secer

Recent Comments
Who shut me down? (It would be a FrEe SpEeCh ViOlAtIoN if it occurred, but it hasn't.) Seems like the one following me around name calling and whining is the one who is really triggered.
@johnny - I was replying to the insinuations in comment above. You're not making sense. But feel free to keep following me.
They don't. Not sure what you're talking about, but why are you trying to divide us into sides?
As I keep saying, there are no apples to apples comparisons, so I did the best I could. Seems like you just don’t like the result or that you failed to prove I said something other than what I actually said. All A’s, but I’m guessing you’re the one who failed. 5/12 = 41.7%, 2/2 = 100%. All of Mac’s stats in my analysis came from his toughest games; less than half of Bo’s stats in my analysis did. That should heavily favor Bo, but he still came out behind. But sure, to be more fair we could look at Bo’s tough games vs Mac’s tough games and….Mac does better by an even wider margin. I would love bigger sample sizes, but that isn’t the point here. I have explained how he is. You have yet to make sense. Newman isn’t even the starter right now, and he has never started a game with any of the players or staff on UGA’s team nor against any of UGA’s opponents. There’s a little room for debate if that outcome occurs, but right now Mac is more proven than the undetermined UGA QB. And he’s clearly got more starts than the LSU QB. How many times do I need to walk you through it? Not sure why you’re getting so offended.
He did not obey a law as written by Congress and enacted by his own signature. He used the Office of the POTUS for political gain at the detriment of our national interest and national security. And that’s just the one situation they focused on. I agree that a more thorough case could have been made, but there also weren’t any great options. Delaying closer to an election would have offended Trump apologists even more. Also, the ‘one-sided’ (it wasn’t) hearing process is the House’s role in impeachment. The Senate is supposed to have the two-sided process, but they opted for zero sides. I don’t really know what you’re trying to say. Never said Biden was an angel. He’s just not as terrible as Trump. Trump has had more scandals during the election and as the actual POTUS. I guess your completely unbiased and expert constitutional legal expertise makes it fact, despite actual constitutional legal expertise to the contrary. I’ve been saying that repeatedly? As far as I know, there is nothing in M4A outlawing private healthcare. If the market it there, it will exist. Not sure why some hypothetical person who likes their current situation should have more of a right to their preferred option than millions of Americans have to any options at all. Why is one person’s preferred plan (they will have sufficient coverage either way) more important than a thousand people’s basic needs? With such a drastic change, it is all but certain that some of the current options will no longer exist and that some people will be less happy with the coverage they end up with. But there will also be millions who are more satisfied and better cared for. I think the US should prioritize the needs of many over the wants of the few, and I understand the analyses that demonstrate that better health for the overall population will have benefits for everyone, even the few who are upset that their healthcare is different.
Wait, who's looking to get outraged again? The people who agree with Leach, his AD, and at least some of his players, or the people who are upset about those people talking?
A clear sign we are in the presence of a wise and logical thinker.
Depending on your definition, everyone's heart bleeds. You don't have to call me chief. I have good news; while it's fine to have your feelings, they don't reflect what is really happening here. You can and are expressing yourself. No one is censoring what you say (unless you break SDS's content rules). So you're just baselessly assuming that what I have to say is logically incorrect? Ironic.
Hey, look at you quoting me to prove my point. None of their games are the same as each other’s, even ones against common opponents. But that’s about as good of a comparison as we can get. You still aren’t understanding me. Yes, Bo had 5 tough games; but to your earlier point about averages, those account for LESS than 50% of his games in my analysis, whereas Mac’s tough games account for 100% of his games in my analysis. So it should be biased against Mac, yet he still comes out ahead. Seeing as Newman is in a QB competition and everyone except UGA fans believes that having a new, tougher conference, new team, new OC (for him and team), new offensive starters, etc. are at least question marks, I’m considering him less proven than a QB who has performed well in several starts, including some against tough teams, and who has the same OC and some of the same players. And Mac is certainly more proven than any of the other QBs who could win the job at UGA. And yes, I’ve repeatedly mentioned that Trask is more proven.
Oh, so I’m biased but you aren’t? You're trolling, right? I don’t entirely approve of how the House went about impeachment, but it was necessitated by the president’s actions. Of course I, like you, have feelings on the matter. However, unlike you, I have also looked at facts and opinions other than mine to evaluate the issue. As I’ve been saying repeatedly, there would be private healthcare options under M4A.
Regardless of people's personal feelings, Leach's and Dabo's missteps have already had consequences (see coverage, apologies, transfers, and an illegal party). This isn't a free speech issue, and the responsibility one has for their words is much greater when they are the face of an organization responsible for others and celebrated by hundreds of thousands. Regardless of their personal feelings, coaches have a greater responsibility to think before they speak because their words have a greater influence on a greater number of people than the average citizen. Hopefully they'll all learn and continue to try to do better in the future.
Nah, I think Paul Pierce makes better use of his time.
Oops, 0/2. Nancy isn't my name, and the two words are synonymous. But nice try.
That isn’t dismissing; that is qualifying or contextualizing. Like you are doing by pointing out that Bo had less experience in his overall worse performance in his first top 15 game. As is countering that the Auburn team Mac faced was a better opponent than the Oregon team Bo faced, and that the nature of the Iron Bowl adds another dimension of difficulty. My sampling also had Mac against 0 ‘inferior opponents’ vs Bo against at least 4. I’ll try to explain again. If Bo had bad games that needed to be averaged up by other games, then he either struggled against bad teams (not a good sign) or he struggled against good teams. If he struggled vs good teams more than Mac did (I only included good teams for Mac’s stats), then that’s my point. I literally just said that he is more proven than half of the starting QBs in my top 4. “As we agree I said, Mac is “one of the more proven QBs” out of the foursome of Bama, LSU, UF, & UGA. Since LSU and UGA will be starting new QBs, I think it’s obvious that having 4 starts makes Mac more proven than those two, thus he is “one of the more proven QBs” out of those four.”
I was saying that that is the absolute extreme, as opposed to the further extreme of literally only one option that you suggested. What is the basis for that opinion? I hope you're trolling. If not, I’ll try to correct some of the lies and misconceptions you presented. It is very likely that the only reason Trump has not been indicted is that the DOJ has a policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted. Seeing as many of his close associates were indicted, it is not unlikely that this is the only reason he wasn’t. Both parties have been partisan, but the Senate refusing to even put on a show of upholding their constitutional duty seems much more dangerously partisan than what you seem to think the House did, much less what they actually did. There was clearly plenty of reason to impeach Trump. I’d say that subverting Congress and using the presidency to gain a political advantage are much worse than using the office for oral s3x. And if that impeachment was actually about lying, boy do I have news for you. Maybe unflattering coverage is unflattering because it reveals an ugly truth? Why do you insist on making vague, unsubstantiated claims about Biden while ignoring the unlawful, dishonest, and corrupt behavior of the current administration?
If someone who decides to find a coach to whom they can entrust their future is a snowflake, what do we call people who yell about them on the internet?
Yeah, people should be more upset by stuff like this than what Herbstreit said.
Constitutionally, there's a massive difference between a private entity (SDS) and the government regulating speech. Conflating the two does no good.
As I said, I was not dismissing his overall game performance and I even made it a large part of my analysis of him. If you want to feel smug by reading whatever you think I wrote, congrats. Your reasoning is nonsensical. By your argument, in my comparison Mac’s “bad performance” vs Auburn should not be made up by his good performance while Bo’s “better” performance should have enough to make up for it in the whole season. But the opposite happened. Yes, there is an unavoidable difference in sample size, but it’s not that big and my sampling method was heavily biased towards Bo and he still came out looking worse. As we agree I said, Mac is “one of the more proven QBs” out of the foursome of Bama, LSU, UF, & UGA. Since LSU and UGA will be starting new QBs, I think it’s obvious that having 4 starts makes Mac more proven than those two, thus he is “one of the more proven QBs” out of those four. Simple enough? For added fun, I even acknowledged that UF’s QB is more proven.
I don’t know what your first sentence means, but none of the interpretations I came up with make any sense. “You’re either in the 1% or not” is a nice tautology, but it’s meaningless; obvious, but pointless. So what? Why should the extremely rich be rewarded with more healthcare? And what are you evening trying to say? You’re the one baselessly claiming there will only be one option; I’ve said there will be more than one. I never tried to paint Biden as 100% clean and honest. But if you want dirt, lies, nepotism, and corruption, Trump is individual number one. And it isn’t even close. Any objective examination would make this pretty clear, but I understand that personal feelings can be hard to overcome.
Speaking of schedule differences: “We would make both Ohio State and Alabama small favorites over Clemson if they were to play today,” Davis said. “Clemson has the shortest odds strictly because of their schedule.” - Caesars Sportsbook trading director Jeff Davis
No, not when I focused on his overall performance in that game. At most that was dismissing those specific mistakes; if you want to take it that way, fine. That's one explanation. More opinion than fact, and doesn't explain why more easy games doesn't make up for it. No, you still aren't getting what I'm saying. You're right that I didn't start by looking only at the 14 starting QBs and going from there, but I never said I did. I looked at several factors and put Bama, UF, UGA, and LSU as at least slightly above the rest. Then, within those 4 that I thought were best, I used that reasoning as my deciding factor for now. Does that help?