AUloggerhead

Here's a pretty good article from a Pacific NW paper re the game: Link This is from the Tacoma News-Tribune which has a better sports section than the Seattle Times, imho.

Nice old school pic. But btw, this is further proof that the he never wore "houndstooth" -- hideous plaid, definitely.

Agree with this. Peterson was paying AU a compliment. Can't fault him for being honest. Incidentally, Peterson & David Shaw of Stanford were at the top of a poll of college coaches who voted them as running the cleanest programs: Link

Hear, hear. I would much rather deal with a "for-profit" insurance company that has to COMPETE for my business and consequently, has to treat me as a paying customer who's free to walk out the door and take my business elsewhere, than to deal with a soulless DMV-type monopoly/bureaucracy that couldn't care less about me except for the paper number ticket I'm holding when I approach the counter -- and knows I CAN'T go anywhere else. Bernie Sanders and his ilk are economic buffoons. Nothing is free and never will be no matter how much they desire it to be so.

Well, there's another way to look at uat's schedule: uat faces "challenges" at 2nd toughest SEC schedule LMFAO

In terms of televised sports (in the USA,) the NFL is king -- more people watch pro football than MLB or NHL or even NASCAR. Still, a nearly 10% drop in viewership last season on top of an 8% decline from the year before is significant. Link

The NFL (and all professional sports for that matter) is entertainment. They're putting a product on the field for consumption by willingly paying spectators. If they do something (stupid) to piss off those spectators willing to part with there hard earned money to watch the over-paid "entertainers" then that's going to affect their bottom line. For the owners & the players, having paying spectators is the Golden Goose that allows for everyone to get paid. Strangling the Golden Goose until it quits laying eggs is just as dumb as killing it. The Dallas Cowboy players were prevented from "honoring" the murdered Dallas police officers with tributes on their uniforms (black arm bands or something similar.) I forget if it was the club or the league who stepped in to quash the tribute. It really doesn't matter but it illustrates that they didn't want the game(s) to become a political demonstration. OK, fine. That's understandable. Would it be too much to ask for a little consistency re the anthem protests then?

If I'm reading that report right, similar pictures such as these were taken at the casting yard before transporting the bridge to the construction site. Hard to believe that any type of quality control inspection at the casting yard wouldn't flag these defects.

Oh man .... don't worry about the D-linemen getting crushed. It's football. Just let Shaun do his thing!

Well, that was entertaining! Best line from the story was the comment from Mr. Bang: “Damn the University of Florida got some b**** a** football players,” 😄

Wasn't sure where to put this, but this article is spot on: Vets Speak Out Against Militarization of Sports Unbelievable that the Mets fired Nick Francona.

Umpire here. The HS rule book went to these definitions for the wind-up & stretch stances a few years ago. I also do age group club ball games which operate under OBR where there is no distinction made. Consequently, you have pitchers positioned on the rubber in a "hybrid" stance where the pivot foot is in contact with and at angle to the rubber, and the free foot is positioned not in contact but in front of the rubber. I've seen pitchers pitch from both the wind-up and the stretch from this hybrid stance.

You mentioned the hypothetical mass unemployment (30-50%) due to increasing AI/automation. Keep in mind that at the height of the Great Depression in 1933, the unemployment rate was just under 25%. I don't believe all human labor will become obsolete or unnecessary due to AI/automation. Human labor is a resource, and a large surplus of any resource will be ultimately used by entrepreneurs. The march of technology through the ages has made some jobs obsolete, true. But all that did was shift humans into other jobs. I still think that will occur in the age of AI/automation. Anyways, some people are not waiting for the mass unemployment thing to happen in the future and are pushing for Universal Basic Income (UBI) to happen now -- Bernie Sanders, for instance. I don't think UBI is feasible due to basic economics. There remains no working or successful example of UBI in the entire world for us to examine. So, to answer your question 'what would you propose as an alternative?' Laissez faire economics at least has a history behind it. UBI does not.

Rough numbers: US GDP (2016) = $18.57 T. Population (2017 est) = 325.7 M. Poverty Level (2017) = $12,060. Low Income = 200% of Poverty Level (2017) = $24,120. Number of US millionaire households (2017) = 11 M (approx.) I'm assuming a "means test" would be applied to any Universal Basic Income -- perhaps it may be at the millionaire household level, perhaps something lower. Say 300 M population x $12,060 = $3.618 T. That's approx 20% of the US GDP. Double that to the Low Income level takes us up to 40% of GDP. What's considered a Universal Basic Income -- Poverty level? Low Income? More than that? Don't forget Margeret Thatcher's comment about "the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

Except ... how does Universal Basic Income work exactly? Who will pay for it? Are there any successful examples we can look at today? Finland recently abandoned their attempt at it. And the Finns are practical people, if anything.