Jenksismyhero

Let me clarify. In saying that they were angry that their representatives "did nothing," I meant that the people sent people to office to accomplish certain tasks (i.e., create jobs, fix the economy, get us back on the right path). Those people in office did not do those things, thus, they were replaced. I tend to think the electorate is not only dumb, but also slow in reacting to bad policy. To me, this "tidal wave" of reaction surprised me. The people gave their representatives a shorter leash because they didn't feel like anything was done to solve the problems they felt most pressing (the economy).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 08:45 AM) WTF? They don't like when their representatives do nothing? This has been one of the most productive Congresses in terms of passing legislation in decades. You have to go back to Johnson's first term to see a Congress that did this many major bills. You can look at it 2 ways. You can either tell me that the Dems totally overreached, or you can tell me that the Dems didn't go nearly far enough, but if people don't like representatives that do nothing, then they'd have loved this Congress. passing legislation and productive are two different things.

Balta, I think you should be more of a sore loser. Seriously, you sound like the 9 year old that just lost his little league baseball game to the other side. I fully expect there to be some gridlock in Washington. But you know, if this election showed us anything, it's that people don't like representatives that do nothing. So I think some things will get done and we'll be in a better position in 2 years for it. Much like in 2004 for the Dems, the GOP can't be the complaining party anymore. Ultimately they have 50% of the responsibility for whatever gets passed in the next two years, which IMO is the best scenario.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 08:58 AM) Thought it might be nice to have a thread for the day So do people think the Repubs are going to take control of Congress? I personally think the Dems are going to come out and vote, lessening the big swing a lot of people are expecting. House yes, Senate unlikely. Also, thank god this election cycle is over. Campaign ads are always bad, but this year was especially negative and obnoxious. Everywhere I turned there was an ad on TV, the radio, billboards, signs, etc., talking about how awful the other guy is. I spent 2 weeks at the beginning of October in Hawaii on my honeymoon and it was all over the islands. So tired of it.

Brady/Kirk Both will suck, but IMO they can't suck anymore than two established Illinois politicians who have done/do nothing.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 1, 2010 -> 02:06 PM) You'd be nuts not to... it's not his fault Brett Favre can't throw. Moss is STILL an elite talent. Honestly, Jay Cutler should be texting JA right now demanding that Moss be signed and featured in Mike Martz' offense. It's not like Martz uses receivers to block ever. What are you smoking? Did you watch the Patriots-Vikes game? Did you see him get jammed EVERY play and then just quit? If he was an "elite" talent New England wouldn't have traded him. He sucks now. He can still make a spectacular catch here and there, but he doesn't run routes very well, he gives up on nearly every play unless he gets the ball, and he refuses to block anyone seriously. If Brady and Favre can't "get" him the ball, who can?

It's a s***ty rule, but I think the difference is that the recruits were on official visits. Celebs can roam the sidelines with current players, but they're not supposed to meet/mingle with recruits. I dunno why that's a rule though. Pretty dumb.

I enjoyed this one:

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 31, 2010 -> 03:06 AM) Even if you ignore the Big Ten classes of both coaches which have been top notch for both of them which is ridiculous since Weber's best years were with players like Deron Williams, Matta has accomplished more in coaching than Weber has in lesser conferences. Weber has 2 conference titles outside of the Big Ten while Matta has 4. He has been the best coach in 3 separate conferences in 9 years of being a head coach, that is damn impressive. Maybe you dont want to give him credit as a coach because you would rather point towards talent, but Matta has coached successfully at every level since he's been a head coach and as an assistant Matta spent six seasons as a full-time assistant coach at three different universities, helping his squads compile a composite 128–58 (.688) record and make six postseason tournament appearances. He was on the bench in five-consecutive conference tournament championship games and won four league tournament championship rings. He was in the NCAA tournament five times as an assistant under four different head coaches and in the postseason National Invitation Tournament once. He is a legit coach that gets far less credit than he actually deserves. He is also a great recruiter, but his true talent is as an "in game coach." Weber made a mid-major relevant and a scary draw in the tournament for a number of years. Matta's best year he had what, 3 NBA players, including Oden? Gimme a break on that point. Both are awesome coaches, but I do think Weber gets the nod as the X's and O's guy. I look at tough games, like @ Wisconsin, where Weber gets W's.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Oct 29, 2010 -> 01:29 PM) Interesting article by Bill Simmons on the Heat... http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...mp;sportCat=nba There was a funny article over at deadspin.com or thebiglead.com a while back where they basically analyzed the logic of a Bill Simmons article, and this is pretty much a perfect example of what they're talking about. Step 1 - make outlandish prediction (the Heat will never work out) Step 2 - write a 5000 page word essay on it, bringing up questionable comparisons (Eisner and Wells...cuz business partnerships are so comparable to two sports stars) Step 3 - at the end, include a "this is why those 5000 words i just used will probably be absolutely wrong" (when they clicked they looked unbeatable) to save face if/when his outlandish prediction is wrong. So the Heat look like a team that COULD be mediocre IF Wade doesn't succumb to Lebron's greatness BUT IF they do then they WILL be unbeatable. I agree with his point that one of the reasons they'll be good is that they'll never rest both guys at the same time. Either one can take over the other teams 2nd unit, which is gonna make it tough for any team to compete for a full game.

If the warranty is already over i'd open that puppy up and clean it really good with a can of compressed air. My first PS3 (original 60gb version) overheated to the point that i'm pretty sure the graphics card fried itself. Luckily it was the series of ps3's that GTA IV messed up, so I got a replacement for free. Before I sent it in, I tried to clean it. You'd be amazed by the amount of dust/hair that it will collect. Also, for those looking to buy a few games, I guess Target next week (starting Sunday) is having a buy 2 get 1 free sale. Good time to stock up on some games.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 29, 2010 -> 10:56 AM) Would you really be able to tell if 4% of the seats went unsold? Depending on where the seats are, yes. You've seen the new Yankee stadium right?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Oct 28, 2010 -> 01:40 PM) Really good get. So out of the 9 top 100 kids from the state Illinois got 4 of them and they got 4 out of the 6 they had a chance at (Blackshear and Davis were never playing for Illinois since we won't pay for players, and Boatright wasn't going to the same school as Abrams). Shaw kind of falls into the Sam Thompson category of leaving you wanting more but he has tons of talent and the interesting thing with Shaw is when playing for his HS team De La Salle he looks like a top 25 type player but when he plays for the Mac Irvin Fire in AAU he is just a guy. But then again Meyers Leonard did nothing when he played with the Fire so I think the coaching staff has more to do with that then the player. Big fan of this: http://yourseason.suntimes.com/2844026,102...llinois.article

Ugh. There's no officiating like the NBA. On a 4-6 pt run? Don't worry, we'll extend it by calling a phantom foul. Bulls much improved, but made a lot of really stupid mistakes in this game. Excited about the offense (Jackson/Gundy are retarded for asking where the points are going to come from. They realize the Bulls scored at will in this game right? I don't think offense will be a problem), but scared about the complete lack of defense.

Rose with a sweet pass.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Oct 27, 2010 -> 01:34 PM) PG- Tracy Abrams, #80 nationally SG- Chasson Randle, #55 nationally SF- Mychael Henry, #86 nationally PF- Mike Shaw, #66 nationally C- Nnanna Egwu, #82 nationally Could be quite the class. whats that from? Most lists i've seen have randle/shaw in the 30-40 range and henry in the 40-50 range. Abrams was pretty high too for a while.

QUOTE (Brian @ Oct 27, 2010 -> 11:24 AM) Heard from a good source that he and Shaw to Illinois which would just be massive for Weber. That would be huge. If he pulls in that kind of class, 2009-2011 have to be the best set of recruiting classes ever for the program. Tons of talent up and down the roster.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 07:41 PM) Well, they can have their chance if they run the table and teams in better conferences with tougher schedules lose enough games to put BSU in the top 2. And better than the vast majority? Eh. I am not sure they are better year in and year out than the VAST majority of major BCS schools. They have a very good record in their conference year in and year out thats for sure. But there are teams like Marshall that dominated a mid major conference for years (5 titles in 8 years) (10-3, 12-1, 13-0, 11-2) and moved to a larger conference and couldnt compete on the same level. Boise has had similar records and caliber of players (2 first round draft picks, 2 pro bowl players) as a team like Marshall, but has largely lived feasting on the same weak competition year after year. Trying to say that they are better than a "vast" majority of major programs is a bit outlandish and frankly impossibly to deduce just from their record. If you compare the caliber of players that Boise has in the NFL compared to other schools that you may consider not as good as Boise base on record, you may be surprised. For example, Baylor has more NFL players than Boise. My point is, you cant really use their record as a way to judge how they stack up against schools that routinely face better competition every week. They just dont have to face tests nearly as often as major conference schools and I think their record reflects that greatly. I would have really preferred that they moved into a better conference than the MWC like they are in 2011, but at least that will give them a little more legitimacy throughout the season. My point was that going 6-7 against top 25 competition is a better clip than that vast majority of the BCS teams out there, so to say that they can't win with the big boys isn't accurate. They can, and they've proven it. That doesn't mean they can hang with the top 5 teams in the country every single year, but I think they are deserving of a shot at one of those teams in a meaningful game at some point. They won a few years ago against Oklahoma, and then they got screwed last year going up against TCU (in that they were scheduled to play TCU instead of another team). All the more reason why a playoff is needed. We shouldn't have to discuss which teams are better than others based on factors like quality wins or strength of schedule. We should let them play and figure it out on the field.

QUOTE (Swingandalongonetoleft @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 10:44 PM) Why does every NBA game I watch that trends toward a blowout in the first half inevitably end up coming down to the final minute or two? I'm getting tired of this. You're down twenty points at the half but you'll probably be within two 6 minutes into the 3rd quarter. I refuse to believe that your head coach throws a Lombardi or Rockne at you in the locker room every time you're getting had. I also find it hard to believe that the team that kicked your ass for two quarters decides they can take it easy on you right after the half with two quarters to play- an animal would be observant enough to see that if this is a recurring scenario (it is, it happens in like half of the games played on a given day) then probably it should avoid relaxing. Instead, I'm inclined to think that perhaps officiating wrongly factors into these remarkable comebacks and majestic 18-4 runs. I find it a lot more difficult to watch an NBA game start to finish than MLB or NFL games because of this. Thanks are in order to the Celtics, Chris Bosh, and Dwayne Wade for facilitating an 0-1 Heat team. This is probably as good as it will get, but I'll enjoy it. Agree

QUOTE (zenryan @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 05:04 PM) I'm not comparing football from 2010 to 1970. I'm saying if Boise is going to cry about being left out of the title game then they need to give up their demands and start playing top tier teams on the road. Go play Alabama and not ask for a return date. Or maybe do a 2 for 1 series with them. So then they would have a stronger argument if they win those games and still get left out. And if they are good then they'll win those regular season games and still make the money by going to a BCS bowl game. If they lose then they really dont belong to be there in the first place. Imagine if Notre Dame decided to join C-USA. ND gets 8 easy conference games, schedules 2 MAC teams, keeps Michigan and then adds an mid level BCS team like Pitt to their yearly schedule. People would be ripping them apart for that. But since it's Boise, its ok. How is this different than what ND is doing now? 8 easy games might be a stretch, but most years they can get to 6 wins pretty easily. Navy, Army, Purdue, western/central/eastern whoever, etc.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 04:38 PM) Let's not act like they've been knocking off ranked teams non stop. Since 2000 they are 6-7 vs top 25 teams and their only win vs a top 5 team was against TCU last season. That's better than the vast majority of major programs in the country. I'm not saying Boise is some traditional powerhouse, but they're a good program (better than most) and they deserve, at some point, a shot at the big boys. It should have happened last year, but maybe it will this year.

anyone know where i can stream this game online?

QUOTE (danman31 @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 12:50 PM) To say Boise in a BCS conference can't be compared to now because they don't have the facilities or the money they would in the BCS is a bad argument. They don't have that money and that's why people are skeptical. They can't match these teams off the field so why do we think they can match them on the field? um, you've watched them beat highly ranked BCS teams the last few years right?

QUOTE (zenryan @ Oct 26, 2010 -> 08:43 AM) Why should BCS teams be knocking on the door to play in Idaho? Boise wants to be a big boy then they need to be the ones knocking on the doors of the top teams. Bobby Bowden made Florida St back in the 70s by taking his team on the road to all the top teams and winning every year. Boise needs to follow the same model. I agree with Rex 100% here. Not sure Boise is for real, but I'd like to see them get a shot if they go undefeated. They've done everything they can, and they've been doing it for a few years now (with success). And college football in 2010 is not comparable with college football in 1970 IMO. Boise makes more money by staying in the BCS discussion every year with their current scheduling than they would losing at a good school in their one or two big games a year (assuming they can find a team to play them). This is why we need an 8 team playoff. If they stink, they'll get beat. If they're good, they'll win and prove everyone wrong. Simple as that.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 7, 2010 -> 11:50 AM) the initial stimulus proposal was 1.2 trillion and had a lot more actual spending. It finished at 800 billion with half in tax cuts. What the hell are you talking about. IIRC when the bill originated in the house the republicans were shut out of the meetings. Then, to try and save face, the senate offered up a bi-partisan meeting to discuss the various provisions of the bill, but basically stated out front that it was their way or the highway. The WH also chimed into the debate, again "inviting" the GOP to various meetings, but ultimately they were nothing more than "you can sit in the meeting but it's not like we're going to do anything you want." and IIRC, the stimulus was cut by moderate dems, not any concessions of the GOP. Even still, my point was the bi-partisan efforts aren't real 95% of the time, and it's not ONLY the GOP. Most of the time it's the party not in power, because the main selling point at election time is ALWAYS "they've screwed everything up and did everything wrong and we voted the opposite way so vote for us and we'll make it better."