A year and a day removed from the only loss of his football career, a year and a day removed from the moment when he insisted on accepting the blame for his team's 25-10 defeat to Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl, John Shaffer walked onto a field in Tempe and tried not to think of anything except the first play of the game. It was going to be a pass. They were going to throw on first down, to try to catch Miami off guard, and then Shaffer found himself distracted by the presence on the sideline of David Hartman, one of the anchors of "Good Morning America," who had been hanging around all week. And he saw all these famous alums from both teams -- Kenny Jackson, Curt Warner, Todd Blackledge, Jim Kelly -- and the whole thing began to sink in: This was bigger than last season. This was bigger than any college football game he had played in. This was bigger than any college football game anyone had ever played. For a few more moments, they had to muzzle themselves. Miami's Irvin walked over to Penn State's undersized safety, Ray Isom. "You're Isom?" he said. He was laughing; all week, Miami had been ridiculing Penn State's defensive backs, likening them to Smurfs -- they were too small and too slow to cover Irvin and Brett Perriman and Brian Blades. Penn State got the ball first. Shaffer called that pass play. Then he looked in the eyes of his offensive linemen, and they were glassy and unfocused. They're not here yet, he thought. He took the snap, faked a handoff to his All-America tailback, D.J. Dozier, and dropped back four or five steps. One Miami lineman, Winston Moss, came charging in from the outside, unblocked. Shaffer ducked, Moss overran him, but here came two more linemen, charging straight into him. Shaffer wound up twisted in the grass, 14 yards behind the line of scrimmage. He never had a chance. It would go like this all night for Penn State's offense. They could not throw the ball, and even behind Dozier, they could not run the ball either. At the end of the first quarter, they had seven total yards. Shaffer finished 5-for-16 for 53 yards. They managed only one sustained drive, of 74 yards, which ended in an ugly dive by Shaffer to tie the game at 7-7 in the second quarter, and negated Shaffer's only crucial mistake of the game, a fumble deep in Penn State's territory that led to Miami's first and only touchdown. That Nittany Lions drive accounted for nearly half of their 162 yards of total offense; Miami would finish with 445.
13 More Days In Hell Unblocked 66
Please see Talk:Stawamus#Requested move and note my most recent post there; reliable sources are being demanded to move the article back to where it was created at, but no reliable sources were used to move the article in the first place; what ones have been provided in the current discussion are also not about the topic at hand. The other guideline invoked by the speedifier (User:Kauffner was WP:UE....but, um, "Stawamus" is no more English than "Sta7mes" is. The fallacy being inflicted upon indigenous placename and other articles as with Skwxwu7mesh/Squamish is that Wikipedia is in English; but Squamish isn't an English word or name either. In any case, this move was undiscussed and should have been reverted immediately; perhaps my error in using an RM to move it back to where its creator and principal author created it at, rather than to seek admin reversion and let "anglifiers" try and prove their case with the reliable sources they are demanding from us that their preferred version of the name is in fact what the community calls itself, and isn't just a pastiche notion of "more English" because of all the toponyms based on the "anglicized" (and mispronounced) version of the name which is, yes, common in the area. Or should this be at Move Review: but that's for RMs huh? I should have taken Talk:Squamish people#Requested move there as it was seriously flawed - and too hastily closed (7 days) despite major namespace collision issues - and shouldn't have bothered starting Talk:Squamish people#Requested move 2, which is seeing all the same misconceptions and other issues that tainted the first one so badly. I'm also seeing that undiscussed moves of such kind which should be reverted immediately and shouldn't have to be RMd to get back to the original, abound....Talk:Owekeeno people#Requested move is another, Talk:Carrier people#Requested move is another, and then there's Okanagan people which used to be at Syilx and was speedy-moved by the same editor (Kwami) who also did a whole bunch of others all some if not most of which were successfully, finally, reverted back to where they belonged, by hard-fought RMs, but which should never have been at RM at all. Now, I'm told that my "walls of text" mean that people don't read what I have to say; that's weak and is, to me, just evasion. That such undiscussed moves are numerous and that the issues around them are complex mean that short explanations are impossible; speedies on the other hand are done with only a one-line justification....very often wrong or mistaken as with Sta7mes/Stawamus, Wuikinuxv/Owekeeno, Dakelh/Carrier and more.... and in asking for admin intervention before in the wake of such undiscussed speedies, done en masse no less, I get no response. Why is that? Anyways with Stawamus it should be reverted; for an obstructionist intervenor to demand reliable sources to move it where it belongs when none were provided to do the move is the reverse of what should be being done. How many other "English" indigenous titles are going to be turned into "English" (that isn't in fact English) without citation by speedy and have to yet face RM? Why should umdiscussed speedies be so easy, and remain unreverted, while RMs to revert them - which should be unnecessary - are regularly faced by difficult and obstinate demands and attitudes that are, to put it briefly, pointedly obstructrionist in character...and often full of more misconceptions and shoddy citation reading than the original speedies? Shouldn't there be a better mechanism to revert speedies than RMs demanding citation/guideline-following that the speedy itself didn't face?Skookum1 (talk) 15:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, sure, like a guy like me is gonna have any luck at at all at Move Review huh, which is more about talking nice and saying "please sir, can I have another RM" than the reasons that the closer, and the "oppose" votes, were wrong? Indeed, it is a subjective decision, and not objective at all.....and skewed by a meaningless and pointedly hostile and too-repetitive "nay" vote from the same editor who discounted the town of Squamish in last year's only-7-days close on the Skwxwu7mesh RM, granting PRIMARYTOPIC to the ethno article even though the same view stats tool as above demonstrate that the town IS the PRIMARYTOPIC of "Squamish". Yes, you do hear the sound of axes grinding; you also hear the sound or RMs slamming shut repeatedly on contested town-as-primary-topic RMs, with Atlin, Comox and Squamish left in abeyance "until next time" but all others passed in favour of the unique town name.
I'm just here fielding those questions and won't be around much. I live in paradise, have had quite enough of wiki-hell, and my guitar is calling me and a much more worthwhile way to spend my energies than being logical and consistent in a digital "place" where those (logic and consistency) are in "abundantly short supply".Skookum1 (talk) 12:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
2ff7e9595c
Comments