Leaderboard

So to add to the "facts" ... the WHO (World Health Organization) evaluates the ICD (International Classification of Diseases) and makes changes when its deemed necessary. The last update was in 1990 (I think that's when this transgender number was added) and they are updating the entire book again this year. Funny thing, they have submitted that transgender should be taken out of the classification of mental disease. It's been through multiple committees and been approved, so I expect that you'll see this go away this year. So @Ric Flair when the APA guidelines change as planned, will that change your opinion of these folks and where they belong in society? The funny part is, they bucketed transgender into the mental disease group because of the "if you have it and it makes you distressed" definition. After doing clinical trials and looking at data they found out that it wasn't the transgender part that distressed them, it was the social rejection and violence - NOT being transgendered. So expect the new codes to include gender incongruence in sexual diagnosis, not mental disorders. And it will be viewed as a medical and biological disorder. Exactly like homosexuality has moved and "hysteria" (often used for labelling women) and then have both fallen off all together. The reason gender incongruence will still be included will be so that these folks can get the medical help they need. And not just for surgical sex changes and hormones (I"m assuming that will be what you question immediately). So in a nutshell - the society around these folks are what is really a mental illness - not them. I anticipate that your opinion will stay the same, similar to the thoughts you've expressed about abortions. Even though that is a medically approved procedure you think it's indefensible and should be curbed. So that medical coding procedure, and all the opinions and data hasn't made you feel differently about it. I'd expect when this changes you will hold your position as it too seems deeper than a definition in a billing book or a medical procedure to you.

When you start appreciating being a "part" of this forum rather than an "opponent" you may realize discussion (and even minority opinion) is appreciated.

When trump does stupid things or absolutely makes things up or attacks law enforcement or his kids do corrupt things...an outlet reporting that isn’t “in the tank” for the democrats.

@Ric Flair, let's go ahead and set this record straight once and for all. First, and most importantly, the APA removed gender identity disorder (GID) as a listed mental disorder in 2012. They publish the DSM. They replaced it with something new called "gender dysphoria" to help diagnose and treat people who are stressed by the gender mismatch between their identity and body. The intent with this move was to destigmatize transgenders, help spur better health care and recognize that the mismatch between someone's birth gender and identity may not be pathological. The cornerstone for your argument is essentially a misunderstanding of the DSM and the APA's position, along with the position of other leading health care professionals. Second, in the early release of the World Health Organization's ICD-11, they've moved gender identity disorders from the classification of 'mental and behavioral disorders' to a new category called 'gender incongruence.' Third, you were suspended for two reasons last month: 1) You were trolling a thread 2) You explicitly referred to transgenders as mentally ill while ignoring the highly controversial and potentially offensive nature of doing so. You presented your opinion from a position of intolerance. The way you posted your opinion was interpreted as a violation of board rule number five. Finally, I have personally told you once before that there is a place on this board in the Woodshed for airing grievances about warnings and suspensions. Consider this the last time we will politely ask to not pollute the board or a thread with misgivings about suspensions.

I don't know many conservatives that seek out liberal sources of information. There aren't a ton of people in rural Nebraska tuning in to MSNBC or reading HuffPo for their info. People self-sort when it comes to media. Most people I know try to consume a variety of sources, and that's what I'd tell anybody who asked how to get news. But again, I think your initial assertion is wrong. There may be a slight bias in favor of liberalism in the U.S. media as whole. But they certainly aren't automatically, reflexively in the tank for libs. I think you're discounting the extent to which Trump is a polarizing figure on his own, and the amount he just says and does really dumb sh#t. Media outlets have to report on that stuff, even his idiotic tweets. Plus, there's often an overcompensation by the media in trying to combat a perceived liberal bias that winds up making liberals look bad. See: Hillary Clinton's emails.

This post basically shows the problem you are having on the site. Hint, it’s not your opinions.

Posts intentionally inflammatory thread crying about intolerance. Thread is tolerated by both Mods & the people the OP intolerantly labels "liberal." Sucks when your victimhood is disproved by your own claim of victimhood.

Having realistic fear based on facts is extremely important and make decision with rational thought. The problem is, this administration has done nothing but fabricate fear based on totally made up crap to build support for their extreme policies. That should be called out and they should not be rewarded for it by supporting them.

You purported the claim about 90% so it is on you to provide the numbers and documentation to support it. The article you posted does not at any point support your assertion that "90%" of the media leans left. In fact, it directly contradicts you. You're purporting and defending a position that has no factual backing.

Great post MC. Thanks for sharing. I suspect most people don’t know anyone who is openly transgender and thus haven’t heard a first-hand account of what that is like. Good luck with your journey. I hope it works out for you.

Didn't know Daniel Tosh played football

I have no other reason for posting this, other than to demonstrate what an empty suit and ideological flimflam man this young conservative "intellectual" is. This is one of the people conservatives expect to be at the forefront and take up their mantle someday. Somewhere along the way politics became more about trying to humiliate the other team and make punchy-sounding arguments than lead the country. It's a shame.

UCF 72 plays a game - 57th in country Nebraska 71 plays a game- 77th in country Nebraska had the ball on offense that much because their defense was constantly giving up scores, usually quick ones. UCF has the ball that much because they were scoring so many points. I don’t remember the stat, but they had a very high amount of points per possession.

Hey don't group me with these people. I intolerantly reported the OP for calling all the mods liberals.

So your problem isn't that your opinions aren't tolerated, it's that you don't understand what "tolerated" means.

I disagree with this part. That's basically saying 9/10 journalists are biased against Trump and Republicans. 1) There is no way to prove this and 2) I've worked in different roles in the news business my whole career; anecdotally, that percentage is simply untrue and impossible. Most people's perception of 'bias' in the news media is grossly over-exaggerated. Trump says a lot of things that are either misleading or wrong. He, deservedly, gets called out for it. He's made it a part of himself so much as a sunrise is part of the world. It's who he is and it's largely his fault that it gets talked about so much - he keeps doing it and at an incredibly large scale.

Here's the deal: "capitalism" is intolerant (*). Hear me out. We like to cry that Laura Ingrahm can't say what she feels. Alex Jones is being silenced. Some reporter from a "left" publisher is pro-life and has an "in your face" way of saying it and is fired. We can yell "censorship" all we want, but you know what matters? Customers. If I'm a manager at Walmart and my cashier is handing out Target coupons; well they will be dealt with. If I'm a salesman for a Ford dealership and talk about how GM has much better value, I'm being dealt with. These people get paid for their opinions, but there is a limit. I don't care where you lay on the political spectrum there is eventually a line between making your readers/listeners "think" and just plain "pissing them off." This isn't "intolerant", it's "business". (*) People will be in charge of themselves, this can be a good thing. But to be a successful individual, you have to care about what others think. Fact of life, better get used to it....

We are in absolute agreement. Letting him have a Twitter account is like letting your uncle drive home after drinking about a case of beer. Take away the damn keys already.

I am making a trip to a road game for the first time since Mizzou in '07 to see NU in Columbus in November. That night, I will be content if we make Ohio State punt for the first time in 3 years. Every other game I would be surprised if each is not competitive. I expect close games all year with way more fight than has been shown in a long time.

I am a liberal and I wear that mantle proudly. I'm pretty tolerant. I believe everybody should have a right to say whatever they want to say, short of direct threats of violence. Even hate speech. But what a lot of people don't get is that while the 1A allows them that right, it doesn't protect them from the consequences from how they use it. I read the article from Ric's OP. It was a pretty long and tortured defense of the conservative dude recently fired from the Atlantic. For reference, he was fired because he tweeted in the past that women who got abortions or medical professionals that provide them should be lynched. But the author went to great lengths to explain how the conservative guy was the victim and the only truly tolerant one in the situation. That's right, the guy who wants to lynch women and doctors is the tolerant one. He even goes into a descriptive passage describing how the guy was born shortly before Roe v. Wade and therefore "narrowly escape abortion" and how "he’d be sharing office space with people who believe it would have been totally fine, completely morally acceptable, and possibly virtuous if a doctor had ripped him to pieces in his mother’s womb." The whole thing reads like an outlet for the author's victimhood complex as a conservative. He attacks the weakest examples of progressivism to make his points. But nothing changed in the fundamental 1A equation: Williamson expressed a pretty strong, controversial view and he was canned because of it. The equation shouldn't change regardless of his political stripes. This is all to say: Free speech (and its ramifications) don't really care about your politics.

I think agreeing on facts gets back to taking citizenship seriously. A good citizen is an informed and educated one. If people actually loved and cared about their country they would understand the importance of solid education system. One provided to every child and teenager regardless of their socioeconomic background, and one that stresses critical thinking. It's no shock at the situation we find ourselves in when we have cut funding and devalued education for the last 20 or so years. We are reaping what we've sown.

If thats true im not sure Nebraska will win another game. Ever.

The tolerance of liberals is on full display here. You’re perfectly cool with silencing the opinions of those you disagree with. How sad. The other thread was deleted Denver....because ....you know...tolerance.

Think we beat both Northwestern and Iowa. Along with at least 1 of the other 4.

I agree. But sadly these are the guys far too many people are turning to for their "news." We understand that they're not journalists. But they are headliners within the conservative media, unfortunately. I felt it was appropriate as a comparison.

Just going to throw this picture in here because I really like the interior of the Hawks Championship Center.

This is some very interesting work that piggybacks on the conversation in another thread about the media as a whole. Trump did better in areas where there was no local counter to the enormous amount of questionable or outright false statements he made. It's quite long, so here's the meat of it: The bolded is a real problem, and I'm not sure how you fix it for people that just don't care.

Personally I'm more comfortable reading from sources you'd consider liberal because the current crop of conservative media sources don't feature the journalistic rigor of a Washington Post or New York Times or even a CNN. You've got a right and a good point to expect more conservative media coverage. My plea is that it would be good conservative coverage that offers something of worth to people that aren't conservatives. Fox News has some good reporters, but it's editorial decision-making is garbage that essentially reduces it to a state-run TV catering only to the president. The WSJ editorial board has been behind some similarly silly work in my opinion. The NY Post seems OK, I don't really read them or the NY Daily News much. National Review is fine, even if I disagree with a lot of their work. Breitbart is a hateful joke. But there's a gigantic vacuum for legitimate, quality conservative journalism to fill, IMO. I just don't see many outlets cropping up to fill it. I wouldn't mind more outlets of a conservative bent getting out there IF they offer quality journalism. The current crop definitely cater to conservatives but the objective quality of their work is sorely lacking.

I don't mean to be condescending, but truly think about you're saying. You're suggesting (without any proof) that journalism is the only professional industry where 90% of the power is liberally biased. That would suggest it's the most unified industry in the world. Forgive my bluntness - it's completely absurd. There's almost nothing in this world where 90% of the people can agree on it. It doesn't matter if we're speaking outlet to outlet or journalist to journalist - there's physically no possible way that 90% of 'news media' (whether that's 90% of all journalists or 90% of outlets) is liberal leaning. There's no honest or factual basis for that claim at all.

Damn, I’m good.

Here is a chart of Time between Snaps from 2016, ranked from lowest to highest. I'm guessing UCF got faster in 2017. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FZBMbxtBrwh-G4Dh-Czz-lRkOLuOEAjRgBfvldp6MmI original source: https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2016/11/7/13549506/college-football-tempo-pace-increasing Team Conference Season Rush Plays Pass Plays Total Plays Time Of Possession Time Between Plays TBP Rank Plays Per Game Plays PG Rank Missouri SEC 2016 291 263 554 9509 17.2 1 79.1 12 Baylor BIG12 2016 325 198 523 10013 19.1 2 87.2 1 California PAC12 2016 279 416 695 13388 19.3 3 86.9 3 Mississippi SEC 2016 231 284 515 10385 20.2 4 73.6 50 Bowling Green MAC 2016 255 296 551 11180 20.3 5 78.7 14 Texas BIG12 2016 388 246 634 12933 20.4 6 79.3 11 New Mexico State SunBelt 2016 293 326 619 12639 20.4 7 77.4 22 Northern Illinois MAC 2016 293 241 534 10946 20.5 8 76.3 28 Tulsa AAC 2016 367 242 609 12485 20.5 9 87 2 Oregon PAC12 2016 308 230 538 11092 20.6 10 76.9 25 Texas State SunBelt 2016 194 226 420 8660 20.6 11 70 83 Syracuse ACC 2016 241 262 503 10683 21.2 12 83.8 6 Texas A&M SEC 2016 281 243 524 11165 21.3 13 74.9 39 Texas Tech BIG12 2016 214 385 599 12801 21.4 14 85.6 5 North Carolina ACC 2016 218 259 477 10305 21.6 15 68.1 96 TCU BIG12 2016 231 295 526 11405 21.7 16 75.1 37 Clemson ACC 2016 253 287 540 11724 21.7 17 77.1 23 Memphis AAC 2016 261 244 505 11051 21.9 18 72.1 61 South Florida AAC 2016 340 231 571 12557 22 19 71.4 69 Cincinnati AAC 2016 234 273 507 11386 22.5 20 72.4 58 East Carolina AAC 2016 252 351 603 13578 22.5 21 86.1 4 Indiana BIG10 2016 322 282 604 13675 22.6 22 75.5 35 UCF AAC 2016 299 208 507 11499 22.7 23 72.4 59

Ok, but they missed out on a whole game due to the hurricane. What was their rank in snaps per game?

I doubt 'most' of the psycological community is in agreement with you. Anyone even making conclusions on this subject can't be too sure given the research available. That said I would defer to the people going through these experience their whole over your biased 5 minute research project.

@Ric Flair, A Little History Lesson The United States was BUILT on immigration. The very inscription on the Statue of Liberty states the core principles of the USA. And just for the record, white people (our ancestors) STOLE this land from the native people who previously lived here. This is not liberal fantasy, this is historical fact. If you steal something, it does not matter how long you possess it...it is never yours. I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and thus far all you've shown me is racism and bigotry. Please do not go for the trifecta of racism, bigotry, and homophobia.

The problem is that the FPI is done by a computer, so, don't get mad at some metric that every other FBS team is measured by. I heard an interview the other day on Hail Varsity -- part of the algorithm is "did you lose a coach", and if so, assume there will be a step back. It also takes into account the past 4 or 5 years in terms of performance -- looking for consistency, with most recent being weighted most heavily, along with the obvious metric of -- returning starters. With returning QB weighted more than other returning starters. Then, to some extent it takes into account recruiting. Having a highly ranked class does imply better FPI. However, if you have highly rated players, it's assumed that even if they weren't starters, they probably played a decent enough amount of snaps, so that gets a team a small bump. Then, of course, the schedule.... So - taking all that into account, and taking any of personal bias out of it, i can see how we've arrived at this prediction. All that said, I think the computer will likely be wrong, as it was last year, but this time in our favor. Dumb computers need to add the "Frost Effect plugin".

Both pretty Impressive for his height. Not a lot of 6’7-6’8 guys can do 3/4 of that.

247

It doesn't matter how we finish because those of us who were involved in the Scott Frost MegaThread last year agreed that we would NOT crab about having a poor season the first season. We all said it will be ok if we don't do so well the first year, in fact we gave him 5+ years! I don't know how we will finish by the end of the year but I DO know that we will play competitively because that is who Scott Frost and his staff are. They will not tolerate mediocrity so we can rest assured that by the end of the year they look better than when they started then look out the next year because they will continue to get better and better until they are the best again! GO BIG RED!!!!!

Done

Trump is such a small-minded, ignorant, f'ing dumbass. It boggles my mind at how anyone can still support that moronic blowhole. To Trump supporters: At what freaking point do you start holding that lying sack of excrement accountable?

Meh, give me T-Magic.

Herm and the regime at ASU have found entirely new (boring) ways to completely suck the fun out of football. First it was their laughable 'approach' to running the program and now it's 'we're evaluating players to see if they're going to stay on the team.' I imagine there isn't a lot of buy in down there right now. Makes me thankful for what Frost and Co. have been able to do in that regard.

Frost is savage

When is Greg Austin going to tweet out “WE NEED A ROAD GRADER FROM ZIP CODE BLAH BLAH BLAH”.

I appreciate the support. Like you, I also grew up in a small Nebraska town so I know all too well how that works. The best part about what you said was that when your co-worker talked to you about it, the "light" came on and you made a choice to be better and more understanding. That's absolutely commendable. I believe that calmly and rationally talking to people goes so much farther than being a wacko and constantly berating people. I've always been open to people who want to know about Trans issues. We get better results through education than anger and blaming. That was a lesson I also had to learn.

I hate to make the same point over again, but I feel I must. If Force Awakens and Last Jedi were episodes 10 and 11 and not 7 and 8, they would be looked at quite differently and be much more well received. If we had a 7, 8 and 9 that focused on Luke, Han, Leia, Chewy and the Droids....well people wouldn't be as down on this trilogy because we would have gotten real closure. Think about it, if we got to see 3 movies of our favorite characters focusing on events after ROTJ that came out in the early 90's and the prequels and current sequels were still the same it would be a totally different animal.

GWB and Obama are the two most recent presidents before our current one, and both served better in their first years than he has. Allowed, or no?