UberCougars said:

For the below 60 IQ crowd, sure.

Click to expand...

You mean Trumpers and MAGA people? I think an IQ of 60 might be generous. And teeth? I'd guess an over/under of 20? (being generous here, I had to count my own full set of teeth to ascertain what is a normal mouthful. Somewhere around 38-40? I just did it with my finger to estimate).

chugspig said:

Coug collective site

I understand not everyone is cool with NIL, but for those that are…. it’s clear people are coming for a handful of our players. Dickert and a few players tweeted out this campaign. The players who did tweet it were many of those I’d assume are the one going be getting offers. Mateer, Din Buh, Al-Uqdah, Stephen Hall etc. Hoping we can keep them, or at least some. Donate 5$ even if you can so we can make a run at having a team again next year. Even a moderate NIL deal will help keep prospects here over reestablishing in a new system.

Click to expand...

I gave $100 to the Basketball Matching Campaign, which of course netted us nothing in terms of players. I'm down for fudging forth a few bucks again, but sorry the lack of transparency of the Cougar Collective turns me off. And the AD and Pac-2 for that matter. That's probably the way of the NIL and Athletic world, which is fine. Just not for me. Especially since 'Ol Crimson Lager appears to be unobtainable in my city.

Loyal Coug1 said:

Sounds like she pegged it pretty accurately.

Click to expand...

For the below 60 IQ crowd, sure.

roses04 said:

The games will still be at least 7 days apart, just like the regular season, not that difficult to come up with a schedule, it would look something like this

32 team playoff, Regular season ends the last weekend of November( like it used to). Bye week the first week of December. 2nd weekend of December Round 1, 32 teams, 16 games, play Friday and Saturday, leave the NFL with Sunday. 3rd Week of December 16 teams 8 Games Friday and Saturday again. 4th week of December or New Years Day, 8 teams 4 big bowl games all the same day. First weekend in January 4 teams 2 games. ( must be at least 7 days after New Years day game, so there will probably be a bye weekend. Final game Mid January on a Monday night. By the way this year's Nation Championship will be played on January 20th,

Click to expand...

This would likely be the death of pretty much all bowls, other than them becoming these playoff games. Which might be better for them anyway. All these mickey mouse bowls would likely go away, and good riddance IMHO.

That said, 32 seems like a lot. Let's say the SEC and B1G get 3 each off the top. ACC and Big-12 get 2 each. That's 10. How about the G6 (yes it's 6 now) gets 2 but have championship games of sorts to determine the 2. Not sure how that works with 6 leagues, but I'm just spitballing here. Maybe the G6 contracts to become the G4. That leaves 4 at-large births for ND and the P4 to fight over. Total of 16. All teams, all leagues have to play only FBS teams or are ineligible for the playoffs.

roses04 said:

The games will still be at least 7 days apart, just like the regular season, not that difficult to come up with a schedule, it would look something like this

32 team playoff, Regular season ends the last weekend of November( like it used to). Bye week the first week of December. 2nd weekend of December Round 1, 32 teams, 16 games, play Friday and Saturday, leave the NFL with Sunday. 3rd Week of December 16 teams 8 Games Friday and Saturday again. 4th week of December or New Years Day, 8 teams 4 big bowl games all the same day. First weekend in January 4 teams 2 games. ( must be at least 7 days after New Years day game, so there will probably be a bye weekend. Final game Mid January on a Monday night. By the way this year's Nation Championship will be played on January 20th,

Click to expand...

It's doable....but with conferences bloated the way that they are, the idea that there is a "regular season" champion of most conferences is kind of a joke. Those conferences are not going to give up their championship games all that easily....more so since losing the championship game isn't going to matter to the losing team. It's all about ego and money and that's going to be hard to stop.

The good thing about a larger playoff is that it gives teams like WSU a more achievable entry point into the party. Right now, with all of the politics of football, there's a good chance that an 11-1 WSU team could be on the outside looking in on a 16 team playoff....as ridiculous as that seems.

UberCougars said:

OK! Lol



Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Sounds like she pegged it pretty accurately.

OK! Lol



https://x.com/goerie/status/1852017931745407115?s=46

UberCougars said:

Here.

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Let's not forget that there were problems with Dominion long before the 2020 election. As I remembered it, Texas evaluated different systems and disqualified Dominion systems due to security flaws. I thought there were other states that did as well. Turns out I did remember at least some of it correctly-Texas actually disqualified Dominion three different times. In scanning the rest of this article I didn't see that other states also disqualified them, but they might have. I didn't research further.

Loyal Coug1 said:

Hi stalker. Dream about me again last night? Wish you could slap me with a subpenis - I mean subpoena?
And she's not ugly. Says "Uh" a lot though. I could change that to "Ooh Ooh"

Edit - Tulsi Gabbard is coming to Yakima on Nov 8th. She's not ugly either.

Click to expand...

I guess enjoy the subpenis slapping. Make sure you're opposite of a consenting adult.

Nice article on voter fraud..........or lack thereof......

KRUSTYtheCOUG said:

If wishes and buts were candy and nuts...

That isn't the system we have and I'd say history has demonstrated we were doomed to be in a two-party system. The chances of a grassroots movement forming to bring forth a viable third option by refusing to vote for one of the two viable candidates is about the same chance that the COUGS win the national championship this year.

Again, you have TWO viable options. The current apparatus and party infrastructure in place makes this a brute fact. Standing aside in the naive belief you are making some difference or meaningful choice will do absolutely nothing in this real world. Perhaps you would also like a medal for being above the dirty pit of presidential elections. Personally to me, it's a cop-out to hide behind the argument that "my vote doesn't really matter in this state anyway".

Standing on the sidelines certainly is what one political party is wanting. They are counting on the tired and lazy mindset that "both sides are the same, they're both terrible". Taihtsat

Click to expand...

Stepping away from the presidential race...I'm watching the congressional race in my district between Dan Newhouse & Jared Sessler pretty closely, because I think it's outcome will show just how far off the wheels have come.

They're both republicans (another gift given to us by Washington's idiotic top 2 system). But Sessler is a Trump Republican (and a sociopathic liar), and Newhouse is a traditional Republican (which now means RINO, and just a typical politician liar). Sessler's key campaign points are "I've been endorsed by Trump" and "Newhouse voted to impeach." He backed out of a debate because he didn't think it was right that a write-in democrat wasn't included. Now, he's running tons of ads that claim the dems are trying to steal the election by having a write-in candidate. Mostly, he's getting her name out so that the dems will vote for her instead of Newhouse.

Anyway, Sessler's back story shows that he's a mindless pawn. If he loses, I'll maintain a hint of hope for the sensibilities of voters in my district. If he wins...not so much.

Back to the top level though...the things that Trump and Musk are talking about, and with RFK waiting in the wings to shred health services...I really don't look forward to the next 4 years. And I desperately hope that no supremes die or retire before 2029.

KRUSTYtheCOUG said:

If wishes and buts were candy and nuts...

That isn't the system we have and I'd say history has demonstrated we were doomed to be in a two-party system. The chances of a grassroots movement forming to bring forth a viable third option by refusing to vote for one of the two viable candidates is about the same chance that the COUGS win the national championship this year.

Again, you have TWO viable options. The current apparatus and party infrastructure in place makes this a brute fact. Standing aside in the naive belief you are making some difference or meaningful choice will do absolutely nothing in this real world. Perhaps you would also like a medal for being above the dirty pit of presidential elections. Personally to me, it's a cop-out to hide behind the argument that "my vote doesn't really matter in this state anyway".

Standing on the sidelines certainly is what one political party is wanting. They are counting on the tired and lazy mindset that "both sides are the same, they're both terrible". Taihtsat

Click to expand...

We have two viable options because the masses only consider two options. Those two have tried really hard to set things up that way, but we're continuing to just give them their way.

I don't expect that my vote, or my suggestions that we don't accept either of our two shitty choices, will have any impact at all. But the fact that it doesn't make a difference doesn't mean that I have to cave in and pick one of two choices - neither of which I want.

And, whether you think it's a cop out or not is completely meaningless to me. The simple fact is that in Washington, if you're not voting for Harris, your vote doesn't matter. That will remain true unless we get rid of the winner take all electoral approach....or until 50 million people start voting for a 3rd party.

425cougfan said:

I used to believe a third party that positioned itself as centrist could be viable, potentially enough to actually govern at some point. Centrist, "sane" candidates have a very hard time winning primaries in the two-party system. A third party could have its own primary process, and if it somehow could get enough attention and dollars, you would think it could, or at least should, work. Most Americans want similar things ... e.g., centrist Democrat policies from the 90s/early 2000s.

Things have gotten so extreme, with apparent disagreement over things that shouldn't be all that controversial--each day is so insane with the news flow that I can't discern whether this is just election-related posturing or something indicative of greater partisan divergence--that it no longer is clear to me the sizeable, silent, largely apolitical middle who just wants things that make sense could ever come together to get it done.

Click to expand...

The media also is a massive problem. It has leaned left at least for the past six decades,

425cougfan said:

95coug said:

I agree, but I think those more centrist people are currently in a position where they feel forced to vote their lean…not their choice. The overwhelming majority are holding their nose and casting a vote against one candidate.

When there are 10 on the ballot - as there are in Washington - most should be able to not hold their nose so tightly. Reading through the 10 platforms, there were none that I agreed with completely…but the D and R ones were among the most outlandish, and had more pillars that I disagree with than most of the platforms did.

Click to expand...

That probably will piss off everyone, which itself would be telling vis-à-vis the viability of centrists now and going forward.

Click to expand...

I'll opine. I too feel that a modest 3rd "Moderate" party could have a huge impact, but the chances are very slim it could take hold. But then you do have guys like Bernie in Vermont. In a top 2 state like Washington the chances of getting elected would be better. If say 10% of the House belonged to the moderate party and had a united front, they would be the swing vote on everything, and the left and right would have to compromise. That's about the best we could hope for.

Oh and I disagree that the media has leaned left for "at least the last six decades". I'm not old enough to remember the sixties, but I do remember Walter Cronkite, Harry Reasoner, Howard K. Smith (he of "The Murrow Boys"), etc. Way too young to remember our own Edward R. Murrow, but I suppose he would be considered a lefty these days by the McCarthy lovers - oops I mean Trump lovers. . I will agree that mainstream media has leaned left for some time, but how much of that is in direct competition/response to the right wing nuts that Fox, etc. have paraded out in recent memory?

Here's a trip down memory lane........

And yes ducks and geese do land on it.

the landing strip

Flatlandcoug said:

The huge difference between football and basketball is that you can play two games in a three day period in basketball. You can't do that in football. I do believe that we should go to a 16 team playoff sooner than later, but anything beyond that is going to be a tough sell. The only reason to go beyond 16 is to guarantee every conference champion a spot.

Of course, a 16 team playoff could take the 10 conference champs vs the top 6 at large teams. Too many egos for that to happen though.

Click to expand...

The games will still be at least 7 days apart, just like the regular season, not that difficult to come up with a schedule, it would look something like this

32 team playoff, Regular season ends the last weekend of November( like it used to). Bye week the first week of December. 2nd weekend of December Round 1, 32 teams, 16 games, play Friday and Saturday, leave the NFL with Sunday. 3rd Week of December 16 teams 8 Games Friday and Saturday again. 4th week of December or New Years Day, 8 teams 4 big bowl games all the same day. First weekend in January 4 teams 2 games. ( must be at least 7 days after New Years day game, so there will probably be a bye weekend. Final game Mid January on a Monday night. By the way this year's Nation Championship will be played on January 20th,

dgibbons said:

Loyal's new politician crush?

Click to expand...

Hi stalker. Dream about me again last night? Wish you could slap me with a subpenis - I mean subpoena?
And she's not ugly. Says "Uh" a lot though. I could change that to "Ooh Ooh"

Edit - Tulsi Gabbard is coming to Yakima on Nov 8th. She's not ugly either.

UberCougars said:

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Loyal's new politician crush?

Coug90 said:

I don’t agree with the argument that it makes regular season games meaningless either. North Carolina/Duke, Kentucky/Memphis, don’t have this problem in basketball. You are still jockeying for position and home field. Alabama and their fans still want to beat Georgia in the regular season. It just puts more teams in the conversation that normally wouldn’t be which is more exciting for everyone.

Baseball has too many damn games but it’s infinitely more exciting for more fan bases now since they’ve expanded the playoffs. When it used to be 4 teams, 3/4 of the league was out of it by September.

Click to expand...

Depends on what you call a "problem." The ratings for a Duke-NC BB game are way lower than an Alabama-Auburn football game. Regular season media contracts for BB are way lower. The inventory of college football games is much lower: 12 regular season games; 134 schools. Basketball is 32ish games; 352 teams.

roses04 said:

Look at what March Madness has done for basketball, it wouldn't be that difficult to replicate that in football. As Leach explained, everyone else has it figured out. they do it in High School, FCS has an expanded playoff, and the NFL has 14 out of 32 teams make the playoffs. You can use the bowls as playoff games. I say start with 32 teams, that means the teams that play in the finals play 5 extra games. Everyone has to play 9 conference games, cut the season to 11 games, eliminate the conference championship. so the teams making it to the finals play 16 games. Currently they play 12 games, plus the conference championship, plus 3-4 playoff games, they are at 15-16 with the current set up.

The problem is the bowls have lost all their meaning, players opt into the portal in December, and the team that qualified for the bowl is a shell of the team that won 8-10 games. A playoff format using the bowls would help 16 bowls a whole lot. You can still have the others for the teams that don't make the playoffs, heck you could even turn the rest of the bowls into an NIT type of format. The lessor bowls are dying, a playoff format could help save them. A 32 team format would require 31 sites for all the games, all meaningful games.

Click to expand...

The huge difference between football and basketball is that you can play two games in a three day period in basketball. You can't do that in football. I do believe that we should go to a 16 team playoff sooner than later, but anything beyond that is going to be a tough sell. The only reason to go beyond 16 is to guarantee every conference champion a spot.

Of course, a 16 team playoff could take the 10 conference champs vs the top 6 at large teams. Too many egos for that to happen though.

roses04 said:

Generally speaking, Cal and Purdue are coaching graveyards.

Click to expand...

Eh. Wilcox has been able to float in mediocrity at Cal for quite some time. He’s gotta be one of the longest tenured coaches in FBS.

KRUSTYtheCOUG said:

If wishes and buts were candy and nuts...

That isn't the system we have and I'd say history has demonstrated we were doomed to be in a two-party system. The chances of a grassroots movement forming to bring forth a viable third option by refusing to vote for one of the two viable candidates is about the same chance that the COUGS win the national championship this year.

Again, you have TWO viable options. The current apparatus and party infrastructure in place makes this a brute fact. Standing aside in the naive belief you are making some difference or meaningful choice will do absolutely nothing in this real world. Perhaps you would also like a medal for being above the dirty pit of presidential elections. Personally to me, it's a cop-out to hide behind the argument that "my vote doesn't really matter in this state anyway".

Standing on the sidelines certainly is what one political party is wanting. They are counting on the tired and lazy mindset that "both sides are the same, they're both terrible". Taihtsat

Click to expand...

When Trump is flushed it will improve a bit, but we are a country of red vs blue. Only a legit third party (better) or elimination of parties will get people back to the middle. We’ve seen the worst of it since Trump hit the political scene, but it was already accelerating in this direction around the first Obama term.

roses04 said:

If Learfield was smart, they would have made the removal of the blue turf a condition of the deal.

Click to expand...

From my understanding, whenever they replace turf next, it has to be green. They were grandfathered in until next go-around. So get used to playing on a run down smurf turf for the next 60 years!

If Learfield was smart, they would have made the removal of the blue turf a condition of the deal.

95coug said:

Valid perspective, but…

Insisting on choosing a D or R candidate just perpetuates the issue with the 2 party system and incentivizes neither of them to return to the middle and pick a better candidate.

Click to expand...

95coug said:

Valid perspective, but…

Insisting on choosing a D or R candidate just perpetuates the issue with the 2 party system and incentivizes neither of them to return to the middle and pick a better candidate.

We have 10 candidates this year. Pick a different one. If 50 million people do that, the wheels start to come off the 2 party system.

Click to expand...

If wishes and buts were candy and nuts...

That isn't the system we have and I'd say history has demonstrated we were doomed to be in a two-party system. The chances of a grassroots movement forming to bring forth a viable third option by refusing to vote for one of the two viable candidates is about the same chance that the COUGS win the national championship this year.

Again, you have TWO viable options. The current apparatus and party infrastructure in place makes this a brute fact. Standing aside in the naive belief you are making some difference or meaningful choice will do absolutely nothing in this real world. Perhaps you would also like a medal for being above the dirty pit of presidential elections. Personally to me, it's a cop-out to hide behind the argument that "my vote doesn't really matter in this state anyway".

Standing on the sidelines certainly is what one political party is wanting. They are counting on the tired and lazy mindset that "both sides are the same, they're both terrible". Taihtsat