• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

639 Excellent

About crashcarson15

  • Rank
    Years Since Title: ZERO.
  • Birthday 07/26/1995

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

43,560 profile views
  1. erm… I tended to think that’d happen with Newcastle (why I much preferred Sunderland to drop instead), but the more I think about things, the more of a mess that club’s in. I don’t see them bossing the division like they did last time, but we’ll see.
  2. As for non-housekeeping things, an early set of Premier League (and then general football) predictions… Clearly, predicting the Prem this year is tough, given you have no fewer than 6 title contenders: It’s difficult to rule out Leicester and Spurs (though if Mahrez goes too, maybe we can with the former), while Arsenal, City, Chelsea and United could all feasibly do it. If you want an outsider shout, and I don’t think it happens this year, but Klopp with Liverpool charging toward the top could be a thing, especially as we enter another year where the three biggest sides in England all have new managers. Give me Chelsea though to take home the title, especially if they can get Lukaku in. I really rate Conte, and find it hard to believe Hazard, Fabregas et al are going to struggle again this year. Avoiding fixture congestion with no European football could also be huge for a title push this year. Neither Leicester nor Spurs qualify for the Champions League again — I think Leicester do no better than mid-table personally — and there’ll be a surprise team that qualifies for Europe. Give me Stoke to finish, like, 6th after mounting a Champions League challenge. I’d love to be wrong on Spurs, but I think they fall off the pace again. Swansea to be relegated. It’s not that they’re a bottom-three team, but as more cash comes into the league and everyone can spend, the margin gets thinner. The saving grace for the established Premier League sides is that Middlesbrough are going to be the only promoted side worth a damn, but I’ve long held the bottom will fall out on Swans at some point. I could see this oddly being that point. Oh, and West Brom to be relegated too. If I say it enough, it’s going to come true, right? But no seriously, I get that Tony Pulis doesn’t get relegated, but West Brom are one of the few sides left in the Premier League with the long-term goal of “remain in the league.” Where, say, Palace and Bournemouth are showing ambition to move up the table, WBA is very content finishing 17th every year, taking their money and going home. Eventually that bites you in the ass, right? Hull will be terrible, which means Burnley get to be everyone’s feel-good story, which would be pretty neat. Sean Dyche is a very good manager, and maybe this time it works a little better for the Clarets. Dropping down a division, I’m a little biased, but I don’t see Newcastle getting out of the Championship this year, I really don’t. I think Derby County finally break through into the top flight as champions, with Wolves going up a bit of a surprise second. Villa though scrape through in the playoff, which would kill my nerves but serve me alright. Outside of England, throwing a tenner on Dortmund to win the Bundesliga at 7/1 is a very, very good idea. They’ve done some great business, have strengthened their side (less playing time for Pulisic is a good thing at BVB, for instance) and Bayern are going through a change at manager. Clearly Bayern are still favorites, but if Dortmund are winning a title anytime soon, I think this needs to be the year. Marseille to be relegated at 16/1 really is a great shout IMO, given how big of a disaster that club is right now. The bottom of Ligue 1 got a little stronger — Gazelec and Troyes dropping out helps that — so a continued mess at the Velodrome could see disaster strike.
  3. Hey, it’s better than five days before the start of the season… you, Martin O’Neill. Merged the PL predictions thread with this one, because it doesn’t really need its own thread. Also changed the title here to “International Football 16/17,” which is our standard naming convention.
  4. I think my favorite thing is everyone bitching about the DNC email that asks to “pull the commentary segment right now on msnbc” thinking it means they wanted it off the air. EDIT: For those of y’all who don’t know/use it, “pulling” a transcript or video is getting a copy of it. (e.g. “Where’d you pull those quotes from?”)
  5. i don’t :censored:ing know. this whole clown show is the epitome of “where everything’s made up and the facts don’t matter” which is not how american politics is supposed to be. hillary clinton can’t do email and lied about it. that’s not good! donald trump is a :censored:ing fascist. your move, america. if you choose the latter, i’m the :censored: out of this place.
  6. Someone should tell the Republican Party that the sitting president has an approval rating over 50%…
  7. There’s almost zero chance the GOP loses the House, since they did a great job in 2010 of winning “trifectas” in key states, allowing them to successfully gerrymander their way into a ton of near-guaranteed seats. I mean, the GOP controlled both legislative houses and the governor’s mansion in Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. FL and OH are understandable to a certain extent, but there’s absolutely no excuse for how badly the Democrats got railed in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, a trio of states that the Dems should never be shut entirely out of government in. Republicans hold 56 of 83 House seats in those five states, all states Obama won in 2008 and 2012.
  8. oh god does this mean mike pence is going to be the policy guy please god no actual trump would probably be better
  9. The sad thing is, among the candidates considered, yeah, Pence is probably the best choice he could’ve made. Which, I don’t know, is what happens when you poison your relationship with anyone worth a damn in the GOP?
  10. It’s… weird? Probably not a good thing when that’s the first adjective that comes to mind to describe a kit. There’s nothing inherently wrong about this — proper stripes look gorgeous — but it’s so… odd, especially for Eintracht. I dunno.
  11. So you’d say Oceania should get the same number of World Cup berths as South America? As it sits, we’re either missing out on Ecuador or a world-class team in Russia. There’s a significant chance Brazil won’t qualify, and it wouldn’t be because they hadn’t been one of the best 31 teams in qualifying. And I don’t get your point about this year’s Euro. The point isn’t that the Netherlands should have been guaranteed a place at the championships — clearly, they couldn’t better Iceland, that’s why they weren’t there in the first place. It’s that the FIFA World Rankings are a poorly-designed measure of team quality (the simple ELO is a better measure, which says something), and that the current qualifying format in UEFA does a subpar job of providing equitable qualifying opportunities for all member nations.
  12. Hey, he’s probably just auditioning for a future running mate role.
  13. With that qualifying, absolutely! We obviously don’t play football on paper, and part of what makes it so great is when the Netherlands can’t get past Iceland, Czechia and Turkey. But it’s worth remembering that the Netherlands were the Pot 1 side, with France the Pot 2 side. Anyway, I just can’t get behind your “free draw” idea. It’s one thing in a knockout tournament to decide one winner like in the FA Cup — hell, the European Cup format was better than the CL though, I’ll give you that — but when you’re trying to find the 13 best teams to send to Russia in a couple summers, the current qualifying format in UEFA is not ideal. The World Cup should feature the best 32 teams in the world (I’d prefer to see more inter-confederation playoffs, and an increase in the amount of berths CONMEBOL gets. Seriously, a top-15 team in the world rankings right now is guaranteed to miss the World Cup), which is kind of absurd, really. Clearly, I’m not saying we should just send the top 10 teams automatically to Russia without making them qualifying. But when we’re trying to figure out who’ll qualify for a World Cup, the path to the final should be as equitable as it can be. That, of course, is something the current format tries to do, but because the world rankings are so miserably designed, it typically doesn’t actually turn out that way. As for UEFA, I’d rather see a format that looks more like this, with the Nations League eliminated… A final stage consisting of 4 groups of 8 teams. Top 16 teams qualify automatically for the final stage, 17-42 enter needing to win one home-and-home playoff, 43-54 enter needing to win two. Top three teams from each group advance to the World Cup, while there’s a single-elimination, neutral-site playoff between the four fourth-place teams to determine UEFA’s 13th place. More teams per group, and more qualifying slots per group, increases the chances you get the 13 best teams. I like that.
  14. When they determine seeding for qualifying groups, as they do in Europe, they mean quite a bit… see Romania being a Pot 1 side this year. Because of the FIFA rankings, we have these two groups for WC qualifying… Romania, Denmark, Poland, Montenegro, Armenia, Kazakhstan Wales, Austria, Serbia, Republic of Ireland, Moldova, Georgia While on the other end of the spectrum, we have both France and Italy as Pot 2 sides — meaning the Dutch and the French are together in one qualifying group, while the Spanish and Italians are together in another. So let’s recap: Either the 2014 World Cup third-place side or the Euro 2016 runners-up will have to play a playoff to even qualify in 2018, while one team from each of those groups will qualify automatically, having never faced a world-class international side. Especially in Europe, the FIFA World Rankings are far too influential, given how terrible of a measure of success they are.
  15. Also, re: Bob Loblaw talking at tonight’s convention.