KJ.

Tell me more, Barack. What types of things do you find the waitresses at Denny's do that Michelle won't?

I was wondering this too! Good question, I can't seem to find much info on it. Which sucks, because it's really what makes or breaks the trip.

Well if Jamrog is running parking now, that's no surprise. The players always get away with parking on Stadium Drive with the flashers on, even though there's a big "NO PARKING" sign right next to their cars. I usually keep an old parking ticket in my car and throw it on my windshield if I'm about to park illegally. Seems to have worked well so far.

We were 10-2 before the title game, and 2 of our 4 losses came in the postseason. So first of all, 2 losses in the regular season is quite a substantial ways away from 5. Secondly, who cares what could have happened? The only thing that matters is what did happen. We won 10 games. 9 before that. 10, 10 and 9 before that. We have been proven as a team that averages around 9.5 wins per year despite circumstances. So yes, 7-5 would be a hell of a shock. Not really, not when you're trying to predict what's going to happen in the future. You're using the assumption that all X win teams are made equal, when in reality a good portion of those teams underachieved at X wins and others overachieved. A team that goes 10-2 with 10 comfortable wins and 2 close losses is probably better than a 10-2 squad with 5 close wins and a blowout loss, all else equal. I'm not making that assumption at all. A team that has 5 straight years of consistency at 9-10 wins despite the differences in opponents and strength of schedule is a consistent team. A 5 year trend is a solid data pool. Combine that with a noticeably weaker schedule, agreed upon unanimously by fans and "experts" alike, and there is no compelling evidence that we would underperform so significantly. Thus, it would be a real shock. First of all, it's not a "solid data pool" despite your subjective claim that it is. A 5 year stretch of 12 games each year is only 46.27% credible according to Bayesian statistics. So mathematically speaking, you're slightly better off using theory to predict our wins this year than 8, 9, 10, 9, 10. There's plenty of compelling evidence that suggests we've slightly over performed in the last two seasons, most notably how we've outscored conference opponents by a net 6 points yet won a net of 8 games. Having a negative number of excess points per victory is pretty alarming. If we won 18 games over the last two seasons, would you say 7 wins for this year is still shocking? 17? 16? At what point do the actual results need to fall before it's not so shocking anymore? My guess is not very far...probably about 17. My point is that it's not inconceivable for us to have won that amount with the exact same team, where our expectations should be identical going into the season. Using a discrete categorization of any game as a win or a loss is a pretty pathetic way to make predictions, and the more intelligent people throughout other sports and industries that attempt to do so recognize that.

We were 10-2 before the title game, and 2 of our 4 losses came in the postseason. So first of all, 2 losses in the regular season is quite a substantial ways away from 5. Secondly, who cares what could have happened? The only thing that matters is what did happen. We won 10 games. 9 before that. 10, 10 and 9 before that. We have been proven as a team that averages around 9.5 wins per year despite circumstances. So yes, 7-5 would be a hell of a shock. Not really, not when you're trying to predict what's going to happen in the future. You're using the assumption that all X win teams are made equal, when in reality a good portion of those teams underachieved at X wins and others overachieved. A team that goes 10-2 with 10 comfortable wins and 2 close losses is probably better than a 10-2 squad with 5 close wins and a blowout loss, all else equal.

That is what the stadium is going to look like permanently if Bo remains head coach and keeps running us into the ground... Someone finally gets it. You two are really not worth responding to. Carry on. Haha. I understand I don't post on here enough for my views to be widely known, but I thought the outlandishness of the comment would lead most to recognize the sarcasm. For those not able to catch on, yes, I was just kidding. Nevermind then. I take back what I said, you kool-aid drinker.

That is what the stadium is going to look like permanently if Bo remains head coach and keeps running us into the ground... Someone finally gets it.

Meh.

I'm willing to believe your audio nerd friends, but we've had speakers throughout the stadium in the past, and it worked OK, even with terrible acoustics. They went with all speakers in one place (by the jumbotron) during the 2005 North Stadium expansion, and it's been worse since. If it's a choice between bad and worse, I'll take bad. Put the speakers all over again, and 86 this method. I'm not saying Memorial is doomed for getting good sound with different setups. Just that there's nothing wrong with the current equipment. It works great for some schools, but it just isn't the right choice for us.

From what I've heard from a few nerd friends, our audio system is fine. Memorial's acoustics are just terrible, and that's the entire problem. I think Penn State has the same setup that we do and it sounds great there (from what I've heard). Maybe having East Stadium fully expanded and having 5k people up there will help. But it sounds like the shape of the stadium has a lot more influence than we think.

I don't understand what the guy did wrong. I thought it was only illegal to charge more than face, but it sounds like he specifically wasn't going to go over?

Anyone have any idea which direction the seat numbers work? Is seat #1 always on the left or right when facing the field? Or depends on the section/stadium?

If I had to guess, without seeing video, I would say you're coming a little over the top. The longer the club, the harder it is to square the clubface, so you're driver face is open to the path (fade/slice). The shorter the club, the easier it is to square, so you may be getting it back to square (pull) or a little closed to the path (pull hook). Thanks for the help, Q. I just went to the range and the problem wasn't as drastic; both were playing slight draws. I can work with that for sure, but I have no idea what I was doing different from yesterday when they were going opposite directions.

Did you buy all of them together? It not and they are different years/models/not the exact "set", then it could be a club length issue. Perhaps your hybrids are a little too short. I've seen you golf on TV, Obama. I don't think I want to take advice from you and your evil lefty swing.

I'd say this is as good a place as any, but I'm looking for some help on a swing issue. My driver, 3/4 hybrids are all TaylorMade Burner's. When I miss hit my driver, it slices. When I hit my hybrids at all, they snap hook very badly. How is that possible, and what the heck is going on to cause that?

While we're young?

Looks like he just picked up offers from SMU and Texas State!! Props to the staff for getting in first on this guy.

Lakisha Briggs.

Landlord, did you go to the Big 10 Championship in Indianapolis and spend the entire weekend completely smashed? You look familiar to a mustached drunk guy who I think said he was from Wayne. I wouldn't be surprised if you don't remember, even if it was you. He was having a good time.

Cross will be a career backup and never anything more than a 3rd down player.

Sounds like next year. Regents meet July 1st to set budget for fiscal year. Could be this year, but that's when we'll know.

Yeah, Congdon couldn't kick the ball very far at all. He needed to be complemented with a big footer, because he was pretty accurate but only within 42 or so. Him and Bondi would be a solid combination for this year.

That was a brilliant call. It gains 40 yards if our player doesn't fumble the pitch that hit him right in the hands.

Yessssss. I've been waiting for this thread since January 1st.