Not hard a hard thing to do. Over the years, I've had perhaps 200 letters published by the Chronicle Sporting Green or the Chronicle's main Editorial Page. All you have to do is say something controversial, and the Chron will publish it, like a shark that senses blood in the water. Today's media, especially newspapers, are struggling to survive, and dirt sells newspapers, even dirt published in the sports section..oskidunker said:
You have give Chauca credit. he got his article published in the Chronicle!
concordtom said:
You said: I never thought McCullogh was given much chance.
I think AM was given plenty of time early. He was in a rotation and played minutes in the middle of games. He simply wasn't mentally ready. Understandable. 18 years old. Far from home. I was a knucklehead at that edge and now I send my eldest to college in 2 months. I get it. No shame!
McCullough was not "given plenty of playing time early." He was never "in a rotation." The Cal rotation last season was 7 players, or 8, if you include Roman Davis, who averaged 8 minutes per game. McCullough had only 3 games in the entire preseason that he played Roman Davis-like minutes, 8 or more.
If by early season, did you mean the first six games through Maui, or something like that? Of those six games, he played 3 minutes vs Cal Poly, 2 vs Wofford, and 1 vs Chaminade. That is not rotation-like minutes, and not worth even looking at. The remaining 3 games, Riverside, WSU, VCU, he averaged almost 8 minutes.
You bash the player by overlooking the statistics, and by judging him not mentally ready. How did you arrive at that conclusion? Why is it that if a player does not perform as expected, so many of us rush to judgment of the player, and don't place any responsibility on his teammates, his coach, or the defense he faced?
First of all, you don't know what Coach told him to do when he inserted him into his games. Was he told to pass the ball or not pass up an open shot, or when he got the ball, to try and create shots on his own? Was he told to move without the ball, or told to get open for a catch and shoot? Was he told to concentrate on his defense and not told anything in particular about what to do on offense? Was he told to just stay out of the way of the primary shooters, while they created their shots?
Second, he was playing with some players who had the ball most of the time and who also spent a lot of time creating their own shots. Did coach Jones tell those players to get the ball to McCullough when he was open, instead of continuing to look for their own shots? Did anyone try to get the ball to McCullough so he could shoot?
Until you know what Jones said to McCullough and to the rotation about what McCullough's role would be, you don't know enough to say McCullough wasn't mentally ready. I just find it odd that a recruit who was billed as a good outside shot, over a span of 19 games, took only 12 shots, and in 12 of those games he did not take a single shot. There is something wrong with this picture. Either he was told not to shoot much, or he was unable to get open, or his teammates did not give him the ball. Most freshmen are not mentally ready, but they find a way to play basketball and if they are a shooter, get a shot up.
It can be an indicator. But there are players who shoot much better in games than they do in practice. I was one of those players. I was the best shot on every team I ever played for, but I was not reliable in practice. I just couldn't seem to keep my focus in practice. Maybe I got bored. I don't know. Even when I was alone shooting baskets, I had to make up mind-games to keep myself interested. Pretend I needed to make the shot or I'd be cut from the team, or pretend some beautiful girl was in the stands and I needed to make this shot to impress her. All kinds of stuff.helltopay1 said:
I go to the games early to see whether the newcomers can shoot. Neither austin nor winston were reliable shooters in practice. Case closed.
The current roster needs a big, desperately, so Thurman would be a help. As for other spots, someone like Jeff Powers or Ryan Forehan-Kelly would come to mind.calumnus said:
Assuming nothing changes, it is looking like a good opportunity for some recruited walk-ons, if just to fill out the roster for practice. Must be another Thurmanator out there :-)
Wyking probably was looking to McCullough to be a spot up catch and shoot guy who could come off the bench and right away knock down a three. McCullough at least proved he could not do that with a few minutes in several games. He probably was a starter in high school and played most of the game, and takes more minutes to get his shot warmed up. Just a wild guess.concordtom said:
Sfc, your post needs to be edited to show where I stopped talking and you starting, however I get it.
You made a good point so I went and looked at his game log. He did have 7 games where he logged 7 or more minutes. I guess that's what I was alluding to. Granted, it's not a lot, and he may have been instructed to not shoot. Still, I guess I felt like it was a enough opportunity to score more than 0 for 12.
Ironically enough, I began my HS varsity career 0 for 18, so if AM reads this, have heart.... I did end up averaging 10 per game at a JC later on. He's already blown away any of my accomplishments.
Perhaps you've misrepresented my take on AM, sfc. I am not throwing him under the bus. I said:
He was given an opportunity, did not meet it.
That doesn't mean I cut him. I'd work with him to help him do what he clearly was already able to do in HS. For me, i was nervous and not ready for the varsity role. My coach was pretty critical and harsh and didn't allow me to be a better player. He wanted to channel all shots to his 2 or 3 favorite shooters. If you made a mistake in practice or games, he'd ridicule you. He was a successful W-L coach, but not an endearing person and not a confidence builder!! I worked hard to grow up and it was tough for me. But I grew up and just like Sam Singer, who hit that game winner at UW, so will AM.
I don't think you'd find me posting AM-bashing posts on here. But I will say that he had some chances.
Hmmm, does that clear things up?
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/gamelog/_/id/4278142/austin-mccullough
Edit: I just re-read our exchange. True, he was not given a ton of time, not as much as I alluded to. You are right. 7 min stints is not a ton.
SFCityBear said:Wyking probably was looking to McCullough to be a spot up catch and shoot guy who could come off the bench and right away knock down a three. McCullough at least proved he could not do that with a few minutes in several games. He probably was a starter in high school and played most of the game, and takes more minutes to get his shot warmed up. Just a wild guess.concordtom said:
Sfc, your post needs to be edited to show where I stopped talking and you starting, however I get it.
You made a good point so I went and looked at his game log. He did have 7 games where he logged 7 or more minutes. I guess that's what I was alluding to. Granted, it's not a lot, and he may have been instructed to not shoot. Still, I guess I felt like it was a enough opportunity to score more than 0 for 12.
Ironically enough, I began my HS varsity career 0 for 18, so if AM reads this, have heart.... I did end up averaging 10 per game at a JC later on. He's already blown away any of my accomplishments.
Perhaps you've misrepresented my take on AM, sfc. I am not throwing him under the bus. I said:
He was given an opportunity, did not meet it.
That doesn't mean I cut him. I'd work with him to help him do what he clearly was already able to do in HS. For me, i was nervous and not ready for the varsity role. My coach was pretty critical and harsh and didn't allow me to be a better player. He wanted to channel all shots to his 2 or 3 favorite shooters. If you made a mistake in practice or games, he'd ridicule you. He was a successful W-L coach, but not an endearing person and not a confidence builder!! I worked hard to grow up and it was tough for me. But I grew up and just like Sam Singer, who hit that game winner at UW, so will AM.
I don't think you'd find me posting AM-bashing posts on here. But I will say that he had some chances.
Hmmm, does that clear things up?
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/gamelog/_/id/4278142/austin-mccullough
Edit: I just re-read our exchange. True, he was not given a ton of time, not as much as I alluded to. You are right. 7 min stints is not a ton.
In any case, after several games and no baskets, his confidence had to be low. Can you imagine what his confidence (and Winston's) is like now after the way they were removed from the team? Once the parents got into it, (and what parent doesn't defend his child), the die was cast and the confidence level of these two is likely approaching zero. Also a wild guess. If they do want to play elsewhere, they will have to get it back. A better path might be to stay at Cal, become full time students, and get a Cal degree, which is still worth a lot. And intramural ball is a lot of fun.
In the old days, Pete Newell used to make players work 20 hours a week on campus as a requirement for their scholarship. If that were true today, it could be less painful to cut a player, if the school were willing to keep him on doing the same job for 20 hours of pay, but give his scholarship back to the coach to use for a new recruit.
helltopay1 said:
Dear SFC--I went to ALL the games early. Was always disappointed with thge lack of shooting prowess of both Austin and Deschon. I kept saying to myself; " I don't get it. why do these guys have scholarships?" WJ needs these scholarships badly. our 2019 and 2020 classes depend on having these two scholarships available. I'm assuming that both Austin & Deschon have enough confidence in their abilities to perform at the D2 level. They are clearly D2 players.
helltopay1 - I have to concede all your points, and agree with you. You've seen more of them, and seen them up close. I was only able to watch games on TV last season, and I confess I turned off some of the games in the 2nd half, as I couldn't stand to watch what Cal advertised as basketball. I was only trying to defend McCullough and Winston, as they were clearly in over their heads. I felt the same about Sam Singer in his first season, but he had desire and the tenacity to improve in many areas, and became a decent borderline PAC12 rotation player.
What I did feel from watching the games was that McCullough was awfully slow, both in speed and quickness. He could not seem to get open on offense, and he could not stay with quicker players on defense. I did not see enough of his shooting to judge his form. If I blinked, I might have missed his only shot of the game, and I might not see another for a couple of weeks.
What troubled me about Winston was he did not try to take care of the ball when he dribbled. He dribbled it out in front of him, never turned to get his body between the ball and the defender. I'm over 70, and I'd like to think even with my slow speed and slow reflexes, I could have gotten a hand on the ball he was dribbling. (Although I'd probably hurt myself doing it.) I saw him make a couple of mid range jumpers, so I thought maybe he could shoot those at least. What also bothered me was that he was supposed to be a point guard, but he never tried to penetrate. He just played out on the perimeter, like a scared rabbit.
As you asked, "Why do these kids have scholarships?" I can not believe Wyking Jones ever saw these two kids play in a game before he offered them scholarships. Did he just take them on someone else's advice? If it was a current assistant, I think that assistant should be reevaluated, and maybe relieved of recruiting assignments. Perhaps Jones was just so overwhelmed once he was hired with all the open recruiting slots, that he did not have time to see all his recruits in person. Maybe he spent too much time trying to recruit the 5-star players and neglected to foresee what might happen if he picked wrong when it came to the last two picks.
If he was faced with having to take McCullough and Winston because he could not find better, then fine, take them, but don't give them scholarships.
SFCity:SFCityBear said:helltopay1 said:
Dear SFC--I went to ALL the games early. Was always disappointed with thge lack of shooting prowess of both Austin and Deschon. I kept saying to myself; " I don't get it. why do these guys have scholarships?" WJ needs these scholarships badly. our 2019 and 2020 classes depend on having these two scholarships available. I'm assuming that both Austin & Deschon have enough confidence in their abilities to perform at the D2 level. They are clearly D2 players.
helltopay1 - I have to concede all your points, and agree with you. You've seen more of them, and seen them up close. I was only able to watch games on TV last season, and I confess I turned off some of the games in the 2nd half, as I couldn't stand to watch what Cal advertised as basketball. I was only trying to defend McCullough and Winston, as they were clearly in over their heads. I felt the same about Sam Singer in his first season, but he had desire and the tenacity to improve in many areas, and became a decent borderline PAC12 rotation player.
What I did feel from watching the games was that McCullough was awfully slow, both in speed and quickness. He could not seem to get open on offense, and he could not stay with quicker players on defense. I did not see enough of his shooting to judge his form. If I blinked, I might have missed his only shot of the game, and I might not see another for a couple of weeks.
What troubled me about Winston was he did not try to take care of the ball when he dribbled. He dribbled it out in front of him, never turned to get his body between the ball and the defender. I'm over 70, and I'd like to think even with my slow speed and slow reflexes, I could have gotten a hand on the ball he was dribbling. (Although I'd probably hurt myself doing it.) I saw him make a couple of mid range jumpers, so I thought maybe he could shoot those at least. What also bothered me was that he was supposed to be a point guard, but he never tried to penetrate. He just played out on the perimeter, like a scared rabbit.
As you asked, "Why do these kids have scholarships?" I can not believe Wyking Jones ever saw these two kids play in a game before he offered them scholarships. Did he just take them on someone else's advice? If it was a current assistant, I think that assistant should be reevaluated, and maybe relieved of recruiting assignments. Perhaps Jones was just so overwhelmed once he was hired with all the open recruiting slots, that he did not have time to see all his recruits in person. Maybe he spent too much time trying to recruit the 5-star players and neglected to foresee what might happen if he picked wrong when it came to the last two picks.
If he was faced with having to take McCullough and Winston because he could not find better, then fine, take them, but don't give them scholarships.
Bold the parts you are responding to and type below.UrsaMajor said:SFCity:SFCityBear said:helltopay1 said:
Dear SFC--I went to ALL the games early. Was always disappointed with thge lack of shooting prowess of both Austin and Deschon. I kept saying to myself; " I don't get it. why do these guys have scholarships?" WJ needs these scholarships badly. our 2019 and 2020 classes depend on having these two scholarships available. I'm assuming that both Austin & Deschon have enough confidence in their abilities to perform at the D2 level. They are clearly D2 players.
helltopay1 - I have to concede all your points, and agree with you. You've seen more of them, and seen them up close. I was only able to watch games on TV last season, and I confess I turned off some of the games in the 2nd half, as I couldn't stand to watch what Cal advertised as basketball. I was only trying to defend McCullough and Winston, as they were clearly in over their heads. I felt the same about Sam Singer in his first season, but he had desire and the tenacity to improve in many areas, and became a decent borderline PAC12 rotation player.
What I did feel from watching the games was that McCullough was awfully slow, both in speed and quickness. He could not seem to get open on offense, and he could not stay with quicker players on defense. I did not see enough of his shooting to judge his form. If I blinked, I might have missed his only shot of the game, and I might not see another for a couple of weeks.
What troubled me about Winston was he did not try to take care of the ball when he dribbled. He dribbled it out in front of him, never turned to get his body between the ball and the defender. I'm over 70, and I'd like to think even with my slow speed and slow reflexes, I could have gotten a hand on the ball he was dribbling. (Although I'd probably hurt myself doing it.) I saw him make a couple of mid range jumpers, so I thought maybe he could shoot those at least. What also bothered me was that he was supposed to be a point guard, but he never tried to penetrate. He just played out on the perimeter, like a scared rabbit.
As you asked, "Why do these kids have scholarships?" I can not believe Wyking Jones ever saw these two kids play in a game before he offered them scholarships. Did he just take them on someone else's advice? If it was a current assistant, I think that assistant should be reevaluated, and maybe relieved of recruiting assignments. Perhaps Jones was just so overwhelmed once he was hired with all the open recruiting slots, that he did not have time to see all his recruits in person. Maybe he spent too much time trying to recruit the 5-star players and neglected to foresee what might happen if he picked wrong when it came to the last two picks.
If he was faced with having to take McCullough and Winston because he could not find better, then fine, take them, but don't give them scholarships.
Good points. One request: it would be helpful when you reply with a quote that you begin your reply under the quote rather than in it. That way I can tell what is your post v. the original one. Thanks.
UrsaMajor said:SFCity:SFCityBear said:helltopay1 said:
Dear SFC--I went to ALL the games early. Was always disappointed with thge lack of shooting prowess of both Austin and Deschon. I kept saying to myself; " I don't get it. why do these guys have scholarships?" WJ needs these scholarships badly. our 2019 and 2020 classes depend on having these two scholarships available. I'm assuming that both Austin & Deschon have enough confidence in their abilities to perform at the D2 level. They are clearly D2 players.
helltopay1 - I have to concede all your points, and agree with you. You've seen more of them, and seen them up close. I was only able to watch games on TV last season, and I confess I turned off some of the games in the 2nd half, as I couldn't stand to watch what Cal advertised as basketball. I was only trying to defend McCullough and Winston, as they were clearly in over their heads. I felt the same about Sam Singer in his first season, but he had desire and the tenacity to improve in many areas, and became a decent borderline PAC12 rotation player.
What I did feel from watching the games was that McCullough was awfully slow, both in speed and quickness. He could not seem to get open on offense, and he could not stay with quicker players on defense. I did not see enough of his shooting to judge his form. If I blinked, I might have missed his only shot of the game, and I might not see another for a couple of weeks.
What troubled me about Winston was he did not try to take care of the ball when he dribbled. He dribbled it out in front of him, never turned to get his body between the ball and the defender. I'm over 70, and I'd like to think even with my slow speed and slow reflexes, I could have gotten a hand on the ball he was dribbling. (Although I'd probably hurt myself doing it.) I saw him make a couple of mid range jumpers, so I thought maybe he could shoot those at least. What also bothered me was that he was supposed to be a point guard, but he never tried to penetrate. He just played out on the perimeter, like a scared rabbit.
As you asked, "Why do these kids have scholarships?" I can not believe Wyking Jones ever saw these two kids play in a game before he offered them scholarships. Did he just take them on someone else's advice? If it was a current assistant, I think that assistant should be reevaluated, and maybe relieved of recruiting assignments. Perhaps Jones was just so overwhelmed once he was hired with all the open recruiting slots, that he did not have time to see all his recruits in person. Maybe he spent too much time trying to recruit the 5-star players and neglected to foresee what might happen if he picked wrong when it came to the last two picks.
If he was faced with having to take McCullough and Winston because he could not find better, then fine, take them, but don't give them scholarships.
Good points. One request: it would be helpful when you reply with a quote that you begin your reply under the quote rather than in it. That way I can tell what is your post v. the original one. Thanks.
SFCityBear said:
As I have understood it, you have to make sure your cursor is below the extremely faint horizontal line that forms the bottom border of the post you are replying to, as though the post was typed on a piece of paper.
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.UrsaMajor said:
SFC:
I'm running Safari, and when I quote, the quoted part shows up as shaded, so I can just post below the shade.
SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I get a tiny bit of shading on Firefox on Windows, but can't run it for more than a few minutes, before its temporary files overload my memory and my computer freezes up. I notice that it gets hung up trying to transfer files from all sorts of sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc., sites I never visit, so I don't know what is going on. I have to use Firefox to edit a post, because BI on Internet Explorer won't allow me to edit. Won't allow me to set a cursor or type anything.stu said:SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I'm running Firefox on both Linux and Windows, the shading works for me.
SFCityBear,SFCityBear said:I get a tiny bit of shading on Firefox on Windows, but can't run it for more than a few minutes, before its temporary files overload my memory and my computer freezes up. I notice that it gets hung up trying to transfer files from all sorts of sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc., sites I never visit, so I don't know what is going on. I have to use Firefox to edit a post, because BI on Internet Explorer won't allow me to edit. Won't allow me to set a cursor or type anything.stu said:SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I'm running Firefox on both Linux and Windows, the shading works for me.
nl
Thanks Yogi very much for all the help. I should have mentioned that I have been using ccleaner for about two years, It was Ellen of BI tech support who first suggested it to me, I think. I used to use it once every couple of weeks. When Firefox began to slow down my computer a couple of weeks ago, I was running ccleaner nearly every day. Now that I switched back to IE, I don't run it quite as often. It is a great tool.Yogi Bear said:SFCityBear,SFCityBear said:I get a tiny bit of shading on Firefox on Windows, but can't run it for more than a few minutes, before its temporary files overload my memory and my computer freezes up. I notice that it gets hung up trying to transfer files from all sorts of sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc., sites I never visit, so I don't know what is going on. I have to use Firefox to edit a post, because BI on Internet Explorer won't allow me to edit. Won't allow me to set a cursor or type anything.stu said:SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I'm running Firefox on both Linux and Windows, the shading works for me.
nl
Download and run this software:
https://www.ccleaner.com/ccleaner/download/standard
Will clean out all those temporary files for you. Don't delete cookies from your computer unless you are confident that you know all the passwords to all the sites you need to access.
Also, depending on what kind of computer you have, you might want to invest in some additional memory. Fairly cheap way to improve a computer's performance. Can't say authoritatively whether it makes sense for you or not without knowing what you're using for a computer, but something to consider.
I'm not a big Firefox guy. Always felt like it was too much of a resource hog. No web browser is perfect, but I tend to prefer Google Chrome. If IE works well for you, go with it.SFCityBear said:Thanks Yogi very much for all the help. I should have mentioned that I have been using ccleaner for about two years, It was Ellen of BI tech support who first suggested it to me, I think. I used to use it once every couple of weeks. When Firefox began to slow down my computer a couple of weeks ago, I was running ccleaner nearly every day. Now that I switched back to IE, I don't run it quite as often. It is a great tool.Yogi Bear said:SFCityBear,SFCityBear said:I get a tiny bit of shading on Firefox on Windows, but can't run it for more than a few minutes, before its temporary files overload my memory and my computer freezes up. I notice that it gets hung up trying to transfer files from all sorts of sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc., sites I never visit, so I don't know what is going on. I have to use Firefox to edit a post, because BI on Internet Explorer won't allow me to edit. Won't allow me to set a cursor or type anything.stu said:SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I'm running Firefox on both Linux and Windows, the shading works for me.
nl
Download and run this software:
https://www.ccleaner.com/ccleaner/download/standard
Will clean out all those temporary files for you. Don't delete cookies from your computer unless you are confident that you know all the passwords to all the sites you need to access.
Also, depending on what kind of computer you have, you might want to invest in some additional memory. Fairly cheap way to improve a computer's performance. Can't say authoritatively whether it makes sense for you or not without knowing what you're using for a computer, but something to consider.
Yogi Bear said:I'm not a big Firefox guy. Always felt like it was too much of a resource hog. No web browser is perfect, but I tend to prefer Google Chrome. If IE works well for you, go with it.SFCityBear said:Thanks Yogi very much for all the help. I should have mentioned that I have been using ccleaner for about two years, It was Ellen of BI tech support who first suggested it to me, I think. I used to use it once every couple of weeks. When Firefox began to slow down my computer a couple of weeks ago, I was running ccleaner nearly every day. Now that I switched back to IE, I don't run it quite as often. It is a great tool.Yogi Bear said:SFCityBear,SFCityBear said:I get a tiny bit of shading on Firefox on Windows, but can't run it for more than a few minutes, before its temporary files overload my memory and my computer freezes up. I notice that it gets hung up trying to transfer files from all sorts of sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc., sites I never visit, so I don't know what is going on. I have to use Firefox to edit a post, because BI on Internet Explorer won't allow me to edit. Won't allow me to set a cursor or type anything.stu said:SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I'm running Firefox on both Linux and Windows, the shading works for me.
nl
Download and run this software:
https://www.ccleaner.com/ccleaner/download/standard
Will clean out all those temporary files for you. Don't delete cookies from your computer unless you are confident that you know all the passwords to all the sites you need to access.
Also, depending on what kind of computer you have, you might want to invest in some additional memory. Fairly cheap way to improve a computer's performance. Can't say authoritatively whether it makes sense for you or not without knowing what you're using for a computer, but something to consider.
What I meant was that ccleaner is a great tool. One reason Ellen suggested Firefox to me was that I lost the capability of getting full access to Calbears.com. I could get on the site, but couldn't open any of the pages like roster, stats and history. With Firefox they all open fine. Like you said, no browser is perfect. I haven't tried Chrome. I'll give it a shot. Thanks.
SFCityBear said:Yogi Bear said:I'm not a big Firefox guy. Always felt like it was too much of a resource hog. No web browser is perfect, but I tend to prefer Google Chrome. If IE works well for you, go with it.SFCityBear said:Thanks Yogi very much for all the help. I should have mentioned that I have been using ccleaner for about two years, It was Ellen of BI tech support who first suggested it to me, I think. I used to use it once every couple of weeks. When Firefox began to slow down my computer a couple of weeks ago, I was running ccleaner nearly every day. Now that I switched back to IE, I don't run it quite as often. It is a great tool.Yogi Bear said:SFCityBear,SFCityBear said:I get a tiny bit of shading on Firefox on Windows, but can't run it for more than a few minutes, before its temporary files overload my memory and my computer freezes up. I notice that it gets hung up trying to transfer files from all sorts of sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc., sites I never visit, so I don't know what is going on. I have to use Firefox to edit a post, because BI on Internet Explorer won't allow me to edit. Won't allow me to set a cursor or type anything.stu said:SFCityBear said:
Sounds like a good solution, the shading. Last I heard, Safari for Windows was discontinued and Apple is no longer providing updates or any technical support for it.
I'm running Firefox on both Linux and Windows, the shading works for me.
nl
Download and run this software:
https://www.ccleaner.com/ccleaner/download/standard
Will clean out all those temporary files for you. Don't delete cookies from your computer unless you are confident that you know all the passwords to all the sites you need to access.
Also, depending on what kind of computer you have, you might want to invest in some additional memory. Fairly cheap way to improve a computer's performance. Can't say authoritatively whether it makes sense for you or not without knowing what you're using for a computer, but something to consider.
What I meant was that ccleaner is a great tool. One reason Ellen suggested Firefox to me was that I lost the capability of getting full access to Calbears.com. I could get on the site, but couldn't open any of the pages like roster, stats and history. With Firefox they all open fine. Like you said, no browser is perfect. I haven't tried Chrome. I'll give it a shot. Thanks.
