bmags

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 10:46 PM) That would cost significantly more than the proposed cut costs. May improve efficacy, but not efficiency. You're looking at many teacher hires, supply purchases, curriculum research, etc. So? We have a revenue problem.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 10:30 PM) http://theenlivenproject.com/the-challenge-of-data/ Yeah...why does it seem these info graphics are almost always poorly put together. They compiled different data from different time spots, and used a confusing "person" graphic. Just silly.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 10:44 PM) The teams letting them interview may not think so. You think Mike McCoy could be a little distracted by this when he has a game plan to implement. Now what if he interviewed every day last week and this week? Interviewing them for s***s and giggles will make a GM look bad. I don't think teams are even allowed to withhold assistants from interviewing for promotions like HC.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 10:17 PM) I read that, but I wonder where the enliven project's data came from? The Slate article says where they got theirs, but not where Enliven's comes from or why it's inferior. I don't think they were working with bad data, the problem was the graphics misrepresented the data.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 10:15 PM) Of the size that a typical Wright home is though? He was building mansions for rich people for the most part. FLW isn't a "in general" house in Oak Park, though many imitate the prairie style. The problem is the houses were a little older (charming), but can have some very strange layouts.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 10:08 PM) Yeah, Oak Park and River Forest Houses in general are going to cost a million if they are nice, as a FLW for sure 1 million and up. However my price range in downtown Chicago right now is laughable for what I am getting anyway. I think you should substitute "historic" with "nice". You can find some nice houses in Oak Park for 450,000 or less, you might just be away from the center.

yeah...that was the problem of me quoting the wrong post. Zoops.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 01:02 AM) Well, it's often a really hard case to try, even if there is physical evidence. A lot of times it comes down to a literal "he said, she said". http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/...intentions.html EDIT: This was not in response to the quote above, rather a strangesox info graphic that has since come into question.

Keep in mind Shumpert had his surgery earlier than rose.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 08:03 PM) And thus, I say it's on you to explain why the smokey the bear ad campaign is a failure. Clearly you must have some market research to back this up, because that's the kind of thing the people running the campaign would have done. I don't really care. I was bringing up that we need not get indignant on questioning how government money is spent. That should be done constantly by liberals to make sure the government is working well.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 07:58 PM) Which is unrelated to McConnell's rhetoric, which was to complain about seemingly silly government spending that is essentially irrelevant in the context of the size of the federal budget because they will continue to demand that Obama make their spending cut proposals for them. If we stayed on topic for everything nobody would ever talk in this forum.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 07:56 PM) I would say, particularly based on my park experiences, that the ad campaign is at least a solid way of reminding people about fire dangers. Perhaps a better ad campaign could be designed...but designing a new ad campaign is a multi-million dollar endeavour. If you have trouble with the basic ads, then something tells me you're going to have trouble with spending 100x that much to develop and start a new ad campaign. I think if wildfire prevention is worthwhile, then we need to make sure our government wildfire prevention methods are achieving that goal. It shouldn't be preventing wildfires is worthwhile, therefore any initiative to achieve this, no matter successful, is also worthwhile.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 06:58 PM) These guys egos though tell them they are worthy and have a shot. Well, there are worse things to happen to an assistant coach then to have their name buzzed about for being head coach.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 08:27 PM) 1. It doesn't need to cover an explosion of campfires. A single wildfire can cost millions of dollars to fight. Last year, the government budgeted $400 million for wildfire fighting, and blew through all of that money for the first time (thank you CO2 for your assist on that). To cover the losses, Congress took money from those same programs, prevention programs, forest control programs, etc. (which of course, is the ol cutting off your nose to save your face trick). If you prevent a single wildfire, you can save millions of dollars. Tens of millions if you prevent a wildfire that threatens or destroys structures. That's the cost-benefit analysis here. 2. Let's say we cut campfires, but we get a 0.1% rise in the obesity rate as a consequence of the outdoor education campaign. Now you've caused a nice increase in health care costs. That's yet another tradeoff to consider. None of this is related to whether smoky the bear is doing anything to reduce future wild fires.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 06:14 PM) Unless of course the end result is more wildfires due to fewer people getting the message. In which case, you'll sacrifice this and Medicare in order to pay for disaster assistance and firefighting. What are the odds smokey the bear is between us and an explosion of camp fires. What about we encourage states to have 1 quarter of phys ed cover outdoor education. Seems worthwhile.

I don't think the regular season would mean less. The problem with college basketball is you have 30 plus games for hundreds of teams across the country, and the games are on odd times nobody can track. That's what waters down the regular season. Everyone knows when football is on. And even at 16 spots with conference births for mid majors...that would still be very limited.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 05:52 PM) Come on shack, call up house hunters and have them tour you around Vegas looking for a MCM home. Ha, to get on Househunters you'll need to have already closed on your house, they then show you other available houses you are not going to purchase.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 06:50 PM) Haha...some of the furniture is very interesting, that is for sure...I have liked the furniture as well, but tend to go with the more contemporary takes on pieces from that era. If you have grandparents that have furniture from this time period though, buy it all off them and put it in a UHaul and come out to California and sell it, because these pieces are going for mucho deniro right now. I don't know about comfort being distant to style though...a lot of what drives the mcm philosophy is integrating nature into the home...lots of windows and natural light, clean lines, an emphasis on landscaping that includes the extensive use of trees and water. But I suppose you are right in the sense that much of the furniture from the era is somewhat spartan due to it's minimalist nature and straight lines. It is broad, when I think of it I'm usually imagining the clean angles, metallic frames and big windows more likely to be found where you are talking about. When seeing homes that style in suburbs it's a little jarring. I like the prairie home style from FLW much more in the Chicago area.

When done well, I find them very interesting. I'd be nervous to own one just because I'm unsure I could pull it off, you really have to commit to that design in the interior as well.

Key quote: "And if an assistant coach believes that there’s no serious interest in hiring him, he has no duty to accept the invitation to interview."

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 06:04 PM) In the context of "we need to cut the deficit," it's absolutely stupid to talk about programs costing $30k a year while you're failing to offer anything really meaningful and specific that you want to cut. Sure, program efficacy should always be evaluated, but that's not what McConnell is doing here. He's talking about wasteful government spending in the context of the looming debt ceiling and offering up a program that's 0.0000000081% of the budget that no one will care about. Yeah but if these will be the programs to ceremoniously sacrifice in order to keep social security and medicare fine, I'll play ball.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 05:53 PM) It's been $200k over the course of several years. That's one person making about $30k a year if that's the trade-off you're looking for. That's about the salary for park employees. I think the point stands. Just because it may be a miniscule part of the budget doesn't mean you don't need to question whether it's best served elsewhere.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 05:38 PM) What the f***... Just remember, none of this has been verified elsewhere.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 8, 2013 -> 04:29 PM) Yeah, I feel much better about them interviewing a lot of candidates rather than jumping on a guy like Marrone immediately. I'm just a bit worried we'll outsmart ourselves and hire like some random linebackers coach or something that turns out to be a bust. Any coach can turn out to be a bust. But, when the pack hired McCarthy I thought they sealed irrelevancy for 3-4 more years. I don't think anyone saw Harbaugh being the great coach he is. You really don't know.

I'm glad to know we are thoroughly vetting numerous options. I'm starting to really believe in Emery. I was always told a bad plan is better than no plan at all. I think he knows what he's doing but wants to make sure he isn't running with blinders on. I really hope he ends up being for real. But everything he is doing is pretty much what I wanted the bears to do when running a football team. The seeking out of stats, the confidence, considering all options. Now all that he needs is results.