Landlord

I'd either mostly or entirely leave. For better or worse.

2007 was an anomaly in the form of the poorly poured concrete foundation of a dam breaking. Similar to 2017. The statistical results of those seasons should be treated as such and focused more on the fundamental failings imo.

Interesting. 2006 was our best year under Callahan - tell me, was it the defense or offense that struggled against the top competition that year? #4 USC - Defense held them to 28 points (under their average), offense scored 10 points #5 Texas - Defense held them to 22 points (under their average), offense scored 20 and lost the ball giving them the game winning score. #10 Oklahoma - Defense held them to 21 points (under their average), offense had 4 picks and a fumble on their first play en route to 7 points. #10 Auburn - Defense held them to 17 points (under their average), offense scored 14 total including 7 on the opening drive, which means 7 total points in the remaining ~58 minutes of play. 2005 was our second best year. In 2005 we were 25th in the nation in points allowed per game (67th in points per game), and led the nation in sacks (can't find the stat but I wouldn't disbelieve if we were last in the nation in sacks allowed).

Not sure what you're getting at in your first bit other than the conference was bad that year. The bolded is an important point to mention, especially since it's impossible to extrapolate the worsening talent and the period of time in which we changed conferences. But the Big 10 was also unusually down then (the original point being that usually the B1G is a step above). It was somewhat of an anomaly. Yes, Bo maintained 4 losses consistently, but we got Ohio State in their only losing season since the dinosaurs, we got Michigan in one of their worst stretches ever, we got Penn State in theirs, we got Wisconsin in their worst year of the last decade, etc. I'd change your last sentence to read Nebraska came into the league at the perfect moment, and Bo Pelini capitalized perfectly by being lucky enough to continue having the same W-L records. If Bo enters the B1G in 2015 there's zero chance we'd still go 9-4.

We went from a 4 loss team inches away from two conference championships and not getting blown out to a 4 loss team finishing 3rd/4th in our division, losing a championship game by 40 points and setting NCAA records for abysmal defensive performance.

I don't think something like culture is a thing that someone 'gets' to decide as much as who does define it. And the answer would be everyone. Coaches instill certain things top down, the players gel and form relationship ground up and it all coalesces.

Future them create a utopia. The gym teacher sends robot replicas back in time to stop it from ever happening. The robot versions kill them and take their places, and then the grim reaper loses a game to them and is at their command. They get better robot versions to beat their evil robot versions, then they win battle of the bands on their way to fulfilling their destiny.

To me the difference is, at least in it's simplest terms for white folk, are you using the word against someone or referring to someone(s), or are you reciting/referencing the word? What Patterson did was dumb, but there wasn't anything 'wrong' with it further than that imo. In contrast, if someone said "a bunch of dirty n-words moved in on my street," we wouldn't be like, "oh cool he didn't say the word so he's obviously not racist"

The only part of Patterson's apology is the "in any context is unacceptable" part. That's not true, and that's not something we should believing. Obviously we already don't believe it because black communities say it all the time. Hip hop uses it all the time. So there's at least some contexts. As far as contexts for white people, should we censor actual quotes from the slavery south? Modify old literature? Depict our racist past in film but not honestly? If your conflict is sanitized and PG, so is your redemption. Why does it have to be more than cultures defining things for themselves? Seems pretty simple, live and let be. Unless you're going to respond with, "But what about cannibals and genital mutilation!?", in which case, you let people be until there's an immediate threat of harm.

That is absolutely insane. Looks like a scene from Armageddon.

Agreed, but that's different than whether or not social distancing was enforced at the funeral, which it wasn't, although a decent amount seem to be anyways.

That's a lot of people in those center sections. Not sure how that photo does anything other than confirm it.

If this cocktail didn't contain something trump promoted you would have never heard of it.

The CDC recommends social distancing of at least 6 feet and wearing a mask. If people aren't wearing masks indoors they should be up to 10 feet away from each other.

I guess we all find it hard to believe that people who think and act this way actually exist and vote. John Lewis' funeral had no social distancing. George Floyd's funeral also had no social distancing. ND Joe's weird flex about Trump's small crowds is not worth engaging, but it's pretty frustrating for many who have recently lost loved ones and legally aren't even allowed to have a funeral because of COVID, and then seeing that.