Sentences with phrase «only enough points»

In reality, that's only enough points for one night at a high end Hilton property.

Not exact matches

That means interleaving not only produces better short - term results, it also results in much greater long - term retention — which is incredibly important in the real world where the point of learning isn't to simply remember something long enough to pass a test.

Not only that, but the broadcast networks could be so weak by that point that they will be unable to pay enough to lock up future Super bowl rights — making it even more likely that the chance to air the big game will be snapped up by a digital giant like Apple or Google.

Aeroplan has now reversed that decision, angering only those who didn't quite have enough points for their dream vacation and spent all their points on Alouettes tickets the day before the announcement, expecting their miles to begin expiring on Jan. 1, 2014.

Adding to this new information is some research conducted by Womenable way back in 2007, Mapping the Missing Middle: Determining the Desire and Dimensions of Second - Stage Women Business Owners, which not only raised the point that not enough policy and programmatic attention was being paid to established women - owned firms that had not yet cracked the million - dollar revenue barrier, but sized this population at between 16 % (if defined to include firms with employees or between $ 100,000 and $ 1 million in revenues) and fully 91 % (if having employees and revenues over $ 100,000 was not a criterion) of the entire women - owned business population.

The Sheraton Lake Buena Vista Resort is a category 2 hotel and at only 4,000 points per weekday night and 3,000 points per weekend night, you would have enough points to book two rooms for five nights at 28,000 SPG points.

Please briefly include: If you had enough airline points / miles to visit a new city or country (i.e. travel for only the cost of taxes and fees), where would you go and why?

Nevertheless, I find it untenable that a quarter point cut in January was enough to close the output gap one year earlier than the Bank of Canada's models were otherwise telling them would occur in the absence of a small cut especially since only 15bps of that cut was passed through.

He makes the now familiar point that if negative real rates are sometimes desirable on counter cyclical grounds there is a strong argument for an inflation target high enough that the ZLB does not bind or binds only very infrequently.

The only question is whether a particular society has enough of the faithful to care for its poor so as not to have the charitable vocation usurped by the state, at which point it is no longer a Christian society.

If you oppose liberalism only because it isn't delivering the goods fast enough and yearn for someone who will do liberalism your way, you are missing the larger point.

Is it so wrong of me to have faith that only one person believes in the drivel that he's posting rather than think that another person a) actually thinks that chad is making good points and good enough points to post and b) go to the 62nd page of an almost defunct article for a conversation that has nothing to do with themselves other than to cheer on a stupid post?

Isn't the point not only to forgive but to have loved him enough to have sought the salvation of his soul rather than vengeance?

For the over-all result of the great reaction has been a sophistication of the true simplicity of the gospel, the use of a jargon which the common man (and the intelligent one, too, often enough) can not understand, and a tendency to assume that the biblical and creedal language as it stands need only be spoken, and enough then has been done to state and communicate the point of the Christian proclamation.

I'm not saying that when you'll do this you'll become an atheist (though personally I believe if you truely do think about it, that you will become one soon enough) there are a few people on this board (like JW) who has thought long and hard about god and rationalized it enough to still be a believer and make some sense, but fred, I will not be even remotely swayed to understand your point if you only use the bible as your bullhorn.

@US Patriot If a person follows the teachings of Jesus to his best ability, maybe even without knowing about Jesus, I think only God can judge whether he is Christian enough, but I don't mind you disagreeing on that point.

Another point about 1 Corinthians 9 is it does not say you can make only enough money to survive nor does it say you can not make millions spreading God's word.

So while Kaufman thinks that God isn't a «cosmic person out there somewhere» and that Bultmann didn't go far enough because he posited an «other world» to which myths point, nevertheless the universe isn't quite the only reality: there is an «underlying reality» or «ultimate mystery» that «expresses itself» throughout the universe.

The second is to remain part of the public conversation, but only with sardonic observations: merrily pointing out the perpetual follies of the world, and branding as naïve any Christian foolish enough to believe they might actually change it.

A crucial UN fisheries meeting is happening in 48 hours — and it could be the turning point in the fight against senseless ocean destruction, but only if enough of us speak out now.

The movements are frequently confounded, for it is said that one needs faith to renounce the claim to everything, yea, a stranger thing than this may be heard, when a man laments the loss of his faith, and when one looks at the scale to see where he is, one sees, strangely enough, that he has only reached the point where he should make the infinite movement of resignation.

they only offer a path through their own journey, flawed as it may be, so they can point the way, but if you're strong enough (and not so weak minded you need to destroy buddhist thinking) then YOU can find your own enlightenment if you so desire.

Take a good look, it isn't only atheists, and it isn't every individual, that are seemingly frustrated to the point of CAPS, that they can not choose their words wisely enough, to convey their established beliefs, or convince another mind of the veracity of there disclosed thoughts.

It is enough only to point out that the inertness bequeathed to matter by dualism has become the basis upon which the quantification of physical reality and motion in Newtonian and Cartesian physics has been constructed.

From the world's point of view it was bad enough when the early church only witnessed to the imminent but future transformation of the structures of the world by a final act of God at the end.

I assume they would explain the essential elements of Paul's point here is that Christ died for sins and was raised — and even in their own interpretation in which they claim this «good news» is only essential for believers — they have enough sense to explain to believers the burial is mentioned as proof of His death, and the witnesses are mentioned as proof of His resurrection.

«By that point, I had worked in product development in small, medium and multi-national food companies, so I had enough under my belt to be solely responsible for the R & D department, then only myself at the time.

At one point I heard the neighboring carnivores come out of their caves to make whining, whimpering noises, but sorry folks, only enough meat to feed my famished five.

To ensure the vegetables remained the focal point of the dish, I only added enough béchamel sauce to hold the lasagna together and flavored it with basic herbs such as basil, thyme and oregano and a sprinkle of Parmesan cheese for extra nutty, salty flavor.

A hearty bowl of delicious chili that was more than filing; a generous 3 cup portion is only 10 Weight Watcher points and was definitely enough for a dinner meal... or for lunch the next day at my desk.

It was the teams only points finish all year and although it was enough to allow March to finish ninth in the Constructors» Championship, the team folded at the end of the season.

Arsenal are currently in 5th place in the Premier League at the halfway stage, and although we are only 8 points behind the leaders, many Arsenal fans think we are simply not playing well enough to challenge for the title — and in fact may have a battle just to finish in the Top Four.

You'll just get a response of «he's not good enough to win us the league» with the only back - up point of «Henry said so....

Jordan (17.1 ppg) was unleashed for only brief spasms; Patrick Ewing was subdued throughout, possibly because of his excess of pine time; Chris Mullin and Alvin Robertson were never allowed enough minutes to go on their characteristic shooting and stealing streaks; and Tisdale, who'll score, oh, maybe 12 zillion points once he gets to the pros, became a robot pick - and - screener.

Mayhew brought this team to the point where not only was 7 - 9 enough to fire a guy, but the guy who came in after him was EXPECTED to make the playoffs.

It is a title at the end of the day and we was only 1 point off UCL football, if we can keep Alexis then I hope we can improve enough over the next few months.

A few key contributors really struggled on the offensive side of the ball as their leading scorer and the leagues second leading scorer, Sterling Williams, was only able to muster 12 points against a very stingy Team Harlander D. Michael Halusek was able to put up 17 points while Chris Hicks chipped in with 10, unfortunately that just wasn't enough to get them past a very determined Team Harlander.

The Friars» long winning streak seemed safe enough when some heavy early bombing by sophomore Jim Walker and Bill Blair put them 10 points ahead of visiting St. Bona - venture with only 10 minutes to play.

Because of goal difference, 3 points is probably enough (only Southhampton close enough to win a tiebreaker).

At this juncture of season pretty much a moot point, who really cares what we do, only mentioning cause don't think media given near enough coverage as to why daft Wenger ever pulled Sanchez from up top in first place.

Chelsea might have a good squad on paper, but I think mourinho only trusts abut 13 maybe 14 of them enough to rotate them in on a regular basis, so really I think if one of their key players goes missing like fabregas, terry or matic at this point it could have an impact.

They may be just two places outside the drop zone but they are still only eight points behind Arsenal and that sort of gap is nowhere near big enough for us to relax.

We still have six points to play for while Liverpool only have three, but because they scored four goals yesterday it does not look like a draw in their last game would be enough and while it is feasible that Boro could take a point it is hard to see them winning at Anfield at the weekend.

Look gentlemen this WAS an extremely well written and well researched article and has to rank as one of the best Ive read in many a long year, Howvever when all of the «in depth analysis» has been done it really boils down to two points and two points only, 1) Our strikers (namely Walcott, Giroud, Welbeck and Cambel) just did nt score enough goals when it really mattered, 2) our defence made too many mistakes that allowed too many goals to be scored against us when it mattered.

Lollar says, «It's hard enough to make the big leagues as one or the other, and you reach a point where ability can take you only so far.

In my opinion, early kick offs tend to benefit our player as they have slipped occasionally when our rivals had games before us in which they dropped points and we only needed wins to move up ahead.playing manure is tough enough without the added pressure of trying to catch up or go ahead based on result of other rivals.

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

When the same receiver scores two plays later and Hustler converts to go up a point, they've left only 58 seconds, which proves not enough time for Carver Mobb.

You don't get my point... What I mean by doing the same thing over and over again is that Arsenal has had the opportunity to sign excellent players (you can't have enough of those)... but year after year, we only fix 1 problem while 3 more problems haunt us for the rest of the season.

As for me, the only attacker d squard need is out to out striker, a point man, we already have enough wingers and attackin mf OG12 seems to be d only one doing dat job, Alexis, Poldoski, Wellbeck and Walcot have all been tried their but all failed.