7429ab26c20c588aecb69&ei=20)
I thought you'd get PO'd before getting to the toppings, after reading this, and not going further.Oh ha! I guess I skipped over that part or tuned it out.
"Burgers are the perfect backyard-barbecue food"
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/358463772_10227960293659904_5281125595841624825_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=5rdeJIL9vhYAX_EYLdz&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfBJaK77SzYclyXwbmLgFvnaoPcz9uP283C_H3F6SDZvCg&oe=64AFC797)🤮🤮
I think you're describing the manufacturing process of hockey pucks.
For engineering undergrad, AAU isn't so much a big deal. It's ABET accreditation that you're looking for. Most licensing boards won't accept transcripts for licensure from a non-ABET-accredited school.bf's point about AAU for engineering undergrad is that, large research investment tends to bring top-flight professors, which ultimately helps the undergrad engineering students.
bf's point about AAU for engineering undergrad is that, large research investment tends to bring top-flight professors, which ultimately helps the undergrad engineering students.Yep. It was extremely rare at UW to have a TA doing instruction. I never had one. Labs are a different story, but even in those the professors were in the room too, most of the time.
And also, licensure for EEs isn't much of a thing, very few get licensed. So it's definitely a discipline-by-discipline matter.
Yep. It was extremely rare at UW to have a TA doing instruction. I never had one. Labs are a different story, but even in those the professors were in the room too, most of the time.Yeah, I don't recall a single TA actually teaching a class at Texas. They were omnipresent for the labs of course.
[img width=487.995 height=499.997]https://i.imgur.com/dQdM9Rb.png[/img]
Kirby isn't so Smart, he's just luckyHe's like Bob Gibson who only pitched when the opponent was in a batting slump.
Yeah, I don't recall a single TA actually teaching a class at Texas. They were omnipresent for the labs of course.During my stay at UT I had no TAs that were actually teaching classes
He's like Bob Gibson who only pitched when the opponent was in a batting slump.Most teams went into slumps when facing him
America's Top States for Business 2023: The full rankings (cnbc.com) (https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/11/americas-top-states-for-business-2023-the-full-rankings.html)so, it's not a RED or Blue thang?!??
The best wings I've had, ever, anywhere, are here, and it isn't close:Here:
Mukja Korean Fried Chicken - Downtown, Atlanta, GA (mukjaatl.com) (https://mukjaatl.com/)
(They are in midtown.)
Here:SAUCES
Sheboygan – Legend Larry's (legendlarrys.com) (https://legendlarrys.com/pages/sheboygan)
Not *quite* rankings, but seems to fit here...Oh yeah? Well this is what I think Europeans look like:
I Asked AI What Europeans Think Americans From Every Single State Look Like, And The Results Are Just Plain Mean (https://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/european-ai-american-list) (https://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/european-ai-american-list)
I think I recognize a few of you?
101!!well, this isn't in America...............
The 101 Best Burgers in America (thedailymeal.com) (https://www.thedailymeal.com/eat/best-burgers-america/)
well, this isn't in America...............No
Burger King is causing a stir in Thailand with its new offering: a burger with no meat and a jaw-dropping amount of cheese.
This week, the Thai operator of the fast food chain introduced what it calls the "real cheeseburger," a bun filled with as many as 20 slices of American cheese.
The item launched on Thai menus Sunday, at a reduced price of 109 Thai baht ($3.1), compared with the usual price of 380 baht ($10.9). It quickly went viral on social media in Thailand, with many users on TikTok posting videos of them trying the new sandwich.
"This is no joke. This is for real," Burger King said in a Sunday social media post.
At one Burger King branch in Bangkok on Tuesday, a shift manager was overheard saying the outlet had to stop taking delivery orders so they could have enough stock left for walk-in diners.
One customer who ordered the cheesy treat told CNN she'd tried it for the first time after seeing it on social media.
Im Jeepetch, a 25-year-old IT engineer, said she loved cheese but "this was a bit too much."
"I could only finish half of it," she said, wiping her mouth with a tissue. "This is an insane amount of cheese added into one burger. Food is good when things are at the right combination."
Im added that she would probably not order the gooey fare again next time: "Other burgers are already good. I think I will go back to my double cheese angus as usual."
Another customer echoed that view, calling the cheeseburger "too intense."
"I may not try it again. I like a few slices of cheese in my burger but not this much," said Alisa Chuengviroj, a 26-year-old entrepreneur who sells skincare products online.
Like Im, she said she had visited the store after seeing many people post about the burger online.
The menu addition is an example of how fast-food franchises around the world are seeking to gain traction by rolling out zany or eye-catching menu options that they hope will spread across social media.
In the United States, Burger King has doubled down on the Whopper, a flame-grilled signature beef burger that has also taken off on platforms such as TikTok through a catchy commercial jingle that came out late last year.
Restaurants are also continuously tailoring their offerings to suit local tastes in different countries. In Thailand, cheese is especially popular among young customers, and it is common for the dairy product to be sprinkled on all kinds of dishes.
Burger King's menu in the country also includes salmon katsu burgers, an apparent nod to consumers' preference for a healthy alternative to beef.
The chain is owned in Thailand by Minor International, a local hospitality group that is one of Asia's largest restaurant owners. The company, which also operates outlets for brands including Dairy Queen and Benihana, did not respond to multiple calls from CNN for comment Tuesday.
(https://i.imgur.com/884sAo0.png)
No ground meat patty and therefore not a burger. Just an ungrilled cheese sandwich.Not even a Cheesehead would eat that trash.
(https://i.imgur.com/mSeBNDf.png)Cool, we only play of these, including 6 of the top 18.
This of course isn't completely bogus ...
I comment to my French friends that the motto of the US is "If some is good, more is better." I think this applies to wines, beers, burgers, houses, trucks, dams, buildings, just about anything.It most definitely does NOT apply to American cheese.
I comment to my French friends that the motto of the US is "If some is good, more is better." I think this applies to wines, beers, burgers, houses, trucks, dams, buildings, just about anything.texas
texasfight
247Sports' Preseason All-SEC coaching staff (https://247sports.com/college/georgia/LongFormArticle/SEC-football-best-coaches-by-position-2023-247Sports-Matrix-Analytical-Solutions-Coach-Rating-index-212783936/?fbclid=IwAR2blz4IxkrtgSY6LfgTm_McqdCwEsvt524R3NMFBi7bYTqJopGIdjtiPoI)Like all of them?
I don't really get it, ranking position coaches etc. Folks rank HCs basically in terms of winning (duh). Saban has won at two places, Meyer won at 4 or 5. I see that as a real thing. But put any of these great coaches at say Kansas State and see how they fare? The current KSU coach might be the best of the lot?
How about a guy who is impressive at "Boise State" and moves somewhere else and is mediocre?
247Sports' Preseason All-SEC coaching staff (https://247sports.com/college/georgia/LongFormArticle/SEC-football-best-coaches-by-position-2023-247Sports-Matrix-Analytical-Solutions-Coach-Rating-index-212783936/?fbclid=IwAR2blz4IxkrtgSY6LfgTm_McqdCwEsvt524R3NMFBi7bYTqJopGIdjtiPoI)From the article, it looks like they've got something akin to a WAR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wins_Above_Replacement) model. Quantify various stats important to performance for a specific coaches "unit", whether that's DBs, the offense as a whole, or the entire team if HC.
I don't really get it, ranking position coaches etc. Folks rank HCs basically in terms of winning (duh). Saban has won at two places, Meyer won at 4 or 5. I see that as a real thing. But put any of these great coaches at say Kansas State and see how they fare? The current KSU coach might be the best of the lot?
How about a guy who is impressive at "Boise State" and moves somewhere else and is mediocre?
Fuddruckers and In&out I'm familiar withFrom that list, I've been to Shake Shack, Culver's, In N Out, and Fuddruckers. The first 3 are fine for fast food burgers, but the only one I'd call out as having noticeably better meat, is Fuddruckers. That was a darn fine chain, but more of a fast casual sit down place, than true fast food like the other three. So it's pretty much apples and oranges.
Culvers is the only one within 90 miles
Haven't been to Culvers in 20 years - since my daughters were young
Is any of it really valid or true? Who knows? But it seems like what they're doing is objective and quantifiable, so it's a lot more than just an eye test.That could be of course, but the assistants, if they do well, seem to move (up) and not stay very long at a place.
That could be of course, but the assistants, if they do well, seem to move (up) and not stay very long at a place.In the article they do state that a coach must have at least 4 seasons coaching that specific unit to be graded. Not 4 years at the same school, mind you, just 4 years at that position.
idk where else to put this, but you can committ 200+ violations, including 18 majors, without a bowl ban.Tennessee Tech better look out. The NCAA is coming!!
So just go to town, I guess.
I think that is part of the point, aside from getting clicks. The old airline magazines would have "Top Ten Doctors of X in the US" which were just commercials.ya think ya know a guy
If I wrote for some mag and some place offered me $1,000 to add their place to a list, I would do it.
I think when the B1G and SEC get to 20, someone might, just might, float the crazy idea of (2) 10-team divisions with round robins with the two champs meeting post season for the conference titleFor me it would depend on the other 9 teams. I'd assume Texas, OU, Arkansas, and A&M would probably all be in the same 10-team sub-conference, but beyond that if we got stuck with the Mississippis and Kentucky and South Carolina or something, I'd pretty much hate it. If that's the option, then I'd much rather rotate and occasionally get Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee on the schedule.
the idea will obviously be shot down by F-ing morons
For me it would depend on the other 9 teams. I'd assume Texas, OU, Arkansas, and A&M would probably all be in the same 10-team sub-conference, but beyond that if we got stuck with the Mississippis and Kentucky and South Carolina or something, I'd pretty much hate it. If that's the option, then I'd much rather rotate and occasionally get Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and Tennessee on the schedule.getting stuck with the mississippis and Kentucky any worse than getting stuck with a couple teams in kansas and Iowa St?
getting stuck with the mississippis and Kentucky any worse than getting stuck with a couple teams in kansas and Iowa St?That ship has already sailed.
or TCU, SMU, & West Virginny?
I'm trying to save the sport here!
my post was regarding in&out burgerThe thread for exceedingly average fast food burgers is... oh wait, this is it.
I will conform.Not gonna lie, having In&Out on that list 3 times is something I can't argue with.
13 Best Fast-Food Burgers, According to Chefs (eatthis.com) (https://www.eatthis.com/best-fast-food-burgers-chefs/)
I've not once been told a burger chain is great, bitten into that burger, and thought "damn, that's a good burger."So out of curiosity, what *is* a good burger to you?
Not In-n-Out, not Whataburger, not 5 Guys, not Culvers, not anywhere.
.
I've not once been told a burger chain is great, bitten into that burger, and thought "damn, that's a good burger."Maybe you just don't like burgers?
Not In-n-Out, not Whataburger, not 5 Guys, not Culvers, not anywhere.
.
And yeah Cincy, a Whopper is about as good as it gets. It's not tiny, has fixins, and I like the ketchup/mayo mix.
But let's say In-n-Out is like 4% better that whatever. The drive-thru is always full. That 4% isn't worth sitting in a line for 27 or 13 or 8 or 18 minutes longer wait.
It's just not.
So out of curiosity, what *is* a good burger to you?All the burgers in question are fine. The issue is someone saying one of them is appreciably better than the others. Sorry, when it's like a 6 oz burger, it has a ceiling. So yeah, a nice meaty steakhouse-style burger is better, obviously, but that's not what they're selling.
Especially if you're not impressed with Five Guys, which isn't similar to the others in that it's not a fast food burger.
Does it need to be a bigger steakhouse-style burger for you?
All the burgers in question are fine. The issue is someone saying one of them is appreciably better than the others. Sorry, when it's like a 6 oz burger, it has a ceiling. So yeah, a nice meaty steakhouse-style burger is better, obviously, but that's not what they're selling.Gotta disagree strongly here. A steakhouse burger is bigger, but in no universe is it obviously better.
What's the bottom ten fast food burgers?Kyrstal and WC are 85% bread, so the quality of the rest is irrelevant.
worst to first
- Krystal (White Castle knockoff)
- White Castle
- Rally's/Checkers (used to be among the best)
- Burger King
- McDonald's
- Jack in the Box
- Hardee's/Karl's Jr
I dunno, I kinda like all the others.
Wood might be just for show, but cooking surface makes a difference on pizza re: crust consistency.
We went to Grana the other day and ordered two pizzas which were quite good, it was happy hour so they were $10 each. Oddly they said one of their wood burning stoves was out. With pizza, I think heat is heat, the wood part is for show.
I like Red Robin.I used to, but the last two times I've been there, in two different locations, it was REALLY underwhelming. Granted, that was pre-pandemic, so maybe those were outliers and they're better now. But I found it to be a rather bland and weak patty, and everything else was just general "shitty chain restaurant" quality as well.
Who has the best breakfasts (chains)?
What's the bottom ten fast food burgers?I won't eat at any of them, not in&out either
worst to first
- Krystal (White Castle knockoff)
- White Castle
- Rally's/Checkers (used to be among the best)
- Burger King
- McDonald's
- Jack in the Box
- Hardee's/Karl's Jr
I dunno, I kinda like all the others.
I understand why they have these conference shindigs, and such "rankings" are OK with me I guess, but they don't seem to have a great predictive power in my experience.That only matters if you go back and see how you did. Too busy making "way too early top 25" for the next year to do that!
(https://i.imgur.com/qC5E7NS.png)
Burgers: There’s a 90 percent chance you could be eating something betterYou need to eat better burgers
I used to, but the last two times I've been there, in two different locations, it was REALLY underwhelming. Granted, that was pre-pandemic, so maybe those were outliers and they're better now. But I found it to be a rather bland and weak patty, and everything else was just general "shitty chain restaurant" quality as well.It's been probably 4-5 years since I've been there.
Which might be fine if Applebee's or TGI Fridays serves a weak burger, but Red Robin is a burger restaurant. I'd hope they could even get that right, but they failed.
Who has the best breakfasts (chains)?Any place that will serve me a burger.
It's been probably 4-5 years since I've been there.I was at Red Robin last week for my free bday burger. Blue Ribbon burger
They are all in NATO, but that doesn't relate to their military spending. I would guess best food, except for Germany being so high.Most pickpocketing.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/360136831_736594808475896_7002423447627867966_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=UG_ULyW00_oAX9CHZxC&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfCDm3QaeeAqmZ8OTe73lexuM48iQpkVcuvvi73Ulgogzw&oe=64C1D8E9)Boise should not be on these lists. 342 games all-time, compared to 1000+ for everyone else. Not to mention the scheduling disparity.
Boise should not be on these lists. 342 games all-time, compared to 1000+ for everyone else. Not to mention the scheduling disparity.This response is deeply amusing.
This response is deeply amusing.Why?
How do you rank Fro's rants in this thread?pot stirring
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fi-6eSOWYAQPV7T?format=jpg&name=small)The photos for 4 and 6 are reversed. Good job, Barstool!
The Worst States Driving The Climate CrisisNow do China and India.
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/ (https://247wallst.com/special-report/2022/09/15/the-worst-states-driving-the-climate-crisis/11/)
All the scholarly ones, I see.Basically energy producers, Wyoming is by far the largest coal producer. ND, shale oil, LA refineries...
Why?Because it’s basically standings for teams currently in FBS. It’s dry and not notable.
Damn Texas @ Bama in week 2 that'll grab some clicks.Would love to win in Tuscaloosa. Horns held their own in Austin last year, we'll see how it goes this time around.
Longhorns - Welcome Back.......but not too much. Be nice to kick the walker out from under Nick
Would love to win in Tuscaloosa. Horns held their own in Austin last year, we'll see how it goes this time around.Hope we dont have the same refs
Hope we dont have the same refsSame here. Those were B12 refs, I'd much rather use SEC refs.
Because it’s basically standings for teams currently in FBS. It’s dry and not notable.I don't think you know what triggered means. I'm a dude typing calmly at my computer. Same as the rest of ya.
And being triggered by standings to demand the particular sort of segregation you can’t let go of is funny to me.
That's a fun list, I don't know what the CH team is. Minnesota?Not sure what the "N" is musta been leather helmut era
Chicago is up 64%? Huh.Not so much Chicago proper as it is the areas surrounding it - and that list includes NW Indiana and SE Wisconsin. Virtually anywhere you can access Chicago via commuter rail. It's vast.
Analysis: Construction slowing across U.S., but Atlanta bucks trend | Urbanize Atlanta (https://atlanta.urbanize.city/post/construction-slowing-across-america-atl-bucks-trend-study)
That's a fun list, I don't know what the CH team is. Minnesota?Holy Cross
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/362948590_326836666341657_8422144381183281822_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=tPvkHMIMH1YAX8ivtYv&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfBya6Pfe52Kh9R2vQJNyZuqAynSgwF1Cya14cSmbrbcmg&oe=64C6B109)Georgia could play games this season against Maryland, Nebraska, Wake and Houston and erase those immediately.
I disagree with a lot of this list.Basically every state is worth visiting. I suppose if one wanted to give the clickbait list some credit, 10 states would have to be the “most boring.” But it remains a pointless exercise.
Top 10 States Voted as the Most Boring to Visit in the U.S. by Americans (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/tripideas/top-10-states-voted-as-the-most-boring-to-visit-in-the-u-s-by-americans/ss-AA1es4SA?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=dadb178068f54812979758f096d9dce7&ei=7#image=1)
Basically every state is worth visiting. I suppose if one wanted to give the clickbait list some credit, 10 states would have to be the “most boring.” But it remains a pointless exercise.Yeah it's obviously clickbait and not worth a serious discussion. Also seems targeted largely at the midwest, so it smells of some coastal snobbery.
Yeah it's obviously clickbait and not worth a serious discussion. Also seems targeted largely at the midwest, so it smells of some coastal snobbery.They are also wrong about Wisconsin's geography. Very wrong.
Yeah it's obviously clickbait and not worth a serious discussion. Also seems targeted largely at the midwest, so it smells of some coastal snobbery.Are you saying a poll could be influenced by folks living where most folks live?
Which ten would be most interesting is more interesting, interestingly.Agree. I like history and scenery so my ten most interesting states to visit might be:
They are also wrong about Wisconsin's geography. Very wrong.
"Wisconsin lacks geographical diversity, so it is quite boring."
Are you saying a poll could be influenced by folks living where most folks live?
Agree. I like history and scenery so my ten most interesting states to visit might be:That is close to my list as well, I think. I might swap NC for PA. Wyoming would get a thought or three.
Alaska
Hawaii
New York
Massachusetts
Pennsylvania
Virginia/Maryland (Washington DC)
Colorado
California
That is close to my list as well, I think. I might swap NC for PA. Wyoming would get a thought or three.Yup I almost put NC, lots of history and the coast and then the Smoky Mountains alongside Tennessee.
Eh. I've visited a number of states on that list for work trips, and wouldn't voluntarily go again if I wasn't paid to.Coastal snobbery in full effect. ;)
Coastal snobbery in full effect. ;)LOL.
[img width=274.381 height=397]https://i.imgur.com/vQhNii1.png[/img]Did Tennessee reduce their capacity at some point? I seem to recall theirs being bigger than the Horseshoe.
The 25 biggest college football stadiums in the country | NCAA.com (https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/article/2018-07-30/25-biggest-college-football-stadiums-country)
8 over 100K
The 25 biggest college football stadiums in the country | NCAA.com (https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/article/2018-07-30/25-biggest-college-football-stadiums-country)
8 over 100K
Interesting. The Cotton Bowl's capacity is 92,100 so it would slot in at 10th, just behind Georgia and just ahead of UCLA/Rose Bowl.It is interesting the way they group/cluster:
It is interesting the way they group/cluster:
First you have Michigan and Penn State way out front at 107,601 and 106,572 respectively.
Next come six stadiums that are all within a tight range from #3 Ohio State at 102,780 to #8 Texas at 100,119. aTm, LSU, TN, and Bama are all between tOSU and UT.
Then there is a big drop-off down to Georgia at 92,746. After that each successive next biggest is within a few thousand seats or so.
Did Tennessee reduce their capacity at some point? I seem to recall theirs being bigger than the Horseshoe.Yes, they did and under the former train wreck of administration who went right at the profits and instant profits instead of long term return... they put in luxury boxes and sold them for rediculous amounts.
I guess this is a question for @Drew4UTk (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1) ?
Several of the more recent stadium renovations around the country have actually reduced total capacity while increasing suite/club type seating, because that brings in a lot more cash.Yep. Wisconsin has gone from 83,000 to 76,000. Quality seats over quantity of seats. And more $$$, of course.
At Texas our recent South Endzone renovation didn't reduce the total capacity, but it also didn't increase it. If they'd just bowled in the South Endzone to match the North Endzone, the capacity would have been around 120,000. But they decided to go a different direction and built it out with a lot of luxury suites, clubs, private loges, etc. Those bring in a lot more revenue than just standard seats for Joe Fan do.
Several of the more recent stadium renovations around the country have actually reduced total capacity while increasing suite/club type seating, because that brings in a lot more cash.
At Texas our recent South Endzone renovation didn't reduce the total capacity, but it also didn't increase it. If they'd just bowled in the South Endzone to match the North Endzone, the capacity would have been around 120,000. But they decided to go a different direction and built it out with a lot of luxury suites, clubs, private loges, etc. Those bring in a lot more revenue than just standard seats for Joe Fan do.
Yes, they did and under the former train wreck of administration who went right at the profits and instant profits instead of long term return... they put in luxury boxes and sold them for rediculous amounts.Quote from: 847badgerfan 8/1/2023, 1:14:59 PM
It won't be long before many of these go empty.Yup. The universities are pricing their future fans out of the market. My dad took my siblings and me to numerous football games per year, it cost a couple of bucks. I haven't taken my kids to a Texas home game in 4 or 5 years, it's just too expensive. I've only been to 4 home games from 2019 to now, and that's because I had a friend with a free ticket (seats that he bought for his corporation to use as a perk for clients).
Rabid fans are no longer being made - at least not like they used to. Kids today show up to be seen. The game doesn't matter to most of them.
And those are your future customers.
Yup. The universities are pricing their future fans out of the market. My dad took my siblings and me to numerous football games per year, it cost a couple of bucks. I haven't taken my kids to a Texas home game in 4 or 5 years, it's just too expensive. I've only been to 4 home games from 2019 to now, and that's because I had a friend with a free ticket (seats that he bought for his corporation to use as a perk for clients).Agreed.
College football attendance is on a decade-plus decline, although 2022 actually saw an uptick in attendance. But I don't see that as being sustainable, the trend is the opposite direction, and has been for quite a while.
can you walk to this place?We could, it's probably 2.5 miles or so. We don't usually cross the freeway. That area is interesting though, it's "West Midtown" and used to be just older light industry, much of which is still around, but it has exploded in growth in the past decade, cheaper property, close to Tech, horrible traffic though. Were we younger we'd probably be interested in living around there more than we are now. It would be cheaper rentwise.
Pijiu Belly - 678 10th St NW, Atlanta, GA 30318
https://pijiubelly.com/ (https://pijiubelly.com/)
can you walk to this place?The only words mandarin Chinese words I know are ni hao, pijiu, and xiè xie.
Pijiu Belly - 678 10th St NW, Atlanta, GA 30318
https://pijiubelly.com/ (https://pijiubelly.com/)
PFF ranks Top 50 college football players in 2023 (on3.com) (https://www.on3.com/news/pff-ranks-top-50-college-football-players-in-2023/?fbclid=IwAR0ufG7d0YTg6XwB2L4QlfkOvK4ejJQIxxVLzbYAZ54Fb8K8EF89EhlY5Go)Brock Bowers is legit awesome and the best TE in 'Merica, but there is no way in hell he should be above Marvin Harrison. The only dude I'm taking over Marv is the guy they got #1 - Caleb Williams.
Not really that interesting to me.
Can confirmGetting the idea Mezzetta paid handsomely for the results as they were at the top for Pesto too.Move along nothing to see here :017:
https://www.myrecipes.com/taste-tests/best-marinara-sauce
I love me some Blake Corum- who is #4 on their list. Donovan Edwards is better than Blake Corum. Donovan Edwards isn't even on the top 50 list. Make that make sense.Ya Edwards is the guy that gives me the heeby-jeebies,inside/outside down field catches - tough to matchup. I'd spy him
Getting the idea Mezzetta paid handsomely for the results as they were at the top for Pesto too.Move along nothing to see here :017:Lol maybe but their spicy sauce is far and away the best jarred sauce I've had. I used to get Carfagna's but not more.
Ya Edwards is the guy that gives me the heeby-jeebies,inside/outside down field catches - tough to matchup. I'd spy himsomething to consider- Donovan Edwards missed the UConn game and the Maryland game with a knee injury and only had 15 carries for 90 yards in the 2 OOC creampuff games to start the season he played in...he barely played vs Neb and missed the Illinois game bc of a hand injury- which means he did virtually all of his damage vs P5 teams despite dealing with a nagging knee injury and playing the last 3 games of the season with a cast on his broken right hand. He's right handed. Still averaged 7.5 YPC and racked up 991 yards rushing- with the bulk of that coming in games vs OSU/PSU/Purdue (B1G West champ)/TCU. Not exactly like he was padding stats vs creampuffs.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/363778762_811468340408247_5060753216292898113_n.jpg?stp=cp6_dst-jpg&_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=unzsk-UdqskAX8d0jjx&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfCp3vdm1ZKGsmUfbnbn-Q-0AgdnoIRb1hBudKyDipg_ug&oe=64D62AC4)JJ had better stats in his first year starting than 3 of those guys and outside of Caleb Williams not sure any one of those guys is more physically gifted than him in terms of size/athletic ability + arm talent.
maybe he thinks the O-coordinator will just run the ball off tackle too much?could be.
Tommy Nobis is way underrated,he was right there with Butkus even quicker going sideline-sideline. And IMHO Horns wins it's 2nd NC under Mack if McCoy isn't hurt vs BamaButkus was a 2-time AA in college, at CENTER. He also played linebacker.
One thing I try and do with "all time greats" is just appreciate them for how they played and not worry overly about whether A should be ranked ahead of B. I personally think that takes the enjoyment out of it and generates arguments for no reason.Some people enjoy the arguments.
Some people enjoy the arguments.Best ever at Wisconsin, yes.
.
One could argue that Jonathan Taylor is the best RB ever.
Or that Terrell Buckley was better than Deion at FSU.....except that for whatever reason, a vast majority of people are wholely unable to separate college and pro.
Take that, TCU!And OU!!
And OU!!Poooooorrrrrrrr soooooonnnneeeeeeerrrrssssssssss.
OUch!!!
Jerry Kill???Heh.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/366606472_835705801251435_6580505596228765441_n.jpg?stp=cp6_dst-jpg&_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=7f8c78&_nc_ohc=ucg_fhHRb3cAX9fOZGU&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfARbYPkqWM9UTLk333VZkdnG-OpAW_KW68_nQRCtNkL0g&oe=64DB94F1)Every single sports-related social media ranking is a horseshit attempt at getting outrage clicks.
It's a bit interesting to me how the MB is a relatively Big Deal with some programs and a distinct afterthought with others.
College football's top 100 players for 2023 - ESPN (https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38122924/top-100-players-caleb-williams-maye-bowers-2023)list has it's issues- as will every list like this...but it's 10x better than that garbage 247 tried to shit out lol.
More click bait, don't bother. It's an OK list, I guess, but some of these players of course will fail to shine and others will.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F4FJQeAWoAAKt1B?format=png&name=900x900)I'd put Tenn and UGA on there before Tenn and KY. And no ND? Hmmm.
I'd put Tenn and UGA on there before Tenn and KY. And no ND? Hmmm.what border state school do they play regularly?
MSU was more often than M, but now that they have to play all of those ACC games, the ones against the B1G schools waned.
yup, this is what folks that want rotating schedules in 18-team conferences don't understandrealignment has killed some great ones....RIP Nebraska-OU.
killing of rivalries
yup, this is what folks that want rotating schedules in 18-team conferences don't understandWell you protect the true rivalries, obviously.
killing of rivalries
Pitt-WVU has no business being on any list....sorry.yes, when you limit the annual opponents to 3 or maybe 4 protected rivalries, when one or two go lopsided for a decade it's not a rivalry any longer.
UGA-UF should be #3....why is that behind UGA-Auburn? Da fk?
BAMA-Tenn was a really good rivalry until Tennessee went into the freaking tank and sucked ass for eons. Maybe it's coming back?
Well you protect the true rivalries, obviously.yup, and as some old rivalries fade, new ones aren't created
But it doesn't make for creating new ones, I'll grant you that.
Yeah I've never really thought of MSU-ND as a rivalry although they're met 79 times.M-ND have a weird ass relationship/history. Lots of pettiness and bad blood there on both sides. They are natural born rivals though- just makes so much sense for them to play each other every year- yet they don't. There were some great M-ND games in the 80s, 90s, 00s, and 2010s. Even in the 2000 and 2010s when one team was bad or they were both bad- the games were usually very good.
UM-ND seems like more of one, but they've only played something like 43 times. And it seems like most of the really good rivalries formed much of their lore during the "Golden Era" of college football in the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, but Michigan and ND only played 4 times in those entire 4 decades
M-ND have a weird ass relationship/history. Lots of pettiness and bad blood there on both sides. They are natural born rivals though- just makes so much sense for them to play each other every year- yet they don't. There were some great M-ND games in the 80s, 90s, 00s, and 2010s. Even in the 2000 and 2010s when one team was bad or they were both bad- the games were usually very good.
I do wish they'd play every year. Even though I hate them. Not gonna lie. It's two of the biggest brands in the sport- and it's good for the sport when they play each other.
Maybe ND will someday join the Big 100.I say take ND and one of Miami/UNC/FSU/Clem, call it the B1G20 and put a bow on it call it a day
I say take ND and one of Miami/UNC/FSU/Clem, call it the B1G20 and put a bow on it call it a dayI think they are going to 24.
I think they are going to 24.I'd be cool with that. think it's stupid af that we have like 197 FBS teams as it is....there's no need for that.
So, Stanford, ND, Miami, FSU, UNC and UVA.
4 6 team divisions, one divisional championship game and a final.
Then the MNC game against the SEC24 winner.
I'd be cool with that. think it's stupid af that we have like 197 FBS teams as it is....there's no need for that.I don't know about "right" but we are where we are and we ain't going back.
48 teams in two super conferences with a playoff sounds about right....
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F4FJQeAWoAAKt1B?format=png&name=900x900)
Pitt-WVU has no business being on any list....sorry.
UGA-UF should be #3....why is that behind UGA-Auburn? Da fk?
BAMA-Tenn was a really good rivalry until Tennessee went into the freaking tank and sucked ass for eons. Maybe it's coming back?
Screw ND.Lol I hate em too but I do think they'd be a huge addition for the B1G and ultimately I want the B1G to get better and catch up to the SEC. I mean the brands the B1G would have....Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, Penn State, USC, and ND? God damn man. They bring TV eye balls. TV eye balls tuning in is what will bring the money now more than ever with all the cord cutting- can't force BTN on basic cable packages in footprint states anymore. Then also having Washington, Oregon, Wisconsin, Iowa, UCLA....not bad man...not bad at all. That's a pretty nice lineup.
If someday there is a BIG 100, I hope ND is 101.
What are the chances ND ends up in the SEC?The chances are about the same as them ending up in the Big 100. Whoever offers the best deal wins.
I've no clue --- I have pondered it recently, however.
Anyone pining for that Colorado St. / Wyoming border war? WTFHell I'd go if it was closer,I'm sure they know how to tailgate
Hell I'd go if it was closer,I'm sure they know how to tailgate
They'd better know how. Cause they sure don't know how to play football.Following hard luck sport teams in Cleveland for over 5 decades ensure That. Since there's not much talk of play offs or success well might as well drink
(https://i.imgur.com/TKL1lzx.jpg)Ok, fine. I agree with Fro. No God.
Is Cleveland mustard the brown and spicy type?Yes. It's delicious.
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/366738661_869469274545374_4010328093083292777_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=GXA0PEXFXN0AX-a55Kd&_nc_oc=AQnQsUP_DjOBHTKRHx6A_A3dNtB2TS_lX_MAt4Za4kV1DjSmJcRFldWmbPyOHkQWocA&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfAy7PuGO521VQb206A8um3BBa93nKirbQFiJJzo2QRq0A&oe=64EB94E1)Colston Loveland is about to blow up this year imo. SO much talent and potential, really flashed at the end of the season as a true freshman. From a raw talent standpoint as a receiver- don't think I've ever seen anyone have as much at TE at Michigan. Major upside that one has- he's got 1st rd NFL draft kind of talent.
sorry, no michigan menAaron Lewis started out at Michigan....do we get credit for that?
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/368236401_871484674343834_2786315247771117051_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=qj81wH2NCqEAX9IKAHM&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=00_AfB_V9QWujAP7MwCUylt1d7-8jJLBZXD43VJUsz462L_Hg&oe=64EBC650)
Tulane in the Top Ten?Sooooo either have a classic look from grainy-footage, silent-film days OR do a powder-blue thing.
UAB doesn't even get honorable mention?
No Bama?
Madness!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F4OmMAXXYAEqk_w?format=webp&name=small)
Tulane in the Top Ten?
UAB doesn't even get honorable mention?
No Bama?
Madness!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F4OmMAXXYAEqk_w?format=webp&name=small)
Jake Butt's top tight ends......that's a Chip n Dale's reference, no?Wait til he gets to the wide recievers
Penn St., Kansas St. should be 1 and 2.as long as it's not orange or baby shit orange like the Horns
Yeah, no Penn State? The CFB version of the Yankee Pinstripes?I’ll be honest. I love it. Not necessarily because I agree with every team on the list but because the list is unique. I’ve said this before on here, but one of my pet peeves about best uniforms lists is I think it’s too influenced by the success of the team.
Did they just draw names out of a hat?
as long as it's not orange or baby shit orange like the HornsIf your baby ever shits burnt orange you need to hit the ER ASAP.
If your baby ever shits burnt orange you need to hit the ER ASAP.When I was very young I got into my moms lip stick and ate several of them
If your baby ever shits burnt orange you need to hit the ER ASAP.BEVO shits like that
Some rankings, for CDawg.Yeah, a good example of a pointless ranking to me. A good coach is simply a coach of a team that wins a lot, duh. He might be a mediocre coach elsewhere.
10 best coaches ahead of 2023 college football season, ranked (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/10-best-coaches-ahead-of-2023-college-football-season-ranked/ar-AA1fOqQS?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6b66b9c0a7334d5fa4d93d669c39f922&ei=10)
Brad Crawford can suck it!yeah, he's an obvious dumbass. Michigan and Notre Dame are both easily top 5 national brands in college football. Dumbfk has Michigan at #16 and ND at #12. Lol.
Well, it's in keeping with the theme of this thread, e.g., how many things get "ranked" by someone, whether they make any sense or not, often not, and whether the rankings even mean anything at all useful or notable.yeah except measuring which brands are the biggest is a very easy and objective thing to do- and there is no subjectivity involved whatsoever.
Now, someone might define "biggest brands" with something related and quantative, like money spent buying shirts etc. Maybe that list would be, well, a list.
If someone posted that, though, they wouldn't get much attention beyond "Well, yeah...". By posting a stupid ranking, one gets noticed.very true.
yeah, he's an obvious dumbass. Michigan and Notre Dame are both easily top 5 national brands in college football. Dumbfk has Michigan at #16 and ND at #12. Lol.Having A&M above Texas really brings the lulz as well. No offense intended to our good friend Gigem.
Alabama is not in the AP top 10. Clemson is unranked.Brands don't change nearly as quickly as the current football landscape. If it did, then we'd have no designation for "helmet" teams.
The world is changing.
Looks like they weigh MOV over total cupcakes pretty highly.ESPN FPI and their playoff predictor or whatever the f it's called are both just god awful. but it's from ESPN, so of course it's god awful.
Hopkins is a Lacrosse member only.I think my point about the silliness of that infographic is made. :)
ND is a member for hockey.
I think my point about the silliness of that infographic is made. :)
I think my point about the silliness of that infographic is made. :)The point of my post was to simply show that the B1G has a collection of pretty good/great schools.
The point of my post was to simply show that the B1G has a collection of pretty good/great schools.I'm just giving you a hard time. :)
Including Hopkins in that graphic was just plain dumb, but I didn't make it.
One of your (and B.R.A.D.) favorite pastimes.For some reason Fearless tends to go easy on you and leave you out of his pot stirring. Somebody has to make up the difference.
I rather enjoy it.
Looks like they weigh MOV over total cupcakes pretty highly.Why wouldn’t they? (I assume there’s a specific team this is aimed at?)
Why wouldn’t they? (I assume there’s a specific team this is aimed at?)Because MOV over complete cupcakes is a worthless basis for ranking and comparison?
For some reason Fearless tends to go easy on you and leave you out of his pot stirring. Somebody has to make up the difference.I like Badge
Because MOV over complete cupcakes is a worthless basis for ranking and comparison?If MOV over cupcakes isn't an important component, then why is everyone freaking out over Alabama?
And yeah, I'm looking at Oklahoma.
(https://i.imgur.com/a67OQ1f.png)Go Gators!
10 hottest chicks in the 90s:Me too.
1. Cindy Crawford
2. Catherine Zeta-Jones
3. Sharon Stone
4. Claudia Schiffer
5. Shania Twain
6. Pam Anderson
7. Demi Moore
8. Elizabeth Hurley
9. Denise Richards
10. Salma Hayek
Others receiving votes: Alyssa Milano, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Cameron Diaz, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Elle Macpherson
90s Top 10 (https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/top-10-sexiest-women-per-decade-1990s)
I have a lot of opinions on this....
10 hottest chicks in the 90s:
1. Cindy Crawford
2. Catherine Zeta-Jones
3. Sharon Stone
4. Claudia Schiffer
5. Shania Twain
6. Pam Anderson
7. Demi Moore
8. Elizabeth Hurley
9. Denise Richards
10. Salma Hayek
Others receiving votes: Alyssa Milano, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Cameron Diaz, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Elle Macpherson
90s Top 10 (https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/top-10-sexiest-women-per-decade-1990s)
I have a lot of opinions on this....
The 1960s may be all time greatest:disagree. it's just like with athletes. hell with everything. the new ones are better today.
disagree. it's just like with athletes. hell with everything. the new ones are better today.Eh. Again, I'll respond with:
There are lovely ladies of every decade. It's good to be alive.
There are lovely ladies of every decade. It's good to be alive.Same with college campuses.
10 hottest chicks in the 90s:I could write a full essay on this, but I'll just comment on #1.
1. Cindy Crawford
2. Catherine Zeta-Jones
3. Sharon Stone
4. Claudia Schiffer
5. Shania Twain
6. Pam Anderson
7. Demi Moore
8. Elizabeth Hurley
9. Denise Richards
10. Salma Hayek
Others receiving votes: Alyssa Milano, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Cameron Diaz, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Elle Macpherson
90s Top 10 (https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/top-10-sexiest-women-per-decade-1990s)
I have a lot of opinions on this....
I could write a full essay on this, but I'll just comment on #1.I would
She was the popular supermodel of the decade. But I wouldn't put her at the top of any "hottest" list.
Same with college campuses.
I wouldOver prime Denise Richards?
(https://i.imgur.com/6SurHFv.png)
But she tries to hog the tv when her team plays at the same time as mine, so she doesn't get to be on the list.Well after all, UT is more important than LSU.
Over prime Denise Richards?YUP!
Yeah, where ya going to find another skinny brunette with B-cups? :57:Like Cindy Crawford? They are still looking, my man.
lolHey, I get it. Maybe the girl you like down the street is just as hot as Cindy Crawford. But maybe not.
Put her in the swimsuit edition and give her some commercials and she's the end-all, be-all.
There are 10,000 random youtube/tik tok/etc chicks just as hot. But they're anonymous. So they're magically not as hot.
Pop culture indoctrination.
Hey, I get it. Maybe the girl you like down the street is just as hot as Cindy Crawford. But maybe not.Every graduating class in every school in the country has a Cindy Crawford.
Every graduating class in every school in the country has a Cindy Crawford.I don't recall my graduating class having Cindy Crawford.
I don't recall my graduating class having Cindy Crawford.53 kids in my graduating class of 1981
53 kids in my graduating class of 1981How many Cindy Crawfords
lolWell then maybe they're bimbos for not capitalizing & recognize opportunity ya know like NIL
Put her in the swimsuit edition and give her some commercials and she's the end-all, be-all.
There are 10,000 random youtube/tik tok/etc chicks just as hot. But they're anonymous. So they're magically not as hot.
Pop culture indoctrination.
Not sure I get the point of arguing about something that's objectively not objective.I disagree vehemently ... I think.
Not sure I get the point of arguing about something that's objectively not objective.What else would we do then?
What's an example of an entirely objective matter about which one can argue?Oh, I suppose there are some areas of politics, or more specifically public policy, where we could do this.
What's an example of an entirely objective matter about which one can argue?The existence of the supernatural?
What's an example of an entirely objective matter about which one can argue?
The existence of the supernatural?
It's perfect, because it seems to be unknowable, which means that although it's perfectly objective (it exists or it doesn't) we can argue it forever.
Those items have objective aspects about which no one argues. They do argue about interpretation, "opinion", which is subjective.
I suppose it's semantics.
It's my favorite subject.It's a quick study. Here is the entirety of falsifiable evidence of the supernatural: ______.
Not sure I get the point of arguing about something that's objectively not objective.When does it become an argument, though?
It's a quick study. Here is the entirety of falsifiable evidence of the supernatural: ______.
What evidence?
10 hottest chicks in the 90s:I could get behind every chick on this list, and the others receiving votes too.
1. Cindy Crawford
2. Catherine Zeta-Jones
3. Sharon Stone
4. Claudia Schiffer
5. Shania Twain
6. Pam Anderson
7. Demi Moore
8. Elizabeth Hurley
9. Denise Richards
10. Salma Hayek
Others receiving votes: Alyssa Milano, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Cameron Diaz, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Elle Macpherson
90s Top 10 (https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/top-10-sexiest-women-per-decade-1990s)
I have a lot of opinions on this....
Every graduating class in every school in the country has a Cindy Crawford.Sure, there are 10,000 girls almost as pretty as her....but close don't count.
But,
does she want to rely on her looks as a career?
does she get "discovered?"
does she work her way up while being poor?
does she catch a big break?
does a famous photographer/editor think she's special?
does she get in front of enough eyeballs to become a "thing?"
does she get lucky?
.
Cindy Crawford wins a popularity contest, hands down.
Her story is special. Her looks are not (when compared to models, etc - of course).
And I'm willing to concede that others' opinions on this entirely subjective matter could differ, and they might pick Cindy over Denise in that case.You're well paid but you don't make that much
Obviously, the best answer is:
(https://i.imgur.com/DE6jyJG.png)
53 kids in my graduating class of 1981
How many Cindy CrawfordsFearless had the girls from Hee Haw - including Minnie Pearl and Lulu Roman - SA-LUTE
I've heard alot about God and Jesus at the Cleveland-Pittsburgh Games and the Race Track
In fact, his preordained plan thus must be that I was to be an atheist, to *NOT* accept Jesus as my savior, and his plan is responsible for that and every other thing that has occurred in my life. I have no autonomy in any of it.
If God accepts that he has made me flawed as I am, then a benevolent God would not punish me with eternal damnation simply for doing what he literally created me to do, and cannot choose otherwise.
Fearless had the girls from Hee Haw - including Minnie Pearl and Lulu Roman - SA-LUTE(https://victoriahallman.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/article.jpg)
That's a broad question, so I'd probably narrow it down to categories. There's literally dozens, but there are some popular ones that have been debated for decades and even centuries now. Start with what's commonly known as the cosmological argument; the beginning of the universe. This wasn't always heavily corroborated by the latest scientific findings (think: Einstein, who is relatively recent, and initially preferred a static model of the universe), but the universe having an absolute beginning is widely accepted now. There's a ton of evidence for that, from both the scientific and philosophy communities. But what does it mean? There's the rub. Something not in or part of the universe caused the universe to come into being, but what? "Something not in or part of the universe" would be one working definition of "supernatural" so I'd argue that it doesn't really matter which view you side with, it technically is "supernatural." Both sides are forced to extrapolate a list of qualities that must necessarily belong to such a cause, but they don't agree on all of them, or who or what it is. One example is Stephen Hawking's view later in his life, that gravity caused the universe to come into being. If you wade through the details of his explanation, what he actually does is assign to gravity nearly all the qualities a religious person would assign to a deity, excepting personhood. So there's a lot of agreement on the evidence, but different conclusions drawn. This is a 50,000 ft. overview....I'm skipping a literal ton here, like I said, it's one of my favorite topics.So an argument isn't evidence. Evidence is evidence. I know, I know, it sounds like I'm throwing your big, lost post out the window, but I'm really not.
A second popular argument is the teleological argument, or what could be called the design argument. The evidence not in dispute is an ever-growing, very long list of characteristics about the universe that are extraordinarily fine-tined for there to be a universe at all, and in particular one that can support life. The meaning, again, is in dispute. Briefly, an atheistic view tends to argue one of two things, either it's blind chance that everything is fine-tuned the way that it is, or they appeal to a multiverse theory, stating that this universe is one of many, possibly an infinite number, and so one of them somewhere was bound to have these characteristics. The theist view will of course argue for a grand designer, so to speak. But they're arguing from the same evidence.
A third popular one is the moral argument. This one is different in a couple of ways. First, it's nearly strictly philosophical as it doesn't appeal to science like the first two. Second, the evidence sort of is and isn't in dispute. What I mean by that is the "evidence" in this case is an objective morality, something that transcends our opinions and is true whether one believes it or not, and atheistic views often deny that while theistic views tend to (not always) affirm it. Where it gets tricky is that when atheist philosophers are really pressed on it, they often do ultimately want to affirm objective morality, meaning they see some things as actually, truly wrong, which are not just matters of opinion, evolution, or societal norms. But they either fail to see the contradiction, or they admit they have a problem and that the problem may not be intractable and shouldn't be given up on. Or put another way, theists frequently argue that there is an objective morality to our existence and that the source is supernatural, whereas atheists frequently argue either there is no objective morality, or that there is, and try to advocate for alternative explanations outside of something supernatural (though they admirably admit shortcomings here, which is why I say their position is sometimes that while they have a problem, they shouldn't give up on it). So it's a little disingenuous to say there's evidence not in dispute in that realm. Nevertheless, there is evidence either side produces for why there is or isn't objective morality, and then of course the different views drawn from either of those positions.
Those are just the most popular 3 areas, in my opinion, where there's evidence--generally agreed upon--but differing conclusions. There are a ton of other areas of arguments with the same thing.....some evidence from some discipline which theists and atheists try to explain in different ways. Alvin Plantinga, formerly of Notre Dame, successfully defended over two dozen arguments in his career, many of which get extremely esoteric and beyond what the average layman can follow. He's just one of many, and of course there are atheistic proponents such as Daniel Dennett and many others, who attempt to tackle the same subjects, the same evidence as it were, and show that atheism more reasonably explains it.
What I've always wondered...Maybe he should've created a universe with no atheists.
- God is omniscient and omnipotent.
- God knows the past, the present, and the future (being omniscient). To think that God's knowledge is limited by the constraints of traveling through geological time is not giving him true omniscience.
- This would imply that God knows in advance every decision I make in my life, because for me to make any decision contrary to God's knowledge would make Him wrong, and being omniscient he cannot be wrong.
- This means that there cannot be such a thing as "free will", because I can only make the decisions God has already known I will make.
- God created the universe. He is omnipotent, so he could choose to make the universe in any way he likes.
- He clearly liked the one he made, hence why the religious always talk about things, bad or good, being "God's plan".
- Since he is omniscient and omnipotent, his PLAN for the universe is such that every sin I commit, he has preordained that I will commit, and that I have no free will to do (or think) otherwise.
- In fact, his preordained plan thus must be that I was to be an atheist, to *NOT* accept Jesus as my savior, and his plan is responsible for that and every other thing that has occurred in my life. I have no autonomy in any of it.
Which leads me to...
- If God accepts that he has made me flawed as I am, then a benevolent God would not punish me with eternal damnation simply for doing what he literally created me to do, and cannot choose otherwise.
- If God, knowing he full well could have created a universe where I either didn't commit the sins he is holding me accountable for, or chosen to create a universe where I never existed (and thus didn't need to be punished), STILL chooses to punish me with eternal damnation? Well, then God is an ass.
If it's the former, then I'll see y'all in heaven. If it's the latter, well, who would want to believe in that asshole God anyway?
What is meant by "donor"? They have donors? They are donors?Caption is misleading. It's the amount of money donated TO each school over the years.
One of these is not like the others.two them are not like the others. Oregon and Oklahoma State have no business ever being good, but they both have old crusty geriatric prehistoric aged bored billionaires who are super-fans and way too into their college teams being good so they've both went overboard and to the extreme as fuuuuucccch trying to buy success for their teams. At that point- just go buy an NFL team bro.
(https://i.imgur.com/wZhC2DZ.png)
Regarding the existence of God...
I think about this a lot. If, and that's a big IF, a God creates the universe and all that is within it including the laws of physics and all the atoms and quarks and dark energy and the whole shebang I've always wondered.....where did God come from? I mean, alpha and omega aside, how did he come into being......is there a higher God that rules over our God? And if there is a higher God, who made this God?
And if, another big IF, there was a "Big Bang" and that's what started it all....what came before the Big Bang to make the stuff the Big Bang came from. And my understanding is that ever since the Big Bang the universe is expanding...but I've often wondered....expanding into WHAT?
Imagine if we could just answer only 1 of the questions from above.
two them are not like the others. Oregon and Oklahoma State have no business ever being good, but they both have old crusty geriatric prehistoric aged bored billionaires who are super-fans and way too into their college teams being good so they've both went overboard and to the extreme as fuuuuucccch trying to buy success for their teams. At that point- just go buy an NFL team bro.
Michigan at only 15 is kinda sad. They probably have a significantly wealthier alumni base than every school ahead of them on that list except for maybe the Texas schools- and even then they're still probably pretty close. Time for them to hit up their billionaires. What are we doing here guys? F the academics, let's win some god damn football games fellas.
What I've always wondered...
Man, I'd love to kill some time with you if this is the stuff you like to think about. You've outlined a fairly well-known dilemma, or objection. Just processing your version quickly, it's not logically fallacious, but it is missing some pertinent info that would change things.Don't really want to dig into it too much. Something to ponder over a case of beer, not over a message board. I was just stirring the pot to see who would get sucked in.
Unfortunately it's way too much to type. I teach a whole class on this stuff, I can't force-fit it into several paragraphs. I'm trying to think of a good book that covers different views of this, but off the top of my head I'm drawing a blank. If you were interested in further reading, I'll give you a rec if I think of one.
So an argument isn't evidence. Evidence is evidence. I know, I know, it sounds like I'm throwing your big, lost post out the window, but I'm really not.
Okay, so the universe started, and the cosmological argument suggests something started it. But believers like to leap to someONE, which is B.S. But even positing a creator for it all isn't evidence. WHAT creator? Don't know? Not evidence.
You seem to be confused on what "evidence" is. You're using the word evidence but asking for a decision on it That's not what's offered, and that's not the basis for either side. Similar to a court case, evidence is presented, and the evidence doesn't say anything. People who judge the evidence based on their best logical thinking and extrapolations say something.....they judge evidence and draw a conclusion. The evidence is just the evidence. You frequently get two different people looking at the same evidence in a criminal trial who draw two different conclusions. Why? The evidence was the same. In a court case, evidence should suggest something beyond reasonable doubt, but it's not proof of something. In the case of the cosmological argument, no one is leaping.....not either side. They are both looking at the evidence and then drawing their best conclusion about how to best explain the evidence. You characterize believers as "leaping" but this isn't the case at all, and either you're unfamiliar with their claims--I didn't outline their claims, only their conclusions, and I don't believe you've ever taken the time to examine their reasons--or you just reject them out of hand. Atheists are also drawing conclusions from the same evidence, but also like the theists, what they are NOT doing is making something up in a leap from evidence to conclusion. They're trying to best explain the exact same evidence. If you don't understand how any of it counts as evidence, well, it means you have never properly engaged in the long history of literature about the matter.
.
Teleological argument? Sorry, but that one is embarrassing. See: puddle analogy. Of course this world seems designed, we exist in it. The teleological argument treats the universe like a snapshot and ignores the billions of years of primordial hot garbage. Yes, in the past 100 years, things seem so convenient for us. As if the creators of this sidewalk made a shallow lull so our wet puddles asses fit right in.
You're better than this one.
Now, unfortunately, you have really demonstrated your unfamiliarity with the subject matter. You've hit on a very common objection, but not a good one, and pop-level atheists who try to use it do not fare well in debates and their writings are widely rejected by serious philosophers of the subject....even the atheist ones. I'm not going to say something like "you're better than that" because again, I am positive you aren't even close to as familiar with these subjects as I am. I do wish one day you'd really examine the best arguments for both sides rather than just rejecting things out of hand. Not everything that seems a no-brainer actually is. You don't know what you don't know. I think you probably have no idea the amount of study, work, debates, and critical thinking that has gone on for centuries about this stuff. Which is a shame.....you might enjoy it. Without you knowing any more about it than you do, I realize I'm not giving you much here other than a summary of where the two sides stand and not offering any of the substantive content that accounts for why the two main sides think what they think, and that's because, well, it's just way too much to type. I'll try to drop a quick arrow in the dirt and say that the crux of the problem with what you've said here is there's an implicit assumption that life could be anything. We're here, so of course we fit in this universe. Meaning some other kind of life could've/would've evolved in another universe. The problem here is two-fold. From a physics perspective, I don't think you understand the fine-tuning of the physical constants, just to use one area among, many, many, many. Most universes would not permit matter as we know it and it's mind-bogglingly unlikely that this one does. So how does some other life evolve in a world without elements? Most people recognize that as a problem. Secondly, from a biological perspective, it needs to be shown that something other than carbon-based life is possible, and the experiments dealing with other elements as a basis for life have not yielded promising results. The assumption that whatever chemicals a universe does allow us will result in "life," let alone advanced life, is not one that can be supported from what is currently known about what's required for biological life. As far as "we" know....it was this or bust. Consider a quote from Fred Hoyle, prominent Cambridge astronomer and physicist: "A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." Fred Hoyle, by the way, was an atheist. There are many, many atheists of high education who entered this realm in their careers, and none of them reject the idea of fine-tuning. What they dispute is the cause of the fine-tuning observed, but they all acknowledge the necessity of an explanation for it. Unfortunately I don't think you're aware of that.
.
It's funny, the moral argument is where I believe religion was born in the first place. There was no objective morality, just the biggest, baddest got what they wanted. Invent a god that is watching and judging them (unfaslifiable) and that they will be punished after death (unfalsifiable). The warlords were dumb enough to fall for it, and thus religion was born.
It's hard to say there's no objective morality when you're raised in a society with generations of legal morality baked in.
Again, you simply don't seem to be aware of the long, rich history of work, thought, and debate about this. I suppose you don't realize that you're far from the first person to have ever thought that, and that that idea has been explored. At any rate, the worst flaw of that "rebuttal" is that it completely dodges the question. It says nothing about whether there's actually an objective morality, and if so, where does it come from? All you've done here is commit the genetic fallacy, which is an attempt to explain something away by showing where it comes from. So I won't spend time agreeing or refuting it, because explaining where the idea of morality comes from is an entirely separate issue than whether it's real and what the source might be. And before you that you committed the fallacy of circular reasoning when you stated "There was no objective morality," which is what you're trying to argue for, thus assuming your conclusion, thus, circular reasoning. This isn't a rebuttal, only an opinion that you don't like the moral argument.
.
But as you've acknowledged, and I give you credit for doing so, is that all of your "evidences" are disputed and maybes. None of it's confirmed. You know what "evidence" means, and none of these is actually evidence. It's possibilities. It's hopefulness. It's want-to.
The next real, tangible evidence for a god will be the first.
This leads me ask what is YOUR criteria for belief? And is it a reasonable one? What evidence do you think needs to be present for one to reasonably assume some sort of theistic position? This is a rhetorical question and I'm not looking for an answer. Just posing you the question to think about. It's one thing to hand-wave everything away, it's another to honestly ask yourself what standard should be met, and if it were, would I change my mind? I'd like to say in advance, this one gets tricky. What tends to happen here is atheists I talk to, once they've thought about it, usually come up with whatever they think God (or anything like him) should do, or demonstrate, or have done in the past, in order to meet their criteria for belief. In other words, they want God to be whatever they think he is, and then prove THAT. What they almost never do is seriously engage religious claims on their own terms. For example, if one wanted to investigate the Christian God, then you can't just make up whatever character you think God should have and then set your criteria. You have to take that God on his own terms, i.e., what is the character and nature of God generally understood and agreed on by the teaching of that religion, and THEN assess whether such a deity can meet the burden of proof of its own claims. For example, I could decide that if a god existed, he should make it to where I make a million dollars a year, but I don't make a million dollars a year, so what rube could possibly believe in that god? But maybe the god under investigation, according to the traditions and claims of the religion, has no reason to grant me a million dollar salary, or maybe actively doesn't want me to have such an income. So I'd be ruling him out completely erroneously. I'm sorry to say that Christians at large haven't done society many favors in this regard. IMO most Christians aren't good at explaining the nature of God or outlining much helpful theology that gives vital context to what people should be expecting IF the Christian God exists.
FWIW, I realized the necessity of a falsifiable criteria one day myself, and was shocked to realize I'd never thought about it. Fortunately Christianity has one built in, which is the resurrection. As one of the writers of the New Testament put it (paraphrasing), if Christ wasn't raised from the dead, this religion is pointless. Christianity distinguishes itself from other major religions precisely in that it's not a philosophy (Hinduism, Buddhism) or built on divine revelation (Islam), both of which are nigh impossible to falsify. How do you prove or disprove a philosophy or supposed divine revelation? Christianity hinges itself on a historical event which can be investigated like any other historical event for it's probable truth of falsehood. I mentioned earlier different resurrection theories, and my point in all this is if someone could convince me that one of the other theories better explained the 4 minimal facts than the resurrection theory, I'd be forced to admit this might be hooey. What I obviously didn't do was outline the pros and cons of each theory, but I suppose it's obvious which one I find most plausible. I'm aware this all probably moves your needle exactly 0 degrees. That's fine. I just don't appreciate the constant jabs that Christians are all gullible idiots, and not from someone who doesn't even seem to know where we are in the ongoing conversation. I'm not trying to jab back, but I really don't ever see anything from you other than pop-level, angry internet meme level accusations and talking points, and this is so far below and beneath where the scholarship is on both sides that it makes me sad. If you want to be an atheist, I could probably steel-man some way better arguments for you.
I don't think you can "logically" prove or disprove God.Which is why I operated with the idea that we all build our worldview on certain presuppositions. And it is impossible to build a worldview without some presuppositions, then it becomes what are your presuppositions. (I found most of the most vocal opponents of others worldviews do not recognize their own presuppositions). THe issue then comes to whether your worldview is logically consistent or it falls apart at certain points. If it falls apart, it very well could be that one or more of your presuppositions are wrong.
Some of these numbers clearly include donations to capital improvement projects-- upgrades/renovations/rebuilds of stadiums, practice fields, other infrastructure.Nebraska just finishing the $165 million, 315,000-square-foot North Expansion Project
So if Michigan hasn't undergone a major capital improvement campaign in the last 10 years or so, there's no way they're going to rank toward the top. A&M spent over $600M on their major stadium rebuild, UT something like $250M, and I know Oregon just spent a fortune completely redoing their lockers/weight room/practice facilities. Don't know about the others but Oklahoma State is quite obviously T. Boone related.
So just keep in mind, these are not donations to operational expenses, these are almost entirely donations to fund capital programs.
I think we went through the money thing before and agreed it comes in all shapes and sizes and generally isn't comparable.Mr. Wealthy?
And the real money thing probably depends mostly, or significantly, on TV revenues, aside from a few cases where Mr. Rich is a fan. It would be fun to see a list of how much NIL monies are doing here and there. I wonder if that has cut into direct contributions.
I've spent a bit of time in Knoxville, I wouldn't consider it a top college town, however one defines that, whatever.Agreed. It's more of a big city with a college in it.
Agreed. It's more of a big city with a college in it.I guess this could describe Austin, but Austin actually felt like a college town to me.
I think we went through the money thing before and agreed it comes in all shapes and sizes and generally isn't comparable.For the schools with the largest athletic budgets, TV revenue plays a part, but it's not the majority. For example, Texas' annual budget is around $200M these days, and around $50M comes from TV and other conference distributions. So 25%. It's still significant, but it's not the driver.
And the real money thing probably depends mostly, or significantly, on TV revenues, aside from a few cases where Mr. Rich is a fan. It would be fun to see a list of how much NIL monies are doing here and there. I wonder if that has cut into direct contributions.
it's all in your experience and how limitedThis is probably part of it. BF's experience in Austin was centered on the university and the football game and the Board Meeting, so it probably felt a lot more college-y to him.
Madison did to me, Austin did not, but I've been to Austin many times and during the offseason
Minneapolis certainly doesn't but........
Lincoln doesn't to me much, probably only because I went to college there
One dollar at a time?
How badly do you want me to derail this thread?Go for it. I’d love to hear your thoughts.
It's odd to me how an English word can mean completely different things, like how "rank" can mean "smells bad". Or put in order of ... Or military status ...Which is why the dictionary does not define a word, context does. This trips up so many people when learning a foreign language, they look words up in a lexicon and say it must mean this, when the context of it useage is something different.
This trips up my wife at times.
September 25th already ...
Here Are 12 Cities People Voted as the “Snobbiest” in America (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/tripideas/here-are-12-cities-people-voted-as-the-snobbiest-in-america/ss-AA1eJF6A?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=fd9396177a1045eb849b35bf44b4d965&ei=23#image=1)The fact that it’s “people voted” is odd. That methodology has to be very specific and actually might be interesting (not very scientific, to be sure)
Just a list.
RankingsAri Wasserman somehow just made his first trip to Notre Dame stadium, and he said an underrated thing, that he didn't even realize he appreciated was how much lightning has changed now that night games are a regular thing. A lot of stadiums had either shitty lightning or the network would bring in temporary lights, but they were purely meant for the field. Now the permanent lightning also accounts for the fans. Probably smart, but he mentioned how cool it was that ND didn't. He said you really can't see anything except the field in the dark.
(https://i.imgur.com/7pWXadD.png)
The fact that it’s “people voted” is odd. That methodology has to be very specific and actually might be interesting (not very scientific, to be sure)I mean
Ari Wasserman somehow just made his first trip to Notre Dame stadium, and he said an underrated thing, that he didn't even realize he appreciated was how much lightning has changed now that night games are a regular thing. A lot of stadiums had either shitty lightning or the network would bring in temporary lights, but they were purely meant for the field. Now the permanent lightning also accounts for the fans. Probably smart, but he mentioned how cool it was that ND didn't. He said you really can't see anything except the field in the dark.
I've always said natural grass looks WAAAAAAY better than FieldTurf under the lights, which gives off a fake plastic shine, but Notre Dame is the one exception. I wonder if that is why
I can definitely see that being a major change for stadiums up north.I remember growing up the vibes of being the 3:30 ABC game after October 1, because ABC brought in their lights the night before. That was when you knew it was a big game. I still think the most big time game feel is a 3:30 game that starts in daylight and ends under the lights. Moreso than prime time
Down here in Texico, most stadiums installed high quality lighting in the 60s/70s. We didn't play day games in Austin before about September 21st or so, until the mid 80s, when television started dictating the kickoffs.
Now, of course, television dictates all.
I thought they suspended games if that happenedI think you are thinking of SEC games if there is cloud cover, or it drops below 60, or they have to play a "neutral site" game north of the Mason-Dixon line.
MLB "Power Ranking"Readers read it, and people who get feelings-y about rankings share it.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/38490804/mlb-2023-power-rankings-week-26-playoffs-braves-orioles-rays (https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/38490804/mlb-2023-power-rankings-week-26-playoffs-braves-orioles-rays)
It does not get lazier than this. Literally the teams ranked by record.
Why do they bother?
Who is eagerly anticipating this?
Who is the boss/editor requiring another human to produce it?
What is their major malfunction?
This one is based on DATA!!Every one is just “Badge’s guest house.”
The best place for retirees in every state, based on data (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/the-best-place-for-retirees-in-every-state-based-on-data/ss-AA1h2NBT?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=d1dfcf98144d4eb3b6f5589690d85c10&ei=8#image=1)
Readers read it, and people who get feelings-y about rankings share it.The amusing thing, to me, is the comments section where folks claim X should be ranked 8th, not 9th.
https://atlanta.eater.com/2023/9/28/23894110/chicago-hot-dog-chain-portillos-opening-atlanta?utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=eater.socialflow&utm_medium=social&utm_content=eateratlanta&fbclid=IwAR1GCr5TEtxKy281NngHVmolFrF6fQX-E7VK47OIKFE4Rk1lbdy5At-UoCYYes, I'd call it authentic. There are better local places in Chicago to get Italian Beef IMHO, but their Chicago Dogs pretty much set the standard for me.
Is Portillo's authentic? I think we dined at one in Orlando.
What is the largest US city you have never been in or through?Probably Miami for me. Other than an airport layover of course, which I don't count.
It's probably Boise for me. I don't think I was there. Salt Lake if you don't count the airport.
San Antonio is much larger than Boise. Considering only the urban core within city limits, San Antonio is larger than both Dallas and Austin. It doesn't have the extensive suburbs and exurbs though.Will be in the city only one night on the Riverwalk with my in-laws, and then hanging out at their place down southwest of the city. I'm sure they'll be showing us around.
If you're looking for any recs around the city I could give you a few.
Will be in the city only one night on the Riverwalk with my in-laws, and then hanging out at their place down southwest of the city. I'm sure they'll be showing us around.
As for the city vs metropolitan area, though, I always consider the overall metropolitan area population rather than just w/in city limits. Cities across the country developed SO differently over time so I don't really view population within the formal limits as meaningful.
I.e. a city with 700K in the official city limits but 4M overall will generally have a more rich "scene" as a tourist than a city with 1.1M in official city limits but only 2M overall...
My only purpose in citing city center sizes was to demonstrate that San Antonio is a major urban area compared to Boise. Comparing it to Dallas and Austin proper rather than something like, maybe, Modesto, which is a more apt comparison for Boise.#1: Agreed. I didn't feel like it was worth looking up for the purposes of "largest metro you've never been to" since I'll be there in ~10 days. But I had a feeling it was significantly larger than Boise.
All that said, I'm not sure I agree with your subjective point that I highlighted.
I saw the headline of a Jalopnik post on FB about "worst rest stops" and they had a photo of Bucees on the page, I am pretty sure to get folks to click. It's like "Worst Universities in the US" and feature Ohio State in the cover page.That's more and more common and the norm, really.
#1: Agreed. I didn't feel like it was worth looking up for the purposes of "largest metro you've never been to" since I'll be there in ~10 days. But I had a feeling it was significantly larger than Boise.But this is what I'm getting at. Your vision of "culture" doesn't reflect all visions of "culture" and I think it's a little WASPY/Elitist to project that vision onto a population. A city like San Antonio doesn't sport an opera (that I know of) but it's extremely rich in culture and history. That's why I'm steering the idea toward "diversity" rather than "richness." Yes, New York or Chicago are more diverse than much smaller towns, but I don't think that directly translates to "rich."
#2: I'm sure there are exceptions. But I tend to believe that the network effects of a larger population within any metro area leads to a greater range of goods, services, activities/experiences, and cultural enrichment opportunities compared to smaller. I.e. if you've got a metro of 1.5M people and 3% of them are into opera, you may not have enough density of that niche to support a theater performing opera. But if you've got a metro of 9M people and 3% of them are into opera, perhaps you do. And for every metro of 1.5M people, that means that many niche interests won't be viable, whereas for a metro of 9M people, most niche interests will be viable and much fewer will not be.
But this is what I'm getting at. Your vision of "culture" doesn't reflect all visions of "culture" and I think it's a little WASPY/Elitist to project that vision onto a population. A city like San Antonio doesn't sport an opera (that I know of) but it's extremely rich in culture and history. That's why I'm steering the idea toward "diversity" rather than "richness." Yes, New York or Chicago are more diverse than much smaller towns, but I don't think that directly translates to "rich."Sorry. My use of the opera was meant to signify a niche interest. I do realize it was a poor choice because it's an example of "high" culture. FWIW, I could go the rest of my life and not step foot in another opera (I've seen one) and not miss it.
And I'm going to go ahead and say any population of 1.5M plus has plenty of capability for supporting all of the white people arts, anyway. Sure the Austin Symphony Orchestra isn't as good as the New York Philharmonic, but it's still pretty darn good.
Anyway, I don't REALLY care enough to debate any further, I just think your take might be a little narrow.
I enjoy theater (plays/musicals), and could do a symphony.I like them all. Opera in Paris was incredible, opera in Prague pretty great too. Many French operas include a ballet.
No on opera or ballet.
Fro posted that while singing opera and dancing ballet.Stop peaking through my windows! :96:
I like them all. Opera in Paris was incredible, opera in Prague pretty great too. Many French operas include a ballet.You wouldn't cut it as a dead head.Austin is suppose to be weird - that's not weird that's culture - you should move
It's a bit terrifying to see people ranking Texas as #1. Just waiting for the other shoe to drop, and with my luck it'll be against the hated Sooners on Saturday.At least they both matter. That's cool.
Still, it should be a heck of a fun game to watch! I'll be there for the 34th time in my life, including 31 of the last 34.
Largest cities I’ve never been to….hell that would be nearly all of them. Never been to NYC or LA, and tbh I don’t really care to go.Thankfully, Texas is loaded up with large cities. Four of the top 10!
Been to San Francisco, Denver, NO, Dallas, and that’s about it. I would like to travel to Europe before I kick the bucket.
Thankfully, Texas is loaded up with large cities. Four of the top 10!Yeah, LA is a hard "city" to visit. Essentially it's the kind of place that you'd be more likely to come because there was some specific thing you wanted to see/do, and then build around from there. I.e. come for the Rose Bowl, or Disneyland, etc. But it's not a city you visit just to see the city IMHO.
Of the rest, NYC is the kind of place I'd only suggest if you want to experience that kind of thing. LA is so spread out, meh (some parts are nice, but it's not a place you can take the real temp of). Chicago is like NY, but less. Also one with some intentionality of experience. Phoenix is nice enough. Never done Philly. San Diego is deeply nice, though might not have the highest high points.
I have mentioned before how we had a bad visit to New Orleans. Usually I give a place a pass after one visit, but I really have zero interest in returning in this case. And yes, maybe I should, but I won't.Out of curiosity, what made it bad?
It's best when you have a "local guide", a friend who has lived there and does live there. I know here I could take you places and you'd think this is a S-hole, and other places and you'd think "This is much nicer than I expected." I suspect that is broadly true.
LA really is an urban jungle.
Streets crisscross and curl around and up the uneven terrain. You could get lost very easily there.
LA also made me think of a time I "discovered" a part of Phoenix I had never visited before, called Sunnyslope. It's just a neighborhood/community that isn't on the way to anywhere, but I found myself in it one day. LA probably has 70 of those places - parts of the city you'd just never experience because you never needed to.
You wouldn't cut it as a dead head.Austin is suppose to be weird - that's not weird that's culture - you should moveFunny, that is where I saw the Grateful Dead back in 82.
My wife grew up in Long Beach, and had lived in Huntington Beach for 10 years before we met.When I first met my late BIL, he lived on Signal Hill, which was pretty cool. Then he moved to Belmont Shores into a little house like you have. Then he bought 5 little houses and knocked them down to build his empire.
When in Sunnyslope, you must go here:JUst learned I have to officiate a HS Football game at Sunnyslope at the end of October. No thanks rather not drive the 45 miles from my house.
GREEK TOWN RESTAURANT INC, Phoenix - North Mountain - Menu, Prices & Restaurant Reviews - Tripadvisor (https://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g31310-d335643-Reviews-Greek_Town_Restaurant_INC-Phoenix_Arizona.html)
When I first met my late BIL, he lived on Signal Hill, which was pretty cool. Then he moved to Belmont Shores into a little house like you have. Then he bought 5 little houses and knocked them down to build his empire.What the hell did he do?
When in Sunnyslope, you must go here:I will try it.
GREEK TOWN RESTAURANT INC, Phoenix - North Mountain - Menu, Prices & Restaurant Reviews - Tripadvisor (https://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g31310-d335643-Reviews-Greek_Town_Restaurant_INC-Phoenix_Arizona.html)
LA came it at 12th, from the bottom.
Oklahoma was 8th worst, they lost out to Texas.
CA was next to worst, which was held by RI of all places.
I've driven in every state but ND and AL. I had the most issues with NJ.
Most California roads don't have to deal with frost heave, temps from -40 to 120, and junk drainage.That's an issue, but their real problem is all of the dirty politicians who seize the money that's supposed to be spent on roadways and... well... steal it. Huey Long might not still be around, but his legacy remains. We've had some corrupt politicians here in Texico, LBJ was among the worst, but they can't hold a candle to our neighbors to the east.
Not surprised about Louisiana. Everything in that state is 6 inches or less above the water table.
Drainage is the sneaky road wrecker. Spots on our system that are chronic trouble spots for pavement buckles and potholes are places with bad drainage and poor subgrades.
I suspect often they don't literally steal it, they do it quasi legally, favored bidding contracts etc. Fifty years ago you could tell who was governor or DoT Commish by looking at a map of the state roads. The I-85 routing story is illustrative.??
Yeah, maybe, but the 'burbs are different from the city.In many cases SE WI and NW IN are included in the Chicago metro for studies like this one.
U.S. cities where home prices rose the most in the last year (cnbc.com) (https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/10/us-cities-where-home-prices-rose-the-most-in-the-last-year.html)10.6% in Pittsburgh is still insanely affordable. my parents street (bordering suburb) has experienced a housing boom, houses (in excellent shape) that were once selling for 22-40K (like really) 20 years ago are going for 70-90K today.
(https://i.imgur.com/bzfA9OJ.png)those would all be some pretty awesome matchups except for Washington-Tulane.
they don't pay as wellNah, not anymore. For NY6 + CFP all of the payouts are standardized. If the conference sends 1 team you get X, 2 teams you get Y, etc.
$$$$$$$$
I meant what they bid to get the games, not what was paid to the teams.Huh?
sure
so next season the Rose and Sugar get stuck with the G5 rep?
The Rose should get the G5 every year, for those times it was the only thing preventing a 1 vs 2 matchup.The B1G and PAC were also complicit in that arrangement.
it makes sense because of number of losses:57:
A 2nd-grade class could produce what the committee did tonight:It's almost like they reward winners and punish losers
Teams ranked 1-5: 0 losses
Teams ranked 6-13: 1 loss
Teams ranked 14-23: 2 losses
It's almost like they reward winners and punish losersRewards OOC schedules like Michigan's.
Rewards OOC schedules like Michigan's.Michigan has been far and away the most impressive team statistically, even though their schedule blows. They would be favored against OSU on a neutral field right now. Always a test of how to balance those things. Personally, I'd put Georgia #1 because I subscribe to the Ric Flair rule.
Michigan has been far and away the most impressive team statistically, even though their schedule blows. They would be favored against OSU on a neutral field right now. Always a test of how to balance those things. Personally, I'd put Georgia #1 because I subscribe to the Ric Flair rule.Stacking bad idea onto bad idea.
Stacking bad idea onto bad idea.Yes yes I know I'm not paying enough attention to recruiting rankings. But I think Georgia is fine there too.
I'd probably think about square footage per dollar in rent as a primary. At least it's a real metric not based on judgment.Yeah, but what about square footage per dollar in purchase price? You clearly have chosen high-rise living in a dense urban area where everything is walkable, and you're paying a SERIOUS premium in square footage per dollar compared to those folks out in Alpharetta. You had different metrics you cared about that make higher cost worth it.
dog friendly might be a negative metric for meI thought this was for guys with ugly wives...
and I'm a dog person that has had a dog living in my house
Yeah, but what about square footage per dollar in purchase price? You clearly have chosen high-rise living in a dense urban area where everything is walkable, and you're paying a SERIOUS premium in square footage per dollar compared to those folks out in Alpharetta. You had different metrics you cared about that make higher cost worth it.Sure, the ranking is "best cities for renters", which has to infer criteria of some sort of course. And this is an excellent example of why such rankings are irrelevant. But for anyone renting, price per sqft should be A consideration at least.
The problem with any of these rankings is that they have to try to figure out metrics that they think people will value, and the minute they do that, anyone who doesn't care about one of those metrics call bullshit on the entire endeavor.
Huh. I always thought I was called Gen Y, slightly younger than Gen X, and different from Millennials.Gen Y was essentially renamed to Millennials.
Gen Y was essentially renamed to Millennials.i'm there as well. don't feel i fit in either group very well, but do fit in some regards for each.
I'm in the subgroup of late Gen X known as "Xennial". We're described as the "analog childhood, digital adulthood" group that basically grew up without the internet but that it came on so fast in our teens and college years that we adapted to it in real time while older Gen X was already into their professional lives and trying to do it after the fact. On the younger end, most Millennials don't really remember that life could exist before the internet because it was a constant in almost everything they did.
If you're at the front of Gen Y, you might be in that Xennial group as well.
I'm in the subgroup of late Gen X known as "Xennial". We're described as the "analog childhood, digital adulthood" group that basically grew up without the internet but that it came on so fast in our teens and college years that we adapted to it in real time while older Gen X was already into their professional lives and trying to do it after the fact. On the younger end, most Millennials don't really remember that life could exist before the internet because it was a constant in almost everything they did.
The credit ratings, for me, don't seem very revealing. I think there is a difference between a 500 and an 800. But were I a lender, I'd be looking at more information. I know mine bounces around a bit, maybe +/- 30 points, for no apparent reason. Like most ratings of things, my suspicion is the CR is based on weirdnesses.
Gen Y was essentially renamed to Millennials.Hmm...I'm not really crazy about that term. I was born in '75, slightly before what most consider a Xennial (77-83, coincidently the same years the original Star Wars films were released). I can remember computers and technology being at the forefront of my childhood, from the Speak and Spell I had as an elementary school student, to calculators, early computers, and then the beginnings of the internet in the early to mid 90's. My college experience perfectly mirrors the statement that "digital adulthood" group that basically grew up without the internet but that it came on so fast in our teens and college years that we adapted to it in real time". That part is definitely real.
I'm in the subgroup of late Gen X known as "Xennial". We're described as the "analog childhood, digital adulthood" group that basically grew up without the internet but that it came on so fast in our teens and college years that we adapted to it in real time while older Gen X was already into their professional lives and trying to do it after the fact. On the younger end, most Millennials don't really remember that life could exist before the internet because it was a constant in almost everything they did.
If you're at the front of Gen Y, you might be in that Xennial group as well.
Hmm...I'm not really crazy about that term. I was born in '75, slightly before what most consider a Xennial (77-83, coincidently the same years the original Star Wars films were released). I can remember computers and technology being at the forefront of my childhood, from the Speak and Spell I had as an elementary school student, to calculators, early computers, and then the beginnings of the internet in the early to mid 90's. My college experience perfectly mirrors the statement that "digital adulthood" group that basically grew up without the internet but that it came on so fast in our teens and college years that we adapted to it in real time". That part is definitely real.Yeah, you're the same age as my older sister (also '75), while I was '78. I do think there was a big difference, even between the two of us.
I know many in my generation who didn't adapt to computers or the internet at all, beyond looking at the web or using their phone. They are computer illiterates, most of them chose that.
Speaking of which, when I took a job on a large project 10 years ago I was stunned at the number of millennials who do did know how to use a real PC. They could use their phones and Chromebook, but when it came to navigating their way around a PC many of them were clueless.
But I still consider it wild the degree and the speed at which it changed the world. And then advance another decade and you add the smartphone... Someone who lived in 1920 might recognize the world of 1980. Probably the biggest changes in those 6 decades was TV, widespread electrification, and air travel. Someone who lived in 1970 would probably not recognize the world of 2023. We carry around, in our pockets, a portable communication device that can give us access to nearly all of the world's information... In seconds..
. Someone who lived in 1920 might recognize the world of 1980. Probably the biggest changes in those 6 decades was TV, widespread electrification, and air travel. Someone who lived in 1970 would probably not recognize the world of 2023. We carry around, in our pockets, a portable communication device that can give us access to nearly all of the world's information... In seconds..And porn!!!
Yes yes I know I'm not paying enough attention to recruiting rankings. But I think Georgia is fine there too.You're like the Michael Jordan of misrepresenting other people's ideas.
I'm square in the middle of Gen X and proud of it. I feel like Gen X was and still is severly unrepresented in today's media.Gen X is great because many of us still had feral, outdoorsy, you-have-to-earn-a-trophy childhoods and were young enough to understand and use the internet as it expanded into our everyday lives.
I can tell you from my banking days that lenders, at least in that industry, definitely factor in credit scores, but also several other things, like debt-to-income ratio.I could see looking at the score as a first blush, someone with a 400 means you need not look further. But is it possible someone with a 750 could be a poor credit risk?
I could see looking at the score as a first blush, someone with a 400 means you need not look further. But is it possible someone with a 750 could be a poor credit risk?
And it's turned into bragging rights at times since we can all access it pretty easily.
I put my real estate tax on a credit card, it's a substantial amount, paid off when due, but it causes my CR to drop maybe 25 points.
I put baseball on it as well, which is another fairly large amount. At the end of the year I have a lot of different bills coming up that I charge.
I worked for a guy once who had never had a loan default and he was proud of that. That guy wasn't going to take any risks. Others don't care about the occasional default and will make riskier loans.Kinda like the saying that if you've *never* missed an airline flight, you're getting to the airport too early.
The main thing that influences my CR seems to be how much credit I am using, based on the credit cards I have open. So, if I cancel one card, my credit goes down and so does my CR.That's one thing that gets me. I had my score >800. Then my wife's car was finally paid off, and so I have no loans tracked as all three cars are now owned free and clear, and only one credit card with a balance. And my credit score dropped ~50 points.
A few weeks ago when we went to Texas we knew we were cutting it closer than I like. We ended up leaving the house about 15 minutes later than I wanted. We hit literally ALL red lights to drop the dog off at boarding. Then we had to drive all the way up to LAX during morning traffic. We got off the 405 and traffic trying to get to the parking and then on the parking shuttle to the terminal were BRUTAL. My wife could tell I was stressed, which makes her mad because she then gets stressed, so she snipes at me for making her stressed, while I'm just hoping we get to the terminal in time to check bags. You're supposed to check bags 45 minutes before a flight. I think we were literally in between the 45th and 46th minute when we dropped them off. Once we did that, *I* could finally relax but my wife had the stress carryover and it took her a LONG time for it to pass.
I haven't checked a bag in years. It's a stressor, takes forever, and can get lost sometimes.We used to be like that, but AA does a great job, and because they put the priority tag on, our bags are in the claims are before we even get there. We have to go through that area anyway, to get to transport, so for us it's great.
If I traveled with a woman who only brought a backpack like I do, that would be a colossal turn-on.
And ladies can fit more clothes in a bag, because they're smaller.
.
I don't have to take time packing, don't have to wait in that line, don't have to worry about it winding up in Albuquerque, don't have to go to baggage claim, etc.
It's a choice.
I haven't checked a bag in years. It's a stressor, takes forever, and can get lost sometimes.I cannot believe that I have something other than cfb fandom in common with fro.
If I traveled with a woman who only brought a backpack like I do, that would be a colossal turn-on.
And ladies can fit more clothes in a bag, because they're smaller.
.
I don't have to take time packing, don't have to wait in that line, don't have to worry about it winding up in Albuquerque, don't have to go to baggage claim, etc.
It's a choice.
I cannot believe that I have something other than cfb fandom in common with fro.Ever travel abroad for a month? Or travel from Florida to Chicago, then to Cabo, back to Chicago and then back to Florida? In January? Packing for a lot of climate there, which is what we normally do. This year we are going to Cabo, but straight from Florida and back. One large bag will be fine for us.
If you pack a bag that is big enough to necessitate being checked, then you need to relinquish your man-card.
Yeah, you're the same age as my older sister (also '75), while I was '78. I do think there was a big difference, even between the two of us.I went to a small school district in a small town. We had like 180-200 people in our graduating class. We had computers in intermediate school (5th and 6th grade). The lovely Apple IIe. Damn those things were hardy. We also used them in junior high, we used visicalc and that was the first time I heard the term spreadsheet.
I don't think she interacted with the home computer much in high school except for word processing. So for her it was a fancy typewriter. In the one year she attended college (lol), I don't think it was very common for students to have their own PC yet. But by my freshman year, it was very common. And then email was JUST starting to come on in regular usage while I was in college. I couldn't email my parents--they sure as hell didn't have email. I'm pretty sure I couldn't even email my sister at that point. Although she and her BF (now husband) were operating his marina on Lake of the Ozarks at the time, I'm not sure they had email accounts associated even with the business.
Now, part of the difference between my sister and I, like utee's experience, is that I was a techie nerd even back in high school. My sister is very smart, but she is absolutely NOT a techie nerd. She's the opposite. So it's possible I was simultaneously ahead of this curve, while my sister was behind it. I think you may have made use of that early-mid 90s connectivity and internet in a way that I did and she didn't, despite you being the same age ahead of me as she was.
But I still consider it wild the degree and the speed at which it changed the world. And then advance another decade and you add the smartphone... Someone who lived in 1920 might recognize the world of 1980. Probably the biggest changes in those 6 decades was TV, widespread electrification, and air travel. Someone who lived in 1970 would probably not recognize the world of 2023. We carry around, in our pockets, a portable communication device that can give us access to nearly all of the world's information... In seconds..
I saw some FB list of "Five best colognes for men". I didn't click on it.More accurate.
There is clickbaita listfor every set of eyeballsthingI guess.
one where everyone is a different immobile tank thing, and you'd estimate the arc of your shot to go up and slowly back down, killing your friends. It was so tame, but we played the shit out of it. There were different, fun warheads you could use, too.The more popular was called Scorched Earth. My dad and the draftsman he employed used to always play a variant of it called Tank Wars every day at lunch.
Nerd.Brad.
The more popular was called Scorched Earth. My dad and the draftsman he employed used to always play a variant of it called Tank Wars every day at lunch.draftsmen had the best computers for gaming
draftsmen had the best computers for gamingYeah, my house always had a great computer for the day that my dad planned to learn AutoCAD. Which he never actually got around to doing.
I was one
(https://i.imgur.com/90SqmIv.png)Final analysis product. We now have most of this subdivision surveyed.
Speaking of football "polls"/rankings, we have three now that get attention, of course. The CFP ranking differs only slightly from the other two. I know it sounds authoritative to have some collection of CFB giants form a committee to contrive such things, but basically it yields the same overall result as the AP with an exception every so often.the committee has greater power to "correct" things in the final poll to assure the proper programs get the proper matchups in the playoff
Times Higher Education: Top 20 universities in the world (cnbc.com) (https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/18/times-higher-education-top-20-universities-in-the-world.html?utm_content=makeit&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=facebook|makeit&fbclid=IwAR0VADrpNagtX37a5IONGobiSfmas-wvWMYfEIpzkybxy69ulCPHUSQZGe4)
Orlando?hey, I actually kinda really like Orlando.
No.
Anywhere in Florida.. nobadgerfan, HB, and MDot thank you for your support.
Everyone DOES and SHOULD have their own criteria. Maybe such a list brings to mind a place you've never seen and should, maybe. Greenville, SC is surprisingly nice downtown. I've seen Clayton, GA suggested for retirees a few times. Do you prefer mountains or the beach? Do you like seasons? Are you into cultural things?100%. different people value different things. no one size fits all.
Where we live would not be suitable for many here, no doubt, but we like it a lot.
A lisr would be better, I think, if titled "Nice places to live you may not know about".
badgerfan, HB, and MDot thank you for your support.yeah, it's honestly getting fcking ridiculous now. traffic is the worst it's ever been and home prices are insane. they were always kinda high here relative to other parts of the US and i get that they're up everywhere, but the increase in home & rental prices in South Florida has been looney tunes.
(Did I miss anyone? Everyone seems to be moving to Florida...)
I had lunch with my realtor friend the other day. He said the market is cooling here because of interest rates, but supply of single family is still way down. Folks who own don't want to sell and lose that 3% mortgage. So, prices remain high, and a lot of new sales are relos, and the company is involved in making the transition easier because they need the workers here.yup.
Apartments are springing up all over because the 30 somethings can't borrow.
yeah, it's honestly getting fcking ridiculous now. traffic is the worst it's ever been and home prices are insane. they were always kinda high here relative to other parts of the US and i get that they're up everywhere, but the increase in home & rental prices in South Florida has been looney tunes.No, no, no. Y’all told me how great it was, so I’m coming down. It being popular was good, and I’ll help it stay that way! (Popular, that is)
my advice....don't move to Florida. it's terrible here. :)
hey, I actually kinda really like Orlando.In all seriousness, do you mean the city itself or the suburbs?
In all seriousness, do you mean the city itself or the suburbs?downtown Orlando and nearby suburban areas like Winter Park are really damn nice.
I think I’ve been to three or four different spots in Florida and I generally found some thing I modestly enjoy about all of them. Except for Orlando. It felt very much like a unpleasant tourist trap. Although I have a friend who grew up in the suburbs and seemed to generally like the area.
Hey we have a Hotties Thread for thatit got buried under the "hate michigan" thread
If the committee's task is ranking the 4 best teams, they failed. FSU w/o Travis is hot garbage.the task is to do it next week
There will always be a controversy about who is selected last, and next year, probably next to last, and then the order (as 5th will be tougher than 4th).They've already specifically stated that they CAN take injuries into account.
I don't think they take injuries into account, just performance to date. So, yeah, undefeated P5 teams will always be ahead of one losers, always, with perhaps a very unusual exception. I was thinking about Ohio State a bit, playing on the road basically even with the #2 team in the country, and how they'd get dinged down to 6-7-8 for it.
A better way would be to let Vegas do this, but that can't happen.
OK, I didn't see that one. Sure, FSU at 13-0 is in the CFP, no doubt. We could have four undefeateds for the first time. Makes it simple anyway.It comes back to the question of "best teams" versus "deserving teams."
in a few years or decades that's what it might beNext year with a 12-team playoff, how many spots do we think will be taken by B1G and SEC teams?
Big vs SEC postseason
the rest just won't matter or be worthy of the $$$ that is generated
Next year with a 12-team playoff, how many spots do we think will be taken by B1G and SEC teams?well, the current top 12 shows only FSU as a team that won't be in the SEC or B1G next season
Do you get the feeling that Yormark/Big 12 will really pull the punches to let oSu win the game? To the point where it's egregious? oSu is a decent team, they wouldn't need much help to win.Nine
Do you get the feeling that Yormark/Big 12 will really pull the punches to let oSu win the game? To the point where it's egregious? oSu is a decent team, they wouldn't need much help to win.apparently, it's already been egregious in the reg season
Do you get the feeling that Yormark/Big 12 will really pull the punches to let oSu win the game? To the point where it's egregious? oSu is a decent team, they wouldn't need much help to win.
the committee does what ESPN and the SEC instruct them to do
most of us know this
it would seem that the SEC would favor Texas, as they are joining next season
the talkin heads would talk about it, but an undefeated conf champ is a lead pipe lockYeah, I agree. The "drama" would come from a handful of mediots but putting in an undefeated P5 conference champ is a no-brainer from the committee's point of view. It lets them completely off the hook in making decisions about 12-1Texas.
What would be fun, for me, however improbable:
Dawgs win of course.
OkSU wins.
Laville wins.
Oregon wins.
Iowa somehow wins.
Oregon is in, and then .... Michigan? UDubb? OSU? TCU?
More fun for utee would be UGA and UT meet in the final NCG game and Texas blows them out.
10-9?Would be fitting, yes?
Fitting, I guess, yes. The Dawgs don't have a defense as good as that Texas team did.Nobody does anymore. It's a different era.
ESPN wants Oregon for better ratings, or so I've been told ....
I'd think Texas draws excellent ratings just due to their massive fanbase alone, but what do I know.
Don't mind me. I'm a complete Oregon hater at the moment.
Texas' schedule >>> Oregon's and it's not close.schedule, yes, resume, probably but it's not as far off as you make it.
Say Michigan wins, Georgia wins, FSU wins, and they're all in. If Texas and Oregon both win, Texas should get the 4th spot over Oregon with no hesitation. Oregon may have the better loss, but that's the same BS that was used to get Bama in over Okie St. in 2011. It's literally 1 bullet point on a resume of many bullet points. And Texas has numerous points to its advantage compared to Oregon.
That how it should work. How it will work may be an entirely different story.
schedule, yes, resume, probably but it's not as far off as you make it.I keep hearing people say this, I'm not sure why that's a good thing?
oregon will have the best win, a 'better' loss, and they will have avenged that loss
I keep hearing people say this, I'm not sure why that's a good thing?bama loses and that might not be true. ou could be their top opponent.
What it actually means is that it took Oregon two tries to get it done, when Texas beat their top opponent in one try.
I'm not sure that rewarding a team for taking a mulligan is really all that praiseworthy.
But I suppose I could see how Alabama fans are more likely to forgive the mulligan, than others... ;)
bama loses and that might not be true. ou could be their top opponent.Texas loses and it's irrelevant, so what?
Texas SOS = #2
Oregon SOS = #56
UT opp. rec vs. FBS teams (removing H2H): 80-42 or .606
OR opp. rec. vs. FBS teams (removing H2H): 66-56 or .541
UT def. 7 bowl eligible teams, played 8
OR def. 5 bowl eligible teams, played 6
UT 5-1 vs. FBS winning record
OR 3-1 vs. FBS winning record
Simply looking at best win and best loss hardly tells the story. Over the course of 12 games, Texas has an equal record against a statistically significantly more difficult schedule.
Texas loses and it's irrelevant, so what?bama losing is relevant because that's the scenario we're discussing, lol.
If Oregon wins they're still taking a mulligan, not avenging a loss.
bama losing is relevant because that's the scenario we're discussing, lol.Kinda the definition of mulligan
mulligan or not, they're getting a chance to beat the only team that's beat them. kinda the definition of avenge.
Kinda the definition of mulligannah, mulligan isn't counted on score card. this one will. sorry.
nah, mulligan isn't counted on score card. this one will. sorry.Not sure why you've decided to be such an asshole. Weird flex.
lets look at them, shall we. again, scenario is oregon and texas both win, bama loses, so just comparing those 2. best to worst:
wash > bama - both will drop, but wash will be 5-8 range, bama will be 10-15 range.
ore st = ok st - ok st will drop to 20-25 range, which is where ore st is
utah = ksu - literally separated by 1 vote in ap poll
usc =< kansas - due to 1 win better record, but overall not much difference
tt = tt
cal =< isu - again, due to 1 win better record
the rest for both are all bad and don't really matter, but still...
wash st = tcu
colo = byu
stan = houston
zona st = baylor
hawaii < wyoming
port st << rice
and then the loses
wash > ou
again, slightly more ticks over to texas, especially in non-con. but it's not that dissimilar.
you realize sagarin has oregon ranked above texas, right? so even despite the schedule difference, sagarin thinks it's close enough to rank oregon higher. or his formula does anyway. that's all i'm saying. it's close enough that other things matter as well.Yeah uh-huh okay.
nah, mulligan isn't counted on score card. this one will. sorry.I know how this works
Ha!Glad to see someone picked up the slack while I was working
FearlessCD is stirring the pot.
Texas would certainly draw more eyeballs than Oregon.
nah, mulligan isn't counted on score card. this one will. sorry.
A thieving 2nd shot employed by duffers to prove the 1st one was no fluke !!!
I know how this works
ask Nubbz
If UGA loses, they should be out of the discussion IMHO. If every other favorite wins, I'd have the 3 UNDs and Texas personally.If UGA loses, they're still in.
If UGA loses, they're still in.Could certainly happen, but it would be the first time ever the committee has put in a non-champ over a champ, when they had the same record. And it would look especially questionable given Texas H2H win over the same Alabama team that just knocked off the non-champ Georgia Bulldogs.
Bama would be in, UGA would be in, UM, and UW/UO winner.
Yes, even at the expense of an undefeated FSU.
A - they suck w/o J.Travis
B - beating Louisville is a big WHO CARES now, since they lost to UK.
The 2-time defending NCs with a 12-1 record won't be omitted.
It would break an entire decade of tendencies, but sure, it could still happen.We haven't had a 2-time defending champ on the bubble in the playoff era yet. So it's a novel situation.
Yeah, it's fun to speculate, which is why we do it. We all have our personal preferences understand that the committee may well act differently. One theory is they are affected by ESPN and TV ratings, in which case of course Texas would win over Oregon/FSU/most anybody else.Nah, I’ve never bought into that.
If TV ratings are a dominant consideration, we'd have Texas/Michigan/Alabama and then whoever.
I don't think they do personally. I bet the topic never comes up in discussions at least.
Speaking of conspiracy theories, any way the Big 12 refs ensure a Texas L this weekend? Asking for a friend.Well, the last time Texas played OkState, last year, they did it all sorts of ways. Take a look at the penalty stat line. And then take your pick.
Yeah uh-huh okay.same to you.
Anyway, good luck to your team on Saturday. Should be an entertaining game.
If UGA loses, they're still in.
Bama would be in, UGA would be in, UM, and UW/UO winner.
Yes, even at the expense of an undefeated FSU.
A - they suck w/o J.Travis
B - beating Louisville is a big WHO CARES now, since they lost to UK.
The 2-time defending NCs with a 12-1 record won't be omitted.
Anyway, we'll know the game outcomes within about 40 hours.
And then, the magic happens... :86:
You've always been a closet horn, even before you married an i s c & a longhorn gal.it's true. he hates the aggies that much. just natural to him.
Somehow I've turned into a Texas-stumping Longhorn shill, as evidenced by this thread. This is the last season I relinquish TV rights to my wife.nothing to be proud of Rusty
nothing to be proud of RustyEh your brother is a longhorn lover too. He's a good dude.
it's true. he hates the aggies that much. just natural to him.
nothing to be proud of Rusty
Massey composite rankings (96 rankings - last week in parenthesis)This top 5-6 is what my eyeballs tell me.
- MICHIGAN (2)
- Georgia (3)
- OHIO STATE (1)
- Oregon (5)
- Washington (4)
- Texas (8)
- Florida State (6)
- Alabama (7)
- PENN STATE (9)
- Oklahoma (10)
- LSU (11)
- Missouri (15)
- Ole Miss (14)
- Notre Dame (16)
- Kansas State (13)
- Louisville (12)
- Arizona (18)
- Oregon State (17)
- James Madison (22)
- IOWA (19)
- Liberty (20)
- Clemson (24)
- Utah (21)
- NC State (-)
- Tennessee (23)
- 40. Maryland (43)
- 45. Wisconsin (49)
- 54. Northwestern (61)
- 58. Rutgers (44)
- 68. Illinois (70)
- 69. Nebraska (71)
- 72. Minnesota (68)
- 78. Purdue (82)
- 82. Michigan State (79)
- 98. Indiana (94)
so guess that Oregon problem was solved last night. glad we had that in depth discussion lolThat was kind of my exact thought.
That was kind of my exact thought.
it’s sort of funny, we talk about the playoff taking up all the oxygen. But in truth, we really like talking about that kind of stuff.
Because when it’s all said and done, the choices usually aren’t that hard.
There are, I think, three rankings now:“ deserving” is a mirage. “Best” is too. Just opinions with no correct answer.
1. The four best teams.
2. The four teams the CFPC will choose.
3. The four most deserving teams.
Michigan is in all four, but that's it.
“ deserving” is a mirage. “Best” is too. Just opinions with no correct answer.I agree, but I think "best" can be judged using Vegas.
on field results need to be the main thing.
“ deserving” is a mirage. “Best” is too. Just opinions with no correct answer.I think that last part is being treated as synonymous with “deserving.”
on field results need to be the main thing.
The four teams selected for this year's College Football Playoff are:These four teams are all very evenly matched and it will be a very exciting playoff. The Michigan Wolverines are the favorites to win the national championship, but the other three teams all have a chance to make a run.
- Michigan Wolverines (13-0): The Wolverines are the undefeated Big Ten champions and have the most impressive resume of any team in the country. They have a strong offense led by Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback JJ McCarthy and a stingy defense that ranks among the best in the nation.
[color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRn9wZqUqf-X0LD4LNNTBygxJxE_-Ky0eHWy9de9h3aQRYnD1kGarIxaPJf5KVG)Opens in a new window (https://www.maizenbrew.com/23817990/michigan-wolverines-football-roster-revealed-updated-2023-season)[/url][color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/favicon-tbn?q=tbn:ANd9GcTL8Vr0jywu8GgB0jQlWOJlWf7E_XEKteCWrRu84To2-WMP7GemsBROI14fkkIcPudyKTVPusu8tXdjLyvlFixlCGuwV5mP2YLSgkcu)[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]www.maizenbrew.com[/color][/color] (https://www.maizenbrew.com/23817990/michigan-wolverines-football-roster-revealed-updated-2023-season)
[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]Michigan Wolverines football team[/color]
[/font][/size][/color]- Washington Huskies (13-0): The Huskies are the undefeated Pac-12 champions and have one of the most explosive offenses in the country. They are led by quarterback Michael Penix Jr., who threw for over 4,300 yards and 32 touchdowns this season.
[color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQh7qT806sRAERSUEwK6-bm7dXc3dWDLNmVcRRh4zvDz6g0bw0UD2OSgFCMzbO8)Opens in a new window (https://gohuskies.com/news/2022/10/31/football-uw-osu-set-for-friday-night-matchup.aspx)[/url][color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/favicon-tbn?q=tbn:ANd9GcRLMU6d6FYOh_b1gU6cl5qRxNOKzGEccB6Nwc6ttxT7wo-e_rFSFjTVt1K2-aKuJrKOlWNhQcLBHub8ZGYdtZ7MNt_CPgpxvQ)[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]gohuskies.com[/color][/color] (https://gohuskies.com/news/2022/10/31/football-uw-osu-set-for-friday-night-matchup.aspx)
[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]Washington Huskies football team[/color]
[/font][/size][/color]- Alabama Crimson Tide (12-1): The Crimson Tide are the one-loss SEC champions and have a history of success in the College Football Playoff. They are led by quarterback Bryce Young, who is a Heisman Trophy contender, and have a strong defense that ranks among the best in the nation.
[color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSLAQE5He1SfRfu5WlIkBJVC7Nxh4O5M10T9vNGndy0qpEEh458d8gc0X55wnW2)Opens in a new window (https://www.rollbamaroll.com/2023/2/15/23600882/alabama-crimson-tide-football-roster-update-2023)[/url][color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/favicon-tbn?q=tbn:ANd9GcRf0ylQqdmpY873d_gMYFHoMXSIT801OO9NwKOhRfucs31_CKxti7Mo6baMtbHs1RDKBZN7n4WPh68LCpIPqVb07O6IhSo5FIpkoIagTPQ)[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]www.rollbamaroll.com[/color][/color] (https://www.rollbamaroll.com/2023/2/15/23600882/alabama-crimson-tide-football-roster-update-2023)
[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]Alabama Crimson Tide football team[/color]
[/font][/size][/color]- Texas Longhorns (12-1): The Longhorns are the one-loss Big 12 champions and have one of the most talented rosters in the country. They are led by quarterback Quinn Ewers, who is a rising star, and have a strong defense that ranks among the best in the nation.
[color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkNMFW0Lsgj5Kzzf9cYqn94IZ30j3dFALCRgOf6FkMhxj1NFyjdvRugMHo_2On)Opens in a new window (https://texassports.com/news/2022/12/26/no-20-football-preview-no-12-washington-alamo-bowl.aspx)[/url][color=var(--bard-color-primary)](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/favicon-tbn?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ2JW6pANEWmxXoYYbcxxLt6H4damyph8xa4LtqMst6KBgsgV0J-GHydP9uIPjzH_zvr3KhfVoJLFLTnOxyqo-xvjV2OuIBW3kb)[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]texassports.com[/color][/color] (https://texassports.com/news/2022/12/26/no-20-football-preview-no-12-washington-alamo-bowl.aspx)
[color=var(--bard-color-on-surface-variant)]Texas Longhorns football team[/color]
[/font][/size][/color]
I asked Google Bard (their ChatGPT equivalent):The key phrase there is “ artificial “
Which teams will be chosen for this year's College Football Playoff and why?
AI has spoken.
I asked Google Bard (their ChatGPT equivalent):AI telling you Alabama is led by Bryce Young should be all you need to know.
Which teams will be chosen for this year's College Football Playoff and why?
AI has spoken.
The key phrase there is “ artificial “^^^
AI telling you Alabama is led by Bryce Young should be all you need to know.Yeah, AI has been known to hallucinate from time to time.
He's playing today. NFL and all that.
Glad AI pointed that out be kinda pointless playing the games otherwise?Who programmed that? One of those brilliant sideline reporter tartshey, I love the reporter tarts, brilliant & or artificial, or otherwise
You serious, Clark? ;)Georgia is out
I think the debate between FSU-Texas-Alabama-Georgia is going to be pretty tough for them.
I asked Google Bard (their ChatGPT equivalent):There's like a 51% chance the committee does this and posts it as their own.
Which teams will be chosen for this year's College Football Playoff and why?
AI has spoken.
Georgia is out
But they were the #1 team right up until last night at 11 PM. 2-time defending champs. How do you leave them out?this is true
These are actual conversations I'm hearing on ESPN right now.
Georgia in, FSU and Texas out. It makes sense, because SEC.
Colley Matrix:the Aggies mascot has a ranking system?
https://www.colleyrankings.com/currank.html
this is true
because the SEC is accustomed to having 2 teams in the playoff
but, not this season
because, FSU, Washington, & Michigan are undefeated
Committee don't care.yup, they're gonna put Bammer in over your Horns
SEC SEC SEC!
yup, they're gonna put Bammer in over your HornsAnd Georgia over FSU. Which is probably the right call. FSU wasn't all that great even with their starter, the ACC is just terrible.
it ain't right, but they don't care
WOW. I really thought they'd leave Texas out.You sound disappointed, lol
You sound disappointed, lolHa! No. Surprised for sure, but I'm tickled pink.
And Georgia over FSU. Which is probably the right call. FSU wasn't all that great even with their starter, the ACC is just terrible.The ACC had a winning record versus the SEC this year.
The ACC had a winning record versus the SEC this year.It's true.
It's true.And Florida.
GT and USCe suck.
And Florida.Yes, and Florida. Florida sucks. Hard.
Soon as ESPN opened their CFP show listing the criteria for selection and emphasizing the point that missing players/coaches can be considered for team exclusion, I knew right away the fix was in for Bama/SEC.The fix. Great description
Soon as ESPN opened their CFP show listing the criteria for selection and emphasizing the point that missing players/coaches can be considered for team exclusion, I knew right away the fix was in for Bama/SEC.Let me get this straight:
Let me get this straight:*whispers* they could have started with any of their guidelines to justify any of the exclusions. Cherrypicking this one just signals to everyone what they were going to do
the committee abides by it's own guidelines.....and that means the fix was in.
What the what?!?
*whispers* they could have started with any of their guidelines to justify any of the exclusions. Cherrypicking this one just signals to everyone what they were going to doYou're in O.J. land, man. A lot of you are.
The fix wasn’t in. We have to get over this notion that our opinions are so spot on that the only explanation for someone disagreeing with us is because of some nefarious reason.THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
It was a tough call. I would have put FSU but I get the rationale for Bama.
Back to the AP poll real quick......this AP poll is the first time Michigan is ranked #1 since 1997.not me
That astounds me.
You're in O.J. land, man. A lot of you are.I'm sorry these basic concepts are difficult for you to follow.
The fix wasn’t in.The FIX is ALWAYS in, every time, no matter what. Any time a thing happens I don't like, it's because of the Fix, and Catch 22.
Hopefully the first Tom Brady-Patriots Super Bowl, the Giants with Hostetler, the Eagles with Foles, all get wiped off the board. You don't deserve a chance to keep winning with a backup QB.its not that they have to use their 2nd string qb
You can OOC schedule like trash, by your own choice, but if your QB gets hurt, sorry, unforgiveable.
I hope they just go to a 64 team playoff. At least admit it's just a TV product at that point
its not that they have to use their 2nd string qbNo, you actually watched their true freshman third string quarterback, who had zero experience. And they had more offensive yards than Michigan did yesterday.
its because under him the team completely stinks
they have no passing game and the qb just stands there like a deer in the headlights
until most of the time he is sacked
the team going against them plays 8 in the box cause there is no real passing threat and therefore no rushing game either
I watched this for 4 quarters yesterday as did the committee
Bamma is the better team than FSU - obviouslyYeah. on Friday Georgia was obviously a better team in Alabama. And Oregon was obviously a better team in Washington.
didn't think the committee had the balls to do it.
this backlash is why
Screw FSU and the ACC - yup, bad luck that the QB goes down - injuries are a part of the game
I'd rather see Bama vs Michigan
I'd guess Bama would be favored over FSU with the Noles first string QBProbably. They were heavily favored over Auburn too. And Georgia was favored over Alabama.
Yeah. on Friday Georgia was obviously a better team in Alabama. And Oregon was obviously a better team in Washington.when the alternative was to leave the SEC out of the playoff
opinions. Wrong as often as they are right. Was TCU better than Bama last year when Bama had 2 very close losses? Everyone thought so, but they actually went by real results. Until this year.
when the alternative was to leave the SEC out of the playoffAgreed. Doesn’t mean we have to like it.
the SEC and ESPN won't allow this to happen - period
Bama was going to be in - at the expense of Texas or FSU
easier for the committee to use that little clause about injured players than explain the head to head with the Horns
Probably. They were heavily favored over Auburn too. And Georgia was favored over Alabama.agreed, but they were choosing what games will be played. not simply waiting for the result of said game
meaning let’s let the games be played instead of thinking we can just pick and choose based on a beauty pageant
Agreed. Doesn’t mean we have to like it.yup, I'd rather see Bama fans and the SEC melt down for being left out
UGA is a 13.5 point favorite over FSU. FSU at this point is not good. And sure, maybe they pull the upset, upsets happen, but play that game 100 times UGA wins 80.
I think Tenn would be favored over FSU right now.
And for me, it matters, I don't care to see a weakened team get blown out.
Thrilled to announce that @ATLAirport has been crowned the Best Airport in North America by @businesstravelerusa for the second year in a row! This prestigious award acknowledges our unwavering dedication to improving infrastructure and providing an exceptional passenger experience at the world's busiest and most efficient airport.It still is, but once the construction is done it should be much better. Right now it just sucks.
Even as ATL continues to receive recognition for its world-class service, the City of Atlanta is constantly working to improve operations and passenger experience. From opening a new state-of-the-art fire station to adding parking decks to modernizing our Concourses, we are dedicated to ensuring this economic engine for the Southeast region of the country stands head and shoulders above the rest.
Hartsfield-Jackson named ‘North America’s Best Airport’ for 2nd year in a row (fox5atlanta.com) (https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/hartsfield-jackson-named-north-americas-best-airport-for-2nd-year-in-a-row)
I find it a lot easier to think about "worst airports". Most, to me, are about the same. LAX used to be bad, maybe it's better now. Toronto is awful, been through it four times now, really awful.
The rest seem OK to me. The smaller ones are more accomodating I think, like say Savannah.
LAX is pretty terrible. I try to avoid it if I possibly can. I'd rather pay more to fly out of John Wayne. AI'm certain I've mentioned before that John Wayne is my favorite airport in the world. I'll definitely choose it over LAX any time I can.
Atlanta ranked 4th most fun city by WalletHub (fox5atlanta.com) (https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/atlanta-ranked-4th-most-fun-city-by-wallethub?fbclid=IwAR0i_i-OOpjPtOwA1h8IEHj6uNkBh6HyckPWWLovoA_EJ6jPXWHOHc2AjL4)I agree with only a few of those. Some are no longer fun but used to be.
Most Fun Cities in America in 2023 (wallethub.com) (https://wallethub.com/edu/most-fun-cities-in-the-us/23455)
I clicked for you don't have to.
1Las Vegas, NV71.381178
2Orlando, FL62.423366
3Miami, FL55.9172165
4Atlanta, GA55.7396104
5San Francisco, CA53.3565176
6New Orleans, LA52.49184129
7Austin, TX51.6020787
8Chicago, IL50.57812144
9Honolulu, HI49.98222162
10New York, NY49.35510182
11Cincinnati, OH49.22142035
12Denver, CO48.991613125
13Portland, OR48.86178158
14St. Louis, MO48.78231716
15Washington, DC48.67119175
16San Diego, CA48.33421168
17Tampa, FL47.83103096
18Fort Lauderdale, FL47.401515150
19Houston, TX47.28291472
20Los Angeles, CA47.011216164
Every such list is about criteria to an extent, whether the preparer is really serious and made any effort, or just wants clicks. It's plausible this, and other such lists, were prepared in some room in a meeting with "five" people who thought about each one about ten seconds. It's very akin to "best places to retire" etc.It would be better than the list above, without a doubt.
I'd guess our collective here could compile such a list, top 20, and it would reflect our idea of "fun", and it'd probably be an OK list. But would it be of any real value?
Nope.
The four "best teams" might well be UK, OSU, UGA, and Texas, by which I mean the teams that would have the best chance of winning each game.Bold take on Kentucky
States With the Highest Property TaxesThis is kinda misleading
Florida - not on the list of top 15
2. Illinois
Average effective property tax: 2.05%
6. Texas
Average effective property tax: 1.66%
7. Wisconsin
Average effective property tax: 1.63%
8. Nebraska
Average effective property tax: 1.61%
10. Iowa
Average effective property tax: 1.50%
15. Kansas
Average effective property tax: 1.32%
they cornsidered and listed those numbersbut as an example in California the average house cost is over $700,000 the avg tax rate is 1% but the dollar payout is $7000
6. Texas
Average effective property tax: 1.66%
2022 average home value: $308,392
Average annual property tax paid: $5,119
With a property tax rate edging up to 1.7%, and an average home value of over $300,000, Texas homeowners are paying over $5,000 in taxes each year.
___________________
I can somewhat manage my tax by purchasing a less expensive house
like I stated, I can't change the rate, but I can choose to buy a cheaper houseor you could live in a state where housing costs less
well, I sure wouldn't be living in the expensive areas of Texas or NebraskaYoure right Texas is as expensive as hell
I live in a small town of 300 folks in Iowa on a dead end street - 1100 sq ft house - not expensive
House here is worth 25% more than the house I sold in Illinois.The average tax rate for Illinois is 2% and for Florida is 1% so thats possible
Taxes here are 25% of what I paid in Illinois.
You read that correctly.
House here is worth 25% more than the house I sold in Illinois.living more than 25% closer to the marina
Taxes here are 25% of what I paid in Illinois.
You read that correctly.
Our rate is the same. Boarded flight to Kona.Fair winds and following seas
The average tax rate for Illinois is 2% and for Florida is 1% so thats possibleI know it's possible because I write the checks. ;)
How can Milwaukee be the most expensive utilities on average when that average is less than the state average of Hawaii? That should mean at least one city in Hawaii is more than Milwaukee.Possible that there is a population cutoff for city size. Milwaukee is over 500K while Honolulu is under 350K. And if it's including the wider metro area Milwaukee is >1.5M while Honolulu is ~1M.
Better than 2 girls
One bathroom with four boys.
These states saw the largest influx of movers in 2023, according to U-Haul:
- Texas
Misleading. Most of the people who moved here in 2023 illegally crossed the border.Not their fault. They've been encouraged to break the law.
Misleading. Most of the people who moved here in 2023 illegally crossed the border.I'd say we need to make it illegal for Californians and yankees to move here, too, but clearly that doesn't work.
I used u-haul to move the last 4 times because it was all local and I don't own that much stuff.And you seem to think that anyone who isn't absolutely uncomfortable every day about money and living paycheck to paycheck is rich.
I love it, though - talk of $3K game packages and trips to Tuscany, having never moved with u-haul....but scoff when it's suggested you have wealth.
There are multiple "rivers in Egypt" on this board.
I'd say we need to make it illegal for Californians and yankees to move here, too, but clearly that doesn't work.because laws aren't enforced
I rented a Ryder truck to move across Iowa for work once - company paid for itI've moved myself a LOT of times. From 2000-2010 I had 10 different addresses across 3 states. I think the only time I had paid movers was the relocation from CA to GA (paid by company), but it's not like that was much b/c it was from a 1bdr apartment into a 4bdr house, so we didn't have much stuff. I had to pay for the move back out of pocket so used PODS which I packed all the stuff, and loaded and unloaded myself (plus with friends). From 2010 on I only had my move in the divorce in 2016 which was easy as my ex ended up taking most of the big furniture, so I did that with a uhaul myself as well.
all my other moves, (haven't been many) I didn't pay U-Haul or Ryder.
found friends and relatives - too cheap
But I think I'm at a point in my life now that the next move I make I will pay movers to handle it.
I'd say we need to make it illegal for Californians and yankees to move here, too, but clearly that doesn't work.
I love it, though - talk of $3K game packages and trips to Tuscany, having never moved with u-haul....but scoff when it's suggested you have wealth.Who here said this?
These states saw the largest influx of movers in 2023, according to U-Haul:Too cities:
- Texas
- Florida
- North Carolina
- South Carolina
- Tennessee
- Idaho
- Washington
- Arizona
- Colorado
- Virginia
- Nevada
- Vermont
- Utah
- Wyoming
- Delaware
California is at the bottom of U-Haul’s list for states that gained population
I've moved myself a LOT of times. From 2000-2010 I had 10 different addresses across 3 states.:o :cheer: Damn Papa was a rolling stone.I've pulled up stakes but that's like the tribes striking the
We didn't move much anyway. Midwest furniture is not a fit down here. Plus, movers charge by the pound for long-haul moves.
Wut?See CD's response above.
Does space work differently in Florida than in the midwest?
I had a box of trophies I had "earned" in HS playing ball. They seemed like really nice keepsakes when I was 18. They were all tossed.Yeah, I had a ton of trophies from martial arts tournaments during HS that were just sitting in my parent's house. When I lived in Marietta and they once drove down from Chicago to see me, they brought them all. They didn't make the move back to CA lol.
:o :cheer: Damn Papa was a rolling stone.I've pulled up stakes but that's like the tribes striking theYep. Lot of life changes in that decade. Started in West Lafayette in 2000. Then San Jose. Then after 11 months in SJ my roommate wanted to move to downtown SJ and I moved to a different place in SJ. Then I got laid off and ended up moving to SoCal, but wasn't married, so rented a room in a house for a while until I got married and moved into an apt with my now-ex. Lived there and she bought a dog (we weren't allowed to have one) and when they found out, had to move again to a different apartment. Decided we wanted to leave SoCal and moved to GA. Turned around and moved 2 years later back to CA. I told her if I was moving back to CA I wanted to be near the beach. So we got a small apt near the beach. One kid arrived, then 2nd kid arrived, so we moved to a more spacious condo. Finally the collapse of the real estate market came, and we finally bought a house at the end of 2010.tentsteepees and following the buffalo/elk herds
I think were I to have a place near the beach, I'd probably prefer having lighter beachier furniture.Well beachier couches don't hold up well here during football season. Maybe great with the wine and cheesers not so much for the pretzels and beer crowd :111:
I bought my ex outex out - not a bad idea
daughters stayed in the same house
all worked out pretty well
so rented a room in a house for a while until I got married and moved into an apt with my now-ex.now-ex, another not a bad idea
We have a fair bit of gray. Couch and loveseat are a dark gray. Single chair a light-medium gray.Reason number 18,973 to not have a dog.
Can't do white furniture with kids and a dog.
If the bbq is good, mortal enemies can dine together, because no one is talking.Amen brutha. Lotsa horns and ags will sit together and stfu whilst devouring good Q.
(https://i.imgur.com/fLidEek.png)Sounds a bit like Scott Frost
I have no desire to visit a large truck stop or a BucceesWell sure, you're not towing a 32' RV, either!
now, show me a Czech Stop or a Slovacek's and I'm hitting the brakes!!!Heck yeah! I stop at Czech Stop, with my RV, every time I take it up to the DFW area (which is every year for TX-OU plus other various trips).
(https://i.imgur.com/r8FdkNw.png)
I was surprised to see Wisconsin, to be honest. It's a "smallish" state that is truly dominated by the Wackers.I guess everybody loves whiskey. :)
The ACC will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
$ is the water of legal structures.....you may have built a fortress, but give $ enough time, it will erode everything and win.True enough, I just don't think this one is going to erode nearly as quickly as a lot of folks assumed it would.
True enough, I just don't think this one is going to erode nearly as quickly as a lot of folks assumed it would.If FSU, Miami, UNC and UVA were able to somehow get out to the B1G, would ESecPN even want ACC rights anymore?
Their fundamental problem is that ESPN has their rights either way, so has no incentive to help spring them. Only the B1G's TV partners would have any incentive, and it's apparent that for the time being, the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.
If FSU, Miami, UNC and UVA were able to somehow get out to the B1G, would ESecPN even want ACC rights anymore?Adding Stanford, Berkeley, and SMU just made it harder to disband the conference, if that were even a possibility. I don't think anyone's getting out until the GOR assumed damages get small enough to pay your way out.
And then Clemson, NC State, and VT to the SEC (along with a XII school probably (oSu?)).
I don't know how many votes would be required to blow up the ACC.
I'm sure Stanford, Cal, Wake, Dook, Cuse, BC, Pitt, GT and Louisville would not be up for voting to implode.
Adding Stanford, Berkeley, and SMU just made it harder to disband the conference, if that were even a possibility. I don't think anyone's getting out until the GOR assumed damages get small enough to pay your way out.I forgot about SMU.
I forgot about SMU.Unfortunately for them, those are the bylaws they agreed to when they signed the contracts. Not gonna be very compelling in court to say "Yeah but I only signed up for the good stuff, not the stuff I don't wanna."
FSU, UNC and Miami all voted against the Cal twins and SMU joining.
The ACC is a conference, reluctantly.
times have changedTime were changing in 2011. And 2010. And 1996. And 1992. And 1991.
True enough, I just don't think this one is going to erode nearly as quickly as a lot of folks assumed it would.
Their fundamental problem is that ESPN has their rights either way, so has no incentive to help spring them. Only the B1G's TV partners would have any incentive, and it's apparent that for the time being, the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.
I think ESPN may have some incentive. Assuming FSU and maybe one or two others turn on TVs at a higher rate--and I'm guessing they do--then those teams add exponential value to the SEC, and ESPN could have that value for less than the sum of its parts. Meanwhile, they could drop the ACC entirely, because why would they care about an FSU-less, Clemson-less, Va. Techless (or whoever) ACC?
Similar to Texas and OU joining the SEC. UT/OU carry their own set of eyeballs with them, but moving to the SEC (or Big Ten) is not like moving anywhere else. If those teams moved to the PAC 2 (or, just to be fair about this, let's say the PAC didn't implode and it was still the PAC 12), that's still mostly the extent of it....they carry that many eyeballs. But the SEC/B1G have giant bases already built in, and now that many eyeballs are added on top of what UT and OU already bring. Because they're conference teams, so now we all are interested in what's happening. Why do I watch Tennessee play South Carolina? Solely because as an LSU fan, it interests me to watch what's going on in the conference. I hardly watch OU games, but I will be going forward. Same would apply for Texas if I weren't married to a fan. Same as right now I rarely watch FSU....but I would if they were an SEC team.
So ESPN could not only keep their current SEC viewership, they could turn that entire viewership onto a few new teams, exploding those markets, and quit paying for ACC deadweight nobody is currently watching.
I could be wrong, obviously, without having the benefit of the real numbers in front of me. But that's my theory.
Now, can ESPN sling enough $ to change anything? Maybe not. But like I say......water. It may take eons, but it will win. The ACC will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
Top BBQ restaurants in each state, a ranking, sort-of.I don’t think the SC one is right. Although maybe he has gotten better in the past few years.
https://travelerdoor.com/2023/10/12/bestbbq/?utm_campaign=TD-us-d-bestbbq-guido-V2GUIDOsol-G265-desktop-feedspla-BC-vv20-s-271223&utm_content=120203870853760734&utm_source=FB&utm_medium=120203870870450734&cq_src=facebook&cq_cmp=TD-us-d-bestbbq-guido-V2GUIDOsol-G265-desktop-feedspla-BC-vv20-s-271223&cq_con=120203870870450734&cq_med=Facebook_Desktop_Feed&cq_net=fb&fbclid=IwAR18urK5TNK2lSabd7DrR8FCjHJeZpQ1sjE90ZKjC3afgz9ezkXw5tCFHoo
But also, ESPN is currently being viewed as a losing property by Disney and is being shopped around. It's uncertain going forward that they're going to have ANY money to throw around. Which is another reason to doubt ESPN's willingness to become involved in springing FSU or anyone else, from the ACC. That would cost them additional money they probably don't currently have to spend.
I've heard that. Is that supposed to mean ESPN isn't profitable? That would surprise me.
Plus, out of all of Disney's arms, I'd think their recurring massive movie/TV failures that have been losing them $ hand over fist would blot out any concerns about ESPN, if not actively make ESPN the cash cow that pays the other bills in the meantime. Their movie/TV dept. is on a massive run of losses, and their streaming service continues to hemorrhage $. I imagine the theme parks are still doing well, but I don't know.
In both directions--the fact I thought ESPN is successful, and the fact I know their film/streaming branches aren't--I'm surprised they want to dump ESPN.
Judging by my step-sons and everyone their age I know, generations behind mine aren't "watching TV" anymore. It's stream-or-die...
What would it take for ESPN to break free from the cable/satellite companies and associated contracts? If they could go completely a la carte, offer mainly live games and successful programming like College Game Day, they could do massive layoffs, cut the unprofitable content, and get more in the black.What I think we've seen over the last 5(ish?) years is that it's not necessarily "stream or die". It was thought that cord-cutting would kill live TV. It didn't. Streaming services have cropped up that offer the same product as traditional linear cable/satellite TV with an alternative delivery method. So if you want live TV, you can pick cable/satellite. Or you can pick Hulu Live TV, YouTube TV, Sling, etc. They're all "streaming" but they're live TV.
I personally would be irked by that, because it means in football season I'd have to turn on YTTV for FOX, NBC, and CBS, and then also whatever form ESPN's revamped service was. However, from their standpoint, perhaps it would be worth it.
I imagine they'd lose viewers in that model because a certain amount of viewers will only access them through tradition cable/satellite. But with an eye on the future, I think that stuff is dead anyway. Judging by my step-sons and everyone their age I know, generations behind mine aren't "watching TV" anymore. It's stream-or-die, and they'll never have cable unless some massive shift happens. A move like that might hurt in the short-term, but may pay off long term. Not sure.
The issue with streaming was that is was only appealing when it was a semi-cable bundle. Now it’s quasi a La carte and no longer a great deal.Which is exactly what so many of us predicted when people were clamoring for a la carte content. Be careful what you wish for, right?
specially when they are piggy backing on cable-internet.They don't have the overhead and still could cut their charges and make up for it on volume,then reputationI don't see an issue with piggy-backing on cable internet. They pay a ton of money to secure the nationwide network bandwidth they need that the cable guys don't have to pay. The cable guys don't need to pay that b/c they own the last-mile delivery.
Agree on this in general, except for my 16yo daughter the exception, who hates sorting through all the various streaming apps and prefers a more traditional "cable" type viewing experience, where she can flip from channel to channel on a single consolidated guide.WORD - No doubt your kid is prolly more tech savy than the average over 50/60 crowd.And that's where a lot of us are at,is constant sorting doable? - sure but we're tired of sham artists moving the goal posts.Higher price stabbing,changing progaming,getting worse reception,basically a total lack of customer care. As if somehow them even mailing the bill out is too much of a burden.I have been OTA Antenna coming up on 2 yrs in April took some tweaking but I'm very happy and impressed with some of the line ups. I Have about 15 ft of coaxial cable hooked to the rabbit ears and i seemingly always find reception spots.I get quite clearly the "old" program channels.
There were two primary ways that they "cut their charges":as you know, avoiding the tax man is fleeting and futile
- Not related to overhead, but related to taxes/fees. Across the country, there are tons of taxes and fees that have been applied to cable TV (and possibly satellite, but it's been too long since I had satellite to know). The streamers could avoid that b/c they weren't beholden to local gov't.
(https://i.imgur.com/FL6aCML.png)Florida drivers do suck. I think the reason is simple.
I hear many folks claiming they have the worst drivers of any state, oddly enough. Nobody claims to have the best.
And of course it's entirely an opinion unless based on some metric.
Florida drivers do suck. I think the reason is simple.Almost everyone in Texas is from #6, so that explains a lot.
Half of the people who live here come from #'s 2-4 in the above list.
Also #'s 9, 11, 12, 18, 19 and 22.
Almost everyone in Texas is from #6, so that explains a lot.
What I think we've seen over the last 5(ish?) years is that it's not necessarily "stream or die". It was thought that cord-cutting would kill live TV. It didn't. Streaming services have cropped up that offer the same product as traditional linear cable/satellite TV with an alternative delivery method. So if you want live TV, you can pick cable/satellite. Or you can pick Hulu Live TV, YouTube TV, Sling, etc. They're all "streaming" but they're live TV.
An odd "fact" is that about 78% of drivers believe they are better than average.
If you want an outstanding example of oversimplification and bastardizing the philosophy of statistics....A smart person would know their anecdotal evidence and sample size of one is meaningless. :57:
I've always considered myself to be of average intelligence. Reason being, I have met many people who I was certain are smarter than me, and I have met many people I was reasonably sure probably weren't as smart as me. I am in the middle, therefore I am average.
WTF? I don't even know who that is?Miles O'Neill, Hun School , Quarterback (247sports.com) (https://247sports.com/Player/Miles-ONeill-46141335/)
(https://i.imgur.com/bucJEem.png)
In my opinion, having a great recruiting class is a lot better than not, even if other factors also are important. To disparage it as "not very important" is a large over statement in my view. And yes, some great recruiting classes fail to produce at times.
With the transfer portal, it's nearly meaningless anyway. The better your class, the less likely you're going to keep as many. Everyone can't play."nearly meaningless" is sort of like "not very important", to me.
"nearly meaningless" is sort of like "not very important", to me.Cool, thanks for quoting the original thing that you were responding to.
"nearly meaningless" is sort of like "not very important", to me.The fact that CU has the 90th-rated class, BUT ALSO:
The fact that CU has the 90th-rated class, BUT ALSO:22nd is WAY better
When the transfers are incorporated, Colorado’s class is 22nd. His transfer class alone is 5th nationally.
From 90th to 22nd....."nearly meaningless" doesn't seem so absurd, does it?
I disagree entirely that recruiting rankings are anything close to "nearly meaningless".I'm not even sure you believe your 2nd part. Going from 90 to 22 is MASSIVE. How in the holy hell can you suggest otherwise????????????
No one even suggested this - the specific point is that traditional HS player rankings are now far, far less important, thanks to the transfer portal.
Citing some single outlier is not very persuasive otherwise. It's not really all that much to go from 90 to 22 anyway, a handful of stars can do it. They'd be far better off with a recruiting ranking of 30 with transfers boosting them to maybe 13 or so. No shit. Higher rankings are better than lower rankings. That's what you just said here. Duh.
In my opinion, having a great recruiting class is a lot better than not, even if other factors also are important. To disparage it as "not very important" is a large over statement in my view. And yes, some great recruiting classes fail to produce at times.as a Nebraska fan and living through the years of hearing coaches and fans say it's about development (as if the players from the 80's and 90's were mostly developed from zero stars), I can attest that you have to have good marble to make the Statue of David. We've seen our share of flops, and rankings are not perfect as they don't account for player fit... BUT, you have to have difference-makers and you have to recruit them.
I had some business with the "local" tag office south of us and after finishing, I drove to Fox Bros. BBQ. I'm pleased to report it's still excellent. Their brisket is not dry. We had leftovers which I had for dinner.seems a bit pricey - $6 for a sausage link - but when in Rome
We had leftoversI don't understand.
seems a bit pricey - $6 for a sausage link - but when in Romejust checked one of my favorite BBQ spots in Iowa
The AXE is in Madison as of today.it's embarrassing, but true
Illinois and NU is a thing. Iowa and UNL is becoming pretty heated.
The AXE is in Madison as of today.Oh yeah, that makes sense. I always forget about Northwestern, even though I did a 2-month program there one summer.
Illinois and NU is a thing. Iowa and UNL is becoming pretty heated.
RANKED: The 30 Best Tailgating Schools In College Football (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/ranked-the-30-best-tailgating-schools-in-college-football/ss-BB1j8tPB?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=762499079c004b23805f351bd4789ad2&ei=22)
Looks about right to me, from what I hear from folks that go to a lot more stadiums than I do.
Check out this article excerpt from ESPN's all-CFP team of the decade:Make that 3. Taylor was in high school in 2016.
If Henry's 2015 season set the standard for running backs, it was Taylor's career at Wisconsin that created the blueprint for consistent greatness. There have been 17 player seasons during the playoff era in which a tailback racked up 1,900 yards on the ground. Taylor is responsible for three of them. He finished his four-year Badgers career with 6,174 yards on the ground, the fourth-most all time (and second only to Donnel Pumphrey (https://www.espn.com/nfl/player/_/id/3047519/donnel-pumphrey) in the playoff era). He's the only player in history with multiple 2,000-yard seasons. He finished in the top 10 of Heisman voting three times. Taylor's Wisconsin teams made the Big Ten title game three times (2016, 2017 and 2019) but lost all three, leaving one true void on his résumé: reaching the playoff.
.
2 glaring errors.....just sloppy.
interesting rankingGoff.
the top 5 follow 5 star recruiting
the next 5 do not
Cal = QB "U"? - Rogers
Projecting college football's 11 most intimidating environments during 2024 season (247sports.com) (https://247sports.com/college/georgia/longformarticle/projecting-college-footballs-11-most-intimidating-environments-during-2024-season-229322127/#2394402)Michigan stadium is NOT loud or intimidating. At all.
This is rather silly to me. The most intimidating stadium would be the one with the best team, maybe one could include some vennue that is particularly hostile like Penn State or Iowa even if they happened to be so so. I don't think they even included Ohio State, but I glanced quickly.
Memorial Stadium in Lincoln isn't nearly as loud as it was in the 80sword
Much more wine & cheese corporate types and fewer blue collar real fans.
real fans can't afford tickets these daze
there was no chance at verbal audibles or snap count back in the 80sI agree with that.
clapping to get the snap??? forgettaboutit
none of today's stadiums are as loud as they once were
Yeah, that 51% notion is not broadly true at all, not even close.
it's all 100% beefI guess you got me there. Snouts and tendons and shit. Good eatin'.
you want Snouts and tendons and shit - eat all beef hot dogsOr spend a couple days in Vietnam.
I think we all know more or less what's in hotdogs, and sausage. Ground beef is just that. We have ingredient labels which I know few read. There is a lot of "hidden" salt and sugar in a ton of things, though it's all listed on the label.
There is a regulation on wines from California about the varietal in the wine, if not listed specifically. Anything saying "merlot" as the type of wine must be at least 75% merlot. This is not a big deal usually as a blend that isn't 75% of one varietal may be called simply "red wine" and still be superb. Or not.
Wine "ratings" and "gold medals" seem to have abated a bit fortunately.
Malbec is the other allowed grape in red Bordeauxs, and I don't know of any that are 100% either. The right banks tend to be merlot heavy of course, maybe merlot and cab franc. Some of the most expensive ones are unclassified, like Petrus.Yup, hence my preference.
I'm good with the Bibs and the 1* places. Topolobampo in Chicago is a great 1*. Probably the best Michelin place I've eaten at. Topolobampo - Chicago Restaurant (topolochicago.com) (https://topolochicago.com/)
Bib Gourmand: Signifies great value, highlighting simple yet skillful cooking at an affordable price
One MICHELIN Star: Restaurants where dishes with distinct flavors are prepared to a consistently high standard
Two MICHELIN Stars: Awarded when the personality and talent of the chef are evident in their expertly crafted dishes
Three MICHELIN Stars: Chefs at the peak of their profession whose cooking has been elevated to an art form
My guesstimates...
Bib Gourmand: Signifies great value, highlighting simple yet skillful cooking at an affordable price
One MICHELIN Star: Restaurants where dishes with distinct flavors are prepared to a consistently high standard
a small meal, but it was good, so you're happy
Two MICHELIN Stars: Awarded when the personality and talent of the chef are evident in their expertly crafted dishes
a smaller meal, kinda weird, you grab a burger on the way home
Three MICHELIN Stars: Chefs at the peak of their profession whose cooking has been elevated to an art form
is this food? not sure what it is, not sure how to eat it. you sit and eat at a known commodity restaurant afterward
93 Zona played in the PACThey allowed fewer rushing yards than rushing attempts.
not a run heavy conference
They allowed fewer rushing yards than rushing attempts.because the PAC was a passing conference?
Case closed.
It's official: I'll get push-back on anything I post. Jesus.No you won’t.
wasn't pushing back so much as asking questionsIt was just the flex eagle defense aka "Desert Swarm" with the right personnel.
see the "?"?
Man, I've never followed golf very closely, but now apparently I follow it even less. I only recognized maybe 5 names on that list.(https://i.imgur.com/TOpPbjo.jpeg)
Force the poor to be so poor they don't have to pay taxes.I don't know of anyone who favors that approach. I certainly don't.
I don't know of anyone who favors that approach. I certainly don't.Everyone with quarterly share-holder meetings does.
I will bet you every cent I earn for the rest of my life that this isn't true.
An interesting thing about the "disappearing middle class" we hear about, most of those who depart it move to the upper class.
Sigh.The quote you cited is not in the Pew Report anywhere. It's in the one I first referenced which is just a summary thereof. And it's clearly wrong.
4% of a larger population > 7% of a smaller population (not in every case, but apparently in this one)
Take it up with the writer, not me.
From your article:
[img width=500 height=181.998]https://i.imgur.com/2s71Tjw.jpeg[/img]
7% > 4%.As long as you believe those providing those numbers.As Twain said over 100 yrs ago there are lies,damn lies and statistics
The math may be hard for some here.
I'm not talking about the "extremes".
How the American middle class has changed in the past five decades | Pew Research Center (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/20/how-the-american-middle-class-has-changed-in-the-past-five-decades/)If the term "percent" throws anyone off, think of it this way.
(https://i.imgur.com/gWP272n.png)
Everyone with quarterly share-holder meetings does.I don't know where to start with you. Really.
I don't know where to start with you. Really.Everyone requiring perpetual growth, how's that?
Everyone requiring perpetual growth, how's that?You realize that this "Wall Street requires perpetual growth" myth is, well, a myth, right?
I think the average knowledge of the stock markets and investments in general may be pretty low, and often wrong. I have some knowedge and experience, but I don't by any means claim to be an expert.Well, yeah.
The most expensive stock is BRK-A which pays no dividend, one share costs over $600,000. There is a reason for that.
I think the average knowledge of the stock markets and investments in general may be pretty low, and often wrong. I have some knowedge and experience, but I don't by any means claim to be an expert.Yeah, I'm by no means an expert. But this has been a frequent topic of conversation as my son is 16 and he's got some interest in it, and my 11 yo daughter is copying his interest as well.
Re-investment is not a bad thing for a company like Berkshire.Berkshire is a superb example of a perpetual growth company. And given how their business works, that's not a bad thing.
You realize that this "Wall Street requires perpetual growth" myth is, well, a myth, right?I understand this, but does Coca-Cola not have quarterly predicted earnings and/or marginally-increased or maintained (depending on the financial environment) market share they need/want to meet/exceed?
A huge portion of large public companies (~75% of the Fortune 500) pay a dividend. Which, to a large extent, means that investors in those companies expect the company to pay out a large portion of their quarterly profits directly to shareholders, rather than constantly reinvesting in growth.
For those companies, the Street doesn't care ALL that much about growth much. They care about earnings (profit). Now, contraction can reduce earnings and growth can sometimes increase earnings, so growth may be good. But growth at the expense of earnings, i.e. buying market share through reducing prices, is bad.
Think about it. If you buy shares of Coca-Cola (KO), do you expect them to grow revenues 20% every year? They already DOMINATE the market share for the categories they play in. They simply can't perpetually grow. Their stock price has hovered between $50 and $60 for the last 5 years. There's no "buy low / sell high" in there. So why buy KO? For predictable income--their annual dividend yield is ~3% so just by parking your money in KO you're getting a very predictable and safe 3% annual ROI. Because while they're not likely to grow much, they're also not likely to go out of business or stop making money.
| Allied Chemical Corporation | Exxon Corporation † (formerly Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey) | Owens-Illinois, Inc. |
| Aluminum Company of America | General Electric Company | The Procter & Gamble Company |
| American Can Company | General Foods Corporation | Sears Roebuck & Company |
| American Telephone and Telegraph Company | General Motors Corporation | Standard Oil Co. of California |
| American Tobacco Company (B shares) | Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company | Texaco Incorporated |
| Bethlehem Steel Corporation | Inco Limited † (formerly International Nickel Company, Ltd. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_Inco#Pre-Vale_history)) | Union Carbide Corporation |
| Chrysler Corporation | International Harvester Company | United States Steel Corporation |
| E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company | International Paper Company | United Technologies Corporation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Technologies_Corporation) † (formerly United Aircraft Corporation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Aircraft_Corporation)) |
| Eastman Kodak Company | Johns-Manville Corporation | Westinghouse Electric Corporation |
| Esmark Corporation † (formerly Swift & Company) | Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M) ↑ | F. W. Woolworth Company |
The companies like Coke do prefer to have rising earnings. Whether they look like some runaray freight train or not is subjective. Bear in mind, the figures are not adjusted for inflation.Coke owns a lot of things other than Coke too. They do reinvest, to diversify their portfolio.
(https://i.imgur.com/RM4Nmab.png)
Pepsi turned itself into a snack company. Most of their products aren't good for you.Not good, but not terrible. They have some decent holdings.
"Progressives" need to move to Europe. They will find out they are not wanted in most places.Our "progressive friends" were literally shocked when my wife stated, on being asked, she had no interested in living in France. Oddly enough, none of them ever asked why.
Kodak, heh.AT&T
3M and P&G still listed. I think they are the only 2.
| [th]SYMBOL [/th] [th]NAME [/th] [th]PRICE [/th] [th]CHANGE [/th] [th]%CHANGE [/th] [th]LOW [/th] [th]HIGH [/th] [th]PREVIOUS CLOSE [/th] | |||||||
| AMZN (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/AMZN) | Amazon.com Inc | 177.23 | +2.6 | +1.49 | 0 | 0 | 177.23 |
| AXP (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/AXP) | American Express Co | 233 | +1.96 | +0.85 | 0 | 0 | 233 |
| AMGN (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/AMGN) | Amgen Inc | 271.91 | +2.98 | +1.11 | 0 | 0 | 271.91 |
| AAPL (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/AAPL) | Apple Inc | 165.84 | +0.84 | +0.51 | 0 | 0 | 165.84 |
| BA (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/BA) | Boeing Co | 170.48 | +0.66 | +0.39 | 0 | 0 | 170.48 |
| CAT (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/CAT) | Caterpillar Inc | 357.61 | +2.95 | +0.83 | 0 | 0 | 357.61 |
| CSCO (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/CSCO) | Cisco Systems Inc | 48.14 | -0.18 | -0.37 | 0 | 0 | 48.14 |
| CVX (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/CVX) | Chevron Corp | 161.92 | +1.92 | +1.2 | 0 | 0 | 161.92 |
| GS (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/GS) | Goldman Sachs Group Inc | 417.35 | +13.35 | +3.3 | 0 | 0 | 417.35 |
| HD (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/HD) | Home Depot Inc | 336.11 | +0.75 | +0.22 | 0 | 0 | 336.11 |
| HON (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/HON) | Honeywell International Inc | 195.58 | +1.32 | +0.68 | 0 | 0 | 195.58 |
| IBM (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/IBM) | International Business Machines Corp | 181.9 | +0.32 | +0.18 | 0 | 0 | 181.9 |
| INTC (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/INTC) | Intel Corp | 34.41 | +0.21 | +0.61 | 0 | 0 | 34.41 |
| JNJ (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/JNJ) | Johnson & Johnson | 149.12 | +1.21 | +0.82 | 0 | 0 | 149.12 |
| KO (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/KO) | Coca-Cola Co | 60.55 | +0.38 | +0.63 | 0 | 0 | 60.55 |
| JPM (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/JPM) | JPMorgan Chase & Co | 189.41 | +3.61 | +1.94 | 0 | 0 | 189.41 |
| MCD (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/MCD) | McDonald’s Corp | 275.58 | +3.59 | +1.32 | 0 | 0 | 275.58 |
| MMM (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/MMM) | 3M Co | 92.62 | +0.35 | +0.38 | 0 | 0 | 92.62 |
| MRK (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/MRK) | Merck & Co Inc | 126.94 | +1.16 | +0.92 | 0 | 0 | 126.94 |
| MSFT (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/MSFT) | Microsoft Corp | 400.96 | +1.84 | +0.46 | 0 | 0 | 400.96 |
| NKE (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/NKE) | Nike Inc | 94.19 | -0.34 | -0.36 | 0 | 0 | 94.19 |
| PG (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/PG) | Procter & Gamble Co | 160.54 | +2.4 | +1.52 | 0 | 0 | 160.54 |
| TRV (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/TRV) | Travelers Companies Inc | 214.27 | +0.2 | +0.09 | 0 | 0 | 214.27 |
| UNH (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/UNH) | UnitedHealth Group Inc | 491.23 | -9.9 | -1.98 | 0 | 0 | 491.23 |
| CRM (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/CRM) | Salesforce Inc | 273.81 | +3.44 | +1.27 | 0 | 0 | 273.81 |
| VZ (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/VZ) | Verizon Communications Inc | 38.6 | -1.89 | -4.67 | 0 | 0 | 38.6 |
| V (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/V) | Visa Inc | 272.33 | +2.55 | +0.95 | 0 | 0 | 272.33 |
| WMT (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/WMT) | Walmart Inc | 60.14 | +0.61 | +1.02 | 0 | 0 | 60.14 |
| DIS (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/DIS) | Walt Disney Co | 111.99 | -0.62 | -0.55 | 0 | 0 | 111.99 |
| DOW (https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/DOW) | Dow Inc | 56.99 | +0.33 | UNCH | 0 | 0 | 56.99 |
So, it's clear a lot of companies don't keep growing and prospering like some runaway freight train. It would be easier if they did.Don't let facts and truth get in the way.
I understand this, but does Coca-Cola not have quarterly predicted earnings and/or marginally-increased or maintained (depending on the financial environment) market share they need/want to meet/exceed?Yes, like any corporation they're tracking various business targets that they want to meet or exceed. They're a global company so I'm sure they're looking at markets where they're not doing as well as others, and trying to grow. They're looking at stable markets and trying to defend share and profitability. They're looking at emerging threats from different categories (as Badge points out, they diversify their brands for this reason) to ensure they don't shrink.
The over-arching idea being that these entities are runaway locomotives that can't ever stop being runaway locomotives.
Yes, like any corporation they're tracking various business targets that they want to meet or exceed. They're a global company so I'm sure they're looking at markets where they're not doing as well as others, and trying to grow. They're looking at stable markets and trying to defend share and profitability. They're looking at emerging threats from different categories (as Badge points out, they diversify their brands for this reason) to ensure they don't shrink.Okay. I didn't intend for the "runaway train" concept to include a fiery crash. Just the opposite. It's going to behave in a way to ensure perpetual forward movement.......they can't stop fuelling the train with coal, they can't fuel it with less coal, etc.
Business is really hard, because the instant you leave any opening, a competitor will fill it.
But it's certainly not this:
The hyperbole of this statement suggests that a runaway locomotive's inevitable end is a fiery crash. The Coca-Cola Company was founded in 1892.
It's a freight train, to be sure, but it's not a runaway.
So, it's clear a lot of companies don't keep growing and prospering like some runaway freight train. It would be easier if they did.I already cleared up the perpetual prospering in an earlier post. The point is that these companies have to meet their checkpoints of growth or maintenance or market share or or or......or the sky falls. Or they think it will and so then it does.
Okay. I didn't intend for the "runaway train" concept to include a fiery crash. Just the opposite. It's going to behave in a way to ensure perpetual forward movement.......they can't stop fuelling the train with coal, they can't fuel it with less coal, etc.Yeah, if a company stops performing, they stop being a company. See the points above us, talking about the companies that "used to be" in the DJIA.
Or maybe it's a trapeez artist on a tight rope that can never stop walking on the tight rope.
Coca-Cola knows soda isn't a forever thing. So what do they do? Diversify into other drink options while buying up the good ones and bullying the smaller good ones so they can't get any shelf space in stores.They adapt. They also introduce new soda products like Coca-Cola Zero Sugar. They realize that consumer tastes change, and they can't just keep shoveling the old product down our throats. Or we'll stop buying and then they go away.
A year ago, KO had a market cap off 277B. Then it dropped over a number of months to 221B. A 20% drop. It didn't collapse.
I simply foolishly imagine Coca-Cola-esque companies should be able to go from $260 billion worth to $200 billion worth and have it be perfectly okay. Only $200 billion. It's fine, we'll rebound - you know, confidence in the damn thing.
But if that happened (I assume it hasn't), the company would collapse (again, I assume). Thus the tightrope analogy.
There's a point at which the shit would hit the fan, yes?Since you knew everything anybody has posted here on the topic, you should know the kinds of things that happen when some company starts to deteriorate.
“In the short run, the market is a voting machine, but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.”
There's a point at which the shit would hit the fan, yes?I've been at the same company for over 16 years. I've seen our stock price in the teens and I've seen it in the 115 range. We are in a bit of a cyclical industry.
Must border Canada, unless you're Wisconsin!!Do the great lakes borders count?
Do the great lakes borders count?Yes, and Wisconsin does not share one with Canada. It shares Lake Superior borders with Michigan and Minnesota. Ohio and PA share a Canadien border but are not included.
(https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f448e80fac7304d11a7ba3ff3449a11a-pjlq)
(https://i.imgur.com/ysMGwPQ.png)According to who?People who manufacture snow plows? Or have Christmas Tree Farms?Own Ski Resorts?Salt Mines?
Where does this running back room rank with the best of all-time?
Gordon, Ball, White.
(https://i.imgur.com/DEoeY0o.jpeg)
1982 - Roger Craig, Mike Rozier, Tom Rathman
1996 Texas-Ricky Williams, Priest Holmes, Shon Mitchell. Mitchell is the fastest guy I have ever seen. Think of Ron Leflore with shoulder pads.agreed, but I was addressing this claim
My guess is some players may LOOK fast on the field to the casual observer while having a 40 time of 4.67.Maybe but from my own observations, many players that have "football speed" that doesn't necessarily show up in the 40 times, tend to be more dynamic runners that can change speed and direction more quickly then their counterparts. They also tend to have better than average field vision and can plan their routes and make their cuts before defenders crash the lanes, so they appear fast by comparison.
Nick Chubb didn't look fast unless he broke away and was being chased by some safety, then he looked pretty fast.
I think everyone here should be smart enough to understand there's a difference between track speed and football speed. Shon Mitchell was very fast with a football in his hands, but like I said he was never going to break any rushing records. He was a good alternate back though.I can understand this statement
My guess is some players may LOOK fast on the field to the casual observer while having a 40 time of 4.67.Calvin Johnson was always that guy to me. Long loping stride and looked like he was jogging. But nobody could catch him from behind.
Nick Chubb didn't look fast unless he broke away and was being chased by some safety, then he looked pretty fast.
I can understand this statementAdd the implied "on the football field" or "with a football in his hands" and I don't see the issue. Sounds more like you're just trying to kick up some controversy where there really is none.
"the fastest guy I have ever seen"
cannot understand this statement
Add the implied "on the football field" or "with a football in his hands" and I don't see the issue. Sounds more like you're just trying to kick up some controversy where there really is none.I stated I don't have an issue with the added implied
(https://i.imgur.com/Q9QF5Rq.png)
there's the controversy
"the fastest guy I have ever seen"
I remember Burny referring to Shon as a "tanglefooted dwarf"It wasn't Shon, it was a few years later, somewhere around '99 I believe.
It wasn't Shon, it was a few years later, somewhere around '99 I believe.I just remembered! It was Hodges Mitchell, a RB at Texas from 1997-2000. He was 5'6" 180 lbs and Mack Brown always tried to use him like a 6' 220 lb bruiser.
Calvin Johnson was always that guy to me. Long loping stride and looked like he was jogging. But nobody could catch him from behind.
He was pretty good until Ryan Kerrigan killed him.
Terrelle Pryor
(https://media.balls.ie/uploads/2013/10/Terrelle-Pryor-93yd-rush.gif)
Look at all those useless yankee states hating on the Cowboys. I love it!That's gonna happen when you put a team from Texas in the NFC East.