Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    42441
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

TwiceHorn last won the day on August 3

TwiceHorn had the most liked content!

Reputation

43819 Surly 1%

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I didn't say you have no control over it. Every addict that recovers and achieves abstinence exercises some control, some choice. But it's not a simple choice of "don't drink" or "drink less." But the top science in the field is that addicts brains essentially "overreact" to the introduction of substances in a way that others don't. And that never goes away. And it gets worse the more you feed it. Corollary to that is, the only cure is complete abstinence, and secondarily, if you resume, your brain is in approximately the same state you left it, so, if you were a bad drunk when you quit, you're gonna be a bad drunk in a hurry if you start back up, even if it's 20 years later. A guy like Sark that has a demonstrated history of bad decisions relating to alcohol. Alcohol doesn't help anyone's decisions, but most people are in control enough as adults not to show up to work-related events shiftfaced. An adult with a high-responsibility job that shows up shiftfaced on the regular has a problem, a lack of control that evinces an addiction. A guy like that is going to have to remain abstinent. If he doesn't, the wheels are going to come completely off.
  2. I'm 30 years sober. Former, recovered, recovering, whatever. It's true that you never a) completely get over it b) if you start up again you're gonna be right where you left off in a goddamn hurry.
  3. No shit, let those larping weirdos have their penile colony somewhere. Fucking Elmo, Thiel, Andreesen, Yarvin, they're all made for each other.
  4. One thing odd about Sack. First off, he's an employment lawyer, of the plaintiff's variety, and seemed to handle employment discrimination cases with some regularity and presumably some degree of success. He was, accordingly, critical of the heavily anti-plaintiff burden of proof in those cases, which is not a very Trumpy attitude, using Trumpy loosely as pro-business, anti-minority. Also, he had done some pro bono criminal defense litigation of the type intended to change the law in a way beneficial to underrepresented types, ie poors and minorities. And, he often helped explain why tort reform was bullshit. So, before the politics became acute, he seemed a lot more reasonable than he became later on.
  5. There are no bright line rules. You can't just sit around and collect checks, you've got to seek other employment. You can't intentionally underemploy yourself to keep the checks big. Nor can you unreasonably decline a job because it's somehow "beneath you." You can't be expected to find a head coaching job that exceeds your current salary or is some arbitrary 75, 80% of it, either. You have four years from the time the contract is breached until you must file suit or lose the claim. Without contract language to the contrary (setting out a "buyout" or "liquidated damages") you'd be entitled to the monthly or periodic payments you'd have been entitled to if still employed, offset by the income of whatever employment you obtain. So, your obligation to mitigate or avoid damages extends as long as your contract might have, or resolution occurs, by lawsuit, settlement, whatever. In a trial, the coach is apt to argue that he couldn't get any better job than whatever he got, whatever it is, while the school is apt to argue that he should have sought/accepted some assistant/coordinator job at some large percentage of his salary. The jury gets to sort it out. Yes, it is a situation that begs for settlement/compromise.
  6. That doesn't fly either. Sark was publicly drunk and humiliating himself at UW and USC ten years ago. If he never stopped drinking, he'd couldn't hold a press conference today without puking. Or go three hours on Saturday without a twelve-pack or the equivalent. An alcoholic like that doesn't get control of his drinking for a $10M/year job or an unlimited NIL budget. It. Just. Gets. Worse.
  7. I did no such thing. But, as a former alcoholic, I know what falling off the wagon looks like for a guy who was fired for publicly being drunk on the job. The nature of the disease is such that once control is lost, it's never regained, by long abstinence or human intervention. If he had fallen off the wagon in a way that interfered substantially with his coaching duties, it wouldn't be the subject of rumors, and as mentioned previously, his football woes would be the least of them. There are plenty of explanations for Sark's shortcomings that do not involve that.
  8. He's gone from pretty, pretty bad to pretty. pretty good. Wish it had been a smoother transition for him, I was really worried that he was a complete bust for a while there. And worried for him personally.
  9. And irrelevant according to the current brain trust.
  10. Well out with it then. What is that really nasty thing that's not merely a rumor? Although it can happen, a guy like Sark that falls off the wagon usually creates a lot bigger and more obvious problems than those of his football team. I haven't seen anything objective that indicates that Sark is drinking. Pretty sure we'd know. Second, given his history, if he'd fallen off the wagon in the off-season, I would expect him to be terminated with cause, success notwithstanding. Mid-season might be a different story.
  11. The flip side of going for it is an INT in the short game or turning over the ball on downs with 30 seconds left, to an offense that had been running through us pretty well to that point. Also, curiously, we had relatively few penalties yesterday from any of the usual suspects.
  12. Nah, what he missed was people repeating the same bullshit over and over and over again. And a few memes.
  13. Use justwatch.com. IMDB's where to watch also lets you know whether it's a ppv, or rental or what.
  14. Been meaning to ask, but Pitt + Auburn seems to be a rather incongruous, if not bizarre combo. Unless you're an engineer.
  15. He's been one of the saner ones, which is why I commented. Sure, it was disappointing. Arch took that deep shot, which I think was on him more than the play call and could have been DPI, it was close. We ran Tre twice for 9 yards. I suppose maybe we should have tried a short/intermediate route, but you don't want to turn it over there, or put it to one side or the other if you have to kick. Maybe go for it, but not a lot of time to score. Getting the ball back after the half, I was ok with taking the FG.
×
×
  • Create New...