(10-08-2018 11:30 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-08-2018 10:46 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The MAC TV deal is 10M for 12 teams to split. This old link on the contract says 8M, which think was a raise on the few years left on the existing contract.

https://www.crainscleveland.com/article/...ough-2027#

So.... now, what? Let me get this straight... individual MAC schools were getting $83,333.33 per year for their ESPN media deal? Holy crap.

It wasn't until recently these tv deals exploded. The only value of the Mac is they are will to play non traditional days which is valuable for ESPN. Espn has been passing off these increases to customers. The cord cutting I thought would cool it down. Not sure now...

(10-08-2018 11:43 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(10-08-2018 11:30 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-08-2018 10:46 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The MAC TV deal is 10M for 12 teams to split. This old link on the contract says 8M, which think was a raise on the few years left on the existing contract.

https://www.crainscleveland.com/article/...ough-2027#

So.... now, what? Let me get this straight... individual MAC schools were getting $83,333.33 per year for their ESPN media deal? Holy crap.

It wasn't until recently these tv deals exploded. The only value of the Mac is they are will to play non traditional days which is valuable for ESPN. Espn has been passing off these increases to customers. The cord cutting I thought would cool it down. Not sure now...

It's a myth. The cord is now a phone line (or still the same cable cord). People who want to watch sports still buy a TV service that pays ESPN their $5 per month or whatever it is. Like my house for instance. We switched from Dish to PlayStation Vue. We still get all of our old ESPN channels that we used to get. I know the millennials are supposed to all be strictly Netflix and Amazon Prime, but as these kids get their jobs and are making money in this new raging economy, it's just too easy to go ahead and sign up for Sling or whatever. "Cuz you can cancel at any time... right?" Which, I admit... IS TOTALLY cool, compared to what it was like with Dish and DirecTV.

UMass joining the MAC as a full member means death to basketball in the same way that UCONN going Big East/Indy means death to football.

I don't see either scenario happening, at least not in the immediate future.

(10-02-2018 10:07 AM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 09:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 08:48 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 10:14 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 04:33 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  My great grandmother used the term "Orientals" to refer to Asian people until the day she died. Some people will never learn, nor do they want to. Some people shut their growth off at some arbitrary time in their life, and whatever they knew or thought at that point, that's it. It's not as if we ever thought boomers were the strongest critical thinkers. You guys gleefully let Reagan trick you into destroying the middle class, you destroyed the American small town, you let inner cities rot, you gutted the core of small business. You let education prices inflate to the point of costing an average annual salary to attend two semesters of college. People have far less opportunity and lowering purchasing power than they did after the depression. Now you have the ball to turn around and shove this "Millenials are entitled" narrative down everyone's throat because you're too lazy to try to understand why words like rape aren't OK to use in reference to football.

You politically correct people crack me up. So I suppose when you talk about blond haired blue eyed people that live in Russia, you call them Asians...

Orientals are people from the Oreint. People from Japan, China, Indonesia, Mongolia, which is a SUBSET of Asians.

Next you'll be telling us it's not okay to refer to people from Mexico as Mexican.

I love that not saying offensive things is now called 'politically correct' we used to call it being polite.

That's just it though. Orientis is a Roman term that has been around for about 2000 years. It is not pejorative, derogatory, or disparaging. Using those types of terms is being impolite or offensive. However, being offended by term that has nothing to do with politeness or offensive intent a real problem with the person who feels offended.

Here's a statement from a Millennial on the subject:

"The problem with the "O" word is that it literally means "Eastern". So, when used to describe people from Asia, it is necessarily an imperialistic, euro-centric term.

As we all know, Europeans spent centuries R'ing and plundering the East (NOT the "O", you hardcore racist!) for their own economic gain. It was a tremendous Penn State of the local peoples. So Westerners no longer get to say what to call people from the area between the Suez Canal and the Bering Straight (need to change this to an Inuit word) in the English language anymore.

People from Asia, whether Israelis or Vietnamese, all just call themselves Asians now since they are all so closely related - if you go back to the amoeba crawling out of the sea and all that. Any other words to distinguish between them surely don't exist in their own native languages, as that would be so terribly wrong.

Anyone who fails to abide by the sensitivities so clearly [strike 'laid-out'] spelled-out herein should lose their jobs and be sent to a re-education camp. Thank you for listening and not questioning. You can collect your participation trophies at the safe space behind the PetSmart."

I am also a Millennial. I have multiple level degrees in History. When you study History you don't simply read the writings of academics from 1990 to present. The term has been used in text consistently for 2000 years. People who use it derogatorily misuse the term. Should we change all terms that are misused? Does that not empower the language abuser? The ignorance comes into play because it is prejudice to assume someone is misusing term when instead it has a documented existence in legal, historic, and other objective usage.

(10-10-2018 03:38 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 10:07 AM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 09:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 08:48 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 10:14 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  You politically correct people crack me up. So I suppose when you talk about blond haired blue eyed people that live in Russia, you call them Asians...

Orientals are people from the Oreint. People from Japan, China, Indonesia, Mongolia, which is a SUBSET of Asians.

Next you'll be telling us it's not okay to refer to people from Mexico as Mexican.

I love that not saying offensive things is now called 'politically correct' we used to call it being polite.

That's just it though. Orientis is a Roman term that has been around for about 2000 years. It is not pejorative, derogatory, or disparaging. Using those types of terms is being impolite or offensive. However, being offended by term that has nothing to do with politeness or offensive intent a real problem with the person who feels offended.

Here's a statement from a Millennial on the subject:

"The problem with the "O" word is that it literally means "Eastern". So, when used to describe people from Asia, it is necessarily an imperialistic, euro-centric term.

As we all know, Europeans spent centuries R'ing and plundering the East (NOT the "O", you hardcore racist!) for their own economic gain. It was a tremendous Penn State of the local peoples. So Westerners no longer get to say what to call people from the area between the Suez Canal and the Bering Straight (need to change this to an Inuit word) in the English language anymore.

People from Asia, whether Israelis or Vietnamese, all just call themselves Asians now since they are all so closely related - if you go back to the amoeba crawling out of the sea and all that. Any other words to distinguish between them surely don't exist in their own native languages, as that would be so terribly wrong.

Anyone who fails to abide by the sensitivities so clearly [strike 'laid-out'] spelled-out herein should lose their jobs and be sent to a re-education camp. Thank you for listening and not questioning. You can collect your participation trophies at the safe space behind the PetSmart."

I am also a Millennial. I have multiple level degrees in History. When you study History you don't simply read the writings of academics from 1990 to present. The term has been used in text consistently for 2000 years. People who use it derogatorily misuse the term. Should we change all terms that are misused? Does that not empower the language abuser? The ignorance comes into play because it is prejudice to assume someone is misusing term when instead it has a documented existence in legal, historic, and other objective usage.

So then we can now use the N word?

After all it's meaning was not deragotory and has been in use longer than Orient?

Stick to history. Communications and in particular linguistics are quite different than history. For example the Nazi's are never going to win the battle of the bulge. The Greeks will never lose at Marathon. What a word means will, over time, use, location, and political implications change. Language evolves and changes.

(10-10-2018 06:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(10-10-2018 03:38 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 10:07 AM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 09:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 08:48 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  I love that not saying offensive things is now called 'politically correct' we used to call it being polite.

That's just it though. Orientis is a Roman term that has been around for about 2000 years. It is not pejorative, derogatory, or disparaging. Using those types of terms is being impolite or offensive. However, being offended by term that has nothing to do with politeness or offensive intent a real problem with the person who feels offended.

Here's a statement from a Millennial on the subject:

"The problem with the "O" word is that it literally means "Eastern". So, when used to describe people from Asia, it is necessarily an imperialistic, euro-centric term.

As we all know, Europeans spent centuries R'ing and plundering the East (NOT the "O", you hardcore racist!) for their own economic gain. It was a tremendous Penn State of the local peoples. So Westerners no longer get to say what to call people from the area between the Suez Canal and the Bering Straight (need to change this to an Inuit word) in the English language anymore.

People from Asia, whether Israelis or Vietnamese, all just call themselves Asians now since they are all so closely related - if you go back to the amoeba crawling out of the sea and all that. Any other words to distinguish between them surely don't exist in their own native languages, as that would be so terribly wrong.

Anyone who fails to abide by the sensitivities so clearly [strike 'laid-out'] spelled-out herein should lose their jobs and be sent to a re-education camp. Thank you for listening and not questioning. You can collect your participation trophies at the safe space behind the PetSmart."

I am also a Millennial. I have multiple level degrees in History. When you study History you don't simply read the writings of academics from 1990 to present. The term has been used in text consistently for 2000 years. People who use it derogatorily misuse the term. Should we change all terms that are misused? Does that not empower the language abuser? The ignorance comes into play because it is prejudice to assume someone is misusing term when instead it has a documented existence in legal, historic, and other objective usage.

So then we can now use the N word?

No. We can not. The "N" word is a bastardization of the word "negro". Furthermore, you should go back and watch the O.J. Simpson Trial.

(10-10-2018 06:34 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-10-2018 06:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(10-10-2018 03:38 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 10:07 AM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 09:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  That's just it though. Orientis is a Roman term that has been around for about 2000 years. It is not pejorative, derogatory, or disparaging. Using those types of terms is being impolite or offensive. However, being offended by term that has nothing to do with politeness or offensive intent a real problem with the person who feels offended.

Here's a statement from a Millennial on the subject:

"The problem with the "O" word is that it literally means "Eastern". So, when used to describe people from Asia, it is necessarily an imperialistic, euro-centric term.

As we all know, Europeans spent centuries R'ing and plundering the East (NOT the "O", you hardcore racist!) for their own economic gain. It was a tremendous Penn State of the local peoples. So Westerners no longer get to say what to call people from the area between the Suez Canal and the Bering Straight (need to change this to an Inuit word) in the English language anymore.

People from Asia, whether Israelis or Vietnamese, all just call themselves Asians now since they are all so closely related - if you go back to the amoeba crawling out of the sea and all that. Any other words to distinguish between them surely don't exist in their own native languages, as that would be so terribly wrong.

Anyone who fails to abide by the sensitivities so clearly [strike 'laid-out'] spelled-out herein should lose their jobs and be sent to a re-education camp. Thank you for listening and not questioning. You can collect your participation trophies at the safe space behind the PetSmart."

I am also a Millennial. I have multiple level degrees in History. When you study History you don't simply read the writings of academics from 1990 to present. The term has been used in text consistently for 2000 years. People who use it derogatorily misuse the term. Should we change all terms that are misused? Does that not empower the language abuser? The ignorance comes into play because it is prejudice to assume someone is misusing term when instead it has a documented existence in legal, historic, and other objective usage.

So then we can now use the N word?

No. We can not. The "N" word is a bastardization of the word "negro".

No it's not. Go look up the meanings beyond its deragotory use for people. Then look at it's origin. It's latin.

So? What I said is true, and what you said doesn't rebut it.

(10-10-2018 06:40 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  So? What I said is true, and what you said doesn't rebut it.

Ummmm, do you mean the part where words change meaning over time and then sometimes aren't to be used anymore?

Because that's what I have been saying the whole time.

Forever and I play Devil's Triangle all the time.

(10-10-2018 06:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(10-10-2018 03:38 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 10:07 AM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 09:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 08:48 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  I love that not saying offensive things is now called 'politically correct' we used to call it being polite.

That's just it though. Orientis is a Roman term that has been around for about 2000 years. It is not pejorative, derogatory, or disparaging. Using those types of terms is being impolite or offensive. However, being offended by term that has nothing to do with politeness or offensive intent a real problem with the person who feels offended.

Here's a statement from a Millennial on the subject:

"The problem with the "O" word is that it literally means "Eastern". So, when used to describe people from Asia, it is necessarily an imperialistic, euro-centric term.

As we all know, Europeans spent centuries R'ing and plundering the East (NOT the "O", you hardcore racist!) for their own economic gain. It was a tremendous Penn State of the local peoples. So Westerners no longer get to say what to call people from the area between the Suez Canal and the Bering Straight (need to change this to an Inuit word) in the English language anymore.

People from Asia, whether Israelis or Vietnamese, all just call themselves Asians now since they are all so closely related - if you go back to the amoeba crawling out of the sea and all that. Any other words to distinguish between them surely don't exist in their own native languages, as that would be so terribly wrong.

Anyone who fails to abide by the sensitivities so clearly [strike 'laid-out'] spelled-out herein should lose their jobs and be sent to a re-education camp. Thank you for listening and not questioning. You can collect your participation trophies at the safe space behind the PetSmart."

I am also a Millennial. I have multiple level degrees in History. When you study History you don't simply read the writings of academics from 1990 to present. The term has been used in text consistently for 2000 years. People who use it derogatorily misuse the term. Should we change all terms that are misused? Does that not empower the language abuser? The ignorance comes into play because it is prejudice to assume someone is misusing term when instead it has a documented existence in legal, historic, and other objective usage.

So then we can now use the N word?

After all it's meaning was not deragotory and has been in use longer than Orient?

Stick to history. Communications and in particular linguistics are quite different than history. For example the Nazi's are never going to win the battle of the bulge. The Greeks will never lose at Marathon. What a word means will, over time, use, location, and political implications change. Language evolves and changes.

Really? I am just trying to have a conversation. I am not trying to conflate your point o absurdity and push into a corner with a label.

Getting back to the term Oriental, it is still widely used innocuously to describe types of food, clothing, music, and culture. Hopefully you are able to understand the difference between the "N-word" and it. The n-word is a pejorative alteration of niger. Niger is not corrupted. Niger and Nigeria are two major countries in Africa.

[quote='HuskyU' pid='15570849' dateline='1539222875']
Forever and I play Devil's Triangle all the time.

"Stoned", use to mean intoxication by alcohol. Dean Martin was really stoned last night on TV.
When you were with the Flintstones you had a "gay" old time.
Use to "hook up" the new stereo system.
"Survivor" was a rock band from Chicago did "Eye of the Tiger".

Along a similar thought line:
Had a friend that went to Australia to play lacrosse. At the first game, he met the coach's wife and thanked her for "rooting" for the team. In Aussie slang, "rooting" is sexual intercourse, putting it politely. Consequently that didn't go over too well.

(10-10-2018 08:54 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Forever and I play Devil's Triangle all the time.

Your quarter bounce is exceptional

(10-11-2018 08:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-10-2018 06:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(10-10-2018 03:38 PM)Poseidon Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 10:07 AM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(10-02-2018 09:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  That's just it though. Orientis is a Roman term that has been around for about 2000 years. It is not pejorative, derogatory, or disparaging. Using those types of terms is being impolite or offensive. However, being offended by term that has nothing to do with politeness or offensive intent a real problem with the person who feels offended.

Here's a statement from a Millennial on the subject:

"The problem with the "O" word is that it literally means "Eastern". So, when used to describe people from Asia, it is necessarily an imperialistic, euro-centric term.

As we all know, Europeans spent centuries R'ing and plundering the East (NOT the "O", you hardcore racist!) for their own economic gain. It was a tremendous Penn State of the local peoples. So Westerners no longer get to say what to call people from the area between the Suez Canal and the Bering Straight (need to change this to an Inuit word) in the English language anymore.

People from Asia, whether Israelis or Vietnamese, all just call themselves Asians now since they are all so closely related - if you go back to the amoeba crawling out of the sea and all that. Any other words to distinguish between them surely don't exist in their own native languages, as that would be so terribly wrong.

Anyone who fails to abide by the sensitivities so clearly [strike 'laid-out'] spelled-out herein should lose their jobs and be sent to a re-education camp. Thank you for listening and not questioning. You can collect your participation trophies at the safe space behind the PetSmart."

I am also a Millennial. I have multiple level degrees in History. When you study History you don't simply read the writings of academics from 1990 to present. The term has been used in text consistently for 2000 years. People who use it derogatorily misuse the term. Should we change all terms that are misused? Does that not empower the language abuser? The ignorance comes into play because it is prejudice to assume someone is misusing term when instead it has a documented existence in legal, historic, and other objective usage.

So then we can now use the N word?

After all it's meaning was not deragotory and has been in use longer than Orient?

Stick to history. Communications and in particular linguistics are quite different than history. For example the Nazi's are never going to win the battle of the bulge. The Greeks will never lose at Marathon. What a word means will, over time, use, location, and political implications change. Language evolves and changes.

Really? I am just trying to have a conversation. I am not trying to conflate your point o absurdity and push into a corner with a label.

Getting back to the term Oriental, it is still widely used innocuously to describe types of food, clothing, music, and culture. Hopefully you are able to understand the difference between the "N-word" and it. The n-word is a pejorative alteration of niger. Niger is not corrupted. Niger and Nigeria are two major countries in Africa.

Wrong.

People have East Asian Cuisine, Oriental rugs is barely used now and by far had the most common usage. It is not accepted, nor should it be. It is no different than calling someone a Chinaman, it's not the preferred nomenclature.

Also you're wrong. The N word goes all the way back to Latin.

You sound like a segregationist in the 1960s:
"I don't care I'll keep using this word because that's what they are."

That's not how language works.

(10-08-2018 12:27 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  UMass joining the MAC as a full member means death to basketball in the same way that UCONN going Big East/Indy means death to football.

I don't see either scenario happening, at least not in the immediate future.

UMass basketball isn't near as big as they think it is...moreover, the MAC could potentially allow them to be the big fish in the MACs little pond. (like Memphis did in CUSA and WSU did in the MVC)

UMass vs Buffalo could become a nice rivalry.

(10-12-2018 12:47 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-08-2018 12:27 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  UMass joining the MAC as a full member means death to basketball in the same way that UCONN going Big East/Indy means death to football.

I don't see either scenario happening, at least not in the immediate future.

UMass basketball isn't near as big as they think it is...moreover, the MAC could potentially allow them to be the big fish in the MACs little pond. (like Memphis did in CUSA and WSU did in the MVC)

UMass vs Buffalo could become a nice rivalry.

https://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/...-rankings/

(10-12-2018 12:47 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-08-2018 12:27 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  UMass joining the MAC as a full member means death to basketball in the same way that UCONN going Big East/Indy means death to football.

I don't see either scenario happening, at least not in the immediate future.

UMass basketball isn't near as big as they think it is...moreover, the MAC could potentially allow them to be the big fish in the MACs little pond. (like Memphis did in CUSA and WSU did in the MVC)

UMass vs Buffalo could become a nice rivalry.

Buffalo with Oats = George Mason with Larranaga

Buffalo without Oats = George Mason without Larranaga

Only a matter of time.