Jump to content

el Tigre

Community Member
  • Posts

    1,036
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by el Tigre

  1. There's a lot of people here in 'nole country who share the sentiment. (and i'm with you) The NCAA is nothing but a bunch of crooks. The local radio guy down here has done the hypothetical situation where a big name school could easily decide to eave the NCAA, pay players a $10k stipend per season, set their own schedule, negotiate their own TV rights, land even host their own end-of-the-season game.

    I agree with you guys that the NCAA is corrupt as hell,but what would we end up with? What kind of regulations would there be and who would enforce them? Would college football fans be any better off?

  2. He is going to be an outstanding NFL QB. Clausen sucks, McCoy is medicore at best. Everyone else in the draft is a joke. Campbell from Washington is garbage also. So you can look forward to another year of Trent Edwards and another decade of 7-9 football. :unsure:

    I know Tebow's a leader and a winner,but there are SERIOUS doubts about whether this guy can be an effective NFL QB. Have you watched any of his college career???? The offense he ran at Florida in no way resembles an NFL offense,and the guy has mechanical flaws in his throwing motion that may make him totally ineffective in the NFL. He's FAR from a sure thing.

  3. So in your mind the only feasible player here was Spiller, another RB, or a DB? Because my point is if a player at ANY OTHER POSITION was available and comparably ranked, they made a terrible choice.

    The FO must think Spiller is a true difference maker,along the lines of Adrian Peterson or Chris Johnson. Only time will tell if they are correct or not.

  4. I bet he's really embarrassed by this. I'm guessing that he would have been happier being caught leaving a bar half cocked. :censored:

    Half cocked??? Thats an east coast saying for drunk right? I used to work with this cat from Boston and he'd say stuff like "Ah'm gonna go out and get caacked tonight". It always sorta disturbed me.

  5. This is just getting ridiculous. Mizzou should go to the Big Ten, and then TCU will fill their slot in the Big 12. Simplest solution. I realize the Big Ten wants that chunk of east coast viewership and media coverage, but they are a Midwest conference. Why wouldn't they want to pick up the St. Louis market?

     

    Obviously Notre Dame to the Big Ten makes the most sense for everyone, except ND's pockets.

     

    Also, I love when people target Rutgers for the "NYC market." Nobody in NY gives a rats ass about Rutgers. Their football team beat Louisville on a Thursday night and were good for about five minutes. Other than that, it's Rutgers, and it's Jersey, and nobody cares. (Obviously, if the conference landed UConn and SU also, well that's different...Those are Big East stalwarts...)

    I agree,Missouri would be a good fit. ND is a natural fit as well,but they seem to want to stay independant. Texas would be interesting also. I don't think that any of the Big East teams bring much to the Big 10 from a fans perspective. With all this talk of expansion to 14 or more teams,I have no idea how this will all end up.

  6. Well, actually I'm a fed, and it has been a long long time since I dealt with DUI's or similar violations. There is a eye test, vertical gaze nystagmus that is supposed to give an indication of drug impairment. Horitzontal gaze nystagmus is for alcohol and vertical is for drugs. Like I said, it has been a long time, and my information might be very outdated. Some drugs do not result in positives anyways (need to do a blood test!).

    The reason I ask is I'm trying to figure how difficult it would be to come up with a roadside determination of whether someone is DUI on marijuana. I lean towards legalizing it,but the DUI aspect of it is a legitimate concern.

  7. Define inexpensive technology? $20? $50? Or does it end up adding $450 to the price of a car? We (family) live on one salary, and the little things add up when buying a car. The good side is that we plan to drive the current car into the ground. Hopefully we'll all be flying around in little spaceships by the time I have to buy another car.

     

    I'm not saying I don't support the idea, I just don't know if I want my car to cost $500 more so it has a device that will keep me from driving drunk (which I don't do anyways).

    Hey you're a cop right? I got a question. How do you guys determine if a driver you've pulled over is under the influence of a prescription drug?

  8. So let me explain it to you again. 4/20's over so maybe you're not as stoned as you were yesterday. Prescription drugs are legal, pot is not. You legalize something else that impairs people you're most likely going to increase the number of impaired people out there. I guess I'm crazy for not wanting someone wasted on weed running a red light and killing someone I love. I guess that's just me.

     

    And to Stl Bills I'm not for making legal things illegal. I'm for keeping certain things illegal. You guys getting my point now?

    I haven't used marijuana,or any other illegal drugs,in over 25 years. So drop the stoner implications. You're still not answering my question.

  9. IDK, ask a cop, i'd guess by looking for RX bottles, or observing behaviors, either way, if they ask you to take a test and you decline, its an automatic dui and 6 month suspension that you have to fight in court

    So why wouldn't the same actions be applied to DUI of marijuana?

  10. correct, so how do you do a breathalyzer style test for pot? you cant take blood, piss doesnt work, neither does hair, show me a legit pot breathalyzer, and I'll be in the legalize it picket lines

    How do cops determine if a driver is under the influence of a prescriptin drug? Like say,vicoden?

  11. correct, so how do you do a breathalyzer style test for pot? you cant take blood, piss doesnt work, neither does hair, show me a legit pot breathalyzer, and I'll be in the legalize it picket lines

    Ok,I can agree with you there. An accurate roadside test needs to be developed.

  12. So you say they shouldn't drive stoned because they're impaired to they should control it and ticket people who get caught. Yeah that's great. Do you have any idea how many people are driving on any given night on the freeway smashed out of their goard but never get caught? So you want to add to that number by legalizing another substance that impairs driving? Yeah I guess that's ok so long as they get a ticket when they get pulled over. <_<

     

    You call that a week argument? I call that a good argument.

    So I guess no new prescription drugs that can impair your driving should ever be approved?

×
×
  • Create New...