-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter LordJeffBuck
- Start date
- Status
Try being a band nerd.He was referring to art class days sucking for latch key kids because you had to lug the shit home and unlock the door with your hands full.
1st world problems to be sure but I do remember hating art class because I had to take all that bullshit home.
Upvote
0
They actually think they have counter-arguments, and they're basing them off this obvious troll account.
Do these fucking idiots not understand that Catapult (who makes those sports bra looking things with GPS sensors sewn in) doesn't have "film" of anything? It's purely GPS data and analytics, so you can tell how far guys ran, and whether or not they're hitting 22mph on kick off cover. That's it.
Upvote
0
Right?! Out here thinking they got body cam footage lol.
How about we take a look at that Stallions Ray-Ban footage - then we will get to Catapult.
Upvote
0
That's just what Catapult wants you to think ....
I have recently joined MGOBlow and have learned of a much more nefarious capability that the dreaded Catapult delivers .....
Upvote
0
gregorylee
I'd rather be napping!!
I think what he is referring to is that alot of areas had "latchkey" programs at the local rec center, they would host activities to keep the kids off the streets and out of trouble. In my neighborhood they had them at Holton, and Westgate. So you could choose your activity lol
Upvote
0
If you go to their website, one of the services they provide is video analysis. Reading further, it's just video taken while athletes are wearing their monitoring devices so data can be collected and analyzed in real time. They don't have "practice footage". The company is very high tech in data analytics. DFBIA is just stupid and desperate enough to believe anything they are told.
Catapult
Discover the Catapult cutting-edge sports technology, data analytics, and insights that will unleash the potential of your team and athletes.
www.catapult.com
Last edited:
Upvote
0
DFBIA "we can't believe these slanderous anonymous sources!"
Also DFBIA when obvious anonymous troll account posts shit "WOW WE KNEW IT THERE IS SOMETHING HERE DAY IS GUILTY!"
Also DFBIA when obvious anonymous troll account posts shit "WOW WE KNEW IT THERE IS SOMETHING HERE DAY IS GUILTY!"
Upvote
0
ORD_Buckeye
Wrong glass, Sir.
And their tackles look completely lost when they don't have numbers on their side in those rollouts.
Upvote
0
For Laughs
mgoblog.com
Also RICO is back!
Relationships between former OSU staffers and Catapult Sports practice film archives | mgoblog
Catapult Sports is a software company used by many college football teams to analyze practice video and game tape. It turns out that Joe Stanek, OSU's former Director of Football Video (2017-2020), and another former OSU assistant football video coordinator (2016-2020) now work at Catapult.
Also RICO is back!
Upvote
0
The amount of Michigan people tagging real media people begging them to report on what a obvious just created troll account is flinging out
Upvote
0
https://www.elevenwarriors.com/forum/college-sports/2023/11/143282/ttun-scandal-part-cii?page=1#new
For those that are interested another post from the Oracle on Eleven Warriors. Link to thread above. Copy and Paste below
Yes. Read your message. Will Hobson at the Post has been making inquiries about the same topics. If I understand correctly, there is a difference between what is known and what is provable. The image database is known and provable. Partridge attempting to delete it is known and provable (hence, his termination). The "processing" of the image database to decipher/decode is known and provable; however, this isn't necessarily illicit. (Frankly, the rules haven't heretofore contemplated the application of machine learning technology for this purpose. Is it within the "spirit" of the rules? Probably not. Is it outside of the letter of the rules? Not as they are currently penned.) The same day, game day collection, processing, and use of signals intelligence is known and also suspected to be provable since recorded images appear in the database that could have only been captured on game day. Naturally, this begs the question: Why would one capture signals on game day if there was no intent to consequently exploit this same information during the game? What is suspected and thus far not proven is the means by which the same day intelligence was communicated to the sideline. There are rumors that it was not via traditional headset communications. Instead, the recent rumors (and perhaps this isn't the best word to describe the whisper campaign since the whisperers are people who would likely have actual knowledge of happenings) is that UM staff were using non-UM devices in contravention of NCAA policies concerning permissible in-stadium electronic devices. There remains an outstanding question as to if Partridge was attempting to delete information from a UM device or from a personal device. There is a further question about the NCAA's ability to access personal content (e.g., data backed up on iCloud) if it was originally resident on a school-issued device. If the communications relay to the sideline was SMS-based (e.g., iMessage) then there is a chance that this information was backed up and, presumably, accessible. I agree that if the NCAA can prove that UM was illicitly communicating this information to its sideline during a game, then that is basically curtains for the program (well, at least as much as Fox would allow the sun to set on one of its premier brands). As per our previous email, I'm reticent to put forth anything in the public domain that hasn't been previously published. I think that we're all hearing much of the same information from many of the same sources, and I continue to believe that - among local persons - Donnelly probably has the best conference-level sourcing and credible information. I would trust his information.
For those that are interested another post from the Oracle on Eleven Warriors. Link to thread above. Copy and Paste below
Yes. Read your message. Will Hobson at the Post has been making inquiries about the same topics. If I understand correctly, there is a difference between what is known and what is provable. The image database is known and provable. Partridge attempting to delete it is known and provable (hence, his termination). The "processing" of the image database to decipher/decode is known and provable; however, this isn't necessarily illicit. (Frankly, the rules haven't heretofore contemplated the application of machine learning technology for this purpose. Is it within the "spirit" of the rules? Probably not. Is it outside of the letter of the rules? Not as they are currently penned.) The same day, game day collection, processing, and use of signals intelligence is known and also suspected to be provable since recorded images appear in the database that could have only been captured on game day. Naturally, this begs the question: Why would one capture signals on game day if there was no intent to consequently exploit this same information during the game? What is suspected and thus far not proven is the means by which the same day intelligence was communicated to the sideline. There are rumors that it was not via traditional headset communications. Instead, the recent rumors (and perhaps this isn't the best word to describe the whisper campaign since the whisperers are people who would likely have actual knowledge of happenings) is that UM staff were using non-UM devices in contravention of NCAA policies concerning permissible in-stadium electronic devices. There remains an outstanding question as to if Partridge was attempting to delete information from a UM device or from a personal device. There is a further question about the NCAA's ability to access personal content (e.g., data backed up on iCloud) if it was originally resident on a school-issued device. If the communications relay to the sideline was SMS-based (e.g., iMessage) then there is a chance that this information was backed up and, presumably, accessible. I agree that if the NCAA can prove that UM was illicitly communicating this information to its sideline during a game, then that is basically curtains for the program (well, at least as much as Fox would allow the sun to set on one of its premier brands). As per our previous email, I'm reticent to put forth anything in the public domain that hasn't been previously published. I think that we're all hearing much of the same information from many of the same sources, and I continue to believe that - among local persons - Donnelly probably has the best conference-level sourcing and credible information. I would trust his information.
Upvote
0
- Status