What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

John Oliver is the best thing on TV. (4 Viewers)

Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.

 
This show is great. Really looking forward to Sunday to see the champagne (lime bud light) toasts and caviar (mcdonalds value menu) dreams

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
I'm guessing it has nothing to do with any single fan that gives a rip about soccer. Wouldn't it have more to do with corporations that are investing in advertising during soccer world wide? A bunch of those companies are based here in the U.S., no?

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
I'm guessing it has nothing to do with any single fan that gives a rip about soccer. Wouldn't it have more to do with corporations that are investing in advertising during soccer world wide? A bunch of those companies are based here in the U.S., no?
I'm sure that they had to have jurisdiction so yeah that's probably it. Of course many countries with rabid fan bases had jurisdiction as well.

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
You are mistaken

http://www.cbssports.com/world-cup/eye-on-world-cup/24622027/world-cup-final-sets-usa-television-record-with-265-million-viewers

Add one more ratings record to the World Cup before we close the book on Brazil: The World Cup Final between Germany and Argentina was the most-watched soccer match in American history, drawing more than 26 million viewers.

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
You are mistaken

http://www.cbssports.com/world-cup/eye-on-world-cup/24622027/world-cup-final-sets-usa-television-record-with-265-million-viewers

Add one more ratings record to the World Cup before we close the book on Brazil: The World Cup Final between Germany and Argentina was the most-watched soccer match in American history, drawing more than 26 million viewers.
next few world cups should be completely terrible with the massive time differences though. I think the momentum dies

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
You are mistaken

http://www.cbssports.com/world-cup/eye-on-world-cup/24622027/world-cup-final-sets-usa-television-record-with-265-million-viewers

Add one more ratings record to the World Cup before we close the book on Brazil: The World Cup Final between Germany and Argentina was the most-watched soccer match in American history, drawing more than 26 million viewers.
next few world cups should be completely terrible with the massive time differences though. I think the momentum dies
With the FIFA blow up, we have no idea where 2022 will be. It could just as easy be in the US as in Qatar.

Russia 2018 might be too late to move and the ratings will certainly be smaller than 2014 due to the time difference.

Although even the day games in the middle of the week for 2014 drew extremely well. The entire 64 games drew an average of 8 million viewers and that is with the large majority of them being at bad times for viewing.

Russia will still draw a ton of viewers, but probably not the high of 2014. Mexico and the US advancing into knockout round would obviously help.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What difference does it make if I take my car to a dealership for warranty work? I'm not paying anything.
Almost all if not all service drives are commission driven. If you enjoy you like having unneeded overpriced repairs pitched to you I guess that is great. Oh FYI you don't necessarily have to have warranty work done at the dealer but a dealer/manufacturer can sometimes dictate the terms of warranty work.

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.
To be fair when 1000 people in Zimbabwe crowd around the towns one tv set it still only counts as one viewer.

 
Mr. Ham said:
Ke$sha taking down investment bankers. Unexpectedly thorough prosecution. Didn't know that was an interest of yours, nice going K! :lmao:
I hadn't really thought about it until he brought it up but it is pretty amazing. It took the country that likes soccer the least to do this. I mean it's soccer, who cares? But there the FBI is investigatin' and all.
The WC tv rights are higher in the US than in any other country in the world.
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
Lol

 
I think the standardized testing piece went off the rails when he decided to spend half the bit focused on Pearson Testing. That's typical of Oliver, of course, to pick out a private company to rip on.

In this case, though, it's especially silly.

Why?

Simple. Pearson is only nominally a private company. It probably wouldn't exist if there weren't a government monopoly on schooling, which creates a market for these tests.

It would have been stronger if he had questioned the entire government school monopoly itself, the teacher's unions, the bloated administration bureaucracies, and the intentional dumbing down of kids age 5-18.

This last point, especially, would make a dynamite episode.

Unfortunately, Oliver is more focused (for the most part) on criticizing private for-profit companies, even when the company he's criticizing is essentially a government agency.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Pearson is a gigantic British publishing company and far from an extension of the American Government.

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?

If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before BushYou say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.

I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them.

I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?

If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before BushYou say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.

I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them.

I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.
:jawdrop: You do mandatory test that do not influence the grades? Why not? I'm totally shuked by this.

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?

If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before BushYou say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.

I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them.

I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.
:jawdrop: You do mandatory test that do not influence the grades? Why not? I'm totally shuked by this.
I know some States have graduation tests. Outside of that, how are schools using these State and national tests to impact kids grades? I don't know of any single school that uses outcomes on these tests to impact a kids class grades. Their grades in class depend on what they do in class. Why do you think all these parents and kids are choosing not to take them?

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?

If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before BushYou say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.

I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them.

I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.
:jawdrop: You do mandatory test that do not influence the grades? Why not? I'm totally shuked by this.
I know some States have graduation tests. Outside of that, how are schools using these State and national tests to impact kids grades? I don't know of any single school that uses outcomes on these tests to impact a kids class grades. Their grades in class depend on what they do in class. Why do you think all these parents and kids are choosing not to take them?
We don't have that issue in Denmark. All national tests to finalize a subject are graded and counts as a separate score. ie. you get a grade for how your teacher (subjectively) thought you did in class and another for how well you then tested.

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before Bush

You say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them. I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.
:jawdrop: You do mandatory test that do not influence the grades? Why not? I'm totally shuked by this.
I know some States have graduation tests. Outside of that, how are schools using these State and national tests to impact kids grades? I don't know of any single school that uses outcomes on these tests to impact a kids class grades. Their grades in class depend on what they do in class. Why do you think all these parents and kids are choosing not to take them?
We don't have that issue in Denmark. All national tests to finalize a subject are graded and counts as a separate score. ie. you get a grade for how your teacher (subjectively) thought you did in class and another for how well you then tested.
My class grades are objective based on the tests, papers, projects and presentations. That's the grade they get for a class. These various multiple standardized national and state tests have typically zero impact on kids. The only ones that matter are the SAT/ACT which collleges use for determining acceptance. Those are completely separate from the tests that our governments are giving to rank schools and evaluate teachers.

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before Bush

You say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them. I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.
:jawdrop: You do mandatory test that do not influence the grades? Why not? I'm totally shuked by this.
I know some States have graduation tests. Outside of that, how are schools using these State and national tests to impact kids grades? I don't know of any single school that uses outcomes on these tests to impact a kids class grades. Their grades in class depend on what they do in class. Why do you think all these parents and kids are choosing not to take them?
We don't have that issue in Denmark. All national tests to finalize a subject are graded and counts as a separate score. ie. you get a grade for how your teacher (subjectively) thought you did in class and another for how well you then tested.
My class grades are objective based on the tests, papers, projects and presentations. That's the grade they get for a class. These various multiple standardized national and state tests have typically zero impact on kids. The only ones that matter are the SAT/ACT which collleges use for determining acceptance. Those are completely separate from the tests that our governments are giving to rank schools and evaluate teachers.
In Denmark they are the same (although I don't think they are used to rank teachers).

All other tests before the finals are testrial runs to acquaint pupils with the process; to make the final on which their future might be determined somewhat less stressful

 
Wouldn't the tests prove out the class size hypothesis?If you look at the Oliver's piece, the decline started way before Bush

You say you "know" this and "know" that but with testing metrics can be gathered upon which to base these conclusions

You need to look at facts and not just arrogantly state your gut ...
Tests do not prove anything if the students do not take them with the intention of doing their best. 90+% of the students who are taking tests in my school right now click away at the buttons without a care in the world. Kids are way over tested... ask any teacher.I wasn't pointing at Bush however he began the policy of more tests and Obama did nothing to curtail it. Blame both, I don't care, but the amount of testing students do proves nothing since many don't care to take them or are opting out of them.

The numbers are not "facts" because not many of the test takers across the country take the tests with the intention of giving the administration/districts any credit to their learning... and the students shouldn't have to do so. The tests open up students to scrutiny where there should be none. I do know... the arrogance is not coming from me.
Part of the irony of these tests for kids is the entire reasoning behind them. One of the major ideas behind the tests are that teachers and schools are to be held accountable. If there is no potential reward/punishment for poor test scores, then why would the teachers or administrators care about doing their best to teach kids? This makes sense, but it fails to take into account the people that actually take the test. If there is no reward/punishment for test scores, why would the kids give a #### how well they do? Why would a kid try hard on a 12 hour test that is absolutely meaningless to them. It won't impact their grades in school, gpa, sports eligibility, moving on to the next grade, college, etc. The more tests you add, the less serious kids take them. I know teachers that beg the kids to take them serious and say that if they do bad, it will make me look bad and I have to pander to them. You guys like me, right? Remember when we went on that fun field trip? That was a lot of work for me and I hope you can return the favor now by doing your best on this test. Please, please, please try.
:jawdrop: You do mandatory test that do not influence the grades? Why not? I'm totally shuked by this.
I know some States have graduation tests. Outside of that, how are schools using these State and national tests to impact kids grades? I don't know of any single school that uses outcomes on these tests to impact a kids class grades. Their grades in class depend on what they do in class. Why do you think all these parents and kids are choosing not to take them?
We don't have that issue in Denmark. All national tests to finalize a subject are graded and counts as a separate score. ie. you get a grade for how your teacher (subjectively) thought you did in class and another for how well you then tested.
My class grades are objective based on the tests, papers, projects and presentations. That's the grade they get for a class. These various multiple standardized national and state tests have typically zero impact on kids. The only ones that matter are the SAT/ACT which collleges use for determining acceptance. Those are completely separate from the tests that our governments are giving to rank schools and evaluate teachers.
Not to be a jerk or anything, but those aren't really objective.

 
Our kids take two separate types of standardized tests: MAP reading and math, which are used to measure a students progress from 1st grade through at least 5th grade. These scores also play a big role in how the students are grouped for their differentiated teaching time - smaller groups of similarly placed students. They also uses these scores for placement in the gifted and talented programs. These tests are taken 3 times a year Fall, Winter, Spring - I don't think they are very long maybe 60-90 minutes for each test.

Then, starting in 3rd grade, student take a week's worth of end-of-the-year standardized tests - these are the tests measuring teachers performance, and my biggest gripe is that they spend too much time catering lessons to these tests. But, since the teachers are being evaluated based on these results, its not hard to figure out why they teach this way.

 
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.


An estimated 26.5 million people in the U.S. watched Germany's extra-time win on Sunday afternoon, the Nielsen company said.
OK so I guess let's compare playoff games to playoff games. Not talking one offs but every year. Roughly 35 million for the last wildcard games, 38 million for divisional games, Packers/Seahawks drew over 49 million, Colts/Pats drew about 42 million and the Super Bowl drew the largest audience in TV history of over 114 million.

 
His wearing those godawful flying addidas sneakers was funnier then drinking that beer. He has a real hard on over budweiser. I get it isn't the artisan micro brew, all it is a top 5 beer in the world.

I don't drink the stuff, but I understand how huge a brand it is.

 
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
An estimated 26.5 million people in the U.S. watched Germany's extra-time win on Sunday afternoon, the Nielsen company said.
OK so I guess let's compare playoff games to playoff games. Not talking one offs but every year. Roughly 35 million for the last wildcard games, 38 million for divisional games, Packers/Seahawks drew over 49 million, Colts/Pats drew about 42 million and the Super Bowl drew the largest audience in TV history of over 114 million.
Multiple people pointed out that you were mistaken in your assertion of the WC tv audience, why not just say "oops" and be done with it?

What does the NFL have to do with any of this?

 
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
An estimated 26.5 million people in the U.S. watched Germany's extra-time win on Sunday afternoon, the Nielsen company said.
OK so I guess let's compare playoff games to playoff games. Not talking one offs but every year. Roughly 35 million for the last wildcard games, 38 million for divisional games, Packers/Seahawks drew over 49 million, Colts/Pats drew about 42 million and the Super Bowl drew the largest audience in TV history of over 114 million.
Multiple people pointed out that you were mistaken in your assertion of the WC tv audience, why not just say "oops" and be done with it?What does the NFL have to do with any of this?
Yes many people picked one game. Let's talk about the regular season a bit. Let's talks about nearly a dozen televized games in March which drew less than 100k viewers. The highest rated game in March drew just over a million. You get canceled on the CW with those kinds of numbers. So I'm not sure oops is really happening any time soon. And the reason to use the NFL is because that's the most popular sport in the US. I am sure you guys prefer a comparison to curling or something but that seems unfair.

 
And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers. The average NFL game draws 21 million.
An estimated 26.5 million people in the U.S. watched Germany's extra-time win on Sunday afternoon, the Nielsen company said.
OK so I guess let's compare playoff games to playoff games. Not talking one offs but every year. Roughly 35 million for the last wildcard games, 38 million for divisional games, Packers/Seahawks drew over 49 million, Colts/Pats drew about 42 million and the Super Bowl drew the largest audience in TV history of over 114 million.
Multiple people pointed out that you were mistaken in your assertion of the WC tv audience, why not just say "oops" and be done with it?What does the NFL have to do with any of this?
Yes many people picked one game. .
Not at all. People were simply pointing out that your statement "And the most watched match in the US drew 6 million viewers" was factually incorrect.

Nothing more nothing less. Not sure why you are struggling to acknowledge you were wrong but no biggie either way.

 
"I don't need any advice from any comedian fool who doesn't know anything about this country. To tell me what file to release or not to release. That is not his business. I take no instructions from him. And worse yet, I won't take any instructions from an American at this point in time."

-- Former Concacaf president Jack Warner, who faces extradition to the United States on Federal charges of racketeering and wire fraud, in response to HBO's (British) comedian John Oliver's recent ad purchase on Trinidadian television station TV6 to ask that Warner release his "avalanche" of incriminating documents he says he has in the FIFA scandals that forced FIFA president Sepp Blatter to make plans to resign.

Here is the vid of Oliver on Trinidad tv

http://youtu.be/ZodT--M_gNE

 
Great show.

The piece on bail was well done.

But I wish he had pointed out one of the key reasons prosecutors and judges use the "pay bail or plead guilty" form of blackmail: to trump up their conviction rates and make it look like they're doing their job by being "tough on crime."

Instead, as usual, he targets the bail bondsmen and bounty hunters who probably wouldn't exist but for the state's "just us" system.

 
Solid if unspectacular episode last night. I'll give him credit for being able to get some humor tangentialy out of the South Carolina story.

 
Another great episode last night.

I wonder how hard it is to become my own church and shelter all of my income?

 
Awesome episode. When he said that he was feeling the calling to start his own church, ".... and that's what we did." I lost it. I couldn't stop laughing for the rest of the show. Brilliant.

 
A brief look around google and that isn't that much to starting your own church. You could shelter up to 50% of your income completely by donating it to your church, which then gives it back to you (its pastor) as a housing stipend, completely tax free. Beyond this, you can consider your home a "parsonage" and become exempt from property taxes.

This could save me 30k a year. Need to look into it more. Anyone have any actual knowledge about doing this?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top