Jenksismyhero

another failed box out, another f***ing 3. After a while it comes down to effort. Mizzou just wants it more.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 10:08 PM) Mike Davis should seriously be embarrassed with his play tonight. I just can't like him as a basketball player. So talented but such a p****. Yep, he's the biggest whiner on the team (if not the big ten). If things don't go his way he's worthless. Tisdale continues to impress. Hopefully Mizzou's shooting comes back to their average and Illinois keeps chugging away.

Not much you can do when they're hitting each 3 pointer they try

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 09:22 PM) Anyone watching the Illini/Mizzou game? Something's wrong with the hoop Mizzou is shooting at, as the ball is taking some crazy spins out of the rim. It will be interesting to see if the same rolls continue in the 2nd half going that way. no, but Illinois is playing like s***. This is going downhill fast.

Illinois and Mizzou tonight. Nine in a row for Illinois. Assuming both teams show up to play, it should be a fantastic game (more so than in recent years anyway).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 22, 2009 -> 08:56 AM) How many teams can blow a 35 point lead? I know everyone loves to talk about the coach, because it is easy, and once in a while true, but ultimately it is the players game. The Bulls don't have anyone who can take control of this team, on the court, or otherwise. I'm with you there. Not much a coach can do but take some timeouts and maybe try a play or two. But in the end it's the 5 guys on the court that basically stopped playing. How did they not see the lead go from 35 to 10 before kicking it back in gear?

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 22, 2009 -> 05:30 AM) The future of American teens in gaming? A great parent there. Hmm, maybe unplug it? And take it away from him?

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Dec 21, 2009 -> 04:44 PM) The world of business. I'm not saying it's right, but the Bears don't usually eat contracts like that. Lovie has what...2-3 years left at 3mil per? Or more? The McCaskeys don't do that. For a team that makes as much money as the Bears, the money is not an excuse. What's 11 million dollars to them? How much are they going to lose for having a s***ty team next year?

In what sane world does Love Smith and his staff keep their jobs? I will refuse to follow this team and spend another f'n dime on the Bears if he's back. This team has done nothing but regress since the SB run 4 years ago. Nothing. Last year was a team that should have gone to the playoffs but didn't because of AWFUL coaching. And, it's not like they've regressed to average, they've regressed to one of the worst 5-6 teams in the league. I'm meh on Jerry. If Jerry has to be sacrificed to get a guy like Holmgren or Shanahan, do it. If you're bringing in a new coach, then I'm fine with him here. Although some of his draft picks have been wretched, it's becoming clear that a lot of those guys are succeeding outside of this coaching staff. As to Cutler, he gets the pass this year because his supporting cast blows and the biggest deficiency of the team is their defense. But guess what, there are a lot of qb's with crappy supporting casts that don't throw awful f'n passes everyone f'n game. At this point, he's WORSE than Rex Grossman. At what point do the apologists stop saying "oh it's his wr's not running the right routes" and start saying "well given the fact that the wr's run the wrong routes all the time, it's his f'n fault for throwing it to them?"

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 20, 2009 -> 09:22 PM) We believe that you make it a lot more likely that people will succeed if failure doesn't ruin their life, if they have a chance to recover. Agreed to a certain extent. What get's me about the hardline capitalists is that such an idea is the only reason our economic system works. If there was no bankruptcy protection, there'd be no great economy. Having said that... No, but that doesn't mean that the government should pay for that person to be covered. There are PLENTY of affordable individual health care plans out there for people to buy. Social security should be enough right? And agree with Alpha, if you've got 99% of your investment funds in something so risky then it's your fault for losing it in the first place. And if you're young enough, history has shown that despite the massive hit those funds might have taken recently, it'll come back eventually. No, instead we say "here's all the f'n money in the world to go to school with and heck, you don't even have to pay it back like those other shlubs in the world whose parents are only slightly more succesful than yours." Oh, and also here's all the food you'll need, and a home for free, and .... Then why can't we have this requirement before extended healthcare to the 30-40 million people that simply do nothing but demand coverage? How many people are really in this category of "i tried something, risked a lot, and failed." 1 million? 2 million? No, they shouldn't, and more often then not they don't. Everyone can go to a hospital and recieve emergency care. The poor and old in this country already recieve free healthcare. So who exactly are we extending this universal health coverage to? I'm fine with the government creating a SMALL fund to ASSIST those people who require SERIOUS health care but can not afford coverage because of reasons WHICH ARE NOT THEIR OWN. Not the people that refuse to look for jobs, not the people that decide to have 4 kids before they're 25, but people that have genuinely been screwed in their lives.

I picked up Fight Night Round 4 this weekend. Best Buy has it for $20. Pretty impressed so far. At first the controls are a little overwhelming, but once you get comfortable they make sense and feel natural. Has anyone beaten it? I'm only ranked like 38, but can tell it's going to get really difficult pretty soon.

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Dec 18, 2009 -> 09:47 AM) Yesterday at the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame banquet Bobby Knight openly questioned why Calipari (sp?) is still allowed to coach after leaving two teams on bad terms with the NCAA. Basically saying the lack of integrity is one of the reasons he's glad he's not coaching anymore. Good to see a prominent college basketball figure come out and question Calipari. Yep. Agreed. Vitale and the rest of ESPN seem to be sucking Calipari's cock (thanks to the huge Kentucky fan base). So it's nice to hear someone question it. Knight also made a couple of other good statements about the fact that players aren't student-athletes anymore. For example, players can qualify to play in the tounament by attending a measily 6 hours of class in the first semester, and none in the 2nd semester.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 07:39 PM) Who's doing that, though? Who's saying Chris Henry was some kinda angel and is a victim? NOBODY. But there's a way to go about certain things. What if we found out Jason was a drug dealer and he had a history of beating women? We would all feel bad because we know (or at least we think we know him) as the mastermind behind this great site. I promise you there wouldn't be a single person from this board saying something like 'well, that Jason, he was scum and deserved what he got." There would be sympathy. I didn't say anyone was. But i don't think saying "asshole of the year" and whatnot is really an appropriate response, that's all. Edit: When I said "people" I meant in a general sense. Why is there sympathy for a loss of a wasted life? Is it sad for the family? Sure. But I don't think saying "he get got what was coming to him" says anything about the grief some people close to him might feel. It's a comment towards that specific individual.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 07:37 PM) As an attorney, you should know more than most that it's all about the way you phrase your argument or present your position. Well sure, but the reactions were a bit strong huh? Douchiest post of the year? Come on...

Yikes, when did this board become the moral center of the world? Steve, I agree with you 99.9%. I wouldn't WISH death upon him, but i'm certainly not going to sit back and reflect on a "loss" society just suffered. Clean the gene pool of people like this I say. I love when people try to spin this "tragedy." If he was in the midst of attempting to kill someone, and got shot, would we all be saying "oh what a terrible tragedy! oh whoa is me! He was TRYING to turn his life around!" The fact is this guy was a waste of flesh, was a complete thug his entire 26 year life, STILL got paid millions and millions to play an f'n game, and (in all likelihood) was killed being a complete moron while attempting domestic violence. Where is the tragedy exactly? If Steve get's the douchiest post of the year, Chris Henry get's a Darwin Award. And how has no one commented on his girlfriends myspace post?! WTF is that?! How long does it take to type that out?

rabbit ears and a digital converter box you mean.

Ouch. White leaves Minnesota.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 06:24 PM) Why take the risk? Some people think he could be the first QB taken. He also doesn't have s*** going at Washington. I don't think he can really increase his draft stock. it usually doesn't happen. But history doesn't really prove anything, as the chance is always still there, especially in a game like football. Look at what happened to Bradford. He may cost himself a lot of money, but at least he had a team to come back to that could play football. Furthermore, when was his first Heisman run exactly? Are you combining Locker and Bradford into one super QB here? Lol, yes, unintentionally. I thought Locker won the heisman. Oops! I do follow Illinos football, so ya know, i'm a retard.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 10:19 PM) They do not belong in the civil court system. Period. The only reason they are doing this is politics. Why exactly? What's the difference between KSM and a guy that murders someone in Illinois and then bolts for another country? Does it really matter that the military happened to pick the murderer up? And yes, I think the security costs of doing this trial in a temporary federal jurisdiction (think 30k people county courthouse in the middle of the country) would be much cheaper than doing it in the middle of manhattan.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 08:25 AM) That was an almost Kap-worthy rant - both in its grandeur, and its departure from reality. First, what is really "self-reassuring" as you put it, is the people who choose to believe they have no impact on their environment. They are then further reassured by politicians who make up all manner of ridiculous things to bolster this belief, because its the easier, lazier one to take. Its the one that says "no really, you can do whatever you want, without consequences". Its idiotic on its face to believe that humans don't effect their environment in a signficant way. And you cited a whole bunch of reasons for it in your own post. Now, some people do actually live under an illusion of greendom, because they are misinformed - but they are at least aware of reality, and trying (though often failing) to act affirmatively to help things. And your idea that little things don't help is patently absurd. Of course they help. This sort of absolutist, dismissive attitude you take on things like polls, or scientific data, is right out of the GOP playbook - lay waste to all data as subjective, thus allowing you to believe whatever you want, regardless of fact. Everything that is an action of CONSERVATION, helps (note: not the same as ENVIRONMENTALISM, though related). Keeping lights on less of the time, using a timed thermostat, recycling, using less plastic whenever possible, using CFL's (which have less and less mercury, and new ones have NONE)... all these things make a difference, and if everyone did them, it would make a HUGE difference. But, it makes everyone feel better to say, eh, since you cannot save the world youself, you might as well not bother trying. Instead, what is true here, is that people don't necessarily see the full consequences of their actions. They see that a hybrid car uses less gas and pollutes less - which it does - but are blissfully unaware of the fact that the batteries in that car are more environmentally costly than normal ones. Now, I have read articles on this, and your statement that the batteries require more pollution than what you save in output from the car is bunk. For one thing, you cannot make a true apples-to-apples comparison anyway, since mining consequences are different than gaseous air pollution. But it also focuses on only one aspect of the positives of hybrid use - pollution. Using less gas, which means less oil, has additional positives - LOTS of them. You want to make everything black and white. You have this odd belief that if you can't go all the way and save the world, then don't bother trying. That is utterly absurd logic. I'll keep doing the little things, because I know it makes a difference. You want to call that being on a high horse, fine, whatever makes you feel better. If you want to give up, that saddens me, but I can't stop you. While I agree with all of this, don't you think the same can be said for liberals that want to make the environmental discussion into a do or die issue? The way some of these people (including people in this thread) speak, it's as if we're all going to die tomorrow if we don't change immediately. It's funny to me that liberals gave the GOP crap for "fear-mongering" us into a war that we didn't truly analyze before we started, but they use the same tactics to get the government to spend billions on actions that may or may not work. At this point even if we all can agree that humans cause AN effect on the environment, we don't know the extent of it. We don't know what will happen. We have "models" and "theories" that are debunked annually (either positively or negatively). The fact of the matter is we don't have any idea what is going to happen, so the environmentalists need to stop leading the charge as if we do. That's not to say we shouldn't do ANYTHING, but as much as people on the one side might be purposefully blind to the issue, so is the other.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 05:09 PM) What's to stop someone who wants KSM released from taking over a grade school now? Proximity doesn't exactly matter there. Right. That's why it's a lame argument. I DO think it's ridiculous they are trying him in Manhattan though. Why spend the hundreds and hundreds of millions in security just to do it there? Why not utilize a federal district that isn't in the most congested area of the world?

QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 05:05 PM) I thought you were still talking about Locker. Ah. My bad. I dunno about Locker's situation, was he supposed to be the #1 QB? Regardless of the millions, a guy like that, whose got a Heisman and a multi-multi-multi-million dollar insurance policy, I think I'd return to school too.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 04:54 PM) Eh, hard to say he has no buzz when he hasnt gone to the combine yet. Kiper does this every year, he makes statements about players before the season, before the combine, only to then completely change his stance before the draft. I trust my own evaluation over Kiper. I think that Benn is arguably the best WR in the draft and that after the combine you will hear people raving about him. Before the season Kiper had Benn at 10 on his big board: http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/2...per-s-big-board I just cant stand Kiper's inconsistency. Yeah, what gets me about those guys is that all they do is name drop. "And then when you're talking about Illinois you gotta talk about Arrelious Benn, a solid WR, and then you got Juice Williams, whose got to get better but could have a solid year, and then you got..." and blah blah right down the list. ZERO reporting, just read the local write-ups, find out who the 3-4 main names are on each team, and then repeat, repeat, repeat.

ditto on the samsung. Look up tv model rankings from last year on cnet.com (or some other review site) and try to find one of those at a store instead of the newest models. You'll save yourself 3-400 bucks on differences you'd never know existed unless you had the two tv's sitting next to each other.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 03:57 PM) Look at the 5 year moving average of Temperature Anomaly. It is clearly showing a warming trend in the 2000's. You are still factually incorrect. Far be it from me, a lawyer, to talk science, but isn't it a little ridiculous to look at global temperature trends in a 120 year window? And even if you are, how sure are we about the guys from 1880 taking down an accurate temp?