But seriously, is there any sort of moderator presence on this board? How hard is it to tell him to keep this crap to the OT Forum (or better yet, just stop altogether) or get booted? I’ve seen other boards do it all the time to trolls. It’s not that hard.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/politics/covid-disappearing-trump-comment-tracker/index.html

Movielover gonna movielover just like always.

If he just posts the part about the changes UCD is making regarding fans at sporting events, it would be a perfectly fine post. Instead, he has to include his biased far-right viewpoint, as he does all too frequently.

It's ironic because movielover should probably take the advice of some of the right wing pundits he certainly follows on TV/Twitter when a famous black athlete speaks out on political matters and just stick to sports.

Unfortunately it seems we cannot just treat people as human beings but need to divide by all sorts of categories real or contrived. I just think there have to be better ways for realizing fairness and treating people with respect. — NCagalum

If we as a society had been treating people as human beings all along, we wouldn’t need implicit bias training or a focus on diversity in our hiring practices. Unfortunately, the people in charge in the country have tended to be, and generally still are, white men. And people tend to hire people who are most similar to them. So when white men are in charge and they do interviews, guess who they tend to hire? And that trickles down.

So yes, maybe there is a better way. But what we were doing in the past was much, much worse than what we’re doing now. That’s not to say that what we’re doing now is perfect. But it’s a big improvement.

I said it a while back but it's highly unlikely they're going to suspend the entire program because a few players did some hazing, regardless of how often they did it. There are 35 players on the team. If 5 or so were involved in the hazing, they'd boot them off the team and move on. It's got to be more widespread than that.

You posted two opinion pieces, one of which directly references the other and relies on the other to make it's point. Try again.

Sometimes it's tough to know when an opinion on a topic is or isn't welcome. You need to know your audience. For example, this board is not the place for Sac State or Cal Poly fans to come and talk about their team in a bunch of threads. Obviously we're happy to hear their insights on their respective teams in relevant threads (such as a gameday thread between UCD and Sac/CP), but this is a UCD board.

That's not a perfect analogy because this board isn't a "Democrat 4 Life" board, but the general point stands. I'll give a personal example. I'm a Cubs fan living in Giants country and I used to work at a bar. I quite enjoy talking about the Cubs and it was very easy to bring them up in baseball conversations. However, a number of the patrons didn't care much at all about the Cubs (especially since most of the time I worked at the bar, the Cubs were bad so they weren't relevant to the national conversation). So I had to be careful to limit my Cubs talk. One customer actually called me out on it one time (in a nice way) and it made me more conscious of it, which was a good thing. If the Cubs got brought up or were playing the Giants and somebody asked me about the Cubs, great. But otherwise, I had to know my audience.

Unfortunately in this case, movielover has been made well aware that his political thoughts, in general, aren't well received on the board. And if he kept them to the OT Board, it wouldn't be as big of a deal. The problem, as BlueGoldAg pointed out, is that he doesn't do this.

I don't have an issue with differing political opinions. What I do have an issue with a large amount of his political opinions are, at best, stretching the truth, and, at worst, downright lies. All too often it's simply regurgitating whatever far right troll he likes to follow at that particular moment.

Want to have a fact based discussion? Great. Nothing wrong with that. But what he tends to do isn't that in any way.

That list is accurate. It's players drafted, as opposed to guys who actually played in the NFL.

Here's two lists. The first is UCD players drafted and the second is UCD players who played in the NFL and accrued stats.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/schools/californiadavis/drafted.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/schools/californiadavis/

I'm guessing it's a combo of how you've looked so far and how good the voters thought you'd be coming into the year. This is the argument for waiting a few games to do a poll. Because preconceptions can cloud judgement. But people like polls and they like seeing "#3 vs #5" or whatever it may be to hype up a big game.

Guessing it's nothing more than Sac was ranked 25, they won, and teams above them lost so voters move them up.

Now, let's be honest here Drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians- there's lots of terrible ones to go around, and that is because at least 90 percent of the population is comprised of stupid, selfish, scum. There is no moral superiority among users of any of these methods of transportation — Goags20172

90% is a bit high but your general point stands. I can't stand when bicyclists just barrel through the stop sign like cars have to wait for them. Ditto for pedestrians who don't look and just walk into the intersection. Now, I try to be as aware of pedestrians/bicyclists as I possibly can be and will let them cross in front of me even if I have the rightaway. But just acknowledge that I'm there. I don't think that's too much to ask for. More often than not, bicyclists do wait and pedestrians do look before walking into the intersection.

But yeah, like you said, tons of idiots out there regardless of the mode of transportation they're using.

Tulsa had one final chance to get the ball back, as the Aggies faced a third-and-4 at their own 49 with 2:03 left and Tulsa out of timeouts.

Always the riverboat gambler, Hawkins called for a pass play that would have stopped the clock if incomplete, but Rodriguez was on target for an 8-yard gain to Gilliam and the Aggies took two snaps in the victory formation to secure the win.

Boy I love this mentality. Lot of coaches would play it safe, run the ball, burn 40 seconds and punt to pin them deep. But you’ve got 3rd and short with a QB who has completed 80% of his passes on the day. Go for the win. More likely to pick up the 1st down and there for more likely to pick up the win. Obviously you tell your QB not to force anything because the worst case scenario should be an incomplete pass.

IMO, the Big Sky is the best FCS football conference in the country. — movielover

I'm not sure if the Big Sky is the best, because I don't pay enough attention to FCS football, but the Big Sky, Missouri Valley and Colonial are consistently stacked year after year.

Holy crap. Went to check the US soccer roster and the score popped up with us up with about 4 minutes left.

Amazing win.

Question, which president agreed to pull all troops out of Afghanistan in the first place?

Of course, we all know movielover doesn't care about that fact. If the same exact scenario had happened except it was Biden who agreed to pull the troops out but Trump was president when the troops got pulled out, movielover would have been destroying Biden for agreeing to pull the troops out in the first place.

This whole situation is a disaster and likely would have been regardless of the political party in charge. Bush got us into this war and Obama was fine with it. Trump wanted to get the troops out and Biden seems to be in agreement with that. It's an incredibly unfortunate situation all around that appears to not have a clear good solution.

My god that's a terrible column.

Several years ago UCD qualified for the I-AA — now the FCS — playoffs and came within a whisker of playing for the national championship.

It was three years ago. Several implies like a decade or so. Just say three years ago.

If men’s and women’s basketball can do it, so can football.

Yes, we're D1 in those sports because the FCS only exists in football. We're essentially in the FCS though if you did break it up into two divisions.

Well, just as I was thinking all these thoughts, I saw a story by ESPN’s excellent senior writer, Heather Dimich, with the headline, “Pac-12 commisioner George Kliavkoff says conference not looking to add schools, but would be ‘foolish’ not to listen.”

Yeah, they're looking to add schools from other major conferences, like the Big 12. They're not even looking at MWC schools, let alone a random FCS team has had 1 season in the FCS with 7 or more wins and only 1 winning season in the last decade.

And, miracle of miracles, the Aggies actually own a football win over Stanford, rallying from a 17-0 deficit to take a 20-17 victory home to Davis.

Of course that win was great. But one upset isn't a reason to justify moving up to the Pac-12.

This is a "I'm up against a deadline, have to come up with something and I've got nothing better to write about" type of column.

Yeah, that seems like it would be odd to suspend the entire baseball program because the coaching staff fostered a culture that discouraged studying and academic success. Seems like you'd just fire the coaching staff if that was the case. And if there was a toxic culture among the players as well, you just tell the new coaching staff to make sure academics are a priority and if some players don't like it, they don't play. Guarantee the coaching staff you back them for a few years to build a better culture and bring in players who buy in that way they're not focused on a quick fix/aren't worried about having a couple horrible seasons as they turn the program around.

Why care what I think ? I'm just a random on a message board whom you offended. — Goags20172

Because it was the courteous thing to do? You clearly took my statement in a way I didn't necessarily intend (not your fault in any way) so I wanted to clarify what I meant. Apparently you thought I was just being a dick with my followup so I attempted to reiterate that I wasn't.

Goags20172: "Its not nice to attack me."

Also Goags20172: *proceeds to attack another poster*

I wasn't walking back my statement so much as I was clarifying what I meant. I know exactly what I said originally and I do understand how it could be taken harshly, hence why I attempted to clarify what I meant. I was being 100% serious when I said that there's nothing wrong with not wanting to be around random fans at a sporting event. I have a coworker who avoids crowds as well. She knows what she likes and doesn't like and she avoids situations that she knows she won't enjoy. That sounds like what you're doing. You don't like random fans bothering you, so you either don't go or you specifically sit in areas where random fans don't and can't bother you. The enjoyment you get in going to sporting events isn't worth the hassle of enduring constant annoyances. That's perfectly fine. That's how we make choices. We ask ourselves if the positives outweigh the negatives.