Search results

Sure, I have no "credible data." Neither do you. There is not a single statistically rigorous survey you can point to to support your point. Fine: Oldsey, Brown and Doran won. I don't care, those trustees don't have that much power. Besides, I have the best weapon of all on my side. TIME...

I'm not here to "change hearts and minds." I'm just here to make fun of 9fold. :-) It's fair to admit it --- last week was another situation for the "HA HA Penn State, fuck those cultists, hopefully Mark Emmert does his thing and screws them" crowd to feel good about themselves. I get it...

Yeah --- so this survey (which as I look more closely, was not actually commissioned by the Penn State Alumni Association itself but another group, FWIW) --- there isn't even a hint of statistical rigor to the results...

Wow. 486 respondents. And those 486 self-selected themselves - which pretty much guarantees the subset of 486 is not a statistically representative subset. At least when Quinnipiac or Gallup does one of their political polls, they make a best effort to get a statistically representative...

Got it --- it's MY fault. The alumni Board of Trustee members don't have that much power. The adults are still in charge. And they will remain in charge. Big picture, PS4RS is irrelevant and I don't NEED to "get involved" from my home here in Northern Kentucky (I don't exactly live that...

Yeah, most people simply aren't engaged. And the "Paterno Loyalists" have more motive to participate in these surveys/elections. They just do. FWIW, I do work in the market research field. There's an element of truth to the joke: "tell me what number you want, there's a way for me to spin...

Is there a link to this 91% number? Where are your sourcing that from? I just looked in my e-mail now, it turns out I got a e-mail message from the Penn State Alumni Association a month ago. I get a fair amount of junk e-mail, I don't carefully look at everything. But anyway, I clicked on...

Barron has never disparaged the Freeh report as regards its conclusions regarding Curley, Schultz, Spanier or Paterno. Never. Barron's January 2016 comment about "not being a fan of the Freeh Report" was in reference to the Freeh blaming Penn State as a whole (his "culture" comments). A quote...

I had already concluded that JoePa was "a bad person" prior to last week. Now some folk want to debate between "was Joe a very very very bad person", a "very very bad person", "a very bad person" or a "bad person"? Fair enough if some want to debate that, but it's an irrelevant debate IMO...

I'm not a "cultist", but I think Wetzel swung and missed. It was a subtle miss, but it was a miss. Barron didn't get angry about what was said in the court ruling. There's nothing to get angry about there. Neither did Barron make reference to the Freeh Report, he made no reference to 2001...

FWIW, I'll chime in. I've thought about the things that have happened the last couple days --- there are a few oddities that pique the curiosity: (1) The CNN and NBC stories break within 24 hours of the ruling in the Penn State vs. Insurance Company case. Two big stories, BOTH within 24...

Damn Cingrani. His 1st career save. Looks like I'm having Skyline Chili for lunch Monday!

I like the guy, but he's a tad optimistic. He was seriously predicting (rationalizing) 85 wins in March! Milwaukee does stink. Damn it, that batter needed to take a few more pitches! Give Cingrani the opportunity to walk him.

I have a lunch bet with a colleague, we'll pay it off Monday. I bet that the Reds' bullpen gives up an earned run in each of the 3 games vs. Milwaukee this weekend. (e.g., I bet "the streak" continues) I'm starting to get worried. Bring in Home Run Hoover!!!

Penn State DID take responsibility. But this is still how insurance works. The insurance company themselves wrote the policy, and Penn State paid the premiums. And as today's ruling said: the insurance company is responsible for paying a portion of the claims. OF COURSE Penn State is going...

Yes, that's a drop-off, and a significant one. But, it's not a 100% apple-to 100% apple comparison. More like 100% apple to 90% apple. A few more years to one side, weaker schedules in the 1966-1975 era. If you do a 100% apple-to 100% apple comparison (same # of years), there is no drop-off...

FWIW, I researched this "faced 12 teams that won 0 games" statistic. What the statistic really appears to mean is "faced 12 teams that either (a) won 0 games, or (b) are not D-1A." Those teams: 1967 Maryland 1973 Iowa and Army 1983 Brown (non-D1A) 1984 William & Mary (non-D1A) 1997 Illinois...

Why would you exclude OOC games in 1993-2000? If your point is that PSU's aggregate record in 1993-2000 gets inflated by non-conference games --- well, they're not an outlier. ALL of Ohio State, U-M, Wisconsin and Penn State --- the 4 teams with the best overall conference record in that era...

Not the revisionist history we get today about the tired old man/figurehead but at the time when they were convinced they were going to dominate the conference. Joe was definitely "fully fit and competent for the job" from 1966 to the late-2000s-ish. If I had to name an exact year on the...

My response to Zurp was simply in disagreement with his usage of the word "might" in his statement "I'd say that if we take away the scandal, Paterno might have been "great"." I provided supporting evidence for my disagreement. He's the one who said "if we take away the scandal", not me...