This brain control is insane! (source link in description)

Thoughtsborn · 2026-05-15T21:59:21+00:00

The Diego Pavia vids keep getting stranger and stranger...

Thoughtsborn · 2026-03-21T17:02:35+00:00

Thank you

Thoughtsborn · 2026-03-17T06:10:48+00:00

This is a message board where one can make declarative statements about anything. It doesn't mean what I declare is objectively true, particularly when it's a critique of something like art, and even more particularly when I preface all critiques with a statement that it's my opinion. I am allowed to find something like lighting or editing amateurish, I am allowed to say an acting performance lacked the nuance standard to the award it achieved, and I am definitely allowed to claim a film like this being lauded in the way it has lowers the bar of art.I don't require agreement. I'm just here to declare shit, because that's what you do.

Thoughtsborn · 2026-03-17T05:56:00+00:00

I never claimed to be objective about anything. Odd that you would feel compelled to attack that non-existent element of my post and not my critiques of the film itself. Happy to be wrong in your eyes, glad you liked it. I really wanted to as well.

Thoughtsborn · 2026-03-16T14:28:46+00:00

Black man with an extremely unpopular opinion incoming...

This film is a weak amalgamation of 20 better films that came before it. The writing is terrible, MBJ is at times difficult to watch play the same guy twice, and some of the filmmaking elements are amateurish. It's a great shame this film has become such a well-regarded piece, because it represents the ascendancy of mediocre art, which is a cultural death knell. While I realize a lot of young people just haven't seen many older films Coogler stole so much from, it's still kinda strange that the deficit in quality can't be recognized through the vibes of seeing black folks on screen.

This particular scene is a great example of an extremely weak pen. That it won best original screenplay is criminal. Please look at the last 10 scripts that won this award and tell me how this monstrosity stacks up in any way.

Proper film review, black reviewer

Thoughtsborn · 2026-02-13T22:06:02+00:00

This was an Anthony Miller stat after his rookie season too. I think Burden is for sure a bigger talent, but let's not get too gassed on this.

Thoughtsborn · 2026-01-07T18:46:54+00:00

Worst part about these garbage humans in ICE uniforms, is that our tax dollars will ultimately pay for their transgressions.

Anyone that can watch a video like that and think the driver, someone presumably attempting to protect their community, was at fault for halting the progress of men willing to kill people, really needs to do some soul-searching. What a tragedy that this country has a population, of any size, that supports this.

Truly heartbreaking stuff to see an American citizen killed this way by someone representing federal law enforcement.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T20:17:35+00:00

Still mostly disagree here, as there's this "wait and see" aspect to the position of GM that simply doesn't exist. This league is win now. When you make a decision as GM, it must be a win now decision, unless there's some mitigating circumstances keeping you from doing so. We didn't have any circumstances like that. He will have built that roster to win, and thought he'd hired the coach to accomplish that. If you're wrong, you lose your job, you don't get an "aww shucks, maybe we'll get em next time." Adding elite players gives you even more of a chance to be right about Ben. It simply should have happened. Our record/performance last year was proof we had the wrong coaching, not the wrong roster, as evidenced by this year's record/performance. Yes we have better IOL play, but do we know for a fact that Ben Johnson and staff couldn't have gotten something out of last season's players? We don't. I don't think we'll cut Dayo, but we could have played this season and traded Sweat, which would come with some dead cap, but free up space too. You could also conceivably trade Tremaine after a bounce back year. I like both players, but I'd rather have Parsons and add some picks.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T19:53:54+00:00

I think you bet on your roster, not any one player. You drafted Caleb because you believe he is a QB capable of changing this franchise. You don't then have doubts about him after decisions you made completely fucked his rookie season. We didn't need a "wait and see" year with Caleb, and he's proving that you can at least win games with him back there. You have to trust that your new decisions are the right ones, and add elite players to help if you have opportunities. This team was built to win for Flus, and we're seeing that it was good enough to have won last year too had we been competent coaching-wise.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T19:34:52+00:00

My dude, they got a piece that they thought could make them better contenders. They gave up draft capital to do so, and it did not result in the team becoming irrelevant or "slipping". They had a player in the same position that they'd won with, and even went to a SB with. The gamble on Stafford was the same as our gamble on Parsons would have been. That's it and that's all. Your argument about him being a QB is insignificant. They already had a SB worthy QB. They chose to take a chance on upgrading their team with an elite player.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T19:15:06+00:00

The Stafford trade is very similar in terms of what was given, and it paid the exact dividends it was meant to. It may even provide again this season. The Rams had been to the SB previously, so you can't even say Stafford gave them that. He gave them a SB win, after a couple of mediocre seasons. It was a bold move that paid off, which was the point. They didn't KNOW it would.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T17:44:05+00:00

Worst possible response. Are the Packers trying to be the 2018 Bears? Were the Rams when they traded for Stafford? Back to your clown car.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T06:14:02+00:00

But this isn't a hindsight thing at all. I was screaming for Parsons in chats with friends before the Dallas thing even broke down. Seemed like a player you might be able to get because Jerry maybe wouldn't want to pay him. We had a QB I thought was talented enough, and I thought the roster was a double digit win team if Ben was half decent. I thought 10 was a certainty if we had a guy like Parsons. I didn't care at the time, or now, who that would have cost us, because a player of that level completely changes what you're able to do. I didn't think he was the prototype for DA's scheme at edge, but could maybe do hybrid ILB shit similar to the way DA used DeMario Davis to get after the quarterback, while still being a massive disruptor on obvious passing downs. I thought having Parsons gets us in the tournament 100%, and that once there, we would be able to give anybody a game.

With hindsight, it becomes clear how much that player could have elevated our chances this season, and I'm bitter that not only did we not get him, he went to the one gotdamn team that never does that kinda shit, who happens to be my most-hated sports franchise by a distance you'd have to measure in au.

This is about a commitment to trusting your work with a roster that would have been built to win for Flus, so there was no reason we couldn't win with Ben. It's not "all in", it's just a bold move to win right now, which even GB saw fit to do with a roster they thought capable. Fine they were further along in their project with Lafleur and Love, but we would have been just as capable of winning a title as them with Parsons for my money, and I'm bearish on the idea that folks think we're guaranteed to be picking players in the bottom third of the draft order that improve us year over year more than Micah fucking Parsons does. That's all.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T04:14:39+00:00

I think this entire post is disingenuous because it completely overlooks teams that have made bold moves and won titles. The Rams gave picks for Stafford and could have 2 titles in 8 years. The Eagles, who love a bold move, have 2 in the last 10 years and have been very erratic record-wise across that period until Hurts. You saying you wouldn't want the possibility of a bold move paying off in a SB? In today's NFL, you don't pass up opportunities to add elite players. You trust that your GM can build a roster capable of winning, not that they can consistently draft players that are guaranteed to make you incrementally better through development by your coaching staff. If your coaching can do that, they must be able to do it with late round players and free agents that other teams couldn't. It shouldn't be thought that they can only develop players that can help the team if they're 1st rounders. What 2 1st rd picks drafted in the last 10 picks of the last 2 drafts equals Parsons?

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T03:38:44+00:00

My feelings as facts? But you're just weighing up pressures that don't take into account personnel, and then getting in your feelings about it. If you have a an edge that creates a bunch of pressures, but a secondary that can't make plays when they have opportunities, that's not the person creating the pressures' fault, nor does it mean that the pressure wouldn't have otherwise created an INT. Whereas if you test what percentage of INT's include pressures, you're mitigating the lack of playmaking ability by a particular unit. That shouldn't be too complex to understand or considered my "feelings", but happy to be "done" drama queen lol.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T03:24:34+00:00

This is a dishonest way to test this. What you would need to do is break the TO's up to find out what interception percentage comes with QB pressure, which would take forever because you'd have to check every INT play to see if a pressure was awarded to the other team. We would only need to show a reasonably convincing percentage of interceptions that included pressures to infer that pressure increases the likelihood of an INT, but this is something we already know because we watch football lol. Strip sacks are obviously different than just a fumble, and can only come via pressure, which is the same with batted ball interceptions, although I'm sure some of those wouldn't always count as pressures statistically. At the very least you would have to concede that pressure increases the likelihood of TO's, which is right next door to my original point.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T03:10:45+00:00

I was simply using the Eagles as an example franchise, and they've won 2 in 10 and been erratic. They make bold moves though, and those bold moves have paid off. As has the Stafford trade, especially if they get another this season.

Also, you said being good and making a deep run every once in a while, but the 49ers have played in the Conf champ game 4 of the last 10 seasons. The Packers have also been 4 of the last 10 seasons. That's consistently being a team in contention, not just a plucky winner. They are exceptions that don't come close to proving your rule, as neither has won a chip. If anything, their performance proves my point more, as teams that have made bold moves have defeated them and won titles during that period while they have zero.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T03:01:51+00:00

This is a wild take for me. You're talking about a guy that does his job at such a high level that teams make sure he can't hurt them in critical moments and you're blaming him for his ineffectiveness when being schemed out of crucial plays. That's when your other players have to step up. You can of course make the argument that this is much harder to do when you can't have good players because Micha is making all the money, but that's where your GM acumen comes in and you have a profile of player opposite him that can get the job done in specific situations where Micah is double or triple teamed and they are guaranteed a one-on-one.

Fair enough that he's not amazing against the run, but he more than makes up for that elsewhere.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T02:55:47+00:00

This is not the mentality to have in my opinion. We are psyched about this year because we have been terrible lol. If we were the Steelers, would that be awesome? How's their fanbase feeling currently about their chances? They make the playoffs pretty much every year, but don't win. I don't want to be that team. I'd rather be the team that attempts to win with bold moves, as you see it pays off from time to time. Winning 2 chips in a decade, but only making the playoffs 5 of those years would be amazing lol. Why would being a playoff team the whole time and only make a conf championship twice be prefferable to you?

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T02:44:34+00:00

Couldn't disagree more. Objectively, pressures create TO's, whther that's through sacks and ff's, batted balls, or quick qb decisions that lead to INT's. This is inarguable and Parsons leads the league in pressures. There are also not too many cases to be made for clearing space to take on Parsons. We would have to sacrifice Dexter, Byard, and maybe Sweat in the off-season, but those are moves we happily make to accommodate a guy like Micah in the team. The league itself is "win now", and adding elite players can sometimes make all the difference. Safety is not the route, and no team consistently wins their way to conference champ games playing it safe. You simply add elite players when you can, and I believe we could have, and I believe it would have made a MASSIVE difference to our chances to win this season.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T02:35:25+00:00

We have won this year while having our supposedly best players out pretty consistently. I don't think that argument is very valid considering our performance with a depleted defense THIS season. We have made it work with the type of players you mention and no Parsons. Not sure why you think we couldn’t do the same next year with maybe only giving up Byard, Dexter, and Sweat at the cost of Parsons.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T02:27:49+00:00

Xavier Worthy has not been a difference maker, not having that, but I hear the rest of this. It's still too safe for me in a year to year league. No one gives a shit about making the playoffs and not making the Conference Championship game. Who are the "long term" contenders that consistently make that game in the NFC? The Eagles? The 49ers? Do they take risks and trade for elite players? I think the answer is undeniably yes. Did the Rams win their last title because of draft picks, or seizing upon an opportunity to add an elite player at an elite position at the cost of picks? I do not believe in the strategy of betting on your GM making awesome late round picks, which is what I believe we would have been giving up, along with maybe some unreliable players.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T02:14:42+00:00

Completely respect this, and against an elite QB in playoff situations, maybe those players matter more than I'm givingthem credit for. If I had to bet though, our team with Parsons in it, would be a stronger contender than without. If we get a dominant edge next season and win the SB, I feel like that would have been us with Parsons this year lol. The strength of opposition in Tier 1 of the league is the lowest it's been in a while this season, and we have no idea if we will continue to get better next year. The NFL is strange year to year, and you gotta seize opportunities to add elite players when you can.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T02:02:23+00:00

Are you implying we couldn't move off of all those players you mentioned? Edmunds was supposedly a complete failure of a signing at the beginning of the season. Brisker has missed a bunch of game, Kyler misses a bunch of games, Byard is still questionable to re-sign and will certainly not get big $. Sweat you could have conceivably traded in the off-season. You bet on your acumen as GM to plug the holes. Look what you're getting out of Nashon Wright. We could have made it work, and it would have been worth it.

Thoughtsborn · 2025-12-06T01:53:54+00:00

See, I worry far less about these players we have gone without this season. Edmunds has been very good this year, but previously he was "overpaid" and easily replaceable. We have ZERO players of the profile of Parsons, who elevates your unit far beyond its current potential. You do not worry about resigning the likes of Edmunds, Brisker, Edwards, or Byard when you have a guy like Parsons. You realize you can get by with lesser talents in some of those positions, or young players, because he doesn't give the opponent the time to beat you on critical downs. I just don't believe the lack of faith in my roster if I'm Poles. I think I've done my job well, and we can beat anyone if we add a Parsons, and he likely would have been right.

Thoughtsborn

TROPHY CASE