probably about welcome week. or fish. but probably welcome week.
Dr Sardonicus
History
- Member for
- 3 years 35 weeks
Karma
- Current value
Recent Comments
| Date | Title | Body |
|---|---|---|
| 1 year 27 weeks ago | So you're far more optimistic about the UW game |
Given your overall odds (and assuming you treated the two games as independent events), you've got us with a just over 47% chance of beating Wisconsin and a just under 13% chance of beating OSU. I guess I can't argue too much with those numbers. |
| 1 year 52 weeks ago | Anger = brick wall |
In my exchanges with him he was highly disingenuous, frankly I cut off the exchange because I realized I was wasting my time and I was almost embarrassed for him. |
| 2 years 1 week ago | Does he owe Boren an apology too? |
Boren was critical of Rodriguez. And by your standard he has "give more to this university than we ever will". |
| 2 years 3 weeks ago | Yakety Sax is NSFW |
Well, let's just say that my inability to stop laughing my head off at the video caused a few folks to wonder what I was up to . . . |
| 2 years 6 weeks ago | Thanks for the far more intelligent methdology |
The "scoring percentage" approach has driven me nuts for years. Average points per possession is far more relevant, so the approach here is far more useful. |
| 2 years 11 weeks ago | Regarding privatization |
I hope folks realize that most of the buildings on campus were built through the state's capital outlay process. If U-M wants to go private, the state isn't going to just give them the buildings as a going away present--at least not without expecting the taxpayers of the state to be reimbursed for the tax money that went to build those buildings. |
| 2 years 12 weeks ago | May just be semantics |
It's hard to fault someone for the choice of one word, I guess. If he'd used "more lenient" instead of "fairer", that would have made my interpretation a lot different. |
| 2 years 12 weeks ago | Not trying to be snarky |
But this statement stood out: "I think Michigan's handling of the case has been a model of how to deal with a major infractions case so far. And the result will likely be fairer penalties . . . " This seems to imply that if a school is uncooperative they will receive unfair penalties. Does he have examples of unfair penalties being imposed on uncooperative schools? I mean, the schools which stonewalled/repeat offended over the years seem to have bounced back pretty quickly from whatever sanctions were levied (look at Kentucky around when Pitino arrived), so I wouldn't characterize those sanctions as severe or unfair. SMU's an exception, but that was over 20 years ago. |
| 2 years 12 weeks ago | Nice summary, Wahoo |
The NCAA has to keep its powder dry in case there's evidence that Rodriguez or others higher up conspired to over-practice. As you note, if it's simply what is alleged, these things will lead to U-M changing procedures and ensuring future compliance. It's not a big deal. If there's some coverup going on then that's another matter. And until the NCAA is satisfied that it's relatively minor things, they're going to keep their options open. The definition of secondary violation makes it clear that it's something that only gives a minor advantage (or no advantage) with no top-down commands, etc. Barring some evidence of higher-ups ordering things or covering things up, these are secondary violations. |
| 2 years 12 weeks ago | Not what I read |
"are considered to be potential major violations" |
