Brad_ATX

Clemson is loaded and is the smart money. But the value play may be Florida at 15/1. They get LSU at home and Georgia has to go to Bama next year, potentially giving UF a bit of a mulligan to work with to make the SEC title game.

Older Male. There's video.

The topic was a correct one to approach during the debate. But I agree that the mod didn't frame the question well. She framed it as an accusation when she easily could have said "is this report accurate and did you say those things"?

That wasn't the argument being made at all. But please, keep me posted on your straw man.

Just popping in to say this has been the most interesting and informative thread in a long while here. Kudos.

1) Roster management and recruiting is in the coaches. 2) I'd rather be consistently great. If Auburn freaking basketball can win big consistently, then football absolutely can.

I'm sorry, but in modern college football, the freshman/young QB thing at a major school is a crutch that doesn't work anymore. Some examples: - Jake Fromm won the SEC and went to the natty as a freshman. - Tua led a massive comeback in the natty and won the game for Bama as a freshman. - Trevor Lawrence won it all as a freshman. - Justin Fields had limited playing time at UGA. Took Ohio State to the playoffs as a sophomore. - Jalen Hurts was a true freshman when he started at Bama in 2016 and took them to the title game. In today's game, you can either play or you can't. And if the excuse is "well we started a freshman QB", then all blame and concern needs to go to those whose job includes roster management.

Is being #14 really your definition of "victory"? Based on our staff payroll, the amount of money we invest in football, and our recruiting rankings over the last decade, #14 is underachieving.

Wrong. I've literally had an Alabama fan who had zero affiliation with the school tell me that Bama grads were smarter because "that's who I work with". Her opinion on anything having to do with either university was uninformed and laughable.

I'm bringing a perspective based on a cause and effect relationship. If you disagree, fine. But your replies thus far have been juvenile, which is beneath you.

Your ability to discuss this in a rational and thoughtful manner is truly humbling.

I'm not implying. I'm flat out saying it. Escalations happened because of us. Iran screwed up and shot down the plane. They are rightfully taking heat from the world and within their own country for those actions. However I don't believe they shoot off any missiles without their military leader being killed by us. It's a symptom, not the cause. There are too many years of evidence showing passenger planes peacefully flying over Iranian airspace to ignore. Sometimes things live in a gray area. This is one of those events. I don't believe there is only one entity to blame. We killed Iran's military leader on what many in Congress, including some on right, believe is shaky evidence. Iran retaliated with strikes on our base by (wisely) intentionally missing human targets. However, I also believe the initial action by us put Iran on heightened alert. Add that to the fact that they are using older technology with Russian weapons and boom, crap like this happens.

2001 at UGA. Mark Richt decided to run the ball down 7 with no time outs. We stuffed it, laid on the pile, and won. Happened right in front of me. I then proceeded to snatch a piece of the hedges and take a picture of the UGA statue in front of the burial grounds with my Auburn hat on the dog statue. Good times.

OK, but the point is that this "story" was spread on social media by average, every day morons, not reporters. CNN, Fox, nor anyone else fell for this hoax from what I can tell. And yes, Reuters and the AP are by far the best sources for news.

How did the reporter fall for the story? The tweets here are explicitly pointing out how the story is fake and how it's getting as much engagement as regular articles from news sources.