Hoops: Texas at South Carolina Game Thread

[harveycmd]

4 minutes ago, Assistant Regional Manager said:

I could do without the political crap in a basketball thread. And it’s really one guy who keeps doing it.

Amen.

[THookem]

Liucci:

https://x.com/billyliucci/status/1893726828482769032?s=46&t=qlT4fGrOYJrk5J7VDwmNfg

Edited 2 hours ago by THookem

[Jarveaux]

3 hours ago, harveycmd said:

Was that ever proven? Last I chekced, Sark had problems in the past that wouldn't look good for teenagers or young adults. How many angels coach college basketball? 

Beard beat Texas in Oxford 72 -69 in Lil ole Mississippi. Fact is Coach Terry wasn’t ready for SEC . Beard was , he could have & probably would’ve made a much better showing at Texas in SEC than Terry . But all that’s history. It’s a matter if we want to dominate the SEC or not .we probably will know that answer at the end of the season.

[Oldest Horn]

1 hour ago, harveycmd said:

I'm not trusting anyone, but you can't make a definitive judgment in the absence of solid empirical or logical proof. Therefore the most logical conclusion is to avoid judgment. Why is that hard to understand?

You seem to be casting “judgement” that Brard should be retained. 

[harveycmd]

19 minutes ago, Oldest Horn said:

You seem to be casting “judgement” that Brard should be retained. 

Who is Brard? I think you mean Beard. If that's what you mean, then, yes, that's true.  Not casting. How many Texas coaches do you think are morally superior to Beard?

Edited 1 hour ago by harveycmd

[Oldest Horn]

6 minutes ago, harveycmd said:

Who is Brard? I think you mean Beard. If that's what you mean, then, yes, that's true.  Not casting. How many Texas coaches do you think are morally superior to Beard?

So ok for you to make judgments. Gotcha. 
 

And I have no clue on the moral superiority of other coaches. Then again, that’s not the issue at hand.
 

But I appreciate those who keep their names out of the police blotter for choking their girlfriends. 

[harveycmd]

2 minutes ago, Oldest Horn said:

So ok for you to make judgments. Gotcha. 
 

And I have no clue on the moral superiority of other coaches. Then again, that’s not the issue at hand.
 

But I appreciate those who keep their names out of the police blotter for choking their girlfriends. 

Again, reminds me of talking to lefty nutjobs. I don't know what happened. You don't either. Blotter means nothing to me when it comes to epistemic certainty. The "judgment" is that I don't know. 

[Oldest Horn]

1 minute ago, harveycmd said:

Again, reminds me of talking to lefty nutjobs. I don't know what happened. You don't either. Blotter means nothing to me when it comes to epistemic certainty. The "judgment" is that I don't know. 

I don’t see this as a political issue. Sadly, whacked out extremists on both ends of the spectrum tend to turn everything they can into one. So sad. 

[harveycmd]

1 minute ago, Oldest Horn said:

I don’t see this as a political issue. Sadly, whacked out extremists on both ends of the spectrum tend to turn everything they can into one. So sad. 

I don't think it's political either. Given the absence of positive evidence, there's no reason to think there's a reason to fire Beard absent politically nonsense about domestic violence. No positive proof, no case. That's the truth.

[NothinButDaHorns34]

6 hours ago, Jarveaux said:

If not now - When ?  Texas is being embarrassed by our basketball 🏀 program. How long will this be allowed? 

I have no idea, But let’s hope sooner than later 

[Oldest Horn]

Just now, harveycmd said:

I don't think it's political either. Given the absence of positive evidence, there's no reason to think there's a reason to fire Beard absent politically nonsense about domestic violence. No positive proof, no case. That's the truth.

But you made a political analogy. Brilliant!

[harveycmd]

Just now, Oldest Horn said:

But you made a political analogy. Brilliant!

Where is the analogy? Provide some evidence and stop hiding behind nonsense. 

[Oldest Horn]

Just now, harveycmd said:

Where is the analogy? Provide some evidence and stop hiding behind nonsense. 

Went you equate a reaction to a domestic violence arrest to a political agenda that’s an analogy.. Do you think?

[harveycmd]

Just now, Oldest Horn said:

Went you equate a reaction to a domestic violence arrest to a political agenda that’s an analogy.. Do you think?

I didn't "went you equate" anything. Do you have evidence a crime was committed? 

[Oldest Horn]

1 minute ago, harveycmd said:

I didn't "went you equate" anything. Do you have evidence a crime was committed? 

You were trying to associate intolerance for domestic violence with a political agenda. Keep up the good work. 

[harveycmd]

5 minutes ago, Oldest Horn said:

Went you equate a reaction to a domestic violence arrest to a political agenda that’s an analogy.. Do you think?

Austin DA didn't have evidence a crime was committed. If they did, they would have charged him.

[Oldest Horn]

5 minutes ago, harveycmd said:

Austin DA didn't have evidence a crime was committed. If they did, they would have charged him.

And your point?
 

Employers are not held to the same legal standards as criminal courts. But you know that, right?

[harveycmd]

1 minute ago, Oldest Horn said:

And your point?
 

Employers are not held to the same legal standards as criminal courts. But you know that, right?

I know that I don't now. UT doesn't know. You don't know either. If every person who was thought to have done something wrong was fired, about half the workforce wouldn't be employed. Publicity isn't a reason for firing absent political motivation. That's not me being "political." That's the UT administration being political.

[Oldest Horn]

1 minute ago, harveycmd said:

I know that I don't now. UT doesn't know. You don't know either. If every person who was thought to have done something wrong was fired, about half the workforce wouldn't be employed. Publicity isn't a reason for firing absent political motivation. That's not me being "political." That's the UT administration being political.

Much like a civil jury an employer can look at the evidence and not be bound by “beyond a reasonable doubt”. When a woman leaves a panicked 911 call, has visible marks on her neck and demands an arrest that’s enough for an employer to make a call - despite her decision to retract after her attorneys reached an agreement with Beard. Just like a civil jury will often find a perpetrator guilty while a criminal jury may not. 

[pinkman_90]

13 minutes ago, harveycmd said:

I know that I don't now. UT doesn't know. You don't know either. If every person who was thought to have done something wrong was fired, about half the workforce wouldn't be employed. Publicity isn't a reason for firing absent political motivation. That's not me being "political." That's the UT administration being political.

[harveycmd]

1 minute ago, Oldest Horn said:

Much like a civil jury an employer can look at the evidence and not be bound by “beyond a reasonable doubt”. When a woman leaves a panicked 911 call, has visible marks on her neck and demands an arrest that’s enough for an employer to make a call - despite her decision to retract after her attorneys reached an agreement with Beard. Just like a civil jury will often find a perpetrator guilty while a criminal jury may not. 

It's true an employer can do what they want in the state of Texas. I wouldn't have any other way. There ain't no "despite" in terms of determining the truth. Texas fired Beard. It was a mistake. Not only because they hired a hack to replace him, but because they don't know what really happened and responded to pressure that wasn't based in epistemic reality. If your standard is accused means a man should be fired, then you got your wish. We suck now. We suck because we fired a man without waiting for due process. Congratulations.

[Oldest Horn]

2 minutes ago, harveycmd said:

It's true an employer can do what they want in the state of Texas. I wouldn't have any other way. There ain't no "despite" in terms of determining the truth. Texas fired Beard. It was a mistake. Not only because they hired a hack to replace him, but because they don't know what really happened and responded to pressure that wasn't based in epistemic reality. If your standard is accused means a man should be fired, then you got your wish. We suck now. We suck because we fired a man without waiting for due process. Congratulations.

And yet you chose to politicize the issue. Brilliant!

And you, of all people, don’t know that the AD and administration learned in their investigation. So don’t pretend you do. 

[pinkman_90]

2 minutes ago, Oldest Horn said:

And yet you chose to politicize the issue. Brilliant!

And you, of all people, don’t know that the AD and administration learned in their investigation. So don’t pretend you do. 

You just don’t get it.  He’s an alpha dog that’s saving the world from us pansies that don’t like domestic violence.  

[harveycmd]

1 minute ago, Oldest Horn said:

And yet you chose to politicize the issue. Brilliant!

And you, of all people, don’t know that the AD and administration learned in their investigation. So don’t pretend you do. 

How many times are you going to say "brilliant?" Can you provide an argument for why firing Beard wasn't political? The man wasn't charged. Accuser recanted accusation. Is that "brilliant?"