Soxbadger

right now leaning towards. the inspiron 17Se mid level model for the 2gb nvidia graphics card. probably will pass on 3d screen

does anyone have any laptop recommendations my screen recently blew out and thus I'm looking for a new computer. I am Not really looking for an apple so mainly looking for pc ideas. not really sure what I need, mid range dells seem good enough, alienware seem overkill

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 05:19 PM) no no no, math and science cannot be trusted. it's all a 50/50 coin flip. that's why Nate Silver's 95% forecast of a calm, clear night in NY last night was actually perfectly reasonable. Hahaha the comedian is back. What is funny, is you are actually proving my point. You just still cant grasp the concept. Models are built for numerous events over time. If a model is wrong on a single event, that does not necessarily mean that the model is wrong. In order to determine if the model is wrong you would need lots of events, to determine if it was accurate within a certain tolerance. But thanks for once again proving why whether Silver is right or wrong this election, it doesnt mean that his model is flawed, it just means he was right or wrong this election. Because no where is anyone saying "100% certainty" just like a weatherman says "70% chance of rain". If it doesnt rain that day, its not necessarily that the model was wrong, it very well could be the model was right, this just fell into the 30% category.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 05:15 PM) I'm talking about the restrictions on permission to contact. Not sure what you mean by this. You dont think there should be contact restrictions when a player is on scholarship to a school?

Most states run a negative budget with the fed every year. But for a few states like California, Illinois and New York, they wouldnt even be able to afford their regular spending, let alone pay for a disaster. I like that you care about state accountability, but the problem is that most states have none. Perhaps you shouldnt get any federal money if you are running a deficit with the fed. That would be nice for me

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 04:36 PM) I am not in favor of waiving the year sit-out rule. I am in favor of banning a coach preventing a player from transferring to a different school, while said coach can easily leave the college regardless of contract (really? When have we seen a contract ever affect a coach leaving? The surest sign of a coach about to leave is one that just signs a contract extension). These are amateur athletes. It's ridiculous. Then I am not sure you know the rules because the 1 year sit out rule, is the rule we are talking about. A coach cant ban a player at all. The coach at worst, can restrict the transfer, which means the player has to sit for 1 year and pay his own way that year. Just so you know, Uthoff was restricted from going to Iowa by Wisconsin. Uthoff is currently at Iowa. He will get a scholarship next year. There is no such thing as "banning" there is simply forcing the student to sit 1 year without scholarship.

Im not a super star wars fanboy like some (ive never read the books), but its just going down a bad path to do 7,8 and 9. The entire Star Wars universe in 1-6 was built around the Emperor and Darth Vader. They are gone. Now sure, you can write a story, where out of no where another powerful force comes to fight the Jedi, but then again, you need to at minimum have the story arc of the Jedi temple being rebuilt etc, as currently there is only 1 trained Jedi (Luke). So what is the story for 7. It should be Luke rebuilding the Jedi and the Universe recovering from Sith control. Now you could put episode 7 hundreds of years in the future, but why call it episode 7 then? If you are saying its 7, that means its a continuation of the current story arc. And given that the 2 main antagonists are dead, its just silly. Otherwise you get the fun story arc that there was secretly a more powerful sith than the Emperor and Vader, who really was the the one that Luke needed to defeat, but he was just chilling during the first 6 episodes. As I said, itd make a lot more sense to do a non-related story line and not have it reference episode 1-6.

Im pretty sure the future story arcs are mostly written. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars_novels I just would prefer instead of doing episode 7, they did something from Old Republic that was entirely unrelated to Luke. I just dont care to watch Han's kid ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solo_family ) and would just prefer an entirely new Star Wars universe story arc. /shrugs 1-3 are fine because they are the origin story of Darth Vader. 7-9 will just be nonsense. Emperor is dead, Vader is dead. Why not do a story about Darth Plagueis, or a story about the origins of the Sith. Those would be way better and wouldnt trample on an already told story.

Ha this is in the catch all thread, my comment was: Obi-Wan: I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

I think that if a coach leaves the players should also get to leave. That seems fair.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 03:07 PM) http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory...72#.UJAzI64jzRQ Obi-Wan: I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 02:40 PM) Didn't this Wisconsin transfer thing happen awhile ago now, the start of the season is coming near is it possible we can leave the subject in the past or you 2 can pm it out instead of having 3 or so pages going back and forth over something that isn't news anymore. Just one of you be big enough and let the other person have the last word for the sake of everyone else. If everyone wants to shout down this nonsense for what it is, Ill gladly stop posting. I cant believe that anyone in their right mind still cares about this.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 02:26 PM) Now its about PLAYING BASKETBALL not the U of W education you were popping off about. Well, he didn't PLAY BASKETBALL at Wisconsin, so he should be allowed to go where he wants to go. lol What are you even talking about? He didnt get an academic scholarship. Wisconsin recruited him to play basketball, his benefit was to get a Wisconsin education. Youre right, he didnt play basketball, but yet he got the free education. How you can try and spin that into Uthoff not getting the better end of the deal is nonsense. QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 02:31 PM) There is no. f***ing. reason. on. earth. that a coach should be able to restrict a player's transfer anywhere. Absolutely none. These are amateur, unpaid athletes. The coach is making millions and can drop on a dime and leave the college, leaving the player at the whim of the new coach. And then if the player wants to transfer to be with a good fit? Sorry, you have to sit out a year. The player has no protection if the coach leaves, why should the coach get protection for when the player leaves? The bolded is false. Coaches have contracts that govern what they can do. Most coaches have to pay money to get out, if you are unfamiliar, that is called a "buyout" clause. Since everyone wants to talk about Bo Ryan, lets talk some facts: http://www.architecturalshowcase.com/artic...82&zoneid=8 So you mean Bo Ryan contracted with Milwaukee that if he got the Badger job he could leave? You mean that the only way Milwaukee signed him was by giving this concession. OMG we finally are starting to understand the difference between a contract and NCAA rules. If you believe that the NCAA should change their rules and allow the student to negotiate contracts with the schools, so be it, I am all for that. And I would bet that part of getting a scholarship to any Big 10 school would be that the coach would restrict them from transferring in conference. But right now the rules are the rules and no one forced Uthoff to take a scholarship, but once he did, he knew that the rules were that he could not transfer without a release. So far I have seen no evidence that prior to signing Uthoff asked Bo Ryan to verbally agree to that he would allow him to transfer anywhere. So why Uthoff had that impression I have no idea, but the rules are clearly that Uthoff cant transfer anywhere for 1 year without a release.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 01:58 PM) LOL. What if a student came in on scholarship, and realized they'd be a better fit at a different school's program. Do you realize how outrageous it would be for the school to deny that? NCAA basketball is not a business for the athletes. If it was they'd be getting paid. Estimates are a scholarship to Wisconsin is worth over $50k per year. Tuition was $26k alone, that does not include free boarding at a private residence, food all year, etc. And what if a student realizes they are a better fit? 1) They can go to a school that isnt restricted. 2) They can wait 1 year to go to any school they want. How is that so prohibitive?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) Doesn't make them stupid. Some 18 and 19 year old kids make mistakes or change their minds. And with non compete clauses, there are a huge portion of those that are not enforceable. In Uthoff's instance, it shouldn't be about business when its concerning an 19 year old's life. If the kid wants to leave, let him go where he wants, unless of course, you're so paranoid he'll come back and haunt you on the court. Ryan should have been a man, not the child you describe Uthoff as being. This is tiring. The second that Uthoff got a scholarship to go to Wisconsin to PLAY BASKETBALL it was about business. If he doesnt want to be involved in the business, pay to go to college like the rest of us. Guess what, if you pay your own freight you can do whatever you want. If its just about the good of the players only, why have any rules? Why not let UNC give out 100 scholarships? Why not let a player transfer during the season? Oh turns out that Minnesota isnt that good this year, why not try MSU? Oh MSU lost this week, Ill transfer to OSU? At what point do we hold these "kids" to their mistakes. Why not give them more years of eligibility? I only got 4 years, maybe if I got 10 Id have been something. The facts are no one at Wisconsin is talking about Uthoff. Its the past, yet for some reason an Iowa fan resurrects a dead issue. Bo Ryan is the most terrible person in the world, he wanted Uthoff to get a free education at a premiere university. For shame Bo Ryan, for shame.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 01:35 PM) Why should I be responsible for paying for someone to live on the coast where s*** like this happens every now and again? Why is it so bad that state and local governments should be responsible, for, you know, state and local problems? Emergencies are one of the few things that the govt should absolutely be responsible for. As for state v federal, Im sure some states could manage, I just would prefer that we dont leave certain states behind.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 01:29 PM) I wouldn't be so opposed to his actions if he hadn't recruited someone another Big Ten school already signed to a National Letter of Intent and then appealed to the Big Ten when they said he couldn't transfer to his school and was denied again. He is a hypocrite. You mean he is trying to win basketball games. Everyone in the world is a hypocrite at some point, including me. I dont hold people to ridiculous standards. I dont believe Iowa could restrict the release of the LOI, if they could have and didnt, they are stupid. But why should Wisconsin be punished from Iowa's stupidity? Just because my opponent is a moron doesnt mean I have to be one.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 01:21 PM) In my view, restricting where a player can transfer is the most ridiculous and slimey things a coach can do. I personally dont like transfers in conference. If you want to go somewhere else, fine, there are plenty of other options out there. I just work with non-competes, non-solicitations everyday, so it doesnt seem that odd that college sports programs that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars wouldnt want the same protection. Just is good business. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 01:29 PM) Just because someone followed the rules doesn't mean they weren't being petty or just being ridiculous. If a player wants to leave your program and is willing to sit out a season to do so, they should be able to go wherever they want. Making Uthoff's parents pay for a year of college may be no big deal, but what if he was from a family that couldn't afford it? Is that fair? The guy didn't want to play for Wisconsin anymore, and from what you posted, Wisconsin really didn't want him, why restrict? Why restrict him? Its good business. Whether Uthoff is good, bad or indifferent, you do not want a direct competitor to have inside knowledge of your program. Uthoff was on the scout team for a full year, he learned all of Wisconsin's system. He also knows the depth chart, he knows other players that havent been scouted by other programs. He may have heard Bo Ryan say things about potential system changes, about ways to beat certain teams, etc. Why in the world would you want one of your top 11 competitors to have him? You seem to not understand that Uthoff could have gotten a full ride from hundreds of programs. He chose to go to one of the handful that his parents would have to pay for. If he was so poor, he could have 1) stayed at Wisconsin and received a free education or 2) transferred to 200 other schools where he would have received a free education. I dont know him, but he seems like a petulant child who had first pick of toys, chose the fire engine and now wants the police car that is already being played with. You keep offering him hundreds of other toys, but he only wants the 1 toy he cant have. So at the end you say fine, you can have the toy, you just have to wait, or you can play with another toy. Uthoff put himself in this position. He has no one to blame but himself.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 12:50 PM) And most student athletes, until this year get one year grants that are renewed. If Uthoff wanted to transfer, after fulfilling the one year, and you make a great case for him wanting to transfer, why block where he will go? He blocked Iowa State because he thought the kid wouldn't mind going there. If Uthoff is the mental midget you make him out to be, Wisconsin and Bo Ryan should welcome him on the opposition. If they are so afraid of playing against him, he must not be the piece of crap you make him out to be. And as for your point about Chambliss paying his way to play for Wisconsin, that was the old rule in the Big Ten, its been changed. If that rule were still in place, fine, but its not. Brad Sellers went from Wisconsin to Ohio State, Luke Recker played for Iowa after starting out in Indiana. Neither was on scholarship after the transfer. Don't take conference recruits if you are opposed to the people you have spent time with transferring in conference. I give up, I really dont know what your deal is. As you said, every other player on your list paid their own way. Uthoff has to pay for 1 year. I dont see why Bo Ryan had to let Uthoff go without any restrictions. Who cares what happened with Ben Brust, I certainly dont. That was a letter of intent. If in the future a player wants to transfer from Iowa, can they now not restrict them because they took Uthoff? According to your rationale, yes. According to mine, no. Unless Iowa actually states that they will never restrict, what in the world does it matter what Wisconsin, OSU or any other school does? What does it matter that Wisconsin took Ben Brust after he was allowed to go there. You seem to want these coaches to have to follow your made up rules instead of the actual rules. Bo Ryan followed the rules. I dont think you are going to convince anyone but the most delusional Iowa fans that it is a good idea to just let players transfer in conference without any repercussion. Why cant NCAA players just pick whatever NBA team they want, why do they have to go to the team that drafts them? Its not fair to the player, but there are rules. And in this case there were rules that the player cant get a scholarship from ANY school unless they are released from their scholarship. Uthoff could have chosen any school but 11, that seems pretty reasonable considering there are at least 100 NCAA basketball programs. This is a really hard one to argue, because I just cant understand your angle at all here. Are you really suggesting all players should be able to transfer to any school at any time? Because otherwise its always "unfair".

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2012 -> 08:13 AM) The Big Ten initially ruled Brust couldn't accept a scholarship to another Big Ten school? Why? And if a kid doesn't want to be there, why put the restrictions on him, if he supposedly cares anything about him except for his basketball ability? Why did he say Iowa State, Marquette and the entire ACC was off limits? And as for the "training" and one year of education, until this past recruting class, the norm for college athletes was to sign one year grants that were renewed. Many in the Big Ten, including Wisconsin, now will give a 4 year guarantee, so if Uthoff signed a one year grant, what really does he owe Wisconsin? Are you still fighting this? Why did the Big 10 have the rule? I dont know, you should ask the Big 10 why. Why did Bo Ryan put restrictions of Marquette, ACC and Iowa State? This was the second time any player has EVER transferred from Wisconsin under Bo Ryan. The first came to Bo Ryan personally and asked to be released. Bo Ryan released him completely without any restrictions. The second was Uthoff, who put in for a transfer while Bo Ryan was on vacation. Bo Ryan called other coaches and asked them what he should do. They advised Bo Ryan that the normal procedure was to block transfer to any school you would be playing in the next 4 years. Thus Bo Ryan blocked 1) Marquette who is an instate rival and they play every year 2) ACC who they play via ACC-Big10 challenge and 3) Iowa State as there were rumors of tampering. As for the 4 year guarantee, Bo Ryan has always guaranteed 4 years and Wisconsin has kept players on scholarship who were complete jokes because of that promise. No one is still fighting this battle besides for people who are completely biased. Bo Ryan is one of the good guys in college basketball, even players who dont commit to Wisconsin usually have very high respect for him because he treats players very well. Perhaps you should watch a handshake line where he talks with basically every opposing player and tells them how they did a good job. If this was Bielema I would approach this way differently, but Bo Ryan deserves the benefit of the doubt here. Hes been a head coach for almost 30 years and 1 player in his entire history has complained? To me that suggests it was the player, not the coach. Uthoff was troubled since the beginning, he was at the scorers table to check in and then decided he wanted to red shirt. Hes been confused from the start. Good luck to him, its his decision to turn down a Wisconsin education for an Iowa education. I dont see why Bo Ryan needed to care about Uthoff after Uthoff decided to transfer while Bo Ryan was on vacation. Respect is earned through action, Uthoff did nothing to earn the respect of anyone. Maybe its just me, but creating a story in the press before Bo Ryan could even get back, isnt the way an adult handles something. ----------------------------- Now to the coaching change part. Coaches are governed by contract. The reason they can leave is that they negotiate buy out clauses. The school could theoretically put a non-compete in and restrict the coach from going to another competitor for a few years. The reason they dont is because most coaches would refuse to accept that. You cant compare a negotiated agreement to rules set by the NCAA.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Oct 29, 2012 -> 10:00 PM) Guy plays for BT team. Guy wants to leave BT team. Guy shouldn't be able to freely go to another BT team to compete against team that had him. This isn't free agency. Not sure what's so tough about this one. Thank you, I was honestly starting to wonder if people actually wanted players to be able to go from Iowa to Michigan to MSU.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 29, 2012 -> 09:24 PM) You"ll notice just as large part was , at least from what you highlighted ,Brust never played at Iowa. How many games did Uthoff play for Wisconsin? If Bo,won't give players the OOk to transfer to other Big Ten schools, he shouldn't take them for other Big Ten schools. lol Whatever. Bo Ryan has had 2 players transfer whiles hes been at Wisconsin, 1 Freddie Owens, without any restrictions, the other Uthoff, restricted to the Big 10. If you want to make Bo Ryan out to be a bad guy because he put Big 10 transfer restrictions on Uthoff go ahead. I dont care, and Im sure Bo Ryan doesnt care. But you keep comparing 2 completely different situations and you cant even admit that they are different. Nor do you even care to comment on the fact that a letter of intent is different than actually receiving a scholarship and that actually being part of the team, getting to practice and use the facilities, is different than never stepping foot on campus. You also cant seem to accept that letters of intent and scholarships are under completely different sets of rules. Here is an article that explains the process: http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/11...hts_nation.html Just so its clear: And you also dont ever want to comment on Shareef Chambliss, the PSU player who transferred to Wisconsin and PAID HIS OWN WAY. I dont exactly see what your point is. Brust was released from a LOI and through appeal was allowed to transfer inside the Big 10. Uthoff was released from scholarship with restriction. Why should Bo Ryan have to release a scholarship player without restrictions? Where has Bo Ryan ever suggested that other coaches do that?'

They have those warnings right now. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/b...0,1588490.story If you live/work in certain areas, LSD is a necessary road sometimes. The real issue is that people should have been let out of work early to avoid it all together.

They couldnt run one of those annoying emergency warnings about it not being new, this is the time to give me emergency information.

So CBS must be f***ed because another show is a re-run that was supposed to be new. Maybe hurricane related?