That's No Moon
-
Posts
5,470 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by That's No Moon
-
-
4 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
But what about the cement foundations?
They aren't designed to handle lateral loads like that. They are designed to withstand compressing loads from above, not to be pushed over (or through) from the side.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
I used to live in Baltimore but rarely drove on the Key Bridge. I'm stunned at how easily the bridge went down. I thought those supports were sturdier.
Ships are really heavy and when moving represent a lot of kinetic energy. Bridges aren't built to withstand that.
-
2
-
-
I have a lot of questions. A lot. The first of which being how that happens on a clear night with no appreciable weather.
The second is how does this happen when the ship has a harbor pilot on board and in command.
-
Apparently the Ukrainians and the Russians both like the Bills. C'mon Rog. Let it happen. For world peace.
-
1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:
No doubt. They don't give two *****. And Cleveland already knows what that is like, unfortunately.
We could hope the truckers who show up to move them remember their fuel rebates...
-
I'm shuttin' down the studio!
-
I look forward to getting completely boned by both the calling and non-calling of this at least three times next year.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Saint Doug said:
I don’t understand how players are suppose to tackle anymore.
They aren't, and that step is coming.
2 minutes ago, MJS said:There will be a learning curve, but they call it in rugby pretty accurately.
Our refs can't even call false starts properly.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Mr Info said:
Ok, I will inquire.
Another item I did not mention in my previous post was my rep told me the virtual seats I viewed at the Experience may no longer be available. It leads me to believe they are doing ok selling new stadium club seats.
You expect them to tell you the equivalent of "plenty of good seats still available"? Of course they will try to cause some urgency for you to sign.
On 3/8/2024 at 10:57 AM, Buffalo_Stampede said:I have a question. I’m all for a detailed bison. But do we need to have giant bison balls hanging?
They should be bigger.
-
1
-
1
-
-
56 minutes ago, zevo said:
Is the 10% interest loan accurate?. If so, anyone that finances the PSL should reexamine their personal finances.
Yep
-
1 hour ago, Bob Jones said:
That's why they're making people pay up front, even telling people to get a bank loan and pay it off in 10 years! They are hoping enough people will be OK with the initial PSLs, and they'll have all their PSL money by opening day in 2026. After that, they don’t care.
And I wonder what part of that 10 percent interest M&T is charging is getting kicked back to the Pegulas for the privilege of being the bank that gets to make the loans.
-
That certainly is the optimistic way of looking at it.
-
3
-
2
-
-
I had my wisdom teeth out the day before and accidentally pulled a stitch knot through my mouth screaming at my television.
I think I'll pass on watching that travesty again.
4 minutes ago, Your Brown Eye said:#Flutiewouldvewonthegame
Johnson had that game won, with one shoe on.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, PBF81 said:
Speaking of stadium construction, I looked at the Bufnews piece and comments on the PSLs and they're taking a beating.
The next month or two is going to be very interesting.
The real fun will start when the next round of people get brought in for the non "Club" seating. I don't think that will be in a month or two.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
That is incorrect. The defense has improved greatly. UPL has been great too but it's not all one, it's both. What failed this year is the scoring from last year but even that's picking up now. Could be injuries. But the the big thing is the improvement in defense and finding a #1 goalie. You need that to be a playoff team. So the hope is next year will be the year. If not, then we can talk about coaching/GM changes. At least you would have given Adams and Granato a long chance.
They are wildly inconsistent and the veteran players who are supposed to be there to steady a young team are some of the worst offenders of up and down effort, dumb penalties, stupid plays, etc. About a week ago Tuch made one of the worst plays I've seen in hockey. It was Squirt C level bad and he's supposed to be a veteran leader of the team.
The power play is absolute dog water and that's on Ellis because they have plenty of firepower to have a good PP.
It's the coaches' job to get the most out of the players and that hasn't happened. It's on the GM to give the staff all the pieces they need to compete and that hasn't happened either. It's an absolute clown show, top to bottom.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I had heard about this almost 48 hours ago but kept 🤐
So you're saying you Clapped your trap?
40 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:
This to me is a slighty higher level Greg Mancz type signing. Clapp did play a lot last year when Corey Lindsey got hurt.Yeah, and San Diego (idc what they call themselves) had a lot of trouble protecting Herbert.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
You're right and that's sort of my point with the unlimited transfer portal... That's why I would make it like a one-time thing
My booster friend used to be able to give a lot of cash to a recruit for his loyalty for 3 to 5 years... It was a relationship built upon a brand, which is the program, the players potential and a lot of money
It was like an unwritten rule that it would buy your commitment for at least 3 years
Now that it is in the open... It doesn't buy anything... And boosters like my friend.. have little reason to be a college booster
When there was a significant reason 20 years ago... We're talking about a billion dollar business
But it's only a business because of ex-players and boosters like my friend
Yeah, but it's buying loyalty like doing business with the mob builds loyalty. You are each loyal to each other because you have dirt on each other. That's kind of a weird thing to want to bring back. Form your friends perspective yeah I guess I'd be annoyed that 100k doesn't buy what it used to buy in terms of control and I appreciate why he'd want that back but I don't think giving him that back would be beneficial to the players and if the Universities want that scummy relationship back in the game then the whole sport should be stopped because it's too broken to fix.
I see it as college football going corporate. They don't need your friend's dirty money anymore when there are businesses and individuals who are willing to pump legitimate money into the system now because now they are allowed to. A lot of them aren't looking for loyalty to the university specifically either, they want access to the player to openly rep their business or product in ways they used to not be able to do. They'll pick players from a certain school, but those relationships are openly transactional and temporary. I dunno, this feels healthier though I can appreciate why it's frustrating for people who have been at it awhile.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
Teams and players were bought well before the nil and that is an absolute fact...
I don't disagree with this at all which is why I like NIL. It forces this stuff out into the open. I suspect that the reason why it's unpopular in some circles is BECAUSE it's forced it out into the light and people can comparison shop which has driven prices up in the marketplace and increases pressure on ADs and programs in general to aggressively, but indirectly, fundraise. The fans can directly call out your lack of NIL pool money now when before all they could do was grumble. It's another point of difference they have to recruit against. It was all much easier when a booster could give a kid a car in someone else's name or drop of envelopes full of untraceable cash and the schools could pretend not to know.
-
Just now, Buffalo716 said:
But are you loyal to the school or the coach... My friend gives $100,000 a year to Oklahoma football so they can shower recruits so they're loyal to the school not the coach
Right, but if your coach isn't playing me, Georgia's money is just as green. The coach is the person you have a connection with, the staff are the people who you interact with every day and who are invested in you as a person (if they are doing it right). Your friend writes checks and isn't going to have that level of connection with a player. You know how locker rooms work. The players are battling for the other people in the room ahead of anyone else. The really successful coaches are often the guys who do the best jobs building those relationships and getting the best out of the players, not the X and O guys. That's why the players are loyal to those sorts of coaches. If it's a bad coach the kids won't leave when that coach leaves. If it's a good one that they will miss?
The example I look at a lot is the QB hoarding that top programs do. What does it matter if the NIL consortium gave me money to sign if I'm 4th string as a freshman and the same NIL group gives another 4-5 star QB money the following year? That NIL group doesn't have loyalty to ME as a player, they are boosting the University. If I'm not panning out for whatever reason they are more than happy to try to buy my replacement. Looking out for myself as a player I know I need to play. I need to play to improve and build my own career so that check I got has way less meaning and it only buys you so much loyalty.
People in my world have funneled a couple hundred grand to UGA in the last couple years. They also signed some individual NIL deals with players, well known players that we've all heard of. It not because of any loyalty to those people as individuals. They couldn't have run away faster from one of their NIL players after some issues.
So many really good QBs have transferred because they would have otherwise been blocked and it probably pisses people off when they leave but that movement has been good for players and the game in general.
-
15 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
Injuries and academics are the only thing that could take away a football player scholarship.
This is the problem with the loyalty argument. That's the situation where the player deserves the school's loyalty in return and a lot of times they don't get it. If a kid who has been loyal goes out and suffers a debilitating injury in service of the school they deserve the ability to finish their education under the agreement they signed with the school. That's a reasonable and humane expectation. That is not what happens in many cases and that's wrong.
The one open transfer is fine, but I also think that any time there is a coaching change the kids deserve the right to leave without penalty just like they can rescind their NLI in certain circumstances. If the university fires the coach that recruited them why should the kid have to stay? There's nothing saying that the schemes will stay the same or that that kid will have a spot with the new regime. If the coach just leaves on his own why should the kid be stuck? None of that is in their control.
As much as I personally dislike Deion Sanders I respect the way he handled the existing players at Colorado. He came in, did Spring Practice and told the ones he didn't want that he didn't want them and he encouraged them to transfer. Yes that's self serving on his part to get scholarships back for his own use, but it's also being fair to the players. Hey, you're not going to play if you stay so if you want to actually play college football use the rules, find another school where you WILL play and go play there. With the old rules all of those players would have been stuck in a crappy situation where they weren't wanted, drop a level of competition, or sit out a year because of something that wasn't their doing. We can't go back to that.
-
5 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
There are plenty of scholarship athletes that never start a game in their career.. but they stay on athletic scholarship
And these are a lot of the players who are helped by the open transfer rules. They can go somewhere else where they will play and it frees up a scholarship for the team they left which helps them too. Nobody is complaining about these people leaving their programs, but they can't write rules only for good players.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
AKA One open transfer per player.. anything more is an automatic red shirt... And taking nil money keeps you out of school for at least the entire athletic season
That's a simple solution that doesn't need rules. Write better NIL deals with clawback language. The current lack of that language isn't on the kids, it's on the adults who are rushing to hand them money and write poor contracts. I've seen some NIL deal language myself and it's really naive.
2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:A division 1 football player cannot lose his scholarship if he goes to practice everyday works hard and stays academically eligible
A coach might leave that they like but the school cannot screw them over if they are loyal work hard and academically eligible
A. unless they get hurt then all bets are off.
B. head count sports aren't the only sports that this impacts.
-
4 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
These kids get recruited for years.. not weeks or months... Schools will not take the lack of loyalty, when schools are loyal to the player
Except the schools aren't loyal to the players. Coaches get fired, kids are stuck, kids lose scholarships all the time to other kids that those same schools bring in to replace them, transfers or not.
If schools want to make the loyalty argument then make scholarships guaranteed for 4 years and make them irrevocable unless the player is booted from the school for grades or discipline. THAT is loyalty to the player. They will never ever do that.
-
2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
Well being a college scout and former booster... I have friends who are on the board of major college football programs
Their number one goal is the certainly iron this out
They will not have this stand for a decade.. they would rather collapse the NCAA then keep this
The problem will be that the players have already had a taste of the freedom. Imposing new rules restricting that at this point will come along with a raft of litigation.
Frankly, if your friends wanted to sort it out, they could stop accepting transfers. They won't, none of them will. They'll all whine about it, but they'll all keep poaching from each other.
Ship hits Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, bridge then collapses
in Off the Wall
Posted · Edited by That's No Moon
Yep. And newly constructed bridges usually do but not always. The new Tappan Zee bridge doesn't have them.
Fun fact, the picture of the Skyway in that Wikipedia site is of a bridge that was built to replace a bridge that was destroyed in the exact same way as the Key Bridge was today. Ship collision. Hence when they built its replacement protection from ship collision was a strong consideration.
The Key Bridge was built in 1977. There are TONS of older bridges in shipping lanes that don't have them. The South Grand Island Bridge is an example. The Bay Bridge in Annapolis doesn't have them either.
Whatever they replace the Key Bridge with won't be built the same way. It'll either have the biggest dolphins you've ever seen or be a different type of bridge that gets the support pillars much further out of the shipping channel so any ship would ground itself before hitting them.