Sentences with phrase «longer give point»

Not exact matches

To give you an idea of just how long you have to stay in a city for it to be worth your money to buy, personal finance site SmartAsset calculated the breakeven point — the point at which the total costs of renting become greater than the total costs of buying — for 29 major cities.

What's more, as Buffett points out, he's a long - term investor, so looking at the year - to - year investment and return on a given business doesn't make a lot of sense.

Although $ GLD is still in a downtrend, there are now 2 main technical signals and 1 other point that give me strong reason to believe gold is poised for a substantial, intermediate to long - term rally and / or bullish trend reversal...

As they age, and given that folks are living longer today than any point in history, there is going to be massive demand for skilled nursing, assisted living, and independent living (Senior Community) facilities as well as all the square footage for offices to support those networks.

If you have a long time horizon, I wouldn't be compelled to make any significant short - term tweaks at this point, given the current favorable market environment.

An intelligent designer would have given us a long stiff tail that reached the ground for a third point of support, a method of shielding the male reproductive organs, and a bony spur partly encircling our necks.

If I played the same game as you and took the number of Muslims killed by American ammunition, bombs, cluster bombs, missiles, sanctions, depleted uranium, etc., etc. and divided that into numbered points featuring the victims in groups of 50, 60, or 100, I'd be giving you a MUCH longer list of Muslim victims of America than the list of victims of Islamic terrorism that you provided to us here.

He never stayed in one place very long, but by this point JT at - large was such an important cultural figure that his mere presence gave something importance.

My original point was simply that to ignore the fact that religion does demand special rights is to continue giving religion that free pass I spoke of which does this country as a whole no good in the long run.

Now, i can quote from LOTR all day long, about what Sauron did to who, and when, and how Frodo saved the day, etc, etc, etc. i can give you hundred of pages of quotes, and put it all together in a logically consistent package to establish some point I want to prove about Aragorn.

It is the 1st book of the Bible, Genesis, that gives us how long our Creator, Jehovah God, took in preparing the earth for human habitation (when it reached the proper point of preparation), a period of six «creative» days, with each «day» being several thousand years long.

No longer is there a metaphysical hierarchy or order which can give meaning or value to existing beings (Seiendes); as Heidegger points out, now there is no Sein of Seiendes.

The result gave some indication of the numerical strength of various religious bodies, but the amazing statistic from a long - term point of view is that an astounding 96 per cent of the respondents expressed a religious preference of some kind!

Whitehead pointed out long ago, in Science and the Modern World, that the habits of medieval rationalism prepared the way for the scientific discoveries of the seventeenth century, an insight given far more documentation, depth, and scope in the writings of the historian and philosopher of science Stanley L. Jaki in our time.

You hate the Muslim Religion and you hate our ethnicity I would call it racism, since you fit the definition of a racist, but then you would give another long conversation which has no point.

If we are praying to get some thing or some result for ourselves or others, then absolutely be prepared for disappointment, but when prayer is just an ongoing conversation with the compassionate, understanding deity bubbling out of a growing relationship with the said deity then you don't give a shit about the results because they are no longer the point.

The «Marcan hypothesis,» as Bishop Rawlinson insists in his Commentary, is no longer tenable — the hypothesis, namely, that Mark's order and point of view are infallible and must be adhered to in every case — and yet the general outline of the ministry, as given by Mark, is not only the earliest outline we have, but commends itself upon grounds of probability.

The question here explored, in full awareness of its far - reaching consequences, is whether we have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime.

I'm simply at a point in my life that I am not willing to go along with that program any longer and I am willing to take responsibility for what I have been given in my own heart.

The principal points Paul made in that address are (1) to recall to their minds the character and quality of his ministry to them; (2) to remind them of the trouble the Jews gave him and the anxiety and suffering he underwent in their behalf; (3) to state that he preached repentance and faith in Jesus Christ as the essence of the gospel; (4) to testify that he went now to Jerusalem not knowing what would happen to him there except that he knew by the Holy Spirit that afflictions awaited him; (5) to assure them that nothing concerned him, not even the loss of life itself, so long as he could testify to the grace of God in Jesus Christ; (6) to say that he had no regrets about his ministry to the people in Ephesus, for he was clean of the blood of all the people there, for he preached the full gospel to all of them; and (7) to admonish them to be diligent in their oversight of the Ephesian church and to feed the church of God there, which Christ purchased with his own blood.

So when God began shaping the earth, it was already made, and no timeline was given as to how long that took from point 1.

Preaching can learn from counseling (and creative education) at another point — that it is far less help to people, in the long run, to give them answers than it is to provide them with resources for finding their own answers.

While I do not retract a word of my criticism of the judiciary's usurpation of democratic powers («Our Judicial Oligarchy,» November 1996), I wish that my remarks had not been preceded by the Editors» suggestion that we may «have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime.»

Reflecting on this piece of hermeneutical legerdemain, a First Things editorial called «The End of Democracy» wondered «whether we have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime.»

In 1837, the first editor of Washington's Collected Works wrote: «If a man who spoke, wrote, and acted as a Christian through a long life, who gave numerous proofs of his believing himself to be such, and who was never known to say, write, or do a thing contrary to his professions, if such a man is not to be ranked among the believers of Christianity, it would be impossible to establish the point by any train of reasoning.»

One could give long and ingenious discourses on how a man should love his neighbor, and self - love would still always know how to bring forward excuses and evasions, because the subject is not covered, one case would be overlooked, one point would be not exactly or strictly enough expressed and described.

I have long noted how, when you look at a given year's S&P + rankings, you can pretty quickly point out the teams that are likely to rise and fall the next year (from a records standpoint) by simply looking at the standout records.

Like you, I went through years of total frustration and bewilderment at how a once so honourable club, could now behave in this morally corrupt, though legal, fashion, disrespecting us fans, with extreme arrogance both by manager, board and Owner (I point out the recent AGM and Sir Chips KESWICK»S disgusting behaviour towards the share holders, which sadly, is no longer even surprising) I have pledged not to give another penny of my honestly earned money to this cancerous club, which however I still love with all my heart.

Nelson is questionable for Friday night's game versus Hawaii, but let's put it this way: if he plays but can't move the ball versus Hawaii, which has given up 118 points to two FBS opponents (USC and Nevada), he probably won't be the first - stringer for very much longer.

It had been thought that Arsene would stay as long as he had wished, but it may be more to the point that he is unwilling to leave until a reasonable replacement is found, and he may well have given his seal of approval to Allegri.

1) A great point considering how long we were a man less, hopefully that gives our confidence a boost.

The Cornhuskers, long one of college football's stingiest defensive units, have yielded at least 40 points in four of their last six games — which is one more time than they gave up 40 in the 1990s.

As long as we are mentally prepared for the game I think (hope) we will come away with the 3 points cause physically we should be ready given our 7 day rest.

Long before the Wildcats» 65 - 0 loss to top - ranked Florida last Saturday — the 15th time in 71 games under Curry that Kentucky has given up at least 40 points — his ineptitude in the Bluegrass State was obvious to just about everyone except Kentucky athletic director C.M. Newton, who is closer personally to Curry than to Rick Pitino, the basketball coach who led the Wildcats to the 1996 NCAA championship.

cause even the goal difference isnt such a problem, if we want to go top the would have to lose 2 games and if they lose 2 games the difference in gd would sink atleast to just 3 between us and then if we win the games it would sink to atleast 1 so if we score 2 goals more than them in the other 6 games of us we would be top, well as long as spurs give up 4 points and i strongly believe that they will lose points, cause they are beatable cause they wont play like leicester only on the break but would also want to dominate some games and against liverpool / southampton that will be dangerous

Sorry neil, as people pointed out no one will tolerate failure for this long especially when u consider arsenal were a big club even before Wenger.wenger achieved things, so as a note of thanks fans gave him time.but that time got over some two years back and now he's jus like any other manager....

However, it didn't take long for a fifth goal of the game to arrive, with Giroud producing a bit of magic to give the Gunners their first lead, and it appeared as though the Premier League leaders were set to pick up all three points.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

What's the point of giving to a CB or Xhaka to hit it long, when you could just do it?

A win would give us 7 points from three tough fixtures, and would put us in the top four at least until Monday and perhaps for longer.

Honestly I think you are right about Monreal... he is the loudiest and cockiest player on the pitch so it looks to me as a captain material but he wont stick around here for long so theres no point giving him armband.

The way Chadli and Lamela have been playing worries me a bit, and Erikson could give us some trouble, but as long as our midfield is solid we can take the three points.

St Mary's boss Ronald Koeman did well to keep hold of Schneiderlin and his south - coast side have started the current season in superb fashion, securing seven points from their first four Premier League fixtures and given that Southampton sit in fourth spot in the table one imagines the long serving midfielder may elect to remain at the club.

Finally, and to reiterate an earlier point, the way forward for this club is to stop paying below average bench players so much money and to focus the bulk of the weekly wages on establishing a dominant starting 11... this will require the club to eat some wages in order to ship some players out, get rid of any deadwood over the age of 21, develop a cutting edge scouting service and put your money where your mouth is for once... I would much rather have a starting 11 that was world - class and give some reasonably paid young blue - chippers playing time when injuries occur than have 2 or 3 world class players surrounded by a plethora of overpaid and underwhelming players... management would no longer be able to sell their half - baked plans to the fans under the guise of «winning now», which any intelligent fan knows is a crap - shoot at best, and instead create a a squad that provides hope for the present and the future... this is exactly the model that has been used by Barcelona, Real & Bayern, so it should be good enough for us... by the way, until Messi & Ronaldo re-signed just recently all 3 clubs weekly wages were on par with ours... think about that for a second or two

I really think that would be the best way for Arsenal to win a title as it would not give the players time to think about what they could lose, so although it is far from ideal to be nine points off the top, I do reckon that being underdogs suits Arsenal and as long as we keep in touch it will put pressure on Chelsea and not us.

Even after Suarez and the 40 million plus one saga where he was clearly angling for a move to us, the Kop still gave him a standing ovation during a pre-season game, a gesture I believed went a long way in making him stay at least for that season and give his absolute best to the club even if it were inevitable that he was going to leave at some point because the club clearly did not match his ambitions.

Sanchez is world class but people look down on other players too much.Most of us here didn't even know he was this good until he was given the chance here.How do you know another player can't replace him and can't do better if given the opportunity?If I was Wenger I would've sold him to City long ago last season.I don't care if it would've been a Van Persie situation.All Utd needed was a decent striker to help them win the league but they got lucky and had a world class one.Utd were even favourites to win it prior to that season and if I'm not mistaken City beat them by only 1 point to win it.

3 is a silent pick em so money line the game with a dog of 3 pts or less, 85 % of teams that cover 3 points as dogs win the game outright so why give the books any more than you have to, make sure you take dogs in first half ONLY, i cant stress this enough, more times than not if a dog will cover the game, (big dogs +7 or higher) they will show up early and you do not want to get screwed in the 2nd half by blowing the cover, these are things the sports books never would tell you but surely will save you a lot of aggravation in the LONG RUN

Don't give the other team free points and the Jazz D good enough to at least keep them in the game when the refs are committing a quarter - long assault against them.

Three points will give Blackburn three victories in a row and their longest single - season winning league sequence since securing four on the bounce in October 2007.