Loyal Coug1 said:

Glad to see you back Stretch. Well, not really but compared to Uber you are the voice of reason.

I watched this clip. Yes, it is very powerful and sad. So what is your point? That the Republicans should have supported the bipartisan Border bill? If so, I agree. Since Mexico is so full of horrible people as her testimony suggests, should we just close the border completely? I'd go for that.

Click to expand...

1. Supporting the Demotard Border Bill would have been bad. The DEMOTARD Border Bill wouldn't have helped the Border, and if the Repubs had signed the DEMOTARD BORDER BILL, the Repubs would have signed yes to all kinds of increased taxes, increased spending, increased debt, increased unbalanced budget, green new green deal, free college for everyone, etc, as the DEMOTARDS Almost always attach that crap to bills.

2. Repubs ate not saying to close Border completely.

3. Repubs not saying that all illegal alien immigrants are bad. But semi some to a semi lot are bad, do things like drugs, cartels, gangs, human trafficking, slavery, terrorist acts, murder, rape, etc. Some illegal alien immigrants are good people.

4. Repubs are suggesting vetting, controlling borders, illegal alien immigration, touchback immigration(where illegals are temporarily deported, sent back to back of the legal immigration line, where they have to earn legal immigration, etc.

5. Repubs should vote no to DEMOTARD BORDER BILL, and instead fillibuster, try to force the DEMOTARDS to do REAL GOOD Border Control, instead of being SPINELESS REPUBTARDS.

COUGinNCW said:

looks like a respectable rebuild

Click to expand...

Looks like more then just a rebuild, it looks like a RESPECTABLE RELOAD.

mikalalas said:

You do not get how big the LOCKED ON NETWORK is or how it works.

The LOCKED ON NETWORK is comprised of: LOCKED ON COLLEGE FOOTBALL, LOCKED ON INSERT CONFERENCE NAMES, LOCKED ON INSERT COLLEGE PROGRAM TEAM NAME, like LOCKED ON TEXAS TECH, for example.

Each of the LOCKED ON You Tube videos, etc, including LOCKED ON COLLEGE FOOTBALL, LOCKED ON BIG 12, LOCKED ON PAC 12, LOCKED ON TEXAS TECH, ETC, hire semi credible, semi professional, semi columns, semi reporters, etc.

Each LOCKED ON show gets, sources, uses, etc, a combination of facts, insiders, experts, pundits, logic, reason, extrapolation, etc, from episode to episode. 1 Episode, 1 of the LOCKED ON's might have somebody like the AD of X College, who the Brother in law to Sister of one of the applicable leaders of one of the conferences, programs, PAC 2, MWC, ACC, Big 12, that either is a insider, expert, or has access to, is in the know, because of unnamed sources, insiders, insider knowledge, etc. Another LOCKED ON's Main guy might make a extremely logical, reasonable EXTRAPOLATION.

LOCKED ON is not 100% absolute GOSPEL, etc, but they are often more credible, accurate, etc, then you, others give them credit for.

And the LOCKED ON's from the LOCKED ON NETWORK certainly isn't just some Joe smoe doing a crap You Tube video in their bedroom.

Also the majority, most to almost all the various LOCKED ON's of the LOCKED ON NETWORK has, gets LOTS OF LIKES, FOLLOWERS, SUBSCRIPTIONS, AWARDS, ETC.

Tens of thousands of likes, followers, subscriptions, etc.

So you really dont know what you are talking about in your silly comment about LOCKED ON BIG 12, DRAKE TOLL, ETC.

Click to expand...

The LOCKED ON NETWORK, VARIOUS LOCKED ON SHOWS, is, can be semi worth semi using as a semi way to help semi stay informed of semi likelyhoods that semi likely can, semi often does happen, and at same time semi taking with a semi grain of salt, because like any similar shows, etc, they can be semi wrong from time to time, a couple, few, sometimes.

Flat, Loyal, 95, others, etc, might think they are always wrong, but that's just because they happened to watch the 1,2,3 episode(s), where LOCKED ON was wrong, and didn't watch the 4,5,6,7, etc episodes where LOCKED ON was right, or only watched, listened to the part that was wrong, and didn't watch, listen to the parts that ended up right.

Locked On will occasionally be wrong, just like how even the best stock brokers, or best game predictors, prognosticators, etc, will occasionally be wrong, even when everything seems to point to them being likely right.

Locked On isn't wrong a lot, and isn't like MHver3, Greg Swaime. Locked On does not just throw stuff up to see what sticks, etc, like MHver3, etc, does.

Locked On spends a lot of time, research, money, etc, on logic, reason, facts, extrapolation, sources, insiders, pundits, experts, etc, making their likely true projections, extrapolations, saying likely at least partially true things, etc.

So they occasionally get a couple, few, semi some things wrong, etc. Newsflash, New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, ABC, NBC, CBS, ESPN, FOX, CNN, etc, also have that happen to them too sometimes.

Even the Best Prognosticators, etc, are like 20-7(20 right, 7 wrong)

That's why should take almost everything with a grain of salt, etc.

Loyal Coug1 said:

Somehow a guy that does a podcast from his bedroom does not get me too excited. Especially when reputable media (the article I copied in the other thread) quotes the Big-12 as giving the Pac-2 a heard no.

Click to expand...

You do not get how big the LOCKED ON NETWORK is or how it works.

The LOCKED ON NETWORK is comprised of: LOCKED ON COLLEGE FOOTBALL, LOCKED ON INSERT CONFERENCE NAMES, LOCKED ON INSERT COLLEGE PROGRAM TEAM NAME, like LOCKED ON TEXAS TECH, for example.

Each of the LOCKED ON You Tube videos, etc, including LOCKED ON COLLEGE FOOTBALL, LOCKED ON BIG 12, LOCKED ON PAC 12, LOCKED ON TEXAS TECH, ETC, hire semi credible, semi professional, semi columns, semi reporters, etc.

Each LOCKED ON show gets, sources, uses, etc, a combination of facts, insiders, experts, pundits, logic, reason, extrapolation, etc, from episode to episode. 1 Episode, 1 of the LOCKED ON's might have somebody like the AD of X College, who the Brother in law to Sister of one of the applicable leaders of one of the conferences, programs, PAC 2, MWC, ACC, Big 12, that either is a insider, expert, or has access to, is in the know, because of unnamed sources, insiders, insider knowledge, etc. Another LOCKED ON's Main guy might make a extremely logical, reasonable EXTRAPOLATION.

LOCKED ON is not 100% absolute GOSPEL, etc, but they are often more credible, accurate, etc, then you, others give them credit for.

And the LOCKED ON's from the LOCKED ON NETWORK certainly isn't just some Joe smoe doing a crap You Tube video in their bedroom.

Also the majority, most to almost all the various LOCKED ON's of the LOCKED ON NETWORK has, gets LOTS OF LIKES, FOLLOWERS, SUBSCRIPTIONS, AWARDS, ETC.

Tens of thousands of likes, followers, subscriptions, etc.

So you really dont know what you are talking about in your silly comment about LOCKED ON BIG 12, DRAKE TOLL, ETC.

can someone remind me again why this HAD to be played at Lumen?

looks like a respectable rebuild

Stretch 74 said:

I get it- white folks and US citizens are not all angels. No argument there. However, take a look at the violent crime rates (per 100,000 people) of the worst countries in that category. (from datapandas.org) Now think about where so many of the newest illegal immigrants are coming from, and realize that many of them are coming to the US from these countries with the worst violent crime rates. (some in red below) Now what do you think is going to happen as these folks come to the US, which is rated #76 at 4.96 per 100,000 people?

It is pretty naïve to assume that only those people that don't break the law are the ones coming over our borders illegally. It is logical to assume that most of them will continue their crime activities in the US, and that will end up impacting the violent crime rate in the US negatively.

Wiki estimates 2021 ethnicities as 59.3% white and 18.9% as Hispanic. So isn't those percentages of abusers that you listed just about what you would expect? Neither is out of line with the actual ratio to the population as a whole.

1.		El Salvador	52.02
2.		Jamaica	43.85
3.		Lesotho	43.56
4.		Honduras	38.93
5.		Belize	37.79
6.		Venezuela	36.69
7.		Saint Vincent and the Grenadines	36.54
8.		South Africa	36.40
9.		Saint Kitts and Nevis	36.09
10.		Nigeria	34.52
11.		Bahamas	31.96
12.		Trinidad and Tobago	30.65
13.		Mexico	29.07
14.		Anguilla	28.34
15.		Saint Martin	27.73

Click to expand...

Yeah, most of the people coming here are more likely to be fleeing the crime in their countries - not the ones perpetrating it.

And, you overlooked the part where 95% of abusers are US citizens…not recent immigrants or illegals.

Putin is going to have a rather unpleasant conversation with Trump after this. I’d stay clear of windows for a while Donny

This is F’ing hilarious

I can still buy bacon. In fact I bought some today!

Loyal Coug1 said:

Glad to see you back Stretch. Well, not really but compared to Uber you are the voice of reason.

I watched this clip. Yes, it is very powerful and sad. So what is your point? That the Republicans should have supported the bipartisan Border bill? If so, I agree. Since Mexico is so full of horrible people as her testimony suggests, should we just close the border completely? I'd go for that.

Click to expand...

I hope not. I’m going to Cabo in November. Damn sure not bringing any cats or furrys with me though.

I’m going to be vigilant though. I’m keeping a beer in my hand the ENTIRE time in case I need to throw it at someone trying to defend myself.

Stretch 74 said:

I like your suggestion- Trump wins by a knockout as he sucker punches Kamalalala in the nose as she reaches to shake his hand! LOL

Back in reality land, if she is appearing moderate with her answers she will be lying her ass off and should get fact checked into oblivion. Trump just needs to do a replay of his annihilation of Biden and he'll be fine.

Click to expand...

I mean if you’re gonna be a sexual assaulter, might as well be slapping women around as well 🤷

95coug said:

We've seen pretty clearly that fact checking makes no difference with voters.

Click to expand...

And debate performance will make no difference with the MSM. Kamalalala could come out and vomit all over the podium and then pass out from fright and the MSM will still award her trophy for best performance in a presidential debate since Reagan asked if voters were better off than they were 4 years ago.

95coug said:

You could invite many more people who could tell equally tragic stories about their white child and what a white person did to them. That is, if you're inclined to focus on some fraction of a larger problem and portray it inaccurately as being representative of that problem.

Here are the 10 states with the highest rates of child abuse:

Maine
Alaska
West Virginia
Massachusetts
Kentucky
Montana
Oklahoma
New Mexico
New York
Iowa

Of those, only New Mexico and New York are among the states with the highest percentages of Hispanic immigrants. Massachusetts is also in there if you include all immigrants. Five of the states listed above are reliably red states.

95% of abusers are US citizens. 93% are men. 57.5% are white. Less than 20% are Hispanic or mixed.

Click to expand...

I get it- white folks and US citizens are not all angels. No argument there. However, take a look at the violent crime rates (per 100,000 people) of the worst countries in that category. (from datapandas.org) Now think about where so many of the newest illegal immigrants are coming from, and realize that many of them are coming to the US from these countries with the worst violent crime rates. (some in red below) Now what do you think is going to happen as these folks come to the US, which is rated #76 at 4.96 per 100,000 people?

It is pretty naïve to assume that only those people that don't break the law are the ones coming over our borders illegally. It is logical to assume that most of them will continue their crime activities in the US, and that will end up impacting the violent crime rate in the US negatively.

Wiki estimates 2021 ethnicities as 59.3% white and 18.9% as Hispanic. So isn't those percentages of abusers that you listed just about what you would expect? Neither is out of line with the actual ratio to the population as a whole.

CougPatrol said:

The answer is sort of. Bowl tie-ins now have "or" incorporated into the selection process.

It's not something to worry about either way. With the portal, NIL, and the 12-team NCAA playoff, the bowl game opt outs are going to be off the charts. Fans aren't going to be attending bowl games much longer.

Click to expand...

Yeah, outside of the 6 CFP bowls (Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton, and Peach) the bowls are meaningless now. They provide some extra practice time for the underclassmen, and maybe a showcase for some of them to work toward a NIL deal and portal opportunities. For juniors and seniors who have either NFL aspirations or existing portal interest, they only provide an opportunity to get hurt and lose their deal. There's little reason for the best players on any team to play.

Opt-outs are going to increase, probably to the point where teams decline bowl invitations. As those increase, the quality of play in those bowls is going to collapse. That will lead to rapidly diminishing interest in buying tickets, and reduced media value...which will lead to a reduction in the number of bowls. It's not hard to imagine there being no bowls outside of the CFP within a few years...or the few remaining games being all-star games that are just scouting tryouts for the best players who didn't make the CFP.

Stretch 74 said:

Ms Aguirre testified before Congress (think it was today) about the issue of crime done by illegal migrants. Her testimony was one of the most passionate, powerful things I have ever listened to. It will break your heart. Her part is just the first 6 minutes of the linked video. Do yourself a favor and listen to what she has to say.

Moms Call Out Democrats for Doing Nothing While Their Children Died

These mothers testified today before the House Judiciary Committee about the devastating results of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris' wide open border.

redstate.com

Click to expand...

You could invite many more people who could tell equally tragic stories about their white child and what a white person did to them. That is, if you're inclined to focus on some fraction of a larger problem and portray it inaccurately as being representative of that problem.

Here are the 10 states with the highest rates of child abuse:

Maine
Alaska
West Virginia
Massachusetts
Kentucky
Montana
Oklahoma
New Mexico
New York
Iowa

Of those, only New Mexico and New York are among the states with the highest percentages of Hispanic immigrants. Massachusetts is also in there if you include all immigrants. Five of the states listed above are reliably red states.

95% of abusers are US citizens. 93% are men. 57.5% are white. Less than 20% are Hispanic or mixed.

Stretch 74 said:

I like your suggestion- Trump wins by a knockout as he sucker punches Kamalalala in the nose as she reaches to shake his hand! LOL

Back in reality land, if she is appearing moderate with her answers she will be lying her ass off and should get fact checked into oblivion. Trump just needs to do a replay of his annihilation of Biden and he'll be fine.

Click to expand...

We've seen pretty clearly that fact checking makes no difference with voters.

95coug said:

Her approach even in the planning stages has been - and will be - to try and get him on tangents and tirades. She isn't going to do anything to affect his base. The people who are already voting for him aren't changing their minds. She needs to look rational and reasonable while he rants about a wall, masks, criminals, whatever.

All he has to do is not rise to the bait. Stick to his answers and ignore hers. She'll then have to try harder and say things that are more pointed and less moderate...and then she starts alienating the middle.

Biden was so bad that Trump didn't have to say anything in the first debate. Joe took himself down. It's not going to be that way this time, and I'm not sure DT can keep his mouth shut.

From her side...it's kind of the same - ignore his answers, except where you can turn them around to frustrate him...and start a rant. Stay on message, don't let his attacks send you on tangents. Be factual and cite experts, but not too many statistics.

He's not going to lose his base in this debate. If he walked on stage and punched her in the face, they'd sacrifice their firstborn on their way to vote for him. He's coming to gather undecideds, and his odds of that go up if he can avoid looking like a crazy asshole.

She can lose base. Probably not a lot, but some. If she's calm, coherent, and - above all - moderate, she gains undecideds.

So...which is more likely: her appearing moderate, or him not looking like a crazy asshole?

Click to expand...

I like your suggestion- Trump wins by a knockout as he sucker punches Kamalalala in the nose as she reaches to shake his hand! LOL

Back in reality land, if she is appearing moderate with her answers she will be lying her ass off and should get fact checked into oblivion. Trump just needs to do a replay of his annihilation of Biden and he'll be fine.

Loyal Coug1 said:

Glad to see you back Stretch. Well, not really but compared to Uber you are the voice of reason.

I watched this clip. Yes, it is very powerful and sad. So what is your point? That the Republicans should have supported the bipartisan Border bill? If so, I agree. Since Mexico is so full of horrible people as her testimony suggests, should we just close the border completely? I'd go for that.

Click to expand...

No, that was not my point. But perhaps the Senate should have taken up HB 2 many months before the so called "bipartisan border bill"?

At this point, we absolutely should completely close the border to new immigration for a while. We have been overloaded over the past 4 years, so let's hold off on new folks until we can secure the border and ensure that new immigrants are the ones we want coming in and our immigration courts and processes have the opportunity to catch up. And it isn't just Mexico, it is Guatemala, El Salvador, Venezuela, China, Iran, Afghanistan, etc.

The answer is sort of. Bowl tie-ins now have "or" incorporated into the selection process.

It's not something to worry about either way. With the portal, NIL, and the 12-team NCAA playoff, the bowl game opt outs are going to be off the charts. Fans aren't going to be attending bowl games much longer.

Loyal Coug1 said:

I guess I can agree with that. But at what cost? If we end up going to them hat in hand in a year begging to be let in (a scenario which gets more likely by the day) might Gloria just lay the wood to us with a big entry fee, reduced media rights, etc? I would if I were her.

Click to expand...

The cost of not having to hear a word from you about the MWC commissioner.

I'm more in favor of us signing the top-6 programs from the MWC and leveraging that with the other conferences from the standpoint of schedule agreements and/or expansion.

Maybe the Big12 and ACC don't want the P2 to join as members, but ESPN could encourage them to sign a scheduling agreement where the 8-teams in the reformed Pac/West play 2 non-conference games/year against them.

If we were to end up in a conference with Oregon State, Boise State, Fresno, SDSU, UNLV, Colorado State, and Utah State, we could offer West coast viewing windows to the other conferences without needing to become members of their leagues. We would also have the opportunity to leverage Las Vegas, San Diego, Denver, and Seattle as potential neutral site locations for opening day matchups or to lure larger opponents in their leagues out West.

This is where I see things heading, and for WSU, it wouldn't be a terrible fallback even if it is a G5 classification. If negotiated correctly, the media rights deal would be significantly better than it would be if we're forced to take on Wyoming, Hawaii, San Jose State, Nevada, New Mexico, and Air Force. For scheduling purposes, I think our fan base would be satisfied with annual or bi-annual games vs. the likes of Boise, Fresno, SDSU, UW, Cal, Stanford, Kansas State, etc. Maybe even the occasional game with the LA schools.

95coug said:

Based on another look at the tickets site, the biggest difference will be that there will be a lot more empty seats.

Sales did pick up, but you can still pretty much sit wherever you want. There's no shortage of available seats.

Click to expand...

Ticket sales have ramped up dramatically today and will continue throughout the week. I expect a crowd of 55K by kickoff.