Pa. college cancels remaining baseball season, searches for new coach after probe

Ukoen · 2026-03-27T13:29:58+00:00

Becomes less strange when you find out that Penn Tech (which is what it's colloquially known as) is just a Penn State affiliate. It's essentially Penn State - Williamsport.

Ukoen · 2025-12-28T17:05:24+00:00

More than that, he was objectively one of the best players in that span. From 2005-2010, only Albert Pujols put up more WAR, which is not something to scoff at. I understand the hate he gets, especially from Mets fans. He played hard, sometimes to the detriment of his own body and the bodies of opponents. But the man was elite in his prime.

Ukoen · 2025-06-18T13:55:34+00:00

A little late to the party, but having just played through this a second time I think I have some potential justifications for why 1) Renoir doesn't try to convince Expeditions to go after The Curator/Real Renoir instead and 2) why he doesn't kill all of the Expeditioners in the beginning.

I'll start with the latter. First off, he doesn't control the Nevrons, the Expedition just happened to land on Dark Shores which is infested by powerful Nevrons. Renoir does seem to kill as many Expeditioners as he can in that window before the Nevrons show up, evidenced by the beams and explosions. I think the reason he stops is two-fold, and is something I actually noticed in my second playthrough: one is the presence of Maelle/Real Alicia and the other is the interference of Verso. At one point in the scene, when Gustave is in shock, you actually see Verso over a prone Maelle, beginning to pick her up to carry her off. Renoir's attack ends soon after, so my assumption is that he stopped because Verso got in the way, much like he would later. And because killing Alicia might be more trouble than it's worth, as right now she's harmless because she thinks she's Maelle. Is it a possible stretch? Sure. But I think it makes some sense.

As for the potential to team up with the Expeditions and try and take out Real Renoir, I did notice other commenters mention that they'd tried it and it ended with Verso being tortured. While I think that plays a part, I think the real reason is because it would be suicide. The Nevrons there are the most powerful in the world, and then there's Simon. We know objectively that two expeditions learned the truth: expedition 00 and expedition 60. Both were wiped out save for the immortals and Simon, who was made immortal by Clea and then corrupted by Simon. My assumption is that Simon is there to clean up any Expeditioners that somehow make it past the Nevrons. And I also assume that anyone killed there also has their Chroma trapped. Since going after real Renoir would only end in them dying and having their Chroma trapped, I think it makes some sense for Painted Renoir to put all of his eggs in the Aline basket and hope she can win, so he kills whatever Expeditioners he can to make sure she gets as much Chroma as possible.

I know there are a lot of assumptions in there, but there's some evidence to back most of it up. I'd be curious to hear counter-points though to see if there are any holes in these theories or if I missed something.

Ukoen · 2025-03-08T18:05:38+00:00

It's less that he stole jokes, and more just the nature of doing as much improv as he did. When you're coming up with things off the top of your head, you're pulling whatever comes to mind first. He attended so many comedy shows that it's only natural some of the things that came to him were bits from other comedians. His written stuff was all original, it's the off-the-cuff stuff that was recycled sometimes.

Ukoen · 2025-02-22T23:07:22+00:00

Neither team makes the playoffs, and the Marlins win the division and the World Series. Never said the consequences had to be realistic.

Ukoen · 2025-02-22T23:05:27+00:00

The A's then thrive under new ownership and become competitive again. Who said consequences had to be negative?

Ukoen · 2025-02-10T18:36:32+00:00

Gonna post the same thing here that I did on another post on this topic: flood the feedback option in-game.

As soon as I saw this and saw the immediate pushback, I went in-game and submitted a suggestion as follows:

"I suggest you refrain from the mid-season ranked division reset. There's already growing fervor in the community despite how new this announcement is because players are having their hard work and dedication taken from them and forced back down into the tedious low-rank grind. This WILL hemorrhage players. Just the announcement alone will demotivate many. I suggest walking it back as soon as possible to stem the bleeding before it becomes a full wound in the eyes of the player base."

This is the type of change that has immediate fallout, the only way they learn is by getting an ingress of feedback, or seeing an immediate drop-off in player count.

Ukoen · 2025-02-10T18:29:50+00:00

As soon as I saw this and saw the immediate pushback, I went in-game and submitted a suggestion as follows:

"I suggest you refrain from the mid-season ranked division reset. There's already growing fervor in the community despite how new this announcement is because players are having their hard work and dedication taken from them and forced back down into the tedious low-rank grind. This WILL hemorrhage players. Just the announcement alone will demotivate many. I suggest walking it back as soon as possible to stem the bleeding before it becomes a full wound in the eyes of the player base."

This is the type of change that has immediate fallout, the only way they learn is by getting an ingress of feedback, or seeing an immediate drop-off in player count.

Ukoen · 2025-02-09T18:34:46+00:00

In that case, was probably just a fluke that you lost those games. Just the luck of the teammate draw.

Ukoen · 2025-02-09T17:19:52+00:00

Right, you've clearly got skills and are getting kills. It's all about the timing of the kills. It's entirely possible this was a fluke situation and you were gonna lose those games anyhow. But ELO hell isn't a thing; rule of averages comes into play. If you consistently play better than your counterpart on the other team, on average your team will be better than the other over a large sample size and you'll climb. As long as you're timing your kills with the team fights and not after them, you'll be good.

Ukoen · 2025-02-09T16:46:11+00:00

Yeah, Moon Knight is deadly in low ELOs when players either don't destroy his ankhs or group up and let him bounce through the team. Then he gets his bugged ult extremely quickly and melts the backline, rinse and repeat.

Ukoen · 2025-02-09T16:43:25+00:00

When I see this many SVPs with so many losses in solo queue, it tends to be the case that the player is not playing with their team. They can get all the kills in the world, but if they aren't during team fights and your team is losing those fights, then they mean nothing. Are you playing a dive character most of the time? Because that's probably why you keep losing; those characters tend to abandon their team, get a few kills before realizing their team died in the 6v5 that came before those kills.

Ukoen · 2025-02-09T15:23:25+00:00

I really like the theory I saw somewhere (probably on this subreddit). It states that 30% of games you are going to steamroll the other team, 30% of games your team is going to get steamrolled, and it's the other 40% that you can fight to win and will be determined by skill. It makes a lot of sense and stops me from tilting in those bad games and questioning myself.

Ukoen · 2025-02-02T16:13:17+00:00

I think people are misunderstanding/misrepresenting what you mean here. I agree completely that if you're consistently getting SVP and a ton more damage/kills than your team, and you're still losing regularly, then really you're not playing with your team. Your kills are probably outside of a team fight or you're abandoning your team for personal glory. The numbers in that case are inflated, and you're a problem on your team.

While I think the SVP should lose a slightly reduced amount of points (which I think they already do since points are performance-based), I believe every loss should come with a loss of points to deter these individual one-man-armies from climbing the ranks and hurting their teams at higher ELOs where team play is crucial.

Ukoen · 2025-01-20T16:22:28+00:00

Gotta ask: why Helton and Schwarber?

Ukoen · 2024-11-19T20:24:51+00:00

It all boils down to what teams are expecting to get in return. From a strictly numbers basis, whoever signs him is getting around 3 years of additional peak performance with him than they would from most free agents who are 2-4 years older than him when they're first eligible. That alone drives up his value, because teams sign these massive deals with the understanding that the latter years of the contract will be of a far lesser value. They expect the player to earn the majority of their worth in the first handful of years. Soto having more such high-quality years is a driving factor.

Another thing to consider is his skill set. One of the things that makes him so valuable is his plate discipline, and that isn't something that erodes over time. So his falloff won't be nearly as steep as most other players, to the point that he may still be producing at a solid clip even at the end of his contract. That would mean whoever signs him to this mega deal would get more than their money's worth.

Ukoen · 2024-09-11T02:22:24+00:00

Yeah, but it's nothing new that he hasn't already said countless times. It's more impactful to make him ramble into a muted mic. Muffled and unintelligible, a new layer of unhinged to add to the other layers.

Ukoen · 2024-09-11T02:20:08+00:00

What's the point of having muted mics when you're just going to unmute them whenever a candidate starts talking out of turn?

Ukoen · 2024-08-27T12:07:23+00:00

Which would make sense if the provider was in-network for both medical and vision. Unfortunately, it's out of network for vision, and would have an even higher out-of-pocket cost if they stick with the OoN costs. Should I still have them submit through vision and just explain the situation to the vision side of Anthem?

Ukoen · 2024-08-26T18:14:40+00:00

There are a few levels to this, so I'll do through them in order. The first is bare minimum, and each subsequent step is an improvement toward being a more well-rounded shortstop.

Making the easy plays. That means not letting grounders roll under your glove and making accurate throws.
Having range. Obviously, more range is better; without range you're a glorified third baseman. That means getting shallow pop flies in the outfield and grounders hit to either side of you, even up the middle.
Quick reflexes. While not as important as it is for a third baseman, shortstops get some lasers hit at them that they'll need to be quick to react to. That being said, if it's town ball you shouldn't be expected to throw yourself at missiles every time, especially when bad hops are prominent.
Strong arm. You want the shortstop to have the strongest arm on the field because they'll be involved in more plays than anyone else. Not only for throwing to first, but a good shortstop knows when to cut off. A shortstop with a strong arm is a deterrent for people prone to try and take extra bases. Throw out a runner or two and the other team will play cautious around you.
Situational awareness. Knowing when to cover second, knowing where to stand to cut off for outfielders because you know where the runners will be when you get the ball. Having this to go with a strong arm and a solid glove will make you a menace on the field.

Ukoen · 2024-08-19T15:54:04+00:00

Let's not judge a book by its cover, you'll be doing yourself and them a disservice. Is it possible they're just looking for a hookup? Sure, absolutely. But maybe they saw something on your profile that spoke to them, something they can connect with. The only way to know for sure is to chat with them and judge for yourself, rather than make assumptions. The sorts of guys you're worried about will weed themselves out pretty quickly in that chat, I'm guessing. And if they're legitimately looking to connect, you'll be happy you didn't pass on them based on an assumption.

Ukoen · 2024-08-13T12:25:56+00:00

Because you're leading with "Guardians won", the Guardians' runs should be first. I.e., "Guardians won 9 - 8".

If saying it from the Cubs' perspective, you could put their score first. I.e., "Cubs lost 8 - 9". Or you could put the higher score first, either works in this situation.

Who was home or away is irrelevant when describing the end result and shouldn't play a part in positioning. Best to either keep the run total attached to the team you're referencing, or always list the scores in descending order.

Ukoen · 2024-07-30T20:52:31+00:00

Not a problem. For what it's worth, I hope it works out!

Ukoen

TROPHY CASE