ryskey

Quinn = Blake Sims, Jake Coker, Jake Fromm, or JJ McCarthy. All those QBs CFP-era QBs made the NC game and 2 of them won it, mostly with good defense. Actually Coker had Derrick Henry so that's a big reason too. Anyway, none of them were expected to be superman and put the team on their backs. With this defense we can still win the NC with Quinn as long as he doesn't turn it over, special teams doesn't melt down, and some semblance of a running game. Give it a 20% chance we can do that 4 games in a row. I'll take it.

Avatar checks out

Doesn't happen every snap, but you can see where his brain starts to malfunction, like a program caught in an if loop. Too much thinking, his body and brain out of sync with how the play is unfolding vs how he idealizes it in his brain. It's like the instinct has been beat out of him. I would say he should grow back his mullet, but that would take about a year. Maybe he'll grow it back in time to impress his NFL coaches with Mullet Quinn after being drafted in the 4th or 5th round.

Texas 69 Vandy 0 420 passing yards

Wait now I think I like him

Western Europe's port performance in general outpaces America's. So this doesn't have to be a contentious ideological divide between Management and Labor. The difference there appears to be a healthier and more collaborative, non-zero sum (or negative sum) approach between government, corporations, and labor.

The total ban on automation is insane. He's complaining that his workers had to work through COVID. Yes, many others did too. Do you know what allows workers to work remotely? Automation. The issue with wages not keeping up with dividends/earnings/management compensation is impossible to quantify since most port companies in the US are either 1. Private so impossible to tell what their financials look like. 2. Large multinational companies in which a small percentage of the total revenue comes from US ports. So it's impossible to determine profitability of US ports there unless there's some disaggregation in the financial statements. A read of port performance (several rankings and metrics here https://portalcip.org/documents/port-indicators-and-statistics/ ) indicates the US is middling at best compared to other OECD countries, and American ports lagging way behind other countries after grouping by size and throughput. An attempt to solve all of this could involve RSUs, stock grants or stock options for ILA workers. Let them own part of the company that pays them. Align interests, let workers participate in record dividends and stock performance if they exist. But we are probably past the point where that would solve anything. The combative nature here indicates poor management decisions probably have at least some of the blame here. But back to the ban on automation. Port inefficiencies contribute to inflation and decreased exports, both of which we can all hopefully agree are bad. This is a race to the bottom where a large group of people have a financial incentive to be inefficient and negatively impact the rest of the country. The other countries do a lot more exports, while the US is more weighted to imports, so I don't know how that may effect the numbers above.

Texas 69 UTSA 0 Ewers/Arch 280/140, which adds up to..... 420 This might be the only game that these numbers actually have a chance of working

Texas 69 CSU 0 420 WR Yards

Here's another way to look at it. This is n-butane (c4) production. It's quadrupled in the last 15 years. In reality, actual production of c5+, whatever you want to call it, has likely grown proportionally. It's so hard to track because of where it gets separated in the supply chain. But here's the EIA's lightest (closest to c5+) crude oil classification. Reported supply is down. The biggest reason is blending with heavier crudes to meet WTI spec of ~40 API.

There's a growing trend to only report C2-C4 (ethane, propane, butane) as NGLs. C5+ (pentanes plus, natural gasoline, naphtha, whatever you want to call it) often goes in company financials and reported as crude oil. It is for the most part (usually fetches a price 85%+ of WTI), so this isn't some sneaky accounting trick. What's making this very confusing is that the majors and some large independents own midstream and downstream infrastructure, so double counting of supply is very real. 1. Oil company (or the upstream business unit of an integrated major) reports c5+ in their crude oil production. Cool. No rules against that, and is consistent with what the liquid actually is. 2. Midstream company (or midstream business unit of an integrated major) separates the heaviest of the c5+ at the processing plant and blends it with crude oil. This gets sent down the crude oil pipeline instead of the Y-grade pipeline. Cool, this is consistent with what the upstream company is doing. But EIA's accounting of hydrocarbons often counts it again (especially if the midstream company has an incentive to do so, depends on the GPT contract), especially on these weekly EIA updates. So now we have upstream and midstream counting the same c5+ for supply purposes. 3. Y-grade (mostly c2-c4, but still enough c5+ to throw balances out of whack) gets sent to the gulf coast in dedicated pipelines, individual components go through fractionation. C5+ is then separated and blended into crude oil during downstream processing. This also gets counted as crude supply, depending on how it's separated. This is never balances, volatile hydrocarbons are unpredictable and change drastically with small changes in temperature. 4. Crude oil transportation infrastructure. The lightest ends of stabilized crude oil (this is also c5+) can still flash to vapor, then condense again with small changes in temperature. This is often removed, especially before export. More "crude oil" for the purposes of EIA's supply. Here's more confusion: even heavy crude oil contains a lot of c2-c4 that gets thrown in with propane, etc for supply purposes. It's also worth discussing the differences between the weekly EIA estimates, which are just estimates. Best to take a 4 or 6 week rolling overage, which ends up closer to the balanced supply and disposition a few months later. I'm still confused with all of this, and so is everyone else. The only way to do this more precisely is track the each specific hydrocarbon chain (c2-c30+) and adjust for cracking, and that's not possible. See that big jump in 2023? That's partly a result of the changes DeCarolis was talking about. I have no idea how much of that 1 million bbl/d jump is a result of double-counting, but I do know there's some.

Weird box score. How'd they end up with 10 more shots? That's the difference between a tight game and a blowout. 5 more offensive rebounds explains some, though that didn't make a huge difference as their 2nd chance points aren't much higher. Turnovers about equal. FT attempts about the same.

lol

There are memes for that. Must adapt to post-literate society and only use memes.