UConn James

Week 1 is often a weird time for clubs. The unexpected can happen 1) b/c there's not much tape 2) coaches are feeling things out / getting a feel 3) defenses often have the upper hand in the early weeks when offenses have yet to click. Case in point is the 31-0 blanking we put on them a few years back. (Likewise, they beat us 31-0 in the season finale that same year).

Wait, wait wait.... So you're saying that Belichick doesn't sh-- gold? Blasphemer!

No we don't, and you can't make me! My daddy owns the team, and he doesn't want me stepping in any dookies. Sincerely, Linda Bogdan, chief OL scout, Buffalo Bills

To be serious for a second.... Do the Bills have a representative there in Ralph's place? (Guess that's just too difficult a question to ask for I-reporters. They might have to actually call someone.)

Hell, look at my alma mater in the mid-late 80s.... And then Scottie Burrell with "The Shot."

Carla Berube. And yes. But that whole '94 team was something else. There's been a long string of those 'heck of a player' for Auriemma. To count that high, I'd have to tally all my fingers, take off my shoes and unzip my fly. Imagine if Shea Ralph hadn't blown out her knee (twice. I know I guy who knew her who was literally in tears the second time. He was filling in for color analyst on the local radio broadcast) and yet she was still an animal on that floor chasing balls oob, etc.

I didn't catch the whole game, but the score says a lot. I don't know 'bout people wanting to scrap the bids --- it's seemed to work for a while now, and small-conference winners have produced their share of excitement. Parity rules, but no one really expects a #16 seed to look good vs. a #1 anyway. Congrats for getting to the tourney. As for the women's team, I 'bout think Geno would have had a triple-double... There were many people on-campus in 2004 (when they both won the championships) who said the women's team would've beaten the men's head-to-head. There'd been rumors that they played pick-up and Taurasi kicked a--.

Well, all the things that enabled them all to get back to '77 and change the history of the DI are what led to the DI being what it was. W/o them, it wouldn't have happened exactly as it did. The universe course correcting to make sure than what happened happens. Does fate outweigh free will? I think the answer so far in this show is a resounding, Yes! As the Locke-Jack debate has shown to be in Locke's favor --- "All roads lead here." Perhaps what you write about is the goal of the coming "war." To break the inevitability of whatever future that the Numbers equation quantifies/predicts(?). There was a Youtube video released by the show that shows a Dharma discussion of the numbers... it was pretty vague still, but explained their determination to change them.

Yep. I said that about the runway while watching it. Did not catch a repetition of the numbers... I'll look for it in the replay next week. .... Also didn't catch the Claire appearance. Nice. Jack said a surprised, 'Faraday's here too?!' to which Sawyer said something like 'Sort of.' And yes, the implication of that is that Daniel is there but here's not "there." The blabbering that started after the disappearance of Charlotte's body (and Daniel seeing what is presumed to be Young Charlotte) looks like it lasted. From my reading ahead Faraday's role is not finished, by far and it involves [white fonted for spoiler] the sub. Or, rather, that he is having a Desmond-like experience. Tho, Ben's portents of the future may be more due to diligent research than to actual visions. As such, Ben's plans are much more elaborate than Desmond's free-wheeling it while he was saving Charlie... and with none of the 'should I try to change things' moral questions that plagued Des. And still, the things Ben is doing have happened and will always happen in the Vonnegut-esque Tralfamadorian concept of time/history.

BarryBrady/Fake-Fat Sunny/Pyrite Gal/etc. also was in serious need of an editor. Always said he could edit his stream-of-consciousness posts if he wanted to... but he didn't want to. I also don't think posters were too lazy or stupid to read his posts. Any time I would try, I would find myself with early symptoms of an aneurysm and getting really angry at trying to fill in and correct in my mind what he was trying to say (since he didn't bother with grammar, spell-check or to edit). Also a problem was that he would take 100 lines to say the same damn point over and over and over when his argument could have been done with one line. It was like that Lewis Black routine of "If it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college."

I don't mean to sound like a dick here, but you are living in an alternate state of reality.

Like your first inclination, I also think I remember her saying 'Jin' in there somewhere. Can you bring up Closed Captions on Tivo?

The stevestojan thing... it was the filter for 'sh--' for a long time. Joke, from old. Ummm... I don't know if I'd call it aggravation, and we all well understand the limitations of medicine. (I do not have these problems myself, thankfully). A lot of medicine is a guessing game, trial and error and robbing Peter to pay Paul who originally stole it from Mary. Blaming doctors for freaky sh-- and things out of our scientific/medical understanding at this time... I don't bag on that b/c I am not a trial lawyer. Our limitations are something we have to live with and just hope that cures come around for the various and sundry ailments of the body human (the mapping of the human genome, as people in the know say, was a big step, but results/actual common treatments from that are probably a couple of generations away, realistically). And, with that said, the 'Practice' quip stands. Yeah, to the bolded section. Unless any litigation from any resulting cases brought by a doctor are totally sequestered or a secret filing, this is a situation where any publicity is decidedly bad publicity, unless it's outright provable slander. And I don't know why existing slander/libel law isn't enough... except that it pertains to poste-factum and is subject to various protections, the foremost being truth, etc.... whereas this seems to have the chilling effect of the client to say anything about treatment, and w/o conditions of those protections e.g. even if what you say is 100% true, the doctor can still sue for service disparagement.

First, did anyone catch (or did anyone Tivo?) what Kate said just after Jin drove off in the Jeep? I read ahead and knew that Amy's baby would likely be Ethan... but that also didn't come as a surprise. In 2004, that would make him 27. Maplethorpe looks quite a bit older than his character... but then again, I went to high school with someone I would've guessed was 40, and she was 18. Some people just get those genes, I guess. We met Radzinsky(?), the guy who (according to Kelvin, the CIA spook played by Clancy Brown) killed himself in the hatch. Find out that he's the one who actually designed it. Still don't know what exactly powers it, whether it's the Jughead bomb as has been suggested, and if so, how they might have acquired Jughead from Richard's group/Others and where it'd been for those 23 years. Huh!... 23. Interesting about Sawyer reading books to help him think. This is a trait of Ben's earlier in the series which vouchsafe is not a coincidence. Combine that with Young Ben's appearance to Sayid. So, Ben knew exactly what he was dealing with from the start, from the moment he read their profiles, and when Sayid tortured him in the hatch. He pretty much knew everything that was going to happen before it happened. Just waits for the right time and for the right triggers to act. Most everything else seemed straightforward. So, I'll commentate on "Jim Lafleur" saying a big ol' 'I'm in charge here, now!' Quite a role reversal for Jack... and one I don't think he's going to handle very well. Started with his aptitude being set for him as a janitor --- that's a slap in the face. I don't think this "great man" has much intention of taking orders. Preview next week seems to suggest the Lostaways being pitted all against each other. The board is setting up for the game to begin.

... except that the doctor is providing a commercial billed service. Same as if you get a bad haircut, if the construction company broke a gas line and blew up your house, you buy a brand of potato chip that tastes like stevestojan or you might post to a consumer forum for help if your used car is a lemon, you're good with not being able to tell your friends and neighbors not to get service or a product from these sources? You're good with chilling free speech? Product disparagement law basically went out the window b/c of Oprah in the beef. And try as they will, I don't believe 'service disparagement' --- ultimately --- will fly in front of the first amendment. That said, don't be the one who has to bring it to the courts by signing something like that --- if your doctor is worth a lick, s/he wouldn't need such (unconstitutional) protection. The moment you think about doing that, it tells me you need to find new a new career path. My dad's side of the family has had GI problems. Doctors have poked, prodded, run blood/urine/MRI/ultrasound/scope/ etc. tests, all to no avail. They haven't the first clue. They took out my brother's appendix in their guessing game --- that wasn't it... now they want his gall bladder. There's a reason why the signs say "Practice." I guess this all goes into there not being enough doctors, nurses, etc. Give them special protection so if they f--- up, it's not common knowledge and they can stay in business and f--- up other people. An order of silence doesn't lead to good things.

Umm... I think you mean, "... is $4 that has to be paid back tomorrow." (Unless you know someone who lends at 0%.)

If you're working and charging by the hour, I would agree. Increase in responsibilities that weren't in the original description should mean an increase in pay. When you agree to a salary, it's a different story. You come in and do whatever they tell you to do. And, as I wrote, this is the NFL where guys get shuffled more times than a deck of 52 at Foxwoods. When they agreed to the new contract when Peters went to RT, it was well understood that he w/could be flipped to LT. I wouldn't be against Peters getting more pay.... As the focus of this thread intends, all of this has been handled by JP and his agent with just slightly more class than a pregnant nun.

As a follow-up to one of my earlier posts, I don't think it's too much of a spoiler to now be saying that the opening scene in this season's premiere (with Faraday appearing at the Dharma construction of the Orchid) will be extrapolated before the season finale. Perhaps as early as this ep. Producers have said that this season is about why they needed to get back to the island. Next season (the last of the show) will focus on what happens when they get back.

Yeah. It was a deal to be a Buffalo Bill. The contract that NFL players sign means they get paid to do whatever they tell you to do. That is or should be the expectation, and especially for OL where it's like musical chairs in the league. If agents/players want to be compensated on a per-task basis of what they do on the field, then they should have put in a clause, or simply sign 1-year deals. They want security with a long-term contract? Well, there's a trade-off that you have to make. Instead, there's an expectation on the players' side that it's 'heads-I-win, tails-you-lose' with such deals. I'm sick of this stuff. And I'm getting sick of Peters, his sh-- attitude, and how he completely dogged it this year, for spite. And now he points to a NFLPA-collusion that got him named to the Pro Bowl --- that happened only b/c the $ tide rising for Peters will raise everybody else's boats. Don't think for a second that this wasn't what primarily (and when you look at his play this past year, singularly) got Peters this empty award.

The timer bit is also recommended here. Also, in the John Rosemond articles I've seen on the subject, for tantrums re: potty training, it's often effective to say "Doctor X said that you have to..." (and in your case, "go to the bathroom as soon as you feel you might need to"). Sometimes when they act out against the parents' authority, they will relent a little less against the words of "the doctor says..." (amazing how people, little ones not the only ones, will sometimes listen to/follow advice of a stranger more than people they know) and it provides you a bit of a cop-out.

Seems like every time you hear about it, the drunk walks away w/o a scratch and an innocent person is seriously hurt or dies. "God protects drunks and fools."

Oh, jeebus! You guys can keep up with the 'We wuz robbed' stuff and pretend that you're college referees on the court instead of some schmoe watching from a lounge chair in SD.... I'm going to bed.

Ppppfffttt! They might have to call the water boys and terry-cloth-mop dudes in to finish this game.

C'mon, dude. Don't be that guy.

Just an exchange of fouls at this point.... Make one, miss one. Jeez. 3OT.