I've owned two BMWs. I loved and hated them both. They were a joy to drive and a nightmare to repair. I am unlikely to buy one again. I spend over $7K on just exhaust work for my last one.
That being said, the one thing I'd check for sure is the turbo. It will likely run over $6K to repair if it goes out (which they often do just over 100K miles). It makes BMWs 100K cars. After that repairs easily exceed the value of the car.
Thanks for that euphemism. The imagery that goes along with it is priceless. It has a splash of (very appropriate) southern charm and a dash of emasculation to top it off. +12 motes of appreciation to you.
I listened to an interview with him on FiveThirtyEight's "Hot Takedown" podcast and I was irrationally livid. It was like he was celebrating ignorance. He repeatedly argued that nalytics are stupid and then defended the position by saying. "I'm only arguing that black people don't talk analytics socially." It made no damn sense.
The interviewer repeatedly (and unsuccessfully) tried to steer the conversation to how this impacted front-office employment for minorities in sports, which is an interesting question -- only to be dragged back down in to the morass of Wilbon's irrationality.
It felt like he was deliberately trying to sabotage his own premise with weak unsupported opinions based on nothing but his own perspective.
For your own mental health, don't listen to the podcast, or if you do, not while driving.
Everyone seems to assume that they know the "actual" answer to whether football is a good or bad choice for all kids. I have my opinion. I won't let me kids play. Does that mean I want to take that decision away from everyone else? No. If they want their kids to play and they think it's a great idea, all the more power to them. It could be a great idea for one kid and a terrible one for another, who am I to decide for anyone else?
Just because I believe something doesn't mean I should subject everyone else to my beliefs. I respect their decision to have their kids play, or play themselves at the college level, and that's fine with me. What do I know, maybe they are right and I am wrong.
I don't avoid watching football because I don't judge other people's decision to play or not play. To each their own.
I really have no idea what would be a normal EV for playcalling, but if we say 1/3 good playcalls (not counted here), 1/3 even playcalls (no point) and 1/3 bad play calls, the EV would be 81. We ended up at 94, which I would put us at 1 full bad play worse than average.
I'm still not sure if I'm reading the scoring for playcalling correctly or not though.
In any case, I don't know that I consider the playcalling a major factor in the lack of rushing yards.
Recent Comments
I've owned two BMWs. I loved and hated them both. They were a joy to drive and a nightmare to repair. I am unlikely to buy one again. I spend over $7K on just exhaust work for my last one.
That being said, the one thing I'd check for sure is the turbo. It will likely run over $6K to repair if it goes out (which they often do just over 100K miles). It makes BMWs 100K cars. After that repairs easily exceed the value of the car.
Good luck.
+1 for SRV
I'm really looking forward to seeing them play again.
I put together a stats page for them at http://jenstats.com/team/Michigan
An impressive year for them so far!
Please change it.
Please change it.
Deeply apathetic.
I must say, that was a beautiful bit of writing. Bravo Ace, bravo!
Thanks Brian,
This is great. I appreciate you taking the time to do this. Particularly after last season.
Thanks, it's nice to see someone acknowledge that lack of certainty we have and how strong we often hold our opionions based on so little.
Thanks for that euphemism. The imagery that goes along with it is priceless. It has a splash of (very appropriate) southern charm and a dash of emasculation to top it off. +12 motes of appreciation to you.
So a couple of the +/- calculation don't seem to quite work out. am I missing something?
Darboh -1/+1 = +1?? (0)
Butt +9/-6.5 = +3.5? (2.5)
Hill I get, are there un-named reasons for these differences?
So, just looking over the number, Peppers gets a +13 and a -5.5, which seems like it should net +7.5, yet he gets an +8.5. Style points?
Stribling was +6.5 and -9, which seems like it would give you -2.5 and he gets a -3.5. Lack of style points?
There may be some other reason for these, but they usually have an asterisk when there is unaccounted for points. (see Hill in the defense msu UFR)
I was very surprised he stuck around, but it was a great call by Harbaugh. I do wonder if he enjoys being out of the spotlight.
He gets a +1 and a -3 for receiving and the total is -4. That seems unfair.
35-20 M
I listened to an interview with him on FiveThirtyEight's "Hot Takedown" podcast and I was irrationally livid. It was like he was celebrating ignorance. He repeatedly argued that nalytics are stupid and then defended the position by saying. "I'm only arguing that black people don't talk analytics socially." It made no damn sense.
The interviewer repeatedly (and unsuccessfully) tried to steer the conversation to how this impacted front-office employment for minorities in sports, which is an interesting question -- only to be dragged back down in to the morass of Wilbon's irrationality.
It felt like he was deliberately trying to sabotage his own premise with weak unsupported opinions based on nothing but his own perspective.
For your own mental health, don't listen to the podcast, or if you do, not while driving.
Everyone seems to assume that they know the "actual" answer to whether football is a good or bad choice for all kids. I have my opinion. I won't let me kids play. Does that mean I want to take that decision away from everyone else? No. If they want their kids to play and they think it's a great idea, all the more power to them. It could be a great idea for one kid and a terrible one for another, who am I to decide for anyone else?
Just because I believe something doesn't mean I should subject everyone else to my beliefs. I respect their decision to have their kids play, or play themselves at the college level, and that's fine with me. What do I know, maybe they are right and I am wrong.
I don't avoid watching football because I don't judge other people's decision to play or not play. To each their own.
I really have no idea what would be a normal EV for playcalling, but if we say 1/3 good playcalls (not counted here), 1/3 even playcalls (no point) and 1/3 bad play calls, the EV would be 81. We ended up at 94, which I would put us at 1 full bad play worse than average.
I'm still not sure if I'm reading the scoring for playcalling correctly or not though.
In any case, I don't know that I consider the playcalling a major factor in the lack of rushing yards.
It's a bit south of the Law Quad.
Mani is new, but I think it's competing for Best of Ann Arbor honors.