Member for

15 years 8 months
Points
18306.00

Recent Comments

Date Title Body
Logged in just to upvote you.

Logged in just to upvote you.

To be fair, most people…

To be fair, most people probably said this same thing in 2016 and then wanted him fired 4 years later.  There's no such thing as infinite fanbase loyalty.

This needs so many more…

This needs so many more upvotes.

So far as I can tell, they…

So far as I can tell, they struck that (along with most of the rest of the bylaw) to make it more straightforward. But weirdly, they included in their published "rationale" that "subscription to a recording/dubbing service" is available. 

Certainly makes it sound like AD personnel cannot scout in person, but they can subscribe to a service that records in-person.  And that service is not defined anywhere, so far as I can tell.  Seems like what Stalions was doing is exactly that. Maybe I'm missing something.

I agree -- Day seems like a…

I agree -- Day seems like a perfectly nice guy.  I was pretty surprised by the whole Lou Holtz tirade; it seemed totally out of character for him, and really shows that he's feeling the heat from the fanbase.

I've never heard of this…

I've never heard of this idea before, and it's so elegantly simple and awesome.  Basically, play continues if tied at the end of 4, and becomes sudden death at that point.  Simple enough to describe in one sentence!

I need to know more about…

I need to know more about Brian's mysterious tennis spin.  He said the guy stepped to his left returning the serve and the ball spun into him.  Normally a slice for a righty is always going to curve to the returner's right.  Is Brian a lefty?  Was it a nasty kicker so fast the returner couldn't stop it from hitting his junk?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Logged in just to upvote…

Logged in just to upvote this.

How is it different?  If we…

How is it different?  If we call TO after second down with a minute or whatever left, they just run on third down, run the clock down to 3 seconds, and it's the exact same thing, right?  Except if they get the first down, now we've extended the clock for them.

Genuinely curious, what am I missing?

I don't get this complaint. …

I don't get this complaint.  We had 1 timeout, we used it after third down.  What difference does it make which down we use it after?  3rd seems the best one to us it on, because we've ensured they're not going to get the first down (if they had, we don't want the clock to stop, obviously, so using it on third means we get to know whether we want to use it at all).

What am I missing?

Fellow MgoLawprofs, unite!

Fellow MgoLawprofs, unite!

I think this is spot on,…

I think this is spot on, with the small exception that we don't really know Michigan's true ability to grind through the running game with only Edwards.  I'd be tempted to sit back a bit PSU-style and see if Edwards can kill you 5 yards at a time the way Corum does.  If he can, I agree that the OSU game plan is pretty rational.  You can't just let a team grind to you dust on the ground.  If you have to be unsound to stop it and then you get beat over the top, so be it.  It probably means there was not much you could have done to win.

I think their FPI disagrees…

I think their FPI disagrees with the oddsmakers.  FPI likes Utah for some reason.  That's why.

Yeah, I find it hard to…

Yeah, I find it hard to believe that 9-3 Kansas State is a contender for the playoffs. 538 thinks they are almost 50% to make it if they beat TCU.  Strange.

Georgia isn't lights out…

Georgia isn't lights out defensively??  They're the #1 F+ defense (combination of SP+ and FEI).  They were #1 last year.  And #2 the two years before that.  That's about as lights out as you'll find in all of history.

I gotta say, major college…

I gotta say, major college FB coach is not high on my list of dream jobs.  Insane hours, constant stress, need to recruit 24/7, requirement to constantly move yourself and your family (who you pretty much never get to see anyway because you're always working), almost no choice of where you live, you're almost certain to get fired sooner or later, and half of the world blames you for every mistake made by 18-22 year-olds.

I'll pass.

Good on Cade, but I doubt he…

Good on Cade, but I doubt he shelled out for these.  The whole thing looks like a Carhartt ad, and I don't think you get an @ from a playoff starting qb these days without something in return.

Who does he think he is --…

Who does he think he is...Urban Meyer?

I mean, it's pretty rare for…

I mean, it's pretty rare for a top schools to hire someone without prior head coaching experience. Ryan Day was hand-picked by Urban, and Kirby Smart coordinated the country's best defense for almost a decade.  That's about it for coordinators who get mega-jobs as their first head coaching gig. Coordinators have to strike while the iron is hot -- who knows if the offense struggles next year, and he's not as marketable.

I think you're a little too…

I think you're a little too focused on recency.  Just because one player has missed a few shots on a given night and another player has made a few does not drastically change their odds on the next shot.  It's a small sample of shots.  They're going to shoot at roughly their season average.

UCLA gave Franz a totally uncontested three.  He probably hits a shot like that close to 50%, and it would have put us up 2.  That's a better shot than a contested Chaundee 3 or drive, IMO.

Exactly.  I'm not sure what…

Exactly.  I'm not sure what OP is thinking on the Chaundee thing.  He's a (great) catch & shoot player, not the person you want creating a shot with 10 seconds on the clock.

Honestly, I don't know how anyone can be mad with the end of game strategy.  We got two great looks from two pretty good shooters.  We missed.  It happens.  If Franz makes that shot everyone is talking about how UCLA was crazy to just leave him all alone.

Au contraire, my friend. …

Au contraire, my friend.  Picking all 1 seeds is probably the most logic-based decision you could make.  They reach the final four at double the rate of 2 seeds, and almost four times the rate of 3 seeds.  I'm sure a person who just picks the 1 seeds all the time gets more final four entries correct over a long period of time than a person who picks and chooses among other teams.  Here's a good way to test it: do you get 40% of your final four picks right in your brackets?  Because if you just picked chalk, that's what you would be getting.

The reasons not to just pick chalk are not because chalk is illogical.  Instead it's (1) just picking chalk is no fun, and (2) while picking chalk is a good way to do well in a pool, it's probably not a good way to win the pool, since you need to differentiate yourself from other brackets and probably be the one person backing a surprisingly successful team or two in order to win.  And since usually the only rewards in a pool are for finishing in the top few, it's worth it to take risks, even though that means your overall expected point total is lower than it would be if you just picked chalk.

Congrats, you're a super…

Congrats, you're a super fancy doctor.

There, is that what you wanted?

No one is going to get this,…

No one is going to get this, but well played.  Goes to show what a crapshoot coach hiring can really be.

My favorite is guys who…

My favorite is guys who report huge wins and then explain that their decisions are based on genius insight like, "gyms are closed because of Covid, so I bet people will buy more Pelotons."  As if that wasn't priced into the stock the moment Covid became a serious pandemic.

This is the only right…

This is the only right answer, but it misses that the point of these threads is to circlejerk about how smart you are by reporting all of your big wins and ignoring all of your losses.

Either that, or this just happens to be the blog of choice of an elite group of Wall Street savants.

Protip: don't trust…

Protip: don't trust financial advice from a guy who can't spell Goldman Sachs.

Would you guys just listen…

Would you guys just listen to yourselves for a second?  Of course global warming is an epic disaster slowly occurring.  That's a fact.  Why on earth would that lead you to conclude that the world's leaders are somehow all fabricating a virus and destroying their economies to sneakily combat it??  Some of them are on record saying they don't even believe it's real! (Not looking too far for this example).  I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.

Of course there is going to…

Of course there is going to be a second wave of cases after social distancing stops. And likely many more after that. If we had not social distanced, the cases would be many times higher than what we have now, and NYC would have many more deaths.  The idea is not to allow any one period of time to have so many cases that we can’t effectively treat them (e.g., running out of ventilators).  

Just to make sure I’m…

Just to make sure I’m following this correctly, dozens of independent states and countries, many which have radically different political persuasions, have all conspired to shut down their economies at great cost, so they can covertly fight global warming?  Do I have that right?

or maybe, just maybe, there’s a significant medical risk, that the experts almost universally agree on, and that’s why basically the whole world is all social distancing right now. 

You have let your…

You have let your disagreement about how to respond to this push your perception completely out of reality.  This is not forever.  America is responding to this in a more casual manner than almost every country out there.  There is nothing unique about our political situation.  Everyone is going to lock down for awhile, and then reopen around the time it's appropriate.  Get over it, and move forward.

It's not really sleeping man…

It's not really sleeping man.  We were in the national championship game 2 years ago.

Uh, what?

Uh, what?

Why does everything have to…

Why does everything have to be hyperbolic with you?

I thought you were signing…

I thought you were signing off. 

My favorite anecdote on this…

My favorite anecdote on this: Fidelity did an analysis of whose 401(k)s did the best with them over a 10 year period.  The best "investors" were the ones who either (1) switched jobs and forgot they even had a Fidelity 401(k), or (2) were dead.  Basically, the people who just left their money sitting in an average index fund.

https://wealthydiligence.com/best-investors-are-dead/

Have fun, but just know it's…

Have fun, but just know it's basically the same as sports betting.  You're not going to win in the long run unless you're really, really skilled.

I hope you're right, but I…

I hope you're right, but I haven't seen anyone reputable saying a .005% death rate is feasible.  It's true we don't know the true number of people infected, but we also don't know the true number of deaths from the currently infected, because they're not dead yet.  I suspect we'll end up somewhere around 1% by the end, but that's still really significant -- about 10 times higher than the flu death rate.

The other significant thing is that the hospitalization rate is really high, like 20%.  That's what the real issue is right now.

I think there are lots of…

I think there are lots of people who "didn't like Obama and his policies" who are perfectly reasonable.  I'm friends with plenty. 

But there's a different kind of group -- the ones who rush to blame him for everything, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.  The kinds of people who have watched Trump's response to this in the past month and somehow their first reaction is to talk about Obama's response to H1N1.  In my experience, race is a bigger factor in that group.  They're the same people who bought the "birther" bullshit; the same people who think America was a better place 60 years ago.  And they're the same people that like to blame racial minorities for a lot of their problems.

Obviously I'm generalizing.  I have no idea what blueday thinks about race.  But I know it's ridiculous that is first reaction is to bring up Obama and H1N1.

I don't think it's…

I don't think it's necessarily correct to assume the differences in how we handled it are based on societal or cultural values.  I'm not a public health expert, but I presume our ability to even conduct a mass quarantine or something like social distancing then was much more difficult since communication was harder.  It probably took a long time for us to even know the extent of the spread in various parts of the country. 

Because it's obvious that…

Because it's obvious that race is a part of the constant need to blame Obama for all of the problems that the current administration brings on us.

If you've seen his posting,…

If you've seen his posting, you know he's referring to Obama.  He's brought this up before.

https://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/isaiah-todd-says-he-coming-um-instagram-comment#comment-243789811

Lol, of course your first…

Lol, of course your first response to the complete failure of our government is to blame a black guy for something from 10 years ago.  Christ.  (You also manage -- despite clearly being an expert at this -- to not know the correct acronym for the virus you're talking about).

C'mon dude.  At this point,…

C'mon dude.  At this point, I don't know how anyone can insinuate that this is just slightly worse than the flu.  Many of the major Detroit hospitals will not let anyone in the door at this point, because there are no beds left.  And we are just at the start here.  Just think about that.  Have you ever heard of anything like that with the flu? 

Here's a survey of a bunch of public health experts, and their average death projection for 2020 is almost 250,000.  250,000!  About 290,000 Americans died in all of World War II, if that helps your perspective.

Whatever you think about the media is fine, but no rational person thinks this is a "bad flu" anymore.

Probably right, and even if…

Probably right, and even if not, this is about #5,427 on my list of things to be worried/upset about these days.

My loved ones may end up on a ventilator and the entire world economy may collapse at any moment, but *GASP*, a sports rival tweets its followers something advertising related!

Fair.  I think our…

Fair.  I think our disagreement boils down to this: I think pretty much every person right now is "someone who poses a significant health threat to the general public" because we have no way of knowing and quarantining only the infected (thanks to our lack of testing).

Good conversation.

Well, I disagree, because…

Well, I disagree, because many, many people infected with COVID-19 aren't going to have symptoms that clearly indicate they're infected.  So, if they're not quarantined, they put many others at risk and the virus spreads exponentially.  And it's not likely that enough of them will choose to self-quarantine, so I'm okay with governments temporarily restricting some of our civil liberties to protect health.

But that's just my opinion.  I'm not saying you're wrong; it's a value judgment on how highly you weigh civil liberties vs. public health.  I personally think this is an extreme enough situation that I favor significant governmental power.

Also, why should the government have the power to quarantine anyone at all, under your view?  Does the sick person not also retain their civil liberties?

Your concerns aren't…

Your concerns aren't unreasonable, and people should vigorously defend their civil liberties.  But in my view, this situation is one of the most paradigmatic examples of where a federal government should have significant authority -- this issue is about as interstate as it gets.  Whether folks in Florida quarantine and stop the disease affects me in Michigan quite a bit, both from an economic and health standpoint.

It's not even remotely that…

It's not even remotely that cut and dry.  And if the federal government did impose a quarantine, good luck finding a federal court that would hear your challenge before the quarantine ends, rendering the issue moot.

Okay, and governments…

Okay, and governments following what you're saying are going to have much worse infection rates.  If you want what you're saying, go ahead and vote for it.  I, for one, prefer my free societies to have governments with emergency powers for situations just like this one.