that makes one of us
- Member for
- 4 years 1 week
- View recent blog entries
- Desire for quick/cheap laugh;
- (Likely in conjunction with ) Naivete, lack of experience/relation;
- Experience and disinclination to revisit.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||To be fair Mr. Tobey should||
To be fair Mr. Tobey should be drawn and quartered. And Ridley should have bamboo shoots jammed under his nails. The others are only slightly out of keeping with proportion/propinquity.
|19 weeks 5 days ago||I still don't understand how||
I still don't understand how 'choice' has anything to do with Calipari's metaphor, which seems to instead deal with institutional inflexibility.
He does deal with the issue of player choice in his suggestions though.
|19 weeks 5 days ago||Pertinent is about relevance||
Not sure what role 'choice' plays within narrowed confines of the metaphor 'dwindling but apparent power.'
|19 weeks 5 days ago||Metaphors do not require||
Metaphors do not require exact fit - just pertinent/illustrative likeness. If exact fit is required, it seems there would be no such thing as a metaphor. E.g., the NCAA is . . . the NCAA. Not very illustrative.
Calipari's metaphor draws us to the pertinent/illustrative likeness of 'dwindling but still apparent power.'
|19 weeks 5 days ago||Yes, though unrealistic.||
Though unrealistic. Too much opportunity lost in player/league marketing.
|21 weeks 5 days ago||Well you could certainly||
Well you could certainly recruit well by convincing them to go pro after 2 years. Also, according to recent developments they're basically employees anyway, so you've got that going for you.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||My position is that||
My position is that generating revenues requires program and players. You've explicitly said only the program does, and you appear to be holding fast to that position.
The point is that Hoke has to trot someone out there. Some people think that that someone has or should have an interest and a say. Just because (1) there's always another body behind him to take his place, and (2) fans will watch whoever because they care about the program, these things do not diminish his significance.
If Hoke has no one to trot out there, there's no program and no revenue.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||You're saying players do not||
You're saying players do not generate revenue - the program does.
I think revenue generation requires both program and players. People do not pay to sit in stadiums to look at the emblems on an empty midfield/court. They don't pay to gather around the diag. They also don't pay to watch pickup games.
As I see it, failure to acknowledge a fundamental component - either the program or the players - is failure to understand what's really going on here, who the stakeholders are, what the problem is, etc.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||I have no problem with the||
I have no problem with the end of "college sports as we know it."
The problem isn't so much the deal for the lowest guy on the pole (the players, who are treated well and derive various substantial benefits) but instead the insane profits by the guy at the top of the pole (NCAA et al.).
Get rid of the huge profits, get rid of the problem. Small is beautiful. Otherwise you get into dilemmas about inequity and troubling solutions like profit sharing.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||No players, no name, no||
No players, no name, no program : no content, no form.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||Imagine if, in addition to||
Imagine if, in addition to this, admissions committees reviewed all applicants under the same rubric, and athletic teams were assembled based on tryouts. Then you could really identify with your team as the UM Wolverines or MSU Spartans, etc., instead of halfway mercenaries.
Professional leagues need to stop forcing players to enter university - they do it in their own interests, not the kids'.
|22 weeks 15 hours ago||The nature of football||
The nature of football contributes to this too, i.e., its sedentary component. Younger people have a shorter attention span. The average football game has about 11 minutes of action and more than 2 hours of standing around/huddling. With DVRs we can fastforward through the endless standing/huddling. Can't do that in the stadium.
I think the prior generation accepted this about football; I think we're less likely to do so. We lead busier lives, value our time, are more efficient with it (at least as to entertainment, if not productivity), don't like advertising so we fastforward through that too, etc.
Hurry up offenses mitigate the problem, but there is still a lot of standing around.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||Product of fabric stress tear||
Product of fabric stress tear in front section of Bill Self's trousers.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||The sun on the label smileth upon my daily perfunctories.||
It accepteth my sacrifices, and looketh past my transgressions.
And I am grateful. Urination is never so pleasant, and the green grass upon my feet does examine my fate with prompt approval. And I am happy.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||Cheers||
Nice to join you all for another overcrowded, overexposed internet webspace with a couple interesting ideas/personalities interspersed amongst a sea of drivel.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||I've always thought in this||
I've always thought in this scenario that if you take less money than you could possibly get, you endear yourself to fans, take pressure off yourself to otherwise live up to a huge salary, and that these things would be more than worth the money you would be giving up.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||The Lebowski-cited look, at||
The Lebowski-cited look, at its core, expresses, "Why would you relax? How could you think that is acceptable?!"
Parents are insane. Particularly fathers.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||Watching M so far, I think||
Watching M so far, I think there's a lot left in the playbook not yet revealed in form of backcuts, motion offense, etc. So far they've only run things through the shooting scheme. I like M to beat either Tenn or Mercer.
Can't deny Beilein is class act and first rate tactician.
I wish Izzo did more in the way of offensive diversity a la Beilein, but I can't argue with success my team has had.
|22 weeks 3 days ago||It's nice to see M beating||
It's nice to see M beating the shit out of what apparently is the dumbest basketball team in the country, which of course comes from Texas.
Midwestern toughness and prudence on display here against the yeehaw stupidity of the south. Good going blue.
|22 weeks 4 days ago||There's a little Putin flavor in Tressel's cake mix.||
I don't know - it may be part of ordinary formal duties for coaches across the country, including B1G coaches. Notwithstanding, however, in Tressel's case it comes with particularly cynical implications.
How much power would any institution want to give this guy? He plays the part so well, and reaches his tentacles out so far that you could never be sure whose duties are being carried out by whom.
|22 weeks 4 days ago||What I don't see in his CV is||
What I don't see in his CV is that - per Mr. Gee - as football coach, Tressel ran the entire athletic dep't, and likely also the entire university at OSU. It's hard to know what the limits of Tressel's authority were at OSU, and he really should exploit that in his application.
|22 weeks 4 days ago||I don't know. This guy's||
I don't know. This guy's comment could be borne of 3 possible human reactions:
If it is (3), then UMfan21 can prove himself by contributing his own story to this fine thread. If not, then I suppose we've diagnosed the real, less compelling motivation here.
|23 weeks 3 hours ago||Good catch||
Speculation here - implications would lie with spacetime, the nature of time as related to gravitational and time dilation. The speed of light is not only a "max speed" for purposes of relational physics, but also a constant against which everything is relational.
So if speed of light is no longer a max speed, it's also no longer a constant, which would fuck up the relational nature of physics/timespace.
Which means the world should never have happened and become the veil of tears we now know it to be. Which means Einstein was wrong. But then again science can only explain our experiences, and as Kant would advise, even a full/precise account of our experiences would be just that - and would necessarily distort (but not necessarily have anything to do with) the "thing in itself."
So we're pretty much fucked either way.