Tiger1242
| Favorite team: | LSU  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 33436 |
| Registered on: | 7/30/2011 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
I imagine a version of this with media happens every 15-20 years as one generation of people age out the desired marketing bracket and another group age in.
It’s why everyone over a certain age thinks new music sucks, it’s no longer made for people like them
It’s why everyone over a certain age thinks new music sucks, it’s no longer made for people like them
5
Have people stopped watching on here? This was a big episode as far as plot goes and barely any discussion, we got
Jemma hurt
Someone trying to buy the club
Roy and Keely basically back together
Wasn’t my favorite episode as far as content but it moved the story forward a lot
Jemma hurt
Someone trying to buy the club
Roy and Keely basically back together
Wasn’t my favorite episode as far as content but it moved the story forward a lot
Am I the first one to point out that this is almost definitely AI or dubbed?
quote:
will now become gay communists. Yes.
Wouldn’t a true communist inherently be bi-sexual? Everyone is the same and all that stuff
quote:
Why wouldn't Disney renew the copyright on their stuff?
Eventually they can’t. They’ll probably lobby to retain the rights of certain names. Like people won’t actually be able to use Mickey Mouse. But they might be able to use Steamboat Willie, or heavily insinuate that the character is Mickey Mouse to the point on what used to be considered copyright infringement but won’t be anymore.
re: How much is public domain about to change the media industry?
Posted by Tiger1242 on 9/24/26 at 12:01 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Not gonna' happen.
What do you mean?
It IS going to happen
quote:
can you expound on this? I didnt know about it
There was an article a few years ago but I haven’t been able to find it.
Basically a lot of these famous old cartoons copyrights are about to expire and then anyone will be able to publish works with their likeness. Once that happens it opens the door for all kinds of movies, spoofs, books, stories with a lot of well known characters doing anything you can imagine and the owners of those properties won’t have much legal recourse to stop it.
So you could see a romcom with Mickey Mouse, and war movie with a lifelike Popeye, Showgirls starring Betty Boop, etc….
How much is public domain about to change the media industry?
Posted by Tiger1242 on 9/24/26 at 10:59 am
A ton of famous cartoons and cartoon characters are about to come into public domain.
These include Mickey Mouse, Superman, Batman, Popeye, Betty Boop, and lots of others in the next decade.
We saw some of it already with the Winnie the Pooh horror movie.
How is this going to change the film industry? Do we think companies who own these characters are going to try and fight this somehow?
These include Mickey Mouse, Superman, Batman, Popeye, Betty Boop, and lots of others in the next decade.
We saw some of it already with the Winnie the Pooh horror movie.
How is this going to change the film industry? Do we think companies who own these characters are going to try and fight this somehow?
quote:
I think it’s obvious it’s Zelda. The camera panned to her right after Rebecca said Rupert. And she’s the obvious one anyway.
I generally agree I’m just surprised it wasn’t discovered in this episode. I guess they wanted to end on cliff hangers with the MRI and then this.
Anyone watch tonight’s episode? Not a great episode but pushed the plot along a ton.
Is it as simple as Rupert trying to steal the team? When he found out someone was trying to buy shares in secret, really thought it was Zelda. I still think it could be but Ted Lasso isn’t really a show full of twists like that, she was in the room when Leslie told Rebecca he thinks Rupert is trying to steal shares
Is it as simple as Rupert trying to steal the team? When he found out someone was trying to buy shares in secret, really thought it was Zelda. I still think it could be but Ted Lasso isn’t really a show full of twists like that, she was in the room when Leslie told Rebecca he thinks Rupert is trying to steal shares
Who to start in place of Puka?
Posted by Tiger1242 on 9/21/26 at 10:12 am
Looks like he isn’t going to play, I took a gamble keeping him in my lineup and if he doesn’t play I’m in a tough spot. Has to be a WR because I started 2RBs and have Skattebo in my flex tonight so no flex available.
Possible Rams available
Mondays Mumpfield
Tutu Atwell
Xavier Smith
Possible Giants
Malachi Fields
Odell
Darnell Mooney
Non-PPR and I’m up 4 with Skattebo and a WR going against Isaiah Likely.
Possible Rams available
Mondays Mumpfield
Tutu Atwell
Xavier Smith
Possible Giants
Malachi Fields
Odell
Darnell Mooney
Non-PPR and I’m up 4 with Skattebo and a WR going against Isaiah Likely.
re: Someone with better football knowledge than me. Why did we give receivers such a cushion?
Posted by Tiger1242 on 9/21/26 at 8:42 am to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
Its such a delusion in todays game. If they dont trust them, wtf do they pkay them. Especially when they are the ones that are supposed to teach them. Giving up 10 to 20 yds per play, and doing it to maybe stop longer passes, is a delusional state of mind.
I’m with you on this. They either can or they can’t. If they can’t cover receivers 1 on 1 we aren’t winning much this year anyway, trying to hide them just makes it worse
quote:
seemed to me like we coached and played scared of Chambliss. Everyone was so scared he would take off running, they were undisciplined. LBs cheating up to clogg potential running lanes left underneath routes open with DBs playing behind. DL didn't rush to keep him in the pocket. On the last TD, we dropped 8 and had 7 guys in good position. Our safety over the top came up 3-5 steps when Chambliss stepped up in the pocket (even though we had multiple LBs in position to contain him) and that allowed the TD pass right past the safety.
I just had this thought, do you think practicing against Leavitt, who is run first so often, impacts the at? In practice the QB takes off and runs in that situation so we are expecting the same? Or maybe our coaches over emphasized Chambliss running ability in scout all week?
quote:
Problem was our LBs would run up to the LOS to get a closer look at Chambliss instead of dropping back and getting in those short passing lanes.
You’re saying our LBs are supposed to be in those spots but they’re worried about Chambliss running so they are out of position? That at least explains the issue if it’s the case. To be fair we did do a better job in the 2nd half
quote:
If you are going to blitz, run man to take away the quick easy routes. Can't send 5 or 6 and play 10 yards off, it's an easy 5-7 yards every play.
But this is so obvious to you, and to me, so surely it’s obvious to our coaches as well, who are better at this than we are. That’s what I’m trying to figure out, it’s not like on 3rd & 6 we lined up our DBs 10yds deep and thought “hope they don’t notice!”
quote:
What I would like better is for there to be a wall of shame outside of the locker room showing the pics of every head coach that has lost in VHS. That list would include Saban, Kirby, and Kiffin. It would also include legends like Spurrier and Bear Bryant.
I mean, most schools with history could create this same wall of shame, if any coach is at a place long enough, they’re going to lose in most away stadiums eventually.
Someone with better football knowledge than me. Why did we give receivers such a cushion?
Posted by Tiger1242 on 9/21/26 at 7:37 am
It seemed like, especially in the 1st half, we were just giving up underneath routes for free. I sort of understand on 1st down, but it would be like 3rd & 6, our DBs would be 10yds off the line of scrimmage and they’d just throw right in the middle of the field for a first down, over and over. It was so obvious that even me in my drunken stupor noticed it live, and I don’t claim to be some football expert.
Is there a logical explanation to this? It seemed like a scheme issue to me, but maybe the LBs were supposed to be covering that part of the field and were out of position? I dk, someone enlighten me.
Is there a logical explanation to this? It seemed like a scheme issue to me, but maybe the LBs were supposed to be covering that part of the field and were out of position? I dk, someone enlighten me.
quote:
What did he say? “Man I really wish we didn’t put y’alls band in the upper decks, I bet the AD regrets that. It destroyed our program”
We were talking about the upcoming Ohio State game and he said he doesn’t think they will make the same mistake with the OSU band they did with LSU
quote:
So you think Texas spent years regretting putting the LSU band in the uppers? Lol ok
Yes, literally had a UT friend of mine bring it up at a kids party last week
quote:
What? They aren’t trying to limit fan impact, they are trying to keep fights from breaking out.
This Ole Miss student section ban is going to end up like 2019 UT band in the upper deck
Posted by Tiger1242 on 9/18/26 at 7:40 am
They’re going to regret trying to limit the away fan impact for years after we win.
Popular
21
