(11-15-2017 07:36 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(11-15-2017 07:04 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(11-15-2017 06:54 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(11-15-2017 06:45 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(11-15-2017 06:27 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  Actually it is almost always the exact reverse of that here, and with almost every one I deal with. That is why companies hire me-- to put numbers on their logic.

Funny how most of them abandon their logic once numbers are put on them.

The only thing I have discussed here, and gave the reason for my opinions had to do with those numbers saying A-State has had the most talented roster of players in the SBC, and predicting their record.

Don't care if they believed me, and ultimately they would be able to tell anyway.

Let UALR start football and see.

Again, you've said exactly nothing, and provided no actual point or information on anything.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Actually I've not said two things.

A-State has the most talented roster of players in the SBC, and UALR football will destroy A-State football.

Poster ask me to explain the latter and I told him why I was going to decline.

Have already explained how I came about the better talent conclusion.

Making an assertion, and then when a contradictory point is made, just repeating that assertion, is not actually saying something. Just as a vague reference to your own analysis is not actually a response to criticism of your analysis.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

I would say making the assertion is in fact saying something.

I was not responding to any criticism of my analysis.

Mentioning the methodology employed, and time elapsed since employing that methodology was intended to give the poster a reason for not wanting or even being able to do what he requested in his post.

I don't see that arkstfan responded to my reply to his post, so I hope that means he was not offended.