FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

Started by admin, August 16, 2005, 05:19:08 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

MUC57

#92115
Quote from: hazzben on April 26, 2019, 12:13:07 PM
Quote from: OzJohnnie on April 25, 2019, 05:35:02 PM
Quote from: jknezek on April 25, 2019, 04:38:19 PM
Quote from: MUC57 on April 25, 2019, 04:35:09 PM

OzJohnnie and 57Johnnie

What the hell are you guys talking about? Remember, I live in a small town in Ohio. Help!  ???  ;D
i

ANZAC were the Australian and New Zealand force designation from the various military actions from WWI onward.

Yeah, sorry. ANZAC is the Australian and New Zealand Army Corp.  The corp first formed and fought at Gallipoli in WWI.  Every April 25th is ANZAC day which had dawn services and parades later in the day with old (and new) diggers forming a parade to start it all.  Digger is slang for an Aussie soldier.  The last Gallipoli digger died in 1997 so we're on to WWII diggers now getting pushed in wheelchairs by their grandchildren (and great grandchildren) up the parade.

If any country were to declare war on Australia the worst time is the two weeks after ANZAC day.  Everyone would be prepped to enlist.  The best time is September when everyone is ready to watch the footy finals and couldn't be bothered with any other stuff.

Note to self, move scheduled invasion of Australia from next week to September. In the meantime, send them a bunch of cherry blossom trees as a sign of future peace and goodwill.  8-)

hazzben

Now THAT'S funny!

Note to self - schedule move to Switzerland before September.

Talked to a girl I know yesterday. She said she was feeling romantic. I took her to a drive-in movie last night. I spent the entire time trying to find out which car she was in. And you think you have problems.  ;D 🍺

(Rim shot welcomed)   :o
I'm old! I get mixed up and I forget things! Go Everybody! 🏈 ☠

Texas Ole

So St. Olaf just beat Bethany Lutheran by 9 and 12 respectively.  Does that mean the Oles are banned from the UMAC?

I know I missed out on endowment talk and other fun finances.  A percentage of the interest from the endowment is used to fund various needs of the college.  Eventually it all goes to an master operating budget.  Some schools fund athletics at a greater level.  Dedicated gifts can also drive budgets.  A good example is the Tostrud Center at St. Olaf is endowed.  Funding for upkeep and expenses with it comes from the interest in that endowment.

St. Olaf as a whole is not a strong supporter of athletics.  They fund it at a level they believe is appropriate.  It is my belief their are plenty of other issues within the athletic department, but I don't have the energy to discuss them.

Mr.MIAC

St. Olaf's Music Department supports 16+ on-campus musical groups and offers performance facilities that put most other private Minnesota schools to shame. Administrators see music as something that differentiates St. Olaf from its competitors, so they spend a disproportionate amount of resources in this area and recruit large numbers of talented student musicians. St. Olaf has promoted musical excellence so aggressively that it's now viewed as "the place to be" for aspiring student musicians who want to attend a private school in Minnesota. In fact, St. Olaf has been so successful that other private schools are finding it difficult to compete with them in the world of music. Perhaps there should be a cap on the number of students--especially student musicians--allowed to matriculate at St. Olaf. Maybe St. Olaf should be required to share its resources with other private schools in Minnesota to heighten their musical excellence. Another option is to level the playing field by forcing St. Olaf out of Minnesota, where it can compete against schools with similar musical prowess. I don't necessarily have a solution, but something needs to be done. Music at St. Olaf is getting out of hand...

Link: https://wp.stolaf.edu/music/

Walter Eagle

Quote from: Reverend MIAC, PhD on April 26, 2019, 06:07:04 PM
St. Olaf's Music Department supports 16+ on-campus musical groups and offers performance facilities that put most other private Minnesota schools to shame. Administrators see music as something that differentiates St. Olaf from its competitors, so they spend a disproportionate amount of resources in this area and recruit large numbers of talented student musicians. St. Olaf has promoted musical excellence so aggressively that it's now viewed as "the place to be" for aspiring student musicians who want to attend a private school in Minnesota. In fact, St. Olaf has been so successful that other private schools are finding it difficult to compete with them in the world of music. Perhaps there should be a cap on the number of students--especially student musicians--allowed to matriculate at St. Olaf. Maybe St. Olaf should be required to share its resources with other private schools in Minnesota to heighten their musical excellence. Another option is to level the playing field by forcing St. Olaf out of Minnesota, where it can compete against schools with similar musical prowess. I don't necessarily have a solution, but something needs to be done. Music at St. Olaf is getting out of hand...

Link: https://wp.stolaf.edu/music/
Maybe the STO music department could do a bunch of benefit concerts to help the football team out.

DuffMan

Quote from: Walter Eagle on April 27, 2019, 10:34:55 AM
Maybe the STO music department could do a bunch of benefit concerts to help the football team out.

That, sir, was a fantastic post! +K
;D

A tradition unrivaled...
MIAC Champions: '32, '35, '36, '38, '53, '62, '63, '65, '71, '74, '75, '76, '77, '79, '82, '85, '89, '91, '93, '94, '95, '96, '98, '99, '01, '02, '03, '05, '06, '08, '09, '14, '18, '19, '21, '22, '24
National Champions: '63, '65, '76, '03

BDB

Time for my Stanley Cup Champion prediction which those longtime followers of this site know you can take to the bank.
This year is quite the challenge with the President's Trophy club getting swept and other surprises in the 1st round. All that plus any of the teams left in the west look like they could make the finals.
That being said,  the Cup will be raised by a team from the east once again.
Boston Bruins defeat the Colorado Avalanche in 6 games to take it all. Lay a saw buck on it for me if in Vegas.

BDB

And if you want to see talent, watch Nathan MacKinnon #29 of the Colorado Avalanche.
He's the reason I have them making it to the Stanley Cup Finals.

OzJohnnie



2-3 to start the season.  Injuries all across the midfield have really hurt us.  One of our starting midfielders comes back from a hammy injury today while another returns from a hammy next week.  The Brownlow medalist may also return from a broken leg in another three months, just in time for the finals push.  I nearly forgot, our captain also returns today from a concussion.  Let's hope they hold a good game together.  We need the win.
  

OldAuggie

Quote from: BlueDevil Bob on April 27, 2019, 05:45:38 PM
Time for my Stanley Cup Champion prediction which those longtime followers of this site know you can take to the bank.
This year is quite the challenge with the President's Trophy club getting swept and other surprises in the 1st round. All that plus any of the teams left in the west look like they could make the finals.
That being said,  the Cup will be raised by a team from the east once again.
Boston Bruins defeat the Colorado Avalanche in 6 games to take it all. Lay a saw buck on it for me if in Vegas.
I like it.  Ex UMD Bulldog Karson Kuhlman is on the team so I picked the Bruins also but only to see Kuhlman have a (another) good year. Guy is a winner,  no question. 
MIAC champions 1928, 1997

OzJohnnie

  

OzJohnnie

GoT discussion?  I don't know about you all but I really disliked the ending of episode three.  Disliked it so much I'm not sure I even want to finish the show.  I reckon that if STO had managed to get UST booted then I would still like the STO drama better.  That's how much I disliked it.
  

retagent

Quote from: BlueDevil Bob on April 27, 2019, 06:06:43 PM
And if you want to see talent, watch Nathan MacKinnon #29 of the Colorado Avalanche.
He's the reason I have them making it to the Stanley Cup Finals.

I may have posted this previously, but here is why I'm not a gambler, especially in Pools.

When I was in Vegas in March, a friend bought me a ticket on the Capitals (my team) at 15 - 1 to win the Cup. I thought that was a decent chance. However, since the Bolts torched the league, I bought them to win the Cup at 3 - 1. Once the Bolts got swept, I was down to my Capitals, and thought they were the best team left. Out in 7 games. Now my tickets are trash. This may be the first time all 4 Division winners got ousted in the first round by the 4 Wildcards. That's hockey.

TheChucker

Quote from: OzJohnnie on April 29, 2019, 04:11:03 AM
GoT discussion?  I don't know about you all but I really disliked the ending of episode three.  Disliked it so much I'm not sure I even want to finish the show.  I reckon that if STO had managed to get UST booted then I would still like the STO drama better.  That's how much I disliked it.

I have the opposite opinion and loved it. It tied together the long journey/destiny of some key characters including one of my favorites. I don't want to be a spoiler so that's all I'll say.

Mr.MIAC

Quote from: OzJohnnie on April 29, 2019, 04:11:03 AM
GoT discussion?  I don't know about you all but I really disliked the ending of episode three.  Disliked it so much I'm not sure I even want to finish the show.  I reckon that if STO had managed to get UST booted then I would still like the STO drama better.  That's how much I disliked it.

I have mixed feelings about the ending, which was no doubt aesthetically and emotionally pleasing for many viewers. I like that there was a bit of a twist, with a central antagonist being taken down by someone other than one of the two main (dragon-riding) protagonists.

That being said, speaking as a social scientist focused on international security, I'm less happy that this antagonist appears to have actually been defeated. Some are upset that the show runners didn't clarify this antagonist's background, motives, modus operandi (especially when it comes to the use of symbols), etc. I'm okay with all that because the antagonist represents what, in academic parlance, is considered a "transnational threat." These sorts of threats tend to be more ambiguous; they aren't subject to the traditional mechanisms of international affairs (e.g. economic suasion, diplomacy, etc.); they don't respect established borders; they directly or indirectly affect everyone; and mitigating them requires a collaborative effort. These threats are omnipresent, albeit with varying degrees of acuteness, and can never truly be defeated; they must be managed. Eliminating the transnational threat seems like a step too far.

GoT has been about political maneuvering set against a backdrop of a rising, particularly acute transnational threat. The threat has made the show more realistic, complex, relevant, and dramatic. I'm not sure how the rest of the show can be anything but anticlimactic if it's simply about political maneuvering.

TheChucker

Quote from: Reverend MIAC, PhD on April 29, 2019, 10:34:51 AM
Quote from: OzJohnnie on April 29, 2019, 04:11:03 AM
GoT discussion?  I don't know about you all but I really disliked the ending of episode three.  Disliked it so much I'm not sure I even want to finish the show.  I reckon that if STO had managed to get UST booted then I would still like the STO drama better.  That's how much I disliked it.

I have mixed feelings about the ending, which was no doubt aesthetically and emotionally pleasing for many viewers. I like that there was a bit of a twist, with a central antagonist being taken down by someone other than one of the two main (dragon-riding) protagonists.

That being said, speaking as a social scientist focused on international security, I'm less happy that this antagonist appears to have actually been defeated. Some are upset that the show runners didn't clarify this antagonist's background, motives, modus operandi (especially when it comes to the use of symbols), etc. I'm okay with all that because the antagonist represents what, in academic parlance, is considered a "transnational threat." These sorts of threats tend to be more ambiguous; they aren't subject to the traditional mechanisms of international affairs (e.g. economic suasion, diplomacy, etc.); they don't respect established borders; they directly or indirectly affect everyone; and mitigating them requires a collaborative effort. These threats are omnipresent, albeit with varying degrees of acuteness, and can never truly be defeated; they must be managed. Eliminating the transnational threat seems like a step too far.

GoT has been about political maneuvering set against a backdrop of a rising, particularly acute transnational threat. The threat has made the show more realistic, complex, relevant, and dramatic. I'm not sure how the rest of the show can be anything but anticlimactic if it's simply about political maneuvering.

I have a different take. The "forces" that created that antagonist still exists (dragonglass, unintended consequences, general evil). To me, that GOT scene was an old old story and very similar to this (except way more thrilling): https://youtu.be/AECh4aIKWyU?t=67