Agree. The only thing I don't take favor w/ myself is the idea that a kid loves a school, is committed, has been, this is it... And then he decides he'd prefer to explore another top caliber team's spring practice instead of the place he's committed... Something about that seems a bit confusing. In the end, I'd hope for the best for him, it is his life and future. But as a Buckeye fan, the signal is very mixed, just being honest.
I shouldn't have laughed at this, but I did.
Entirely understand this. I am technically a millenial(sp?) I think(31) as much as I hate that because most of the time it gets a really weak rep. I know when to dial back my work with my job, whereas my dad is the grind it out super hard all the time. That being said I have grown a life outside of my work that I highly value and I don't intend to let the business overrun it. But when it came to sports, I out worked almost everyone I was with and against. I pushed myself way beyond my physical means to accomplish goals. Then again, that was simply pride, and if I was looking at hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars, my perspective probably changes a lot. Curious how comparable pay rates are from the old times to newer. If they were being paid on a fractional level, then clearly the only value was legendary status where as new age players, well they have a financial future to protect that is pretty substantial. So I can see it. I personally would likely push myself until failure unless I knew I couldn't do the job in its entirety, and I'd have to be VERY certain.
And to end this... *dances on your lawn* MWAHAHAHA Have a good day dinosaur. :D
As a guy who worked as a delivery driver in late teens/early twenties, I agree with you. I've been over paid several times and always made sure to clear it up. I'd say over half the time I ended up with a much larger tip or a "keep it, honesty should be rewarded". I have also had people seem pissed that I returned their over payment(we're talking an extra $20, not a keep the change tip level). Like fk me, sorry for looking out my friend.
The thing is simply this, how do we know the kid didn't fight to stay in? He may have pushed to stay in even if he was tired and done that like a sensible human being(they do exist). And instead of creating a shit storm of a mess as a rookie calling out his manager's decision after the game, he towed the line and is moving forward.
It is also possible that he just simply had nothing left. Knowing your body and how much you can push it is valuable in sports. Maybe he felt physically able to throw but could tell he wasn't executing what he was intending to execute(your body is usually failing at this point) and realized that he was becoming a liability for his team winning.
Ultimately, it is great to strive for history, but we don't know what was said between the two guys and shit happens.
As much as I detest the wussification of athletes I've seen around, I don't view this as that type of concept at all.
I'm still not sold on he's a great coach, personally.
Purdue plays football?
ROFLMAO. I feel bad for bracket people, but this is just funny. FU Sparty.
Nope nope nope fucking nope
100% agree younger age has higher probability, never contested that at all. But to claim it is rampant, I want to see stats to back that up. When I hear rampant, I imagine something growing at vast rates/prevalent beyond the norm. I just want to see that data, because I don't think it is any worse than history has shown, but I could be wrong, this isn't my field. Which is why I asked for a linked source to back up the statement, legit curious, but I guess I'll have to do the research on my own to get the answer. I guess it all comes across as being standoffish or w/e, but just don't care for accusations based on age without good reasoning. (Usually there is good reasoning, in this case I'd love to see that information, because I enjoy statistics!)
#1: Not a link.
#2: You don't think you're a pretty biased data point to cite as a source? Your exposure is going to be greatly weighted to the afflicted vs the non.
#3: Seriously, that generalization is pretty off the wall. I'd really like to see scientific data backing this up. I am skeptical you have any, and are just venting your opinion from your perspective, which represents a tiny perspective of the generation.
Play ARK, you'll learn how to stockpile, hoard, and even control prehistoric creatures. But legit, it does present some plausible dynamics of investing work/time into something and doing the best you can to protect it, even when away like at your job. It will also teach you great loss, and accepting that at some point, someone is probably gonna take your shit... Wait, where was I going with this?
GG WP. That dude needed to do more research on his target.
Ugh, that reminder about 1st amendment sort of makes me hate you yet like you as well. I don't get how people don't understand what this thing means on any level. Poking fun at it is points on the board, reminding me is points off. I'm going to bed, GN ya jerk.
My rule of thumb: Quite honestly I don't give a shit about your opinion in the arenas that most forbid conversation, odds are you have similar sentiments. I just skip that stuff and move onto the latest cool thing I've done.
Can you link me to your source that a certain age range has rampant drug use over another? Would be an interesting read.
Committed only means you're in their top 3, I think that was something Meyer said? Until ink is there, I don't count anyone in. And I believe in the staff to do their job. I used to follow recruiting MUCH closer, since disengaging, been quite less a time consumption.
That looks like River Monsters colors but GIF makes hard to tell. Which is sad, as that was my aunt's team... lol That guy was interesting to watch.
Love this piece. I remember following recruiting pretty intently back then. It is amazing to see the names I remember but to see how many of them ended elsewhere/other issues. It truly is insane how hard it is to do this at the collegiate level and make it pro, really helps put quite a bit of perspective in my view. (Yes already knew insanely hard, pro anything is an unbelievable level of commitment, but just to see it here laid out like this, just gives a new view.) TY for the article!
Do you by chance have a good link/source that goes more indepth?
This is where I am. I can't go guilty w/o a reasonable doubt with that weak ass job they did. But that is sort of the point here, dude was "framed" guilty in the media before he even was sent to a trial. That jury started jaded, and that bothers me a lot.
Logic completely dodged this whole incident. I have no idea if he did it or not, but his conviction is 100% bad. Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, for me a lack of blood pools/stain anywhere in the supposed areas is a pretty reasonable doubt for me. Suddenly this 70 IQ guy is fucking Dexter? Nope, sorry, I'm out.
Would you like me to look into having your cheerios depissed-in-a-fied? Didn't realize you could live his life better than him.
Going to miss him dammit. He's by far been one of my happier watches in games. His story is stupid good and I love what has happened, I hope he just keeps rolling. Might even get me to watch some of that proball stuff.
Nadal has these types of things happen frequently, moreso since having both knees worked on. Is it possible? Sure. I doubt its probable considering he's getting millions of dollars for winning these things(the events) and I imagine the dude has a hell of a sponsorship contract too. Not impossible, but makes it far less probably to me.