Official Jon Gruden Thread XXVI

Status
Not open for further replies.
i've got to learn how to do gif's. Pics i can do

been a while since anyone asked ... and since you sorta did ...

1) Select desired gif.

2) right click on gif and select copy image address
note: if that phrase does not pop up, just keep right clicking on the gif until it does, or open in another window and right click it there.

3) come back to volnation, and click ”insert image” icon, appearing in the box above the text box square.

4) a window pops us with http:// already appearing, right click beside that, and paste beside that, then click okay

5) all the stuff magically appears in the text box!

6) submit reply

das it mane

[B][I]note: if your/re on mobile, you’ll have to talk to someone else[/I][/B]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I find this interesting but have only begun to scratch the surface. Figured I'd give it a shot to test my understanding.

We can assume the two parties settled at an equilibrium state when they agreed to the terms of the Gruden deal/Butch release, which puts the system at a pareto efficient (optimum) state. We know it is a pareto optimum state since any attempt to benefit someone by deviating to some other outcome will necessarily result in a loss in satisfaction to someone else. The equilibrium state is a function of time, which, prior to the Kendrick situation, can be considered a constant.

The introduction of the Kendrick situation forced a change in the time, which forced a change in the equilibrium. With an artificial movement in the equilibrium point, the pareto efficiency was forced into a pareto ineffient state.

The effect of time on the equilibrium means Currie receives less of his perceived advantage of the original deal (in a sense, a loss from his equilibrium state) and the boosters receive more of the perceived advantage of the original deal (in a sense, a gain from their equilibrium state).

Gonna need that in MLA format with citations and a cover page please
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Why don’t u guys that live in this thread just call it girly Gif competition, with a splash of rumors

giphy.gif


tumblr_oto92e8YgQ1u1ljrzo1_500.gif


tumblr_m0u74iln1i1qfi8d2o1_500.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Everything that has been said so far has not happened. Now we have a kid who played with a concussion and Butch is still being paraded in front of the media and continuing to embarrass us even more and showing just how lost he is as the head coach of Tennessee. Our admin is doing everything it can to keep Butch Jones.

We have heard every rumor under the sun, seen former players stir up smoke on social media, and "insiders" share the information from their "sources." But nothing has come true or shown any part of being the truth. I'm losing faith on us getting Gruden. Heck I'm losing faith that our admin can even handle this without screwing it up. Our admin is a national joke and continues to show that it is ran by incompetent people who are so blind to their personal egos and agendas. We need more people in our admin who truly care and are passionate about Tennessee and doing what's best for Tennessee, not them.

Lastly, it blows my mind if it is true that the admin is in the way. How do all those "brilliant" people not understand that by paying for a great coach and having a healthy football program will only increase the money the university makes and receives in donations for fundraising campaigns. Plus, it'll ultimately help achieve their goal of being a top 25 public university. If they screw this up, they'll quickly realize how important it was when they are short on money for construction projects and renovations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 people
I find this interesting but have only begun to scratch the surface. Figured I'd give it a shot to test my understanding.

We can assume the two parties settled at an equilibrium state when they agreed to the terms of the Gruden deal/Butch release, which puts the system at a pareto efficient (optimum) state. We know it is a pareto optimum state since any attempt to benefit someone by deviating to some other outcome will necessarily result in a loss in satisfaction to someone else. The equilibrium state is a function of time, which, prior to the Kendrick situation, can be considered a constant.

The introduction of the Kendrick situation forced a change in the time, which forced a change in the equilibrium. With an artificial movement in the equilibrium point, the pareto efficiency was forced into a pareto ineffient state.

The effect of time on the equilibrium means Currie receives less of his perceived advantage of the original deal (in a sense, a loss from his equilibrium state) and the boosters receive more of the perceived advantage of the original deal (in a sense, a gain from their equilibrium state).


Where have YOU been? Great post. I think.
 
The Comb is one of my favorite posters on VN. Insiders are around, it has been a very interesting past 2 days. The Kendrick’s issue is a big deal (both in the health of that kid and on the implications it has on Butch).

For the game theory nerds, whoever can correctly summarize the implications this has on Currie and the boosters will win a a couple free scotch drinks on me at a home game next year.

So with Game theory you are going to pick the option in which you get the best return while assuming the other player will choose the best outcome for themselves. So for the boosters their best choice is to hire Gruden simply because of the massive return on Investment so Currie will also choose Gruden because this option makes him look like a savior vs the alternative of having no support from boosters who would walk away with their money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Some good news today, our RB commit Anthony Grant said that he did not commit to Butch Jones, he committed to Tennessee. I thought that was very cool and admirable. It definitely made him one of my favorite recruits. He said a coaching change will have no effect on his decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19 people
I found her, I found her...Daniela is refereeing the Central Michigan / Western Michigan game...
 
Because you know I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude, no Jonesin'
I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude, no Jonesin'
I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude, no Jonesin'
I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude... Grude... Grude... Grude
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Because you know I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude, no Jonesin'
I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude, no Jonesin'
I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude, no Jonesin'
I'm all about that Grude
'Bout that Grude... Grude... Grude... Grude

Sounds intimate
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Gonna need that in MLA format with citations and a cover page please

I find this interesting but have only begun to scratch the surface. Figured I'd give it a shot to test my understanding.

We can assume the two parties settled at an equilibrium state when they agreed to the terms of the Gruden deal/Butch release, which puts the system at a pareto efficient (optimum) state. We know it is a pareto optimum state since any attempt to benefit someone by deviating to some other outcome will necessarily result in a loss in satisfaction to someone else (Goyal). The equilibrium state is a function of time (Agukwe), which, prior to the Kendrick situation, can be considered a constant.

The introduction of the Kendrick situation forced a change in the time, which forced a change in the equilibrium. With an artificial movement in the equilibrium point, the pareto efficiency was forced into a pareto ineffient state.

The effect of time on the equilibrium means Currie receives less of his perceived advantage of the original deal (in a sense, a loss from his equilibrium state) and the boosters receive more of the perceived advantage of the original deal (in a sense, a gain from their equilibrium state).

1. Goyal, Amit. “What is the Difference Between Nash Equilibrium and Pareto Efficiency?” Quora, 29 Dec. 2016, ☆ The Difference Between Nash Equilibrium and Pareto Optimality - Quora.

2. Agukwe, Franklin Chiemeka. “Favorable and Unfavorable Balance of Equilibrium.” American Journal of Economics, vol. 4, no. 5, 2014, pp. 195–199.

As you wish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top