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!

     

England or Australia?


OneBadassCat

Recommended Posts

Sup guys. So I'll have the opportunity to study abroad next semester and the dead line to apply is soon approaching. I'm basically stuck between these two countries. I'd really like to see both of these places. In England I'd go to Kingston University(really close to London), and in Australia I'd go to Wollongong University in New South Whales.

I'd love to see London and they SAY the transportation is excellent to go all over the UK. I've got family in Ireland too. So I find it appealing that I could go to other places as well. Plus there are pubs and night life etc..

As for Australia, it's fuging Australia. The campus looks really beautiful and there would be lots of poo to do there as well. I was told that Wollongong is very outdoorsy.

So I hope it's not a stretch ask for advice on here but I think we have some Australians and English folk here too. So if anyone has been to these schools or has experience studying abroad tell me whats up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i bicycled part of the coast of australia last year... started in sydney headed for melbourne, passed through wollongong on the way. the weather was over 110 degrees fahrenheit (hottest summer in 70 years, i've never been accused of being a master of timing) so i decided to stay a few days and cool off my sunburn. and i can tell you firsthand wollongong is the poo.

ten minutes west and you're in the middle of the mountains and deserted australian bush. half an hour north you're in sydney. two hours northwest and you're in the middle of the desolate wollemi wilderness. two hours south and you're in lush australian wine and cattle country. half a day north by train and you're on the great barrier reef, which basically is like an episode of LOST. half a day west and you're in the middle of one of the largest, most desolate spaces on earth - australian desert.

england is splendid but australia offers adventure and an allur unparalleled by most countries. go. you won't regret it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really can't go wrong with either. Australia has great weather, sun, surf, partying etc...

England has pubs, loose women, and ease of travel.

Remember with England, you also get easy access to the rest of europe.

and this right here would seal the deal for me imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • First, apologies @MHS831, I know you began this about tackles, and it was good. But... Frank, your post is just another Bryce sucks post. You obviously believe, like your buddy, that if we draft a WR it's all about evaluating Bryce Young or coddling Bryce Young. In short, it would be about improving the damned team. If anything, if Bryce is as destined to fail (or is already a failure right now... irredeemable), then another playmaker at WR would just seal the envelope and send him on his way. In my world, that's a good thing.  If some of you think that Bryce is a lame duck, then why wouldn't you want to set the offense up for the next QB to come in and be dropped into the offense to have success? Or, maybe you think it's all a moot point anyway because Tepper sucks, Dan Morgan sucks, Canales sucks, Ejiro sucks, Brandt Tilis sucks---everybidy sucks! If that's the case, then why does anyone care who or what we draft? Obviously some of you have all the answers and can run a gotdamn franchise better than the FO does now.
    • Yeah man, idk. I’m not super big on looking at the position group overall and damning the group. I’ll do the same with less words for WR. I think Proctor is the ultimate fit because he could be your future left or right tackle or left or right guard. Guys a starter, how much Zavala, Christensen, Curhan, and Corbett did we see last year again? Mauigoa will not be there when we pick, but you take him for the same reason you take Proctor minus maybe the LT. Freeling *could* be an upgrade at LT for the future. You don’t take Miller or Iheanahor because the position flexibility isn’t there, likely RT only guys. Those Utah guys are light in the ass, don’t want. Now I do WR. All extremely unproductive when compared to previous Round 1 WR. Tate- Gone Lemon- Complete player, not a burner, would take at 19 Tyson- Made of glass, Colorado washout  Cooper- Not the best hands. Like 300 of his yards were lucky ass stumble blooper looking poo. Bernard gives you similar but better in the 2nd. KC- Slaps then catches the ball. Lightning fast for about 20 yards. Good return man. poo QBs probably more to unlock. Would take at 19 if Proctor, Freeling, Lemon were gone. Washington guy- Lumbers, the smoothness Canales hyped for TMac, not there with him. We need a different style player.    
    • Logically yes. Boston has the right balance though. Jalen Brown is #2 in the paint and their best shooters are 17th and 19th. While our best shooters are #1 and #2 and we have one player in the top 50 for points in the paint. And my understanding looking at the information I just referenced is we were basically at the exact same paint percentage last year in Charles Lee's offense. At the end of the day we either want to compete for a playoff series winner and the finals or we just want to stumble our way to another play in. We've already done that with James Borrego.
×
×
  • Create New...