| Favorite team: | Central Florida  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 44836 |
| Registered on: | 6/2/2013 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: What is the most annoying fan base here?
Posted by Prof on 4/30/25 at 3:06 pm
quote:
When Tennessee is winning, they’re insufferable, far worse than the Texas trolls.
Y'all hate a handful of alts and trolls that we also hate.
0
re: How is letting men compete in women’s sports good for women?
Posted by Prof on 4/30/25 at 1:11 pm
quote:
So, if that’s done for the Olympics, what do people expect college & lower to do? I personally think it’s a grey area if you NATURALLY produce above a certain limit to be forced to suppress it or not participate. How is that fair to that individual? For example, my roommate always had high blood pressure (according to charts), however that was NORMAL for his body.
Testosterone is a super drug when it comes to athletics. At certaIn levels it’s just too big of an advantage. Sports teams and governing bodies can’t concern themselves with what’s fair for the individual at the expense of what is fair for 99 percent of the participants. That’s the fundamental problem trans women are running up against. It’s not fair for them individually to be excluded but it’s also not fair to the rest of the field to include them in a lot of sports.
Trans policy had been based on Olympic standards for a long time where if testosterone levels are at a certain level for long enough they could participate (just like the bio women who produce testosterone above even high levels for women). While suppressing testosterone works with high testosterone producing women and equalizes competition it turns out that just going on blockers and taking estrogen isn’t quite enough for trans women because the gains they enjoy from going through male puberty remain compared to biological women.
I’m sure as the science gets better there may be better solutions and maybe even more reversals of policy but at the moment that’s where we are. Right now, it’s just not as easy as putting a weighted blanket on a horse to handicap a race.
The issue would make better progress towards resolution if it weren’t a political football but it is and both the science and politics of it will suffer for it.
re: How is letting men compete in women’s sports good for women?
Posted by Prof on 4/30/25 at 11:47 am
quote:
& what about those females with more testosterone than other girls…is that an unfair advantage too?
That’s policed at the Olympic level and has been for eons, long before trans people became an issue. There’s a range of high testosterone in women that’s acceptable for competition but biological women who exceed that due to medical conditions or just because they naturally produce above the limit have to either take something to suppress their levels or not participate. That is how track and field has handled things.
re: Where are the Tenner posters?
Posted by Prof on 4/30/25 at 11:25 am
quote:
I imagine they are pregaming for July and early August when we crown them preseason national champs.
Fyp
re: Where are the Tenner posters?
Posted by Prof on 4/30/25 at 11:21 am
Where the frick is Tenner?
As for Tennessee fans, or Tanasi if you prefer the original Tsalagi, we’re still here. But you’re not looking for Tennessee fans you’re looking for alts.
As for Tennessee fans, or Tanasi if you prefer the original Tsalagi, we’re still here. But you’re not looking for Tennessee fans you’re looking for alts.
re: Why is Tennessee baseball so douchey?
Posted by Prof on 4/29/25 at 7:14 am
College baseball is a douchey sport. It wants to have the decorum of country club sports from the 1950s until it wants the shenanigans of WWE.
re: How is letting men compete in women’s sports good for women?
Posted by Prof on 4/29/25 at 7:01 am
quote:
If you’re talking about the trans issue, the head of NCAA said that out of 514,000 athletes, under 10 are trans. Now, if you’re talking about Neil Degrasse Tyson, he has talked about why some Olympic sports are broken into M/W & should be united (like equestrian). Also, he has talked about males with more estrogen in their body or females with more testosterone. They’re not trans, so where are they placed in the discussion?
Hormones can be regulated (suppressed or boosted) and for the longest time when it came to competition we thought that was all that mattered but it’s more than that. You don’t lose the gains you make from puberty even if you suppress testosterone. A trans woman’s strength will absolutely go down with estrogen and by pretty large percentages but on average it’s still going to be higher than a reg female. This is why non trans women who have biological differences that produce advantages are often either excluded or forced to take medications that suppress those advantages. They’re women but have a condition that effects performance enough for competition to be deemed unfair.
I don’t think completely combined events/teams are necessarily a solution either. While unified equestrian sounds good in theory it presents problems in the way of funding and roster slots. Having some open categories where men and women can compete allows competition while keeping women’s teams. A horse race doesn’t much matter who is the jockey but funding the lower levels of sport as well as national teams it becomes problematic because it forces a competition over those early resources.
re: Bama Fans, get in here
Posted by Prof on 4/28/25 at 12:05 pm
Classic "get off my lawn, you stupid kid," type complaint.
re: On3 Post Spring Top 25
Posted by Prof on 4/28/25 at 11:36 am
It's fairly common with prostate cancer to monitor it for eons before doing anything. It tends to be super slow growing in older men but faster in younger men (a younger guy will tend to need treatment sooner because it can get very aggressive the younger you are). Hugh is kinda in between but as long as it's slow growing there's no reason to rush surgery.
A lot of men will die of other causes before their prostate cancer becomes an issue which is the main reason it's a cancer that tends to be watched for a long time.
A lot of men will die of other causes before their prostate cancer becomes an issue which is the main reason it's a cancer that tends to be watched for a long time.
re: Beating Tennessee in basketball and baseball has become like beating prime Bama in FB
Posted by Prof on 4/28/25 at 11:25 am
quote:
Dont be a boob
Isn't that what 34 post alts are for? :lol:
re: On3 Post Spring Top 25
Posted by Prof on 4/28/25 at 11:04 am
For UT, it's fair despite the fact that it's based on the wrong thing. The loss of Nico isn't going to hurt us as much as losing some key defenders and being a giant unknown at WR (which was the case last year too). I think our running game will be fine although I doubt one RB equals Sampson's load we have guys that can make up the difference.
Texas, BAMA and UGA look about right. Others I'd change around.
Texas, BAMA and UGA look about right. Others I'd change around.
re: Does anyone want Shedeur's narcissistic arse?
Posted by Prof on 4/26/25 at 11:01 am
quote:
Do the pearl-clutching talking heads really not understand why he hasn’t been picked?
They can’t be this myopic
They don't care either way. They just know a lightning rod is good for business and Deion and sons provide that. Say you love them, say you hate them (it doesn't matter) --the audience will jump up and engage at any mention. That's what they (the tv side) want.
re: LA Times Body Slams Nico and Fambly
Posted by Prof on 4/24/25 at 10:32 am
Holy shite. And they probably thought Tennessee fans were bad before reading that. :lol:
re: LA Times Body Slams Nico and Fambly
Posted by Prof on 4/24/25 at 10:06 am
Quotes for those of us who have read too many LA Times articles because of Nico?
re: Joey Aguliar to TN from UCLA after Nico transfer
Posted by Prof on 4/21/25 at 7:39 pm
quote:
How is the OL? Thought that was a part of the drama.
OL is in decent shape. Hell it was in decent shape last season once Heard got into game shape. Nico just held the ball for 8 seconds but OL improved immensely from the beginning of the season.
We will miss our starting center though. That's the big question for OL this season.
re: Joey Aguliar to TN from UCLA after Nico transfer
Posted by Prof on 4/21/25 at 7:29 pm
quote:
Wish some very wealthy UTk booster would give him $4 million just for laughs.
I think the plan is to get him for nothing and invest the extra in WRs. But yeah, I wouldn't mind dropping a stupid amount on him just to prove a point.
re: Joey Aguliar to TN from UCLA after Nico transfer
Posted by Prof on 4/21/25 at 7:08 pm
quote:
That he took 0 snaps for UCLA is a pretty big red flag
He only wintered there. :lol:
re: Joey Aguliar to TN from UCLA after Nico transfer
Posted by Prof on 4/21/25 at 6:55 pm
quote:
How good a player is he?
Balled out and then went 'meh' after a coaching change. He was great with his first App St. HC.
re: Nico’s brother leaving Arkansas
Posted by Prof on 4/21/25 at 6:49 pm
quote:
I think you made a good trade. You got the UCLA QB and they got the leavins.
Yeah, I think Aguilar can def. run our offense and let's be honest Nico wasn't elite last year (just has the potential to be).
I do like that Joey is going to have a metric ton of motivation to have a better season than Nico. :lol:
That said, he still has to win the job (I think he will because GMAC is too skinny/true froshie and Merklinger is changing mechanics and a RS frosh).
Popular
30
