Yes...Yes it is.
good luck with that
Yes...Yes it is.
in the PSU job, in case anyone hasn't seen that
I did see that today. What a tire fire the PSU situation is becoming.
PSU should be a top ten-ish team every year, but the current situation is unprecedented in its awfulness. I can imagine a lot of coaches passing on the chance to coach there.
Those silly Mayans....gotcha
At 4 so I won't find out what's happening until I land. I'm assuming it has something to do with our Pac 12 opponent though.
You just posted how you would be on a plane twenty minutes ago in future tense...
On the layover in St. Louis....
put the apostrophe in the correct place if they are going to parody. <Insert joke about Tennessee here>
Gramatically speaking, it should read "Tiger Woods's" because the 's' in Woods is not indicating a plural.
I think you can do "Woods'" or "Woods's" when you've got a proper noun.
according to this site the second 's' is not required, but it is preferred.... now the question is who the hell is doing the preferring?
I think that, after the Reformation, we can decide for ourselves whether we want to use the second "s."
If it's possessive (which it would be here) it should be Woods'
Gramatically speaking, it should read Woods'
Check rule #3
Woods's is preffered. again, not sure who prefers it... but that's the way it is
As a holder of the stellar UM English degree, I am going to side with those who prefer Woods' to Woods's. Not that it matters much. A lot of the old grammar points are becoming optional these days. Whatevs . . . .
Do you think every generation thinks the generation that follows is destroying written language? I teach high school and the things kids write make me want to pull my hair out.
While every generation seems to think that the next is making things worse, that can (and probably will be) true at some point. Our country really is slipping behind in a number of ways - not that this is the fault of today's 18 year olds.
but the posessive of Woods is Woods', fwiw
edit: I'm late to the grammar party, it appears. My aplogies on bringing yesterday's news today. My 6 month old tends to distract me from time to time
See above. I know it sounds odd when spoken, and it wouldn't be my choice, but it's not wrong.
Is that Daniel Tosh???
Add a PAc-10 team, sounds like ND is going to get squeezed out, they're coalitioning against the SEC, and hey, Arizona-Michigan just became a real possibility. And Brian says nothing happens over break...
Someone mentioned that Delaney said that they might stay at 8 games.
So...how's everyone's day going? Anything new?
I would be excited by this, but who the hells knows what the conferences will even look like by 2017.
They said in the announcement that this is in an effort to prevent the need to go past 12 teams.
The news came out at like 1. It's all over the board. Check out the thread about B1G-Pac12 scheduling agreement for more info.
schadjoe Joe Schad
There's a big difference between those two words.
...certainly can't hurt when it comes to the recruitment of West Coast players.
The news is that this Y2K thing could be serious, bro. Stock up on supplies.
This is a nice fucking thread.
Is the BTN trying to get into California (good for revenue)? Is the Pac10 Network going to merge with the BTN (would be awesome)? Recruiting would probably be worse, as now modwest guys can go to Cali and play in the midwest 1-2 times a year so their family can attend.
Scheduling 9 conference games + 2 Pac10 opponents would be more difficult than 8 conference games, 3 cupcakes and ND.
It certainly makes getting to a NC game more difficult. With Western, Central, & Eastern, why play games on the West Coast with a home & home? We make more money by playing at the Big House and keep more money in the state of Michigan.
I'm sure this is just the beginning of something big, but as of now, I don't understand.
Is that all the announcement entails?
looking forward to seeing some Pac-12 schools come to the Big House. We owe Oregon. To see RichRod back at the Big House would be awesome. I would really love to see how a Mattison Defense would fair against a RichRod Offense.
Nothing of any substance was announced.