Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Seems about right for Dallas


PanthersATL

Recommended Posts

https://nypost.com/2019/10/22/dallas-tv-station-kept-cowboys-game-on-over-tornado-warning/

KXAS in Dallas-Fort Worth delayed breaking into Sunday’s Cowboys’ key divisional matchup against the Philadelphia Eagles for six minutes to issue a tornado warning, riling some viewers who accused the local NBC station of putting football ahead of public safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

As they should have. Nothing worse than a dumb ass weather delay interrupting whatever it is you’re trying to watch. 
 

Ain’t a soul out there that takes those things seriously anyways 

People with an inkling of intelligence would head warnings of deadly weather events.  You ought to be a Dallas fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

People with an inkling of intelligence would head warnings of deadly weather events.  You ought to be a Dallas fan.

If it takes having your local tv station notifying you of a storm or whatever coming your way you’re obviously pretty out to lunch as is and doomed for anyways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

People with an inkling of intelligence would head warnings of deadly weather events.  You ought to be a Dallas fan.

It was a tornado watch, not warning. HUGE difference. And it lasted for hours.

And as someone from that area you’ll have  100 watches a year.

Also, there are plenty of outlets to get weather.

But a small banner on the TV while the game is playing would be nice, though maybe there was one.
 

Lastly, I bet the watch was most certainly televised during commercial breaks so about 10,791 times.

The viewers who got riled up because NBC didn’t interrupt the game to tell them about  a watch they already knew about are no doubt ‘passionate about politics’ and age 70+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, onmyown said:

It was a tornado watch, not warning. HUGE difference. And it lasted for hours.

And as someone from that area you’ll have  100 watches a year.

Also, there are plenty of outlets to get weather.

But a small banner on the TV while the game is playing would be nice, though maybe there was one.
 

Lastly, I bet the watch was most certainly televised during commercial breaks so about 10,791 times.

The viewers who got riled up because NBC didn’t interrupt the game to tell them about  a watch they already knew about are no doubt ‘passionate about politics’ and age 70+.

It was a warning and an ef 3 actually on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I'm going to be real, the reason that vote ended up so lop-sided by the end was directly due to my programming. So there's nothing tongue in cheek about it. Also I left PFF after the Collinsworth acquisition (didn't want to move to Cincy) but have stayed involved in analytics via backdoor channels, but I can absolutely say that the experience was eye-opening, not because those guys are unquestionable football savants and that I became one by proxy, but because the amount of information that becomes available outside of what the typical fan has access to is revelatory and also really drives home how much context is still being missed even with all of that information. You don't discover that you know everything, you discover how much you still can't know no matter how hard you try, hence my point about the NFL not being able to figure out what makes a QB good. There's a lot of AI work going into that now and even that only seems to further confuse things vs. actually enlighten the problem. In the professional realm teams don't really talk about quarterbacks as A strictly being better than B, but how A can potentially perform better than B given a specific context of C. Of course those contexts may be wider for A than B, but there's also contexts where B can outshine A, even with lesser talent surrounding them. So what good teams strive to do is ultimately define a process of how they want their entire team to operate under schematically, find players that fit that scheme, and hopefully find a guy whose skillset will be maximized running that scheme with those players. Where bad teams fall of the wagon is constantly shifting those schemes and chasing bad fits or fads vs. sticking with a core identity and developing it.
    • there is a 100 mile long list of NFL players and coaches going to bat and defending horrible play from teammates.   
    • In 6 games, we've only had 6 hurries??? ... that can't be accurate
×
×
  • Create New...