Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

facook

Members
  • Posts

    11,998
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by facook

  1. ZIGGLER can't be Shane's champion, can he? I mean, he's just ridiculously boring.
  2. So, uh, they kinda rushed that Jericho/Styles blowoff huh? Also Shane's "punches" were embarrassing. He'd BETTER have a champion at Mania. ?
  3. Maybe it's because I had no expectations for Season 2, and knew almost nothing about Bergdahl. But I'm really enjoying Season 2. I'm 5 episodes in and so far I have had rage with Bo, empathy with Bo, empathy with his fellow soldiers, hero worship of the soldiers, and a genuine sense of wonder at what the heck happened. I think the whole story is fascinating.
  4. Thanks steelerfan1. Well, I love Longmire, Cork, and Fleming so I'll keep on with McKnight.
  5. I read the first in the McKinght Series and thought it was ok. A lot of series really improve after #1. Just wondered if you could give me another series or two you would equate it to, not on a style or content level, but just on an enjoyment level for you.
  6. Sorry good buddy. On a brighter note, maybe?...when is B, Q, & B visiting?
  7. Not sure he's writing anywhere, but he followed Simmons to podcast on that network. I'll be shocked if he doesn't start writing for Ringer too. However, I actually heard him on Kornheiser and that's where he talked about liking 11/22/63.
  8. Gotcha, thanks. I think I stopped watching not too long after Shane did the crazy jumping off of stuff in matches. And some of that stuff you mention reminds me of things I'd heard. I didn't realize he left with ill will. And the idea that there could be heat between Shane and HHH makes sense now that you write that. So it kind of sounds like you're saying it could be both: a great angle and better leadership...IF Shane is actually given a say. Correct?
  9. So, as a guy who has come back to wrestling in the last 18 months, why does this matter? I mean, I feel like a total newb, but isn't this just another angle? Shane's a good character, and I certainly prefer him to Stephanie. Or is there actually an element of creativity/leadership that he brings that you all know about?
  10. Interesting. Greenwald likes it so I'll try it, but I could see how having read it might be a handicap.
  11. We don't have hulu but I thought about getting the free week to binge this. Care to share in spoiler tags for those of us that read (and in my case LOVED) the book?
  12. I used to like gladwell on the podcasts even though I found his books a little undewhelming, but his last podcast appearance, he really had very little to say and now I wonder if he was tricking me all along with previous appearances. Klosterman still rules to fill my contrarian, hypertheoretical, alternative, borderline pseudo-intellectual cravings. Especially since Bret Easton Ellis barely puts out new episodes anymore. You serious Clark? This (Klosterman) makes me stabby. It's like hipster-meets-fake-smart-dooosh.
  13. He started as a guy writing from a fans perspective so he has always brought in his view of his teams and used that as much of the basis for his arguments or discussions. I am not a fan of any of the Boston teams but I have always enjoyed the way he talks/views/discusses like most fans and their teams. I can see where people don't like the his methods but I always go at it from the perspective of entertainment and take it as that. Its amusing and as long as you don't take it serious and more as listening in to some friends talking crap with each other it serves the purpose. I think everyone here can agree they wish they were able to take the track Simmons did and make the kind of money he has by basically talking about your favorite teams/pop culture/etc with your friends. It's kind of incredible he has made such a living doing that. I give him all the credit in the world for making it work. Absolutely agree and would love to be in his shoes. Just gets old having everything brought back to four teams ALL the time. If he at least tried to be objective once in a while it would go a long way.
  14. The self-involvement of Simmons is fascinating. I really enjoy his podcasts for the most part, but it feels like he's constantly referring back to his teams at the drop of a hat. "Reminds me of of the 94 Pats", "They are the 86 Red Sox of field hockey", etc. During the Haralabob interview he asked Bob who the best owners in the NBA are. After giving Bob 3 seconds to hmmm and haww and think, Bill blurts out "The Celtics have a great structure!" Oh really Bill? I'm shocked you think so. It's almost like he asked the question just to talk about his team again. He's one of those guys that, while you are talking, he's thinking of how he's going to bring the conversation back to him and his interests. I remember a couple of weeks ago when Sal was on for the SB podcast Sal said to play "No extra points missed" prop because no kickers ever miss extra points. He was obviously poking fun at Gostkowski missing in the AFC championship. He said it a couple of times. But the only person who didn't get it was Simmons because he was too busy thinking of more ways to defend New England or attack Manning or whatever. Mostly this is just pointless birching because I love the podcast and listen to most of them. Hmmm...I also love Kornheiser's podcast. Maybe I'm just into self-involved talkers. Takes one to know one?
  15. Finished Bazaar of Bad Dreams by Stephen King. I realized one major thing while reading this short story collection: I don't really like short stories, at least by King. Because they are either: A) Bad or B) Too short. The good ones I wish would be a full novel. Ur was the one I most enjoyed (which is funny because it was an admitted cash-grab by King for Amazon - he was paid to write a story featuring the then just-debuted Kindle) and I wished it was 600 pages instead of 60. Great characters, tense, fun, interesting. I guess the only saving grace is the end made sense. We all know how King usually does with that.
  16. 1. Nothing changes from trial to subscriber in terms of content. They just start billing you for it.2. DVD catalog will always have more content available vs streaming. It will also be more current. 3. You should have no restrictions to about what content appears available through your device. The interface may be different but that's it. You can always go to the Netflix website, search there to create your "List" and review new titles added. 4. Amazon is very similar overall. The key difference between Netflix and AP is that you can rent or buy titles with AP to stream directly. Netflix doesn't have this option and likely won't ever. They are both adding more original content, too, but the quality of it is all over the place. I find the AP interface to be pretty terrible and hard to search. Netflix is much better in that regard. I think the DVD plan with the streaming will give most people what they want with mostly convenient access to new content and a library to stream too. DVDs are key. Wife and I have had streaming + DVDs for several years and there is always something we want to watch between the two, and usually on both at the same time.
  17. An error occurredYou have reached your quota of positive votes for the day
  18. @ZellnerLaw Kathleen Zellner now representing Steve. Vows not to quit until he is released. I don't think this story is going away.
  19. Dim doesn't mean he isn't street smart enough to fool people. True sociopaths can truly turn on the tears and act hurt when they need to (IF Avery is guilty, I think it's easy to argue that he is a sociopath), even if they don't have a high IQ. Interesting. I don't know enough about sociopaths to argue with you. Like I said, it was my gut feeling.
  20. Read through this whole thread. I am torn. My wife and I have discussed a couple of things that make me sympathetic to the locals that watched this drama unfold in real time: 1. We live in a small town in Oregon and have had a few local murders over the years. Of course there was all the local media coverage which we followed just like the people in Wisconsin did. I have no doubt in my mind that the people who were convicted did the crimes. I'm pretty sure if during the trial I saw on the news that the defense was crying "Frame!" I probably would have rolled my eyes. I doubt I'd be so vigorously defending the local system like some in here are doing, but I have some empathy as to why they are convinced as to Steve's guilt. 2. There are a couple of families in our area that remind me of the Averys. Many members, in-laws and cousins all the same, PWT to the core, completely dysfunctional. Several years ago one of the sons was stalking and threatening my dad over a one-time disagreement that he would not let go. We had to get a restraining order, and because he was threatening our lives we carried guns for a short time in our vehicles. Eventually he settled down, apologized, and hasn't been a problem since. But if I heard that one of these people was arrested for murder and saw the kind of things on the local news that Kratz pulled I would not be shocked and I'm sure I'd instantly buy in to his guilt. The irony of the family in my area is that the father of the stalker was a Captain in our city police until he was forced to resign for domestic violence a few years ago. Now he cooks pizza in a pizza parlor. Anyway, again I could see being convinced of their guilt and not being easily swayed, just like some of the Wisconsin folks in here. With all of that being said, I don't know how you can watch this series - even though it is admittedly slanted toward the defense - and not second guess your convictions of guilt. The Brendan stuff is unreal, there is no way things happened the way he was coerced into confessing. He should get a new trial no question. I'm less certain about Steve. My gut says he didn't do it, for two reasons. The first is all of the doubt over the County's involvement in finding evidence against him that has been gone over in her ad nauseum. The second is how he looked when the verdict of guilty on Count 1 was read. To me, he didn't look mad. He didn't look shocked even. To me he looked very sad and almost betrayed. He looked at the jury like, "Seriously? How can you think I'm guilty?" I don't think a guy as dim as him can be that good an actor. I think that look was legit, and in that moment I believed he was innocent. I'm probably 70/30 he didn't do it.
  21. Not sure. What would be the reason for anyone to take the battery? Pretty odd detail in this whole thing. As far as Avery is concerned, I would imagine that if you believe he was bleeding that he could have gotten blood on it and thus took it out. But...why would he be under the hood in the first place? And if Avery did take it...why the hell didn't they find it? I would like to know if the authorities ever looked in any of the running cars to see if they had a battery that may have been in Teresa's van. I would imagine that it is possible that her van still had the factory issued battery...though maybe not. With that cold weather up there maybe she would have replaced hers at least once. So...the three theories I think of when I am looking at the battery is this: 1. Avery took it out and put it in his own car or truck and the authorities never looked under his hood to check 2. One of the other Avery clan members who killed her took it out to put it in her car 3. Whoever planted the truck to frame Avery figured that if they took the battery out of the van...it wouldn't start and thus make it more difficult for anyone to move the van and thus make it easier for the authorities to find it. Dude...I know you're passionate (obsessive) about this case. But you lose all credibility calling her RAV4 a van. Please stop. It's almost Kratz-ian in it's weirdness.
×
  • Create New...