Illinois Hokie's Recent Comments
Not by any chance the Bahia Cabana, is it?
If we lose Miami, we also lose Ft Lauderdale and the Keys. I can't accept that trade.
Nothing is massively going under water for a long, long time. Yes, the North pole is melting, but the North pole is not on land. It's total weight displacement is already compensated for by the ice being in the water (just as a glass with ice does not overflow when the ice melts).
I've heard this argument before. It's a false analogy.
The ocean isn't a glass of water, and the polar ice caps aren't ice cubes floating in it. The water locked up in the polar ice caps are kept out of the oceanic currents and held in place at the pole. If those ice caps melt, that water escapes and enters the currents, which does elevate sea level. And the math is irrefutable. There is enough water trapped in the ice caps to submerged heavily populated areas if they melt.
I don't know the origin of this argument, so I can't say if it's intentially misleading or innocently misguided. But it's a dangerous fallacy that tries to give people false hope that no threat exists when one most certainly does. I feel compelled to refute it whenever I see it brought up.
Raising em right.
I believe you have failed to account for the fact that it is Joey Slye who would be kicking the onside kick. He surely had enough power to cause the ball to ricochet off an opposing player, all the way to the end zone, where we only need to recover it.
I cannot wait for the Notre Dame 'Foe'rensics.
I knew HokieGirl was from my old stomping grounds, but I didn't know krak_t and WiseHokie were.
It now dawns on me that WiseHokie's screen name has nothing to do with wisdom...
And I've wanted a tagging/notification system for a while, but it would probably be a PITA to develop for an already overworked Joe.
Tim Settle is large.
Tank is adorable.
If Frank had been committed to a new offensive philosophy, he wouldn't have just brought in Lefty and Grimes. He would have let his OC completely rebuild the offensive staff to his liking. Instead, what we wound up with was an amalgam of parts on offense, and no clear idea of who was in charge of what. (We still don't know who to blame for the atrocious tailback rotation.)
While programs with an established offensive identify might be able to get away with replacing an OC, even then it tends to be promotion from within, someone who knows the system. We had no system, and no offensive identify. We needed a complete overhaul and culture change on that side of the ball. Instead, we got a new OL coach and a new OC, who was asked work with the head coach's son and the former OC on his staff.
The changes Frank made in 2012 say to me that he wasn't invested in bringing in a new offensive philosophy all.
Paging Go Kart Mozart.
B back trick pass into double coverage.
Paul Johnson, ladies and gentlemen.
For comparison's sake, look at how Fuente killed clock vs BC. Rotate in your twos, use up more play clock between snaps, but still run your offense. When your twos score, bring in your threes. But never stop playing your game.
I think the biggest issue concerning online degrees is that the concept has been tarnished by for-profit online diploma mills like University of Phoenix and Kaplan. Those degrees really are worth less. But online classes at a quality university are a different animal.
There is a zoom option on the X1, but it just takes a small image surrounded on all four sides by black bars and stretches it horizontally so there's only black bars on the top and bottom. I'm looking for a way to make the image fill the whole screen.
Great to see a DB wearing Frank's number.
Quick question for anyone with Xfinity.
Is there any way to zoom in to remove the letterbox formatting (black bars top and bottom) from SD feeds on the X1? My local ACC Network affiliate doesn't broadcast in HD and the letterbox formatting annoys me.
I hope not. It's not taunting, and it's not really showboating. It just shows he's having a good time.
I, too, noticed the lack of celebration vs BC, but I interpreted it as more of a chip on Jerod's shoulder after Bristol.
By my count, were allowing 0 over the last eleven days.
So the ends justify the means?
Not that there is anything at all wrong with a 17-10 win, if the offense could legitimately only put 17 on the board. But a 54-10 win gets your offense that much more tuned up than a 17-10 win.
Games don't exist in a vacuum. The season builds, game after game, until you get the team to where you want it to be. Calling off the offense, out of either a sense of sportsmanship or a concern about offensive mistakes costing you the win, is ultimately self defeating.
I'm admittedly a nerd, but this is my favorite feature article.
My point is, there should never even be an "at least." All that does is set an arbitrary threshold that can instill a false sense of confidence if met. The question of "Should we try to score on this drive?" should never be asked. The answer is always yes.
I have a yuge problem with a coach who says "Get me X number of points and we'll win," because that's just asking for your defense to get gassed and lose the game late. There should never be a target number at which you turtle the offense, because insane comebacks happen.
The only correct answer for "How much should the offense score?" is "More."
But, taking your premise that our issue was failing to meet an arbitrary threshold of points, why do you think that happened? I would put my money on it being directly attributable to the "just enough" mindset that permeated our offense. You can't expect players to turn it on and off like a switch, and when you approach offense with that mindset, it makes it that much harder for the offense to answer the bell.
Somehow the offense's rating dropped this week
How?
No, really, how?
That seems like either a math or an input error.
I'm legging this solely for the Hamilton! gif.