- 05:42 AM
- 11/22/09
Except you're not counting all of the lottery tickets and cigarette taxes that pay for math geeks' public services. We're comfortably ahead in your competition
Not sure what that means, but then again, I did recently switch to decaf.
posted by dviking at 01:26 PM on November 21
Ugh. It's painful to see him reject logic so brazenly.
Though I was really over this discussion, I do find it interesting that a different statistical breakdown of the play has slightly different numbers. Figures used by in this analysis make it a 80.5% to 79% comparison...which fits my definition of a "gut check".
To say that the writer is rejecting logic is to not understand the unique circumstances of this game. The writer makes my point in the section he labled "Inane angle #1", just don't see how you can give the Pats a 60% chance of success in that situation. But, since Belichick failed this time, the numbers are now surely in his favor the next time, I mean, that'd be logical wouldn't it?
math geeks trumping traditional assumptions.
What exact trumping are you referring to? The play failed.
Gut check 1 (admittedly, we'll never know if punting would have won the game)
Math geeks and Bill Belichick 0
posted by dviking at 12:55 PM on November 21
Bet they're missing Brent now.
posted by dviking at 12:28 PM on November 21
Not sure if a student produced song can officially jinx the team, but then again, the mascot was in the video.
posted by dviking at 06:58 PM on November 20
yes, they seemed intent on making others care, I don't
posted by dviking at 07:42 PM on November 19
good grief, they obviously only wore the jerseys for the start of the reception.
Who cares what people do at their own receptions?
They probably couldn't wait to get it on Youtube.
posted by dviking at 06:56 PM on November 19
While I agree with dfleming that leaving the second half out does skew the results, I'm not at all surprised to see that officials tend to want to even the game out. In the NBA it almost gives some games a "fixed' feel to them, in college I've just noticed too many times in which it seemed as though the ref's were controlling the game.
What is so hard about calling a foul when you see one, and not when you don't? Now, my officiating ended at the college intramural level, but I seriously don't remember looking at the scoreboard to determine who was ahead, nor did I ever care how many fouls I had called on one team versus the other.
All that being said, I wonder if the fact that an aggressive player that gets called for a few fouls early tends to get benched plays into this. If a player gets 2 or 3 fouls quickly they're often pulled, so it just may be the team that got a few fouls called on them taking it easy instead of the refs being biased.
posted by dviking at 07:57 PM on November 18
actually, I was basing my decision on just the fact that they were playing the Colts. And, yes, 99.9% was out of line, I have no clue as to why I put that figure as I don't think it's that clear cut. I just don't buy a 60% success rate in going for it against the Colts in that situation.
posted by dviking at 04:58 PM on November 17
The Pats and Colts don't play each other often enough to get the kind of statistical data we're talking about. How many times have they gone for it on fourth and 2 against each other? How many times have they given the other team a chance to win with a drive that began near the red zone? That's not statistics, it's anecdotes.
Sure, the sample size of 100% relevant data is too small to use in most cases, that doesn't change the fact that if you then start using less relevant datat that your outcomes change. That was my point. Belichick can say that teams make that play 60% of the time, but not against the Colts with the game on the line.
Statistics often are misleading due to the influence of data collected regarding similar, but not identical, circumstances/events.
posted by dviking at 10:35 AM on November 17
A team can take a safety if they want, although not very common, it does happen.
No way to prove it, so it comes down to gut decision.
That's one way of thinking about things like this, and it will always be used as a rationalization by people who favor gut checks instead of looking at the numbers
rcade, my point was this, since the statisical data that you cite is not tied to analysis of Pats/Colts games, it has a certain degree of error built into it. And, even if I buy that 60% of the time the Pats would convert that play against the Colts in that situation (I don't, but that's not the point) it would still be a gut check to actually call that play. It didn't work last night, but the odds never said it would work 100% of the time, thus the gut check.
posted by dviking at 11:28 PM on November 16
but, again, you're adding in the odds that Pittsburgh could convert the 4th and 2 against the Chiefs into the equation. I personally doubt the Pats would convert that play 60% of the time against the Colts in this situation.
No way to prove it, so it comes down to gut decision.
posted by dviking at 03:50 PM on November 16
Is it legal to dump beer on a 20 year old...I mean, what if she swallowed some of it???
posted by dviking at 02:05 PM on November 16
In regard to all the stat talk, please bear in mind that most of those stats are almost meaningless.
To lump in %'s that are based on how effective all teams have been on 4th and 2 in all situations is to give way too much emphasis on how the Pttsburgh Steelers did against the Chiefs last year. You have to look at how effective teams similar to the Pats have been against teams similar to the Colts on 4th and two, this year, with the game on the line. Anything else is misleading. I realize that diminishes the pool of comparable plays, but it does make it more realistic, and I would bet that the resulting % of success would be far less than the 30% some of you have quoted. (bearing in mind that 87.4% of all stats are made up on the fly)
As to the route being deep enough, it was with a clean catch, however, in hind sight it's obvious that a route a yard deeper would have been a better choice.
posted by dviking at 02:02 PM on November 16
Don't most football players whether Hall of Famer or not, earn the right to have an opinion about the game of football?
Well, I suppose we all have the right to have an opinion about the game, but I don't think someone like Brian Bosworth has earned the right to speak his mind without being criticized....Tarkenton has (at least in my purple hazed mind).
I give H.O.F.er's a bit of slack that a typical player doesn't necessarily get.
posted by dviking at 10:24 AM on November 16
Maybe Belichick saw something in the Colts practice tapes that lead him to belive they could get the 1st down
Really?
Oh, sure, they thought they could run a quick slant pattern for three yards, surely the defense will be playing loose in that situation.
Whatever Belichick thought he could get away with, he was proven wrong. When the play works he's a hero, when it doesn't he's a goat.
In this particular situation, 99.9% of the time it makes sense to punt. Too big of a risk if you don't make it. Sad that he didn't have more confidence in his defense. Then again, the Colts went the 30 yards with no problem, so maybe another 40-50 yards wouldn't have mattered.
posted by dviking at 02:04 AM on November 16
Actually, when I read the quote below, I though maybe she was just pledging for the same fraternity I tried to get into....
"Just seeing them come out and pour beer all over me, it was a great feeling," Wie said. "I've always seen it on TV and I've always wanted people to pour beer on me. It was as great as I thought it was."
Does this get her into the Masters, or should she win, oh say, about 20 more times on the women's tour before she tries the men's again?
She does look better than Tiger in red though.
posted by dviking at 09:51 PM on November 15
Status alert: Just want to ensure that the world knows that I got my mug on Telemanjaro twice yesterday!
My son's high school team had a playoff game at the mecca that is Cowboys Stadium. During the game the cameras put my wife and I on the screen twice.
Guess I can cross that one off my "Bucket List".
As a non-Cowboy fan, it was great to be able to get into the place for $10. Since it was a high school game, no alcohol, so no temptation to pay $8 for a warm beer. Plus, we got great seats on the 50, 17 rows up.
Beautiful stadium...though I can't stnd the guy, Jones did a very nice job on his stadium.
Sadly, I won't be going back anytime soon, my son's team lost.
posted by dviking at 01:14 PM on November 15
What's the point here? The writer asks a man what he thinks, then blasts him for it. It's not like Fran was going around taking shots at Cutler and Favre.
Tarkenton earned the right to have an opinion about the game of football, and I don't think he said anything out of line.
Now, that could be a guy who once had a poster of Tarkenton hanging on his wall speaking, so maybe my opinion needs to be discounted!
That being said, Favre will take Fran's old team to 8-1 today! (I personally forgive them both for any sins, past, current, future)
posted by dviking at 01:08 PM on November 15
It goes to show how important an offensive line is.
This shows up in the Bears' running game as well, overall production per/game is way down from last year. If you can't establish the running game, the QB is going to have a hard time passing.
That being said, Culter looked like a scared Bear cub last night, even when he was throwing the ball away he looked like he had no idea how to do it.
Of course, being a Viking's fan I took this very hard.
posted by dviking at 11:33 AM on November 13
I hate the way the league is clamping down on celebrations after scores, the cameras cut away from a lot of it anyways, and the fans at the games don't seem to mind.
I do understand that the league can't have players promoting products, especially alcoholic beverages... has to be a hard set line, i get that.
I believe Jackson was pitching this product.
posted by dviking at 08:12 PM on November 12
There are probably 10 sports (not Yankees-specific) sites that were able to discuss the outcome of the series without turning it into a forum on baseball economics. Here's one. What's funny about that is that BBTF is reputed to be a collection of stathead number crunchers, and yet there's more of the kind of emotional response and camaraderie there than you are apparently hoping for here when you describe intelligent sports communities. Yeesh.
did you even look at that silly site? It's just a collection of one liners...no discussion or debate on a single item. If you want to say "congrat's Yankees!" and think that's somehow interesting, please go back to that site.
The Yankees have had this enormous financial advantage for several years. Why is this the first time they've won?
Beyond justgary's reply, I'd like to add that the Yankee's money keeps them as contenders every year. They don't have to keep going through the rebuilding years that small market teams do when they can't afford to resign their top players. Because Steinbrenner can't sign every top player, other teams do have a chance, and collectively the league has denied the Yankees from winning the WS the past few years. That doesn't really diminish the fact that the Yankees had a huge advantage each of those years.
posted by dviking at 12:14 AM on November 07
The sample size is plenty large enough to hold validity, in fact it's probably several times larger than it really needs to be. All that is really needed is fairly equal representation from each team. If they told me that two players from each team were interviewed I'd be totally fine with the results.
Keep in mind that players on teams talk, and they all view films, so if a guy is a cheap shot artist, they get talked about. I doubt a guy could make the list to the level that Ward did without some validity to it. Guys on the bottom of the list might get there due to just one, or two hits, but you don't get top billing without some consistent level of dirty play. Twice as many listed Ward as they did the second place guy. That does send a message.
Unless someone can prove that they only talked to AFC defensive players, or all of the Bengal players and none of the Steelers, I think the survey hold water. Keep in mind that the league fined him twice last year, so it's not exactly virgin territory to be calling Ward a cheap shot.
posted by dviking at 04:15 PM on November 06
Of course, the single biggest advantage the Yankees have had since 1995 is that their "core four" (Posada, Jeter, Rivera, Pettitte (although he left and came back)) have performed amazingly well for 15 seasons. It's really hard to find any teams since free agency that can claim to have had that sort of reliability in that many players for that long
That's exactly the point...Small market teams can't afford to. Look at my Twins...they had a nice run..late 80's to early 90's...but can't afford to hang to players the way the Yankees can. This next year the Twins get a financial boost due to a new stadium, but who knows if they'll be able to compete with big market teams when Joe Mauer's contract comes up next year? Small market teams get very short windows of opportunity, big market teams get a shot at it almost every year.
Playing in cheat mode doesn't give the player all of the achievements for beating a game that they would have earned if they just played by the rules.
That also was my point. I don't think the Yankees are getting the full credit that most championship teams get. Look at the number of people on this site that believe they cheated. You play in cheat mode on video games and no one cares. I see a lot of people that don't care that the Yankees won. I usually watch the last game, just to see the celebrations, and have watched many parades for teams I don't cheer for. I couldn't find the excitement to even finish watching the final game this year, and at work, not a single person is talking about the Yankees. By far the fastest "move on" after the series that I can remember.
posted by dviking at 10:19 AM on November 06
At my son's football game tonight, some guy shows up wearing a Jeter jersey...he got booed. Seems as though there's a pretty widespread dislike of the Yankees down here, or maybe they just hate Jeter.
Personally, I don't think the Yankees cheated, I just feel that the payroll disparity cheapens the win. It's like having the 16 year old playing in the Little League game...yea, you won, but you should have won, big deal. I don't ever recall any other team winning a championship in any sport, and not really being given their due respect for doing so. Everyone I've talked to (have not talked to single person from NY) is pretty much going "whatever, of course they won, look at the payroll"
Kudo's to Steinbrenner for paying the bucks to get it done.
posted by dviking at 11:43 PM on November 05
Holden, it's the payout on a dollar bet. A horse at $10 pays $50 on a $5 bet.
Makes more sense to me than the way odds are shown here.
posted by dviking at 09:04 AM on November 04
Is he really even sitting out 30 minutes? Florida is going to have the ball for the majority of the time anyway, so hardly a suspension.
posted by dviking at 02:48 AM on November 04
Failing that, hit him hard, hit him clean, punish him for the rest of the game
That line brought back memories...in a High School game, an opposing corner back put several cheap shots on our QB, and was seen kneeing a guy in the groin after a tackle. I was one of the wide outs. the coach told us all that on every running play he wanted us to take the jerk out. If he was standing at the end of a play, we were coming out. I think I blind sided him about 10 times myself. The cheap shot artist's last name was Christian. That game was over 30 years ago, funny how some things stick with you. Sorry, that was my trip down memory lane for the day.
posted by dviking at 09:34 PM on November 03
LOL, given that we have a Kenyan Nationalist as our President, what's a marathon runner from Eritrea matter?
Sorry, couldn't resist...I'll see myself out to the woodshed.
posted by dviking at 09:14 PM on November 03
so, you're saying that he played a entire play with Ealey's spit on his glove, taking care not to accidentally wipe it off doing anything silly like, oh, maybe tackle someone. Then, he jumped on the pile, keeping that hand free, and was simply wiping the spit back on Ealey...is that what you're saying? I double the BS call...no way that happened.
Minimum one game suspension...half a game is almost worse than no suspension. With no suspension you could at least make the statement "we reviewed the tapes, and talked to players, and our decision was to handle this one internally" The half game suspension smacks of "yes, he did that, but we've got a national title to win, and we need to beat Vandy by 60 this week"
posted by dviking at 10:14 AM on November 03
Tennis rackets work very well. (not for the squeamish)
Used to deal with the flying mammals at a lake cabin, the animals can do quite the damage to a wooden structure.
posted by dviking at 02:55 PM on November 02
It's all about economics...the seasons of all sports have been expanded to allow for more games, thus more revenue.
While I like watching a football game that's taking place in inclement weather, baseball is another matter. The season should end by mid-October at the latest.
posted by dviking at 10:58 AM on November 02
LOL, nice job of swatting a bat out of mid-air. Though to be fair, the bat was probably pretty disoriented as he was totally out of his natural habitat.
The player swatted it down, he didn't stomp on his head...PETA has no reason for complaint here.
I think the hand sanitizer is the least that should have happened. I'd probably want to take a shower after contacting the bat like that!
posted by dviking at 10:55 AM on November 02
Favre was awesome today! 4 TD's and no picks or sacks.
His replacement had a decent day, though he did suffer through 6 sacks! Can blame some of those on his line, however, he also needs to learn to get rid of the ball.
It could have been worse, the Pack benefitted from some poor officiating at the start of the game. A clear Packer fumble that was returned for a TD was ruled down. I do understand that the whistle blows the play dead, but what the heck was the official blowing the whistle for on a play that was clearly not over? Didn't matter in the end.
posted by dviking at 11:19 PM on November 01
I'll second the vote that baseball be done in September.
posted by dviking at 11:13 PM on November 01
Just going to guess that the tackler plays on both all the special team plays...somehow forgot which he was on.
You wouldn't think this would happen past 7th grade.
posted by dviking at 02:51 PM on November 01
wfrazerjr...at least in Texas an intercepted pass can be run back for the two points...not sure of that in every state.
This was a bit of hotdogging to be sure, and probably not called for. Given that it was early in the game he gets away with it.
posted by dviking at 12:32 AM on November 01
What's the point of having a trial?
If you're charged with a crime, you must automatically be guilty, according to your logic
tommy, perhaps you missed my post about 5 up the list where I clearly stated:. Now, I will also grant that not everyone the police arrest is guilty of a crime, so I could be off-base in calling him a criminal at this point
bperk, I'm not a lawyer, nor a law officer of any type, so you may be right about most states, however I know in Texas I have only have to give the check writer a notice of the bad check. If they don't respond, for any reason, charges can be filed. In the case of a closed account I do not have to give notice at all, intent is never discussed with the authorities. Here's a link from the county that I do most of my business in. No intent is proven with the waiting time, and in most cases the person that absentmindedly bounced a check is calling me before it even comes back from the bank. I should say that they used to...I quit taking checks a while back due to the increased cost of dealing with all the bad checks out there.
posted by dviking at 03:47 PM on October 31
grum, that actually is my point. the kid born in January is almost a full year older that the kid born in December. All things equal, the older kid has an advantage, especially in the younger leagues.
For a short period of time, the youth leagues in my area had two years lumped together...8&9 year olds, 10 & 11 year olds...which made things even worse. They used a July 1st cutoff date. The kid that turned 9 on the previous July 2nd is two years older than the kid that just turned 8 on June 30th. Scary stuff when you consider the likelyhood for injuries.
A widely practiced tactic of some parents is to hold their children back a year before starting school. Thus giving their kid a built in advantage in school sports. I know that my son would play with different kids in school than he would in the summer rec leagues because the kid on his 7th grade team was too old to play on his 12 year old team in the summer, and several 6th grades were forced to play up on his summer team. Should these kids come with warnings?
I think maybe the umpire should announce before every batter what the kid's true age is, and how fast he is capable of swinging the bat. Perhaps, given crash21's point above, we need to announce ahead of time if the pitcher is going to throwing a fast ball, as pitch speed does affect the velocity at which the ball leaves the bat.
We need these warnings as kids need to be able to react, and parents can make informed decisions regarding whether or not little Jimmy should cover 3rd on that pitch. It might slow the game down a bit, but surely it would be worth it.
posted by dviking at 03:05 PM on October 31
rcade, now we're drifting from the real discussion.
To clarify, a criminal is someone that commits a crime. Not all crimes are committed knowingly, or willfully. To bounce a check is technically a crime. You took goods, and did not leave a valid, legal check. Yes, most merchants give you the chance to pay it, with a hefty fine imposed as well. They'd rather have your money than see you arrested. They absolutely can file charges if they want. The ones you read about in the paper are people that write multiple bad checks, and/or don't make good on them.
Even in this case, the casinos are more than willing to let him go if he pays up. However, the fact that they had him arrested shows that he had committed a crime. You actually make my argument when you say "if he pays it, the charge goes away" Why would there be a charge if there was no crime committed?
My point on the wholesomeness of casinos was only that it's hard to feel sorry for a guy writing $1m in bad checks to casinos compared to the individual that bounces a check trying to buy food for their family. I wholeheartedly support the gaming industry, and try not to support them too much!
posted by dviking at 06:06 PM on October 30
As a baseball coach (or, at least a former baseball coach) and someone with intimate knowledge of the coffee industry let me throw my two cents in on both the baseball case and the McDonalds case.
1) The parents clearly went after that party with the most money, not those really at fault. The manufacturer was merely supplying a product in demand. People wanted bats that would hit the ball faster and further. The bat industry puts out a lot of different products, and given that this was a youth league, the league should have restricted the type of bats allowed. Most youth leagues do. We can regulate bat size/type as much as we want, but kids will still be hit with balls, and injurires/deaths will still occur.
2) As others have pointed out, to make the game 100% safe we need to take steps that most of us don't want to take. One logical step is to disband any leagues based on age, and adopt rules based on ability. My kid can hit a ball significantly harder than yours...no really he can...and your kid probably shouldn't be playing with mine. I'm serious about that. When I was coaching rec leagues the most difficult conversations I had were with parents that were upset that I didn't let their little Jimmy play infield. I didn't because their kid sucked as an infielder, and I did not want his death on my hands. A big, more athletic, more coached 12 year old kid hits the ball far more than 8 mph faster than a small, less athletic, less coached 12 year old...do we ban the big kid? Select leagues help, but even then some parents push their kids beyond their ability. Bat regulations will not alter this.
As to the coffee, all good coffee makers make coffee in the 200 to 208 degree range...it's what's needed to extract the oils in the beans. It's the holding temps that matter. McD's used to boil the snot out of their coffee and thus the prospect for deeper burns. And, the old styrofoam cups held temp better than today's typical paper cups so, again, higher burn risk. The burn severity drops significantly with each drop in temp, so going from 180 to 160 is a big deal. Going to 140 is even better. Customers often ask for their drinks to be served "super hot" and that always scares me as I know the risks involved. I also see people driving off with coffee and wonder about the safety risks they're taking. Not just for themselves, but everyone else on the road as well. Back to the McD's case...my mom is 77, and just thinking of her putting a cup coffee between her knees as she tries to stir in sugar makes me shudder. No way her reaction time is quick enough to divert a spill, nor is her reaction time quick enough to pull her sweat pants away from her leg once a spill occurs. Just trouble waiting to happen.
posted by dviking at 05:52 PM on October 30
Not to split hairs.. okay, probably to split hairs, but in order for one to be a criminal, one needs to be convicted of a crime, no?
That is not correct. The definition of a criminal is one that commits crimes. Now, if you're discussing Convicted Criminals, then yes he'd have to be convicted. Sure, papers tend to use words like "suspected", or "allegedly", to avoid lawsuits, I don't have that restriction. Again, I will grant that some view this differently. To me, if I rob a bank I become a criminal regardless of whether I am ever convicted.
Rcade, maybe you and I deal with different issues at work. Over the past 25 years I've sent hundreds of fraudulent check cases to the authorities for presecution. They do arrest these people and charges are brought. Check most local papers' police blotters and you'll see tons of check related charges, so to say that bad check writing is rarely prosecuted is incorrect.
As to the total, I never said that he was being charged with millions in bad checks, I said that he blew through millions and that he owed millions. That seems to be backed up by the article.
As to lumping this criminal in with violent criminals, I'll grant you that. He hasn't physically hurt anyone. He has, at least to the satisfaction of the Las Vegas Police Department, committed a crime. Now, I will also grant that not everyone the police arrest is guilty of a crime, so I could be off-base in calling him a criminal at this point, but, given the number of people stating that he owes them money, and the number of checks written on numerous casinos, I'm pretty sure the word fits.
Because it's Friday, and I'm in a great mood, I will also grant you this regarding Walker. I don't think he committed his crimes in a willful manner. I think he's a genuinely nice guy that has absolutely zero common sense, and he got wrapped up in the living large lifestyle that is the gansta rapper world of many NBA stars. Buying watches, cars, food, suits, houses, etc for an endless number of people. Making some bad investments, listening to some "advisers" that did not have his best interests at heart. He got to the point that it went faster out than it came in, and ended up in a bad situation. All of that does not for one second change the fact that he wrote 10 bad checks to casinos. (casinos of all places...not exactly spending his money on wholesome activities, I mean it's one thing if Aunt Bee bounces a $50.00 check at the supermarket trying to feed cousin Billy, but casinos?).
I'm only saying that he committed a crime and is thus a criminal. Oh, and that he's quite the moron when it comes to dealing with money.
posted by dviking at 10:38 AM on October 30
First, he actually loses two seasons...this one and next year's as he wouldn't be eligible until next October. No way he stays in college.
This was a witch hunt by the NCAA. Yea, lying is bad, and he should have known better. But, at the end of the day he was lying about something that wasn't a violation so to deal out this level of punishment seems excessive.
posted by dviking at 12:26 AM on October 30
Read the story. It's not millions. The 10 bad checks total $1 million.
Well, one of us needs to read the story again. What I read is $1M to the casinos, $4M to various financial institutions, $450K to his agent...and then there's my previous $15,000 bet that the charges we know about are not the full story.
Keep in mind, that if he's writing bad checks, we can assume he's out of money. I mean, that's a fair assumption isn't it? So, he's going to have some large property tax bills due, and probably has a multitude of other smaller bills due as well. It's easily millions of dollars. The $1m to the casinos is only related to the charges in Nevada.
As to the comment of writing bad checks only being criminal if it's prosecuted that way...I guess that depends on one's perspective about a person that commits a crime. I think one becomes a criminal the second they commit the crime, you appear think they only become a criminal when they're convicted of the crime. As someone else pointed out, bouncing a check at Kroger isn't a crime if you can make good on it, cashing 10 for $1M that you don't have probably is. I'll trust that the authorities knew what they were doing when they arrested him. Vegas doesn't normally arrest big spenders that they think were just a bit careless with their money.
If he can unload mommy's house, and get a gig overseas for a decent six figure salary, he might be okay. The casinos and banks would much rather have some money than see him go to jail, he'll probably be able to work a deal out. To some if he works out a deal that means he's not a criminal, to me it just makes him a criminal that got a deal.
posted by dviking at 12:18 AM on October 30
rcade, yes, if he gets a job that enables him to pay off millions in debt he'll probably be fine...fine, as in not having the criminal proceedings go forward. Is that going to happen?
As to being a criminal, I think we've had this discussion before (I forget about which athlete) in which I used the tag of criminal, and others thought that was excessive . Committing a crime makes one a criminal. He clearly continued to spend money he did not have, writing checks that he knew he couldn't cover, so yes he's a criminal. Why is any of the blame on the institutions that allowed him to write bad checks? He was a high profile millionaire that had a history of visiting those places. So, they're supposed to know that he blew through all of his money? Judging from the fact that he wrote the checks to numerous institutions I would guess that he hopped from one casino/bank/whatever to the next in order to continue to write bad checks. Can't do that in the same casino day after day!
posted by dviking at 06:26 PM on October 29
weedy, I appreciate you taking the high road for him, I really do, but come on. An entourage of 70? That's out of control by even gansta rapper standards.
As to his assets, I'll bet him $15,000 that those assets aren't worth the mortgages he has on them. And, I'll bet him another $15,000 that he can't unload those assets in this economy even if he wants to.
Nice guy? Unending generosity? Don't know the man, so I can't comment on the first item, but on the last, it was not unending generosity that got him where he is today, it was unending stupidity. He, and his mother, and his friends wanted to live large, and now he's going to pay the price for it. I'll bet another $15,000 that the bills mentioned in the article are not the only ones out there.
posted by dviking at 12:42 AM on October 29
Wow, moron.
He isn't the first, and he won't be the last, fool soon parted from his money, but what a spectacular fool he is. I haven't the slightest bit of compassion for him. It's one thing to blow through $100+ Million dollars, it's another to blow through the money and then keep spending like you have more.
Obviously, he didn't get any financial advice from his mother, and clearly he needed some advice. I hope all the people he ripped off get their money back.
posted by dviking at 09:08 PM on October 28
This "tweeting" bullshit has to be the nightmare of anyone having to represent clowns like Johnson. They can't edit and run interference for guys who can shoot off their mouths on sites such as that whenever they feel the need.
This tweeting/facebook/myspace crap is getting out of hand. Too many idiots that somehow don't get that others in their organizations might see what they post. It's costing many people their jobs. You'd think that millionaire sports stars would have agents/coaches/owners advising them on what not to post, but I guess some people just can't be saved from themselves.
posted by dviking at 04:59 PM on October 28
Why not play Young? The team is going nowhere as it is, so let's see what the future should be.
If Young performs fine, you're set, or at least his trade value goes up. If he doesn't, given Collins' age, you then know that you have to either draft talent or trade for it. Given the Titan's probable record this year, they should be able to draft a decent QB. But, at least they know where they stand.
To play Collins proves nothing, and almost certainly does not get them to the playoffs.
posted by dviking at 04:55 PM on October 28
because he is more of an all-around fantasy player...runs/receives/returns. He has more fantasy points than Johnson so far, and if Johnson is out it will only get better.
now, they might take his return duties away, but he is a solid third back, and brought me over 18 points last week which is damn good for a bye week fill in. As I said, no AP, but Charles should be a solid back in most leagues. Plus, KC plays some of the weaker defenses in weeks 14 & 15 which are the playoffs in most leagues.
posted by dviking at 04:00 AM on October 28
He took out an insurance policy on his shoulder, i wonder if it pays off if he drops in the draft?
If his shoulder is fixed, I think he'll do just fine as a pro, and dropping a few picks might actually help him in the long run...not having to go to bad team that might try to rush him too fast.
posted by dviking at 10:49 PM on October 27
And, I is feeling very smart for picking up Jamaal Charles in my fantasy league!
He's not going to up Adrian Peterson numbers, but he's going to get more touches for sure, and he gets a fair amount of points from receptions and return.
posted by dviking at 10:44 PM on October 27
They are the clear underdogs here- due to the intangibles
now, that's funny right there....
Bigger payroll, all-stars, home field, umpire bias etc.
Unless, by "intangibles" you meant that A-Rod gets ahold of a bad batch of steroids, or maybe Madonna shows up in the dugout and "drains" his energy.
Other than that, the Yankees are the favorite.
posted by dviking at 10:10 PM on October 26
Wow, picked a bad day to have a meeting that went well into the evening. Since I'm late to this party, let me catch up by saying the following:
That girl is whacked out crazy, and has committed several crimes.
Phillips has awful taste in who he sleeps around with. Why risk everything for someone like that? Yea, it matters to the story. If the girl had been a knockout, at least we (okay some of us) would be going..."yea, I could see that".
A woman that is 22 is a full-fledged adult, and totally responsible for her actions, and if a pretty 22 year old wants a piece of my action I'm all for it. I'm older than Phillips, but don't think age matters much when it's a sexual fling, which it was to him. I'd just be sure that the girl was well aware that I have no intention of a long term relationship. Oh, and that I'm married and all that, but the age is insignificant.
Those that don't like this thread are free to ignore it, why keep arguing that it shouldn't be here? It has definite sports tie ins, and is current news.
Man, it's been a busy year for high profile men having affairs. I'm making a note to only have affairs with married women that have a lot more to lose than I do! Oh, and are hot!
posted by dviking at 10:01 PM on October 21
While I'm totally in favor of jail time for the Foam Finger #1 fans, the Hot Chicks that know nothing about sports we need more of.
BTW, isn't it a bit sexist to just assume that they know nothing about sports?
Plenty of hot women know what they're talking about!
(think they bought that?)
posted by dviking at 10:58 AM on October 20
While I also liked the socks, and the jerseys, those orange officiating outfits have to go.
posted by dviking at 12:06 AM on October 20
dusted, not really disputing anything you've said, however, I've read on numerous occassions that moderate exercise is what is linked to a long, healthy life. Extremes of anything is not good.
posted by dviking at 01:24 AM on October 19
Odd that they died at that stage of the race.
Sad to see.
posted by dviking at 08:49 PM on October 18
This just in...the Favrings...I mean Vikings go to 6-0.
The Vikings beat a solid Ravens team.
Brett has another solid game, 3 TD's and no INT's, and an 136.9 QB rating.
Sanchez has an awful game 0 TD's, 5 INT's and an 8.3 rating.
Green Bay wins...against the hapless Lions...Rodgers has a respectable game, 2 TD's, 1 INT, 113.7 QB rating.
Yea, I'm still glad we got Favre.
Now, I do want our defense to fix what went wrong late in that game.
posted by dviking at 08:45 PM on October 18
holden, that video looked like they were playing in a garbage pit, so much junk on the pitch.
Clearly, given the size of the ball this should have been a situation in which play was stopped.
When you don't score any points it makes it hard to win in any case, but tough to lose on a goal scored off of a beach ball.
posted by dviking at 12:59 PM on October 18
SportsFilter: The Saturday Huddle
But, since Belichick failed this time, the numbers are now surely in his favor the next time, I mean, that'd be logical wouldn't it?
ummm, that was a joke, I'm fully aware that one event does not change the odds for the next event.
Math geeks weren't proven wrong by what happened; probability has to do with aggregates, not individual results or guaranteed predictions. If the play was run 1000 times, it's likely work out around 700/1000. Which 700 times? We have no idea
Wow, now you're up to 70%...in the original thread someone was quoting 60%, which I don't believe, but 70%, no way. I think the writer of the article that rcade qoutes in this thread is looking at it more clearly. His odds, which he backs up, show a much lower success rate. We're never going to see that situation (that exact situation, not just a generic 4th and 2) enough to know for sure what the real probabilities are, but for now it's 100% in favor of punting. I didn't need a calculator to figure that out.