News:

OK A-holes.  It's fixed.  Enjoy the orange links, because I have no fucking idea how to change them.  I basically learned scripting in four days to fix this damned thing. - Andy

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Gilgamesh

#16
Quote from: Eli on December 30, 2013, 10:14:57 AM
I see that the Tribune's poll about wanting Cutler back is exactly 50/50 after almost 18,000 votes. That sounds about right.

Cutler can be frustrating and I don't think he's as good as SKO has built him up to be in his prickly, strawmen-busting brain (love you anyway, Kyle), but I don't see another reasonable option besides bringing him back unless you don't care about next season. Because what's even more frustrating than Cutler is a genuinely bad QB, which is probably what they'll have next year if Cutler is elsewhere.

I guess I'd lean toward franchising him, drafting a QB fairly early and seeing how it plays out with that development. An extension wouldn't bother me either, I suppose.

If you draft a QB fairly early and franchise Cutler, when will the draftee play?  My thinking is that if you are going to expend that first round pick on a QB (or any other player) that player should be on the field immediately.

If you let Cutler go, that's when you draft a QB early; otherwise, it'll be a wasted season for that player.

Alternatively, you could franchise Cutler and then draft a QB in the second or third rounds (or even the fourth) and then let him develop.
#17
Quote from: Fork on December 30, 2013, 10:20:07 AM
Sure, the offense could have done more but how much can you ask out of them? The defense was surprisingly playing well albeit some bad calls. It really didn't matter in the end. Chris Conte and the shitty defense of the Chicago Bears lost this game. No doubt about it.

I'm not disputing your point, Fork, but it was great to see that the NFL's idea of a 40 second play clock evolved into a 40-ish second play clock.

That was convenient for the Packers.
#18
Quote from: CBStew on December 28, 2013, 05:41:52 PM
As are most scam movies, this movie is very intricate and demands constant attention, so stop staring at Amy Adams' side boobs.  As you know by now this is a version of the 1970s' "Abscam" sting that trapped a number of politicians into taking bribes.  The FBI got the idea and roped in a number of politicians who might otherwise have gone on to become President, or Supreme Court Justices.  It was technically not entrapment, but if it walks like a duck, etc.  The movie is well made, and for those of us who wore those clothes, both embarrassing and depressing.  I am not certain that the movie qualifies as entertainment.  Paul Newman and Robert Redford were constantly entertaining us in "The Sting".  The final scene of "The Sting" was the icing on the cake.  This movie doesn't try to amuse as it goes along.   It is not boring, but you are aware that it goes on for a very long time to make the point that it very solidly makes.  Christian Bale has made movies where he starves himself into an emaciated skeleton.  This time he has gained around fifty pounds.  He wears an intricate comb over and hairpiece that I think explains what Donald Trump has going on up there.  Bradley Cooper could steal every scene that he is in except for the fact of Adams' décolleté and Jennifer Lawrence's voluptuousness.  The best acting in my opinion was done by Jennifer Lawrence, or maybe her part was the best  written.  Her character is so destructively stupid and self deceiving that you will wince when she really gets going.  

I'm just wondering if you still have those clothes.

Given the cyclical nature of fashion trends, they should be back in style in about 5 or 10 years.
#19
Desipio Lounge / Re: NCAA/B1G Football
December 27, 2013, 11:26:44 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 27, 2013, 11:08:38 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 27, 2013, 11:07:14 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 27, 2013, 10:45:04 AM
Quote from: InternetApex on December 26, 2013, 11:34:45 PM
Unfortunately Northern Illinois couldn't convince any Bowl selection body to allow to play Purdue again. Because LOL @ Big Ten am I right?

You are right. And as always, heading up that clown parade, Tim Beckman and Illinois.

I hope they lose to all three creampuffs they scheduled next year.

With an Illinois game, you're never sure which team is the creampuff.

Dumb joke aside Illinois sucks and I hope they go 0-12 next year.

At least with Zook, they could marginally recruit some talent, provided he had a quality OC and DC doing the real coaching.

Now, they can't even recruit or competently coach a team.

At least the basketball team is decent.
#20
Quote from: Bort on December 11, 2013, 10:31:03 PM
Quote from: SKO on December 11, 2013, 04:49:18 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 11, 2013, 03:36:46 PM
Quote from: Bort on December 11, 2013, 01:59:36 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 11, 2013, 01:16:18 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on December 11, 2013, 11:42:23 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 11, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on December 10, 2013, 03:33:06 PM
Who have McCown's Bears beaten that's worth a shit?

You can only beat the team that's in front of you, son.

Except for the times you can't.

That's when you establish the run to set up play action.

Then you're more than 60% of the way to being on first down already.

This is absolutely staggering.

Sports for the Layperson: Complex Sports Concepts Boiled Down to Their Essence (Not Literally Boiled Down, That's a Metaphor (a Concept I Also Explain in the Book)) by Gil Gunderson.

I LOL'd.

As did I.

That is a very funny way to start my day.  Nicely done.
#21
Desipio Lounge / Re: Who's a Hall of Famer?
December 10, 2013, 01:29:50 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 10, 2013, 11:55:04 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2013, 10:52:39 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 10, 2013, 10:02:45 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2013, 09:05:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2013, 06:47:47 AM
Paul O'Neill did get hurt a lot and seemed to have a lot of simmering anger, but he also didn't change 3 shirt sizes in a 4 year period.

don't forget that roids or HGH aren't just used to build ludicrous amounts of muscle. Was Andy Pettitte some kind of Ned Flanders when he removed the pinstriped top? Doubt it.

These guys, hell probably every team had guys, who would use something to get healthy quickly and stay off the DL. You'd never know it.

Which is part of the reason why I don't give a fuck about PEDs.

I actually think the juicers should be let in, for all I give a fuck about the HOF.

Fact is, without Sosa and McGwire, baseball wouldn't have had as quick a rebound following the work stoppage in 94.

Not to mention, it's a little hard to say that because these guys cheated they shouldn't be allowed into the same hallowed hall as Whitey Ford, Don Sutton or Gaylord Perry.

No one will ever convince me that Barry Bonds isn't one of the best 2-3 players of all time.

These four years are just unfathomable to me, PEDs or not.



Whenever I talk about the beauty of the on-base percentage stat with friends, I take note of the practical import of the stat.  I've used Bonds' 2004 season as an example to explain the stat: by the time he stepped to the plate, he was more than 60% of the way toward being on first base already.

That is absolutely staggering.
#22
Desipio Lounge / Re: Who's a Hall of Famer?
December 10, 2013, 11:36:41 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2013, 10:52:39 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 10, 2013, 10:02:45 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2013, 09:05:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2013, 06:47:47 AM
Paul O'Neill did get hurt a lot and seemed to have a lot of simmering anger, but he also didn't change 3 shirt sizes in a 4 year period.

don't forget that roids or HGH aren't just used to build ludicrous amounts of muscle. Was Andy Pettitte some kind of Ned Flanders when he removed the pinstriped top? Doubt it.

These guys, hell probably every team had guys, who would use something to get healthy quickly and stay off the DL. You'd never know it.

Which is part of the reason why I don't give a fuck about PEDs.

I actually think the juicers should be let in, for all I give a fuck about the HOF.

Fact is, without Sosa and McGwire, baseball wouldn't have had as quick a rebound following the work stoppage in 94.

Not to mention, it's a little hard to say that because these guys cheated they shouldn't be allowed into the same hallowed hall as Whitey Ford, Don Sutton or Gaylord Perry.

No one will ever convince me that Barry Bonds isn't one of the best 2-3 players of all time.

Even without the PEDs too.
#23
Quote from: Fork on December 10, 2013, 10:19:07 AM
It's a good thing there was a lockout last season, so we wouldn't have to deal with those crazy $70 million salary caps any more.

But seriously - that $58 million salary floor is going to result in some ugly rosters by the smaller-market teams. Woof.

Maybe now is the time for some team to give Alexei Zhamnov that 10 year, 100 million dollar contract he's long deserved!!
#24
Desipio Lounge / Re: Twatheads Twittering
December 10, 2013, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: R-V on December 10, 2013, 10:06:10 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 10, 2013, 10:03:51 AM
Quote from: R-V on December 10, 2013, 09:19:55 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2013, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: Tonker on December 10, 2013, 05:53:41 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2013, 05:49:56 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on December 09, 2013, 08:40:08 PM
I guess, in his own time, Bill Hicks could be said to compare unfavorably to Paul...



He hates Bill Hicks?!?!

Jesus, all this time I was amused in a detached way by teh Paul, but this shit just pisses me off.  Not like his delusional analogies to Kant et.al. didn't already prove the point, but christ what a dumbfuck.

If I had to come up with five words to describe Huey, they would definitely be "amused, in a detached way."

Potato, in a boiled way

Sophomoric meatsack

Helmeted curmudgeon

We're talking about Huey's dong now, right?

TBFA.
#25
Desipio Lounge / Re: Who's a Hall of Famer?
December 10, 2013, 10:01:03 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on December 10, 2013, 09:26:51 AM
Quote from: BH on December 10, 2013, 09:21:24 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on December 10, 2013, 09:19:12 AM
Quote from: Slaky on December 10, 2013, 09:05:29 AM
Quote from: PANK! on December 10, 2013, 06:47:47 AM
Paul O'Neill did get hurt a lot and seemed to have a lot of simmering anger, but he also didn't change 3 shirt sizes in a 4 year period.

don't forget that roids or HGH aren't just used to build ludicrous amounts of muscle. Was Andy Pettitte some kind of Ned Flanders when he removed the pinstriped top? Doubt it.

These guys, hell probably every team had guys, who would use something to get healthy quickly and stay off the DL. You'd never know it.

Which is part of the reason why I don't give a fuck about PEDs.

And that's the end of the PED debate. Thanks, guys. It's been emotional.

Every team had has guys on the stuff during this time, so it's not like these managers had some sort of advantage. They just had better players on PEDs. The whole morality, sanctity of the game crap is ridiculous. You could argue that greenies helped players more, and everyone took those for decades. Who cares.

The game has no sanctity. People who try to project that on it are really sad in the way that they delude themselves and try to impose their beliefs on others. Players took what was available to them before steroids were available. Greenies were a fine example. They kept non-whites out of the game until Jackie Robinson and Larry Doby so take that sanctity, shove it in your pie hole and choke on it.  

The BBHOF also has as members some people who even by their contemporary standards were unconscionable assholes, e.g. Ty Cobb.

I used to be of the belief that the Hall of Fame should keep the PEDers out, but I'm more convinced now that they should be allowed in with the caveat that their suspected PED use be conspicuously referenced on their plaques (or at least somewhere in very close proximity to their wing of the hall)

I think to do otherwise simply enables baseball to continue to sweep the whole issue under the rug, forget its past, and pretend it's no longer an issue.  All history making people and events should have the complete stories told to the widest audience.  To not do so only perpetuates this idea that history's sole value is to glorify the past rather than address everything.
#26
Quote from: Sterling Archer on December 09, 2013, 10:32:50 PM
This might be my favorite system of football I've seen this season. Better save this one. I can feel the football growing (||).

Make sure you protect the precious ball during the tumescent growth phase.
#28
Quote from: CT III on December 09, 2013, 02:51:03 PM
Quote from: Fork on December 09, 2013, 12:38:20 PM
Quote from: Slaky on December 09, 2013, 10:05:58 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on December 09, 2013, 09:14:43 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 09, 2013, 08:58:35 AM
The soccer World Cup makes me wish the IIHF could finally get their shit together and do a hockey one at regular intervals. That would fucking rule.

In addition to the Winter Olympics? So you would have your regular seasons interrupted every two years instead of four? I'm not arguing against it but is that something you would want? How would you make it better than the Olympic tournament if you ran the zoo?

They had this non-Olympic tournament a few times under varying names and there was one in particular when the USA won it and I remember being extremely excited about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_World_Cup_of_Hockey

That's the ticket. Have a pre-NHL season tourney, while everyone is healthy.

Although, it's easy to want this as an American, since the US is one of the four countries (the others being Russia, Canada and Sweden) who are in the medal round of every international tournament from Juniors up.

Just like baseball!

Seriously, I don't see this happening.  As Fork pointed out, there's 4 countries that could definitely drum up interest, maybe 6 if you count Finland and somehow reunited Czechoslovakia.

Other than that you're going to have a bunch of countries getting their asses handed to them while fielding teams full of 4th generation Canadians whose great-great grandfathers came over from Ireland or Spain or Poland.

Which is pretty much how the preliminary rounds of the Olympics go.

So you can put me down as a "present" vote.

The only difference with the Baseball "World Cup" is that the sport is no longer in the Olympics, but aside from that, I think that for soccer and hockey, having just the one major international competition suffices for most.

While I don't normally care for soccer, I typically will watch a few games (or moments of a few games) during the World Cup, but I don't watch any of it in the Olympics, mostly because it's superfluous compared to the World Cup.  Part of what make Olympic hockey so appealing, on the other hand, is that it is the sole international competition for the best players, which doesn't dilute the impact of the event.

Adding another international hockey competition would do that, I believe.

But I'd probably still watch it.
#29
Desipio Lounge / Re: Who's a Hall of Famer?
November 27, 2013, 11:27:15 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 27, 2013, 11:02:32 AM
Quote from: BH on November 27, 2013, 10:57:55 AM
Bump. This is pretty awesome.

This comment is great.

"Vote in anyone with even a whiff of PED, and Frank Thomas. I want to watch the uncomfortable acceptance speech lineup of Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, and then Thomas. "

Because nobody who played football at Auburn ever used PEDs. Nope. Nosiree.

Frank Thomas has always been preternaturally large and he had long complained in MLBPA meetings and in the press, I believe, about steroid use in baseball.

While doubt is fine for pretty much anyone who played during the era, I think there's enough convincing evidence against the thought that Frank Thomas dabbled with dope.
#30
Quote from: PenFoe on November 25, 2013, 10:08:58 AM
Quote from: CT III on November 24, 2013, 07:27:42 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 24, 2013, 12:50:10 PM
The Blue Jays are supposedly putting together a package for him.

SOURCE: Bruce Levine is terrible and always wrong.
\\

Other than Eli's desire for this team to have some veterans for when the win the World Series in 2016, I can't think of any good reasons to keep him. 

Hopefully they can make this happen and add to the stockpile of guys who are unlikely to ever pan out gonna be ready in a couple years.

I can't think of anyone on the current roster who is either actually untouchable or practically untouchable for when they are ready to compete.