West Indies Women’s cricket captain, Stafanie Taylor, has been added to the list of Sportswoman of the Year nominees, the RJR Sports Foundation announced in a release yesterday.The 2015 awards takes place on Friday, January 15 at The Jamaica Pegasus and Taylor joins eight other women vying for the National Sportswoman of the Year award. The other nominees are boxer Alicia Ashley; swimmer Alia Atkinson and track athletes Veronica Campbell-Brown, Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce, Shericka Jackson, Sherone Simpson, Elaine Thompson and Danielle Williams.Taylor topped the tables in a recent ODI home series against Pakistan with a batting average of 130.50 runs and was the most economical West Indies bowler while taking four wickets. West Indies won both the T20 and ODI series. She was also recently named the International Cricket Council’s Women’s T20 Cricketer of the Year.The Jamaican all-rounder recently became the only overseas player selected for the Sydney Thunder Women in the inaugural Australian Women’s Big Bash T20 League.
Today QPR play at Old Trafford – the scene of one of their greatest victories, along with plenty of defeats. How much do you know about the history between Rangers and Manchester United? Answer these 10 questions to find out…[mtouchquiz 4]Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Trevor Bell, Antorious Bell — EurekaEureka picked up its fourth win in the last 25 years over Shasta on Friday by a 35-21 margin.Its two Bell-cows had a heavy hand in the win.Trevor Bell opened the game with a 60-yard touchdown pass to Josiah Graham and ended it with a 20-yard touchdown run. In-between, Antorious Bell rushed for two touchdowns to keep Eureka in front.Will Omey, Justin Hagler — St. Bernard’sThe lone undefeated team in the Humboldt-Del Norte League received another big …
(Visited 32 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 Origin-of-life researchers assume that intelligently-designed experiments in the lab can inform them about the emergence of life without design – in short, that design proves non-design.Life uses chemistry; that’s not controversial. What’s at issue is whether abiotic reactions on a primitive earth led to life without design. Observing chemistry in the lab cannot speak to that question logically. Astrobiologists assume that experiments they design for small portions of their story can be strung together into “scenarios” about life’s origin without design. It doesn’t follow. No one stage logically leads to another. If each step is improbable, the improbabilities grow with each added step, becoming vanishingly small quickly. Maintaining the story requires ample insertion of imagination —the very thing the scientific method was intended to overcome. (Anyone can imagine that a scenario “could” happen. Science seeks demonstrable proof.)Moreoever, astrobiologists never entertain serious criticisms from those outside their field; i.e., from experts who do not believe life could have emerged naturally. All their squabbles are internal. It creates a self-reinforcing belief in naturalism, with disagreement only in the details. Naturalism itself becomes immune to falsification. In addition, astrobiology literature is rife with oversimplification and extrapolation, seasoned with hedging words about what “could” happen or “might” happen. A few recent examples showcase these logical fallacies.Kick-starting life: The leading controversy in origin-of-life theories these days concerns whether metabolism came first or genetics came first (see the two falsify each other in our 1/26/08 entry). The metabolism-first view of Michael Russell at JPL is getting good press these days (see 12/03/04 and 2/15/08). He claims that chemical reactions at hydrothermal vents started chain reactions that life later co-opted for metabolism. Using a kick-starting metaphor, Astrobiology Magazine claims that “Three new papers strengthen the case the life on Earth first began at alkaline hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the oceans.” Russell co-authored all three of these papers, so it’s no wonder they strengthen the case for his belief. He claims his theory is testable, but the only thing he is testing is his intelligently-designed apparatus. The observable present-day chemistry of vents, or the formation of acetate, does not logically concern the origin of life. Imagination replaces demonstration with the use of the “could” word:Once this early chemical pathway was forged, acetate could become the basis of other biological molecules. They also describe how two kinds of “nano-engines” that create organic carbon and polymers — energy currency of the first cells — could have been assembled from inorganic minerals.The question is, who is the kicker? In evolutionary theory, there is no mind or goal. If acetate formed at a hydrothermal vent, nobody was guiding it toward bigger and better things.Giving vent to imagination: In a PNAS commentary, Rogier Braakman of the Santa Fe Institute attempted to support the metabolism-first scenarios at hydrothermal, again with ample use of the “could” word:In particular, much remains unknown about what forms of prebiotic organic chemistry could have been possible at vents, and whether they could have produced abundant biological precursors.Several authors have argued (5–8 [including Russell]) that on the early Earth, this would have created a global network of geochemical reactors that could have seeded life by generating and trapping organic substrates from simple inorganic inputs.While providing an attractive conceptual framework, the strength of such arguments will ultimately depend on experiments that confirm that prebiotic chemistry at hydrothermal vents could have indeed produced analogs of pathways seen in modern metabolism.Studies of this sort can thus help improve our understanding of the variability of prebiotic chemistry within and across hydrothermal vents while also making it possible to consider how the parallel activation of different (sub)networks at different vent locations could have allowed access to pathways not possible under single environmental conditions.Mass concentration within abiotic networks was likely important, because if matter was distributed over too many different pathways it could have significantly decreased the likelihood of more complex structures and functions emerging.Thus, even if total abundances of such organic inputs were high, scenarios depending on them require plausible mechanisms to explain how only small subsets of compounds could have been selected out of highly distributed sets to become part of living systems.If instead metabolism emerged directly from geochemical networks with inorganic inputs, and studies indicate that the number of significantly contributing pathways at hydrothermal vents was likely somewhat limited, then the sparseness of metabolism could in part be a reflection of the sparseness of hydrothermal geochemistry.Before he died in 2007, Leslie Orgel (veteran origin-of-life researcher with Stanley Miller of spark-discharge fame) gave at least 15 reasons why metabolism-first scenarios will not work (1/26/08). None of them were addressed in this new article. The prior year, James Shapiro gave equally potent reasons why genetics-first scenarios will not work (2/15/07).Flowery rhetoric is not enough: PhysOrg gave ample space to another believer in metabolism-first scenarios, Elbert Branscomb from the University of Illinois, an admirer of Russell’s vent hypothesis. “Cracking how life arose on Earth may help clarify where else it might exist,” the headline reads, using three hedging words in one sentence. The grinning face of Branscomb, and his colorful prose (“The answer should help us discover what is truly necessary to spark the fateful transition from the lifeless to the living, and thereby, under what conditions and with what likelihood it might happen elsewhere”) cannot compensate for his illogic. In a single bound, Branscome leaps from the thermodynamics of hydrothermal vents to the intricate machinery of life that produces ATP, as if that is how “life got launched,” given “a free gift of geochemistry on a wet, rocky, and tectonically-active planet.” From there, Branscomb launched himself into an egregious display of personification:“It’s only later when life set out to take its act on the road that it had to figure out how to make its own membranes, pump protons uphill across these new membranes, tap into other sources of energy to do the pumping, etc.,” Branscomb said. “But once hooked on the free stuff, the trans-membrane proton gradient in particular, life never broke the habit. And here we are, every living thing, still frantically pumping protons as if just staying alive depends on it—which it does.”This dreamer was rewarded with an $8 million five-year grant to the University from the NASA Astrobiology Institute, the article said. (He claims his hypothesis is testable, but again, he’s only testing observable chemistry, not the origin of life.) The comments at the end of the article degenerated into name-calling, with angry evolutionists flinging Bible-thumping accusations against one who simply pointed out the improbabilities.Lewis and Clark they’re not: Fresh with more government money from the Lewis and Clark Fund, some young researchers are traveling the world for evidence of life on other planets. That’s right; they are assuming, illogically, that they can “Use Earth to Understand Possible Life in the Universe,” according to Space.com. Out they journey, looking for evidence of early oxygen and other things, on the only planet in the universe where life is known to exist. As much fun as these free vacations might be, they cannot logically speak to the origin of life on other planets from a sample of one. “The Lewis and Clark Fund for Exploration and Field Research in Astrobiology is supported by the NASA Astrobiology Institute and the American Philosophical Society (APS),” Michael Shirber of NASA’s Astrobiology Institute wrote, noting that the APS also had a role in the original Lewis and Clark Expedition of 1804. (That journey, though, was not trying to discover life on other planets.) One young researcher was so happy to take part, he said (with “could”), “The fact that other planets, which are seemingly inhospitable from a distance, could in fact have a prolific biosphere that is actively shaping their environment blows me away.” In science, no amount of emotion can justify an illogical conclusion.SETI self-refutation: Another Space.com article about SETI used the same non-sequitur fallacy, arguing that research into whale songs can inform them about life in outer space. Drake equation in hand, describing the history and current status of “SETI Evolution,” writer Laurence Doyle of the SETI Institute unwittingly stumbled onto an argument for intelligent design (without calling it that):But a new SETI idea is even farther out than that. The idea is that there is a SETI-type “calling card” in the human genome. In order for this to be isolated, one would have to show that this particular region in the human (or perhaps another species’) genome was not just non-random (any process with a rule structure of any kind is non-random), but that this certain region of the genome was incompatible with the processes that shaped or altered the present genome. The idea is that if a region of the human genome could be shown to not be like any other parts of the genome, and — much more difficult — to not be producible by natural selection, for example, then it would have to have been made by a pre-human and very advanced intelligence. I think information theory here would be very useful, as one could perhaps isolate regions of the genome that had unusual structure.From there, he pondered what alien intelligences might be thinking, apparently unaware that if alien intelligences could leave artifacts of their presence that we humans could discern, then design detection is a legitimate scientific approach for viewing the genome.The perhapsimaybecouldness index (PCMI) of these articles is off the charts. We invite you to re-read a commentary from 5/22/2002 about why individual parts of their scenario cannot logically support the scenario, using the analogy of a helicopter holding a girder over a canyon as a “possible” part of a bridge.Our online book and Meyer’s Signature in the Cell have destroyed, many times over, the imaginations of these origin-of-life Imagineers to the point that the rubble is bouncing. Suffice it to say that the Astrobiology fantasyland express continues at full steam (and full funding) despite literally decades of falsification, from the Wistar Institute study that Meyer discusses in Darwin’s Doubt, to numerous subsequent studies and books, even some by evolutionists. Remember when Astrobiology was rushed into a new government-funded science after an emotional press conference about the Mars meteorite? The meteorite was later debunked, but Astrobiology didn’t get ejected with it. Now they are still doling out millions of tax dollars in a down economy to keep the naturalistic myth going. Why do thinking people put up with something that is demonstrably untenable, illogical, and useless? For corroboration (and fun), re-read our 2/15/07 (“OOL on the Rocks”) and 1/26/08 (“Pigs Don’t Fly) entries.
Featuring high profile actors sharing powerful stories raised enough money to fund a permanent arts centre in rural South Africa.A massive fund raising campaign staged by celebrity actors in the UK to raise money for South African children has inspired local thespians to put together a star-studded event of their own.THE CHILDREN’S MONOLOGUESFeaturing high profile actors sharing powerful stories raised enough money to fund a permanent arts centre in rural South Africa. Now our local stage celebrities are preparing to replicate the event to raise money for the same charity, Dramatic Need.The UK version first ran in 2010 starring famous names like Nicole Kidman, Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor and James McAvoy.The local version being staged by the Market Theatre’s artistic director James Ngcobo working with Mfundi Vundla as Executive Producer, Mfundi who has a long standing relationship with Dramatic Need.The Market Theatre production will feature Jamie Bartlett, Robert Whitehead, Lesedi Job, Sonia Radebe, Masasa Mbangeni, Sello Maake Ka Ncube, Lebo Toko, Nokukhanya Dlamini, Gugu Shezi and Nomfundo Dlamini with live music from Tshepo Mngoma.This moving production in aid of Dramatic Need will play for one night only on Friday 20 May, 2016.The Children’s Monologues brings alive the true stories of more than 200 children in rural South Africa as they try to come to terms with moments that changed their lives forever.For many of these kids that means searching for answers in the aftermath of rape, death, and injustice.For others it is about trying to hold on to a memory that still inspires happiness. The Market Theatre has selected 15 of these moving soliloquies.The stories have been adapted for the stage by a Who’s Who of writers, including Napo Masheane, Elliot Moleba, James Graham, Neil La Bute, Laura Wade, Jack Thorne, Roy Williams OBE and Tanika Gupta MBE and Sir David Hare – from first-hand accounts of children supported by the charity.SPONSORSHIPThe fundraising evening will host corporates, high profile individuals, providing a powerful platform for corporates to partner with us.Sponsorship opportunities include:Headline Partner• Brand association: at the event, online, and in print• Visibility in all printed materials and digital platforms• ‘Sponsor a Monologue’ – credit as a supporter of a specific performance and piece• The opportunity to be established with a cutting-edge arts event and a forward-thinking, international charity.To Learn More Follow the link: www.dramaticneed.org.ABOUT DRAMATIC NEEDDramatic Need introduces vulnerable children in rural South Africa and Rwanda to the creative arts as a means to cope with trauma and hardship.It works to develop visual literacy and freedom of expression without recourse to violence. The organisation believes that creativity, not money, has the best chance of changing a generation of children’s attitudes to themselves and to each other.Through engagement in drama, visual arts, filmmaking and music, these children are empowered to confront complex issues with confidence and to resolve – rather than engage in conflict. Its classes are running at full capacity, with demand far outstripping what it is able to supply.ABOUT THE CHILDREN’S MONOLOGUESThe original Monologues played to a sold-out theatre and were covered by every major news outlet in the UK.The production highlighted to an international audience the challenges these children face and the power of creative storytelling to change attitudes and prejudice within developing communities.It was a unique event, in terms of offering both glamour and integrity.The proceeds funded a permanent arts centre in rural South Africa that now runs six workshops a week and serves hundreds of local children.The original event was staged at London’s The Old Vic and was put together by Danny Boyle, a founding trustee of Dramatic Need. Its stars included Sir Nen Kingsley and Eddie Redmayne. The second airing in 2015 was a sell-out performance at The Royal Court Theatre.Tickets cost R200 each with all the proceeds going towards Dramatic Need, which runs an arts and culture centre in a farm in the very poor community of Viljoenskroon, Free State.Ngcobo is also asking companies or individuals to come forward with sponsorship to make it a huge success and raise enough money to make sure more children have a story with a happy ending.The fundraising evening will give corporates and high profile individuals a powerful platform and the opportunity to be associated with a cutting-edge arts event and a forward-thinking, international charity.For bookings and donations call:Anthony Ezeokeon 011 025 0377 (Direct Line) or 083 246 4950 / 072 413 9247AnthonyE@markettheatre.co.zaDate: 20 May 2016Time: 07:00pmTickets: R200
It seems like one accessory that requires some type of subscription buying program where you get a new one every eight to ten weeks is a laptop charger. That’s because they tend to become frayed over time, making them unusable and putting you $80 out of pocket for every replacement charger from Apple that you need to buy for your MacBook.Not Charged UpAlthough the MacBook is a very popular laptop, the charger is not. Out of 2,510 reviews on the Apple.com site, the charger has a 1.5-star rating. Users describe the MacBook’s charger as “extremely fragile” and something that “cracks easily.”Other accessories have been created to store charger cords. However, these require manually wrapping the cord around the device. This doesn’t provide the best safeguard from fraying or damage. Reports have been that fraying happens most frequently where the cord connects with the brick, both externally and internally, cutting off the charge.Leading the Charge For a SolutionNow, there’s a new cool accessory that may finally stop the charger madness. The Side Winder by Fuse is a MacBook accessory that winds up your MacBook charger in under five seconds. In the process, it protects the cord from that damage it experiences when just manually rolled up.Named the #1 Kickstarter MacBook Accessory of 2017, it has garnered five-star reviews from users on Amazon and Facebook. Reviews call it “manageable and clean,” “easily stored.” Most point out the ability to keep the charger from being damaged during storage. The Side Winder’s modern packaging reveals an easy-to-follow set of instructions that have you up and running with it in a matter of minutes. The accessory has a lightweight shell design that can hold several different charger models. These include 45W, 60W, 61W, 85W, and 87W for various MacBook sizes. All you need to do is operate the side handle, which allows the cord to be wound up through the outer shell. It’s this shell that protects the cord from being damaged. Also, there’s a pull on both ends of the cable. This allows you to adjust the length control from ten inches to the full twelve feet. Inside the case, you’ll find an open space where your charger brick sits. A Great Solution Starts with a Frustrating ProblemFuse began when Logan Bailey, a recent graduate of Brigham Young University, was frustrated with the tangled mess that constantly came out of his backpack when he removed his computer. He saw the same issue across the campus with other students. When he couldn’t find a product that solved the issue, he decided to do something disruptive and create the product himself.After 50 prototypes, designed in Bailey’s basement workshop, Fuse launched its Kickstarter in September of 2017. In the first month, the Kickstarter reached 1600% funded. There was $290,000 pledged from 6,447 backers.Bailey continues to have goals. He is working The Side Winder into multiple retailers and expanding their online footprint. Priced at $29.99, it is affordable, high quality, and well designed. You can find it on their website at www.fusereel.com or on Amazon by searching The Side Winder by Fuse. Canvia Digital Art Turns Home and Office Walls … The ReadWrite reviews team provides reviews on the latest and greatest technologies, services, and products.For all review inquiries please email email@example.com ReadWrite Product Reviews Related Posts Molekule Air Purifier: Small in Stature, Big on… Blueair 680i Air Purifier: Clean Air For Your H… HyperDrive Power 9-in-1 USB-C Hub
The theme song “Into the Arena” is written and produced by Chris Sernel. You can find it on SoundcloudConnect with AnthonyWebsite: www.TheSalesBlog.comYoutube: www.Youtube.com/IannarinoFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/iannarinoTwitter: https://twitter.com/iannarinoGoogle Plus: https://plus.google.com/+SAnthonyIannarinoLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iannarinoTweets you can use to share this episodeHaving great product knowledge doesn’t pass the ‘so what’ test ~ Jonathan FarringtonClick To TweetKnowledge is key ~ Jonathan FarringtonClick To TweetSubscribe toIn the ArenaApple PodcastsGoogle PodcastsAndroidby EmailRSSOr subscribe with your favorite app by using the address below Podcast: Play in new window | Download (12.0MB)Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | Email | Google Podcasts | RSSToday’s guest, Jonathan Farrington, is a speaker, coach, author, consultant, and sales strategist leading the way in managing change in business. He is the CEO for JF Consulting, a successful globally influential consulting business. You might also recognize his name from Top Sales World and Top Sales Magazine. Jonathan sees the big picture, and has big ideas, for changes in sales. Listen in as he leads you and your team to greater performance levels, on today’s episode of In the Arena.Will you survive the changes in sales?Click To TweetFinding your way out of a financial meltdownYour host, Anthony Iannarino, fires questions for Jonathan’s expertise, specifically addressing what exactly is affecting the change in sales. The implications Jonathan has uncovered will impact your reality and your team. Jonathan looks at the financial meltdown of our day and age, in North America and globally. His prediction? 80% of sales jobs are going to change in some way. Some will turn into customer service roles. The important roles will become marketing and customer service. Is your role in sales diminishing? Join Jonathan today for the good news that your role will change, not disappear. Can you still create uniqueness?It is more difficult than ever to create and communicate value as a salesperson. The developing transaction purchasing model eliminates the need for uniqueness and differentiating yourself. As Jonathan Farrington tracks the changes in sales, he sees the top 20% surviving and thriving, which forces 80% to shift their strategy. Will you be in that top 20%? Are you taking into account your clients comforts and needs? Have you asked your clients if they mind more computer interaction and less face time? Creating and embracing a new flexible relationship is key. The new breed of sales professionals will have to build their foundations from attitude plus skills plus knowledge plus process. Start today, by listening to this episode of In the Arena. Staying relevant and focused, with Jonathan FarringtonClick To TweetInsight If you want to continue differentiating yourself, you are going to need insight. This buzzword has some salespeople emphasizing product knowledge with their team and clients. But insight reaches beyond product knowledge. Learn today, how to stay relevant and stay focused. None of your clients have time for irrelevant meetings. They do not even care about your product. What they do care about is what you can do for them. Demonstrate that you have the commercial depth and breadth they need and will continue to need. Want to count yourself among the sales survivors? Now is the time to develop your commercial bandwidth, with Jonathan Farrington.One size never fits allJonathan Farrington knows that many salespeople say we need to tailor solutions uniquely to our individual clients. But do we actually do that? One size fits all training, coaching, and counseling has never worked. Have you considered the realm of values, personality traits, etc. that will make your individual clients or sales teams work? Jonathan’s goal has always been to raise the bar in the business world. Today’s episode is just one more free resource you can use to tap into your true potential. Get In the Arena with Jonathan, today!The one size fits all training, coaching, counseling has never worked and it never willClick To TweetOutline of this great episode Introduction and biography of today’s guest, Jonathan Farrington. Will there be far fewer salespeople in the future? Are we moving away from creating value as salespeople? What does a salesperson need to be in the top 20% that survives? What is insight and why is it necessary? Age as a disadvantage. How to make sense of distractions and stay focused. How you consider your clients creates your future. How to connect with Jonathan Farrington. Resources & Links mentioned in this episodeTop Sales WorldJonathan Farrington’s websiteJonathan on Twitter – @topsalesworld
Mumbai, Aug 18 (PTI) Priyanka Chopra was once again at the receiving end of online trolls when she donned a tricolour scarf to mark the countrys 70th Independence Day.The 35-year-old actor had posted a boomerang video on her social media accounts. She is seen sporting a stole resembling the national flag and swaying it in the air.”Independence Day #Vibes #MyHeartBelongsToIndia #HappyIndependenceDayIndia #JaiHind,” Chopra posted.But the Internet trolls started tearing into the actors choice of clothes, calling the move “shameful” and “insulting” for the country.”Whats is going on here Priyanka have some respect for national flag of India,” a user wrote.”She can wear whatever she wants but must choose some decent outfit according to occasion,” another user said.A troll wrote, “You cant defend this shameful lady who is destroying our countrys name globally.”Many, however, came forward in Chopras defence.”Whats up with people… There is nothing wrong in showing love to your country in any way u feel like…,” one wrote.One of the actors fans wrote, “Love you PC… The look suits you! And stop being hypocrites guys… Its her life, let her decide.”Chopra was recently slammed for wearing a dress during her meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Berlin. PTI RDS BDS BK
What KSU was doingAnyone who has followed Big 8/Big 12 football over the years knows a KSU offense when they see it—quarterback under center, fullbacks, one or two tight ends, etc.We see KSU employ a couple of these things for this play. The QB is lined up in a shotgun formation instead of being under center, but we can see a FB (Glenn Gronkowski), TE and three WRs lined up on this play.The ball is snapped and we can see the play is a QB run. With it being 1st-and-10 and KSU experiencing minimal success passing the ball in this game, a QB run of some sort was to be expected.AdChoices广告The WRs, TE and FB are all blocking on this play.You’ve probably heard the phrase “pulling guard” before and KSU has one on this play. A pulling guard is an offensive guard that leaves his side of the line when the ball is snapped and runs to the other to provide the offense with a size and numbers advantage in blocking. On this play, it is the right guard that pulls and comes over to the left side.What OSU was doingAfter a couple weeks of seeing OSU in its 3-3-5 package, we’re back to a play where the Pokes are in the base 4-3 defense.It looks like there’s only three linemen but Jimmy Bean is in a stand-up 5-technique on the left side of the line. The reason Bean is the only lineman standing up is because he is playing spy/contain. KSU was having some success running with the QB so Spencer made the adjustment of having Bean stand-up and play spy on the QB to keep him from getting around that edge.Seth Jacobs, Chad Whitener and Burton are the three LBs, with Burton playing up on the line-of-scrimmage outside of Ogbah.Ashton Lampkin and Michael Hunter look to be the two CBs on the play. If you notice, both are two yards across from the WR’s they’re lined up on. This lets us know that they will be playing man-to-man coverage.As a side note, you’ll see a lot of talented defenses play man-to-man coverage on 1st and 2nd downs and then run a zone defense when they have the offense in 3rd and long. This forces the offenses to execute and make plays against an aggressive defense, rather than just giving them easier yards, which might happen if you start in a zone on 1st down. Of course, as with every scheme in football, this can easily change/be negated as different situations occur.It looks like Sterns and Flowers are the two safeties. Flowers is lined up about ten yards off the inside receiver at the bottom of the screen. With no one else available to cover him, the inside WR becomes Flowers man to cover. Sterns is playing back about 12 yards off the ball. With every skill player already accounted for, Sterns’ job is to prevent the big pass play or come up and provide run support.Why this worked for OSUNotice when the ball is snapped, the three linemen in three-point stances all fire off and go left. This sort of collapses the right side of the offensive line. This leaves all three LBs to hold down the right side of the line.We have the pulling guard, the TE and the FB left to block the three linebackers. KSU might have the size advantage here, but OSU has the definite speed one.None of those three blockers really get a good block on any of the LBs. Whitener uses his quickness to get around the TE. The TE is able to get a little bit of a block on Whitener and the guard comes over to help.Now, we have the FB blocking Burton and no one blocking Jacobs. Even though Burton and Whitener are the ones being blocked, they’re also the ones who make the stop.The best part about this play is Burton. Since he stepped on campus, we’ve been hearing about the hitting power of Burton and I think it was displayed in impressive fashion on this play.No, he didn’t lay out a 190-pound WR, but he did knock back a 6’3”, 240-pound GRONKOWSKI. Fullbacks LOVE running plays because it’s their chance to run and knock someone senseless. But Burton doesn’t shy away from the contact. Actually, he creates it. And not only does he knock Baby Gronk back, he also disrupts the running lane and it able to bring the QB down.It almost feels unfair to do a breakdown of this play because the Wildcats were so limited in what they could do and being backed up in its own 10-yard line causes KSU to become even more limited. Nevertheless, this was a big point in the game for both teams and it was important OSU come up with some stops. While you’re here, we’d like you to consider subscribing to Pistols Firing and becoming a PFB+ member. It’s a big ask from us to you, but it also comes with a load of benefits like ad-free browsing (ads stink!), access to our premium room in The Chamber and monthly giveaways.The other thing it does is help stabilize our business into the future. As it turns out, sending folks on the road to cover games and provide 24/7 Pokes coverage like the excellent article you just read costs money. Because of our subscribers, we’ve been able to improve our work and provide the best OSU news and community anywhere online. Help us keep that up.