Jump to content

blutow

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by blutow

  1. My understanding is that the targeting is reviewable, but you can't reverse the roughing even if was an obvious bad call. That seems really dumb in situations where roughing is only because of targeting, but that's how I've heard it explained.
  2. Ouch...
  3. That all seems pretty squishy to me. "Enrollment in an institution of higher education" has some teeth, but could probably be addressed by an athlete signing up for an online class at the local community college. #2 just serves as a guideline for how to execute this stuff. Everyone understands that many NIL deals are about inducement. #2 just says you can't be explicit about it.
  4. I'm guessing that is someone's interpretation of what happened, I doubt the $ folks were dumb enough to be that direct. Regardless of how it went down in the Utah case, I think it's fair to say that many of these NIL deals (recruiting, retention, or portal) are obviously indirect inducement that fall within the current rules. I don't like it, but the box is open and I don't see a clear way to regulate it. It's too grey/subjective. If a company CEO pushes for a lucrative NIL deal for a recruit or transfer, is it inducement if that CEO is a Texas Ex? If the company only does business in central TX and will only give NIL deals for kids playing at Texas, is that just smart business or is that inducement? Unless they find a way to put up some guard rails, I'm of the opinion that you play the game (within the rules) as aggressively as possible. Get the best lawyers and put strong oversight in place. I don't think this current NIL model is sustainable long term, but watching the world pass you by while "trying to be noble" will be a losing approach.
  5. "Snitch" would imply someone is cheating. Just sounds like whining to me. It's not even bad whining, mostly frustration that I don't blame him for. Is there anything illegal (or even shady) about a collective going to a collegiate player and showing them how much $ they could make with NIL playing for a high profile program like x (ie not utah)? I don't like the dynamic, but I believe it's fair game under current rules (maybe I'm wrong on that?). Yes, everyone understands that it's ultimately an indirect inducement to play at a certain place, but it's within the rules as long as it's structured properly (as I understand it). Either push to revise the rules or learn how to play the game. If that Utah AD called me (as the AD of the other school) and asked me to reach out to the collective to "back off", I'd nicely tell him that the collective isn't under my control and this is just how things work under the current rules.
  6. If we can get to the point where the offense is consistently dominating and the defense struggles at times, that's a big step in the right direction in my book. OU won a lot of games and conference championships with that formula. Riley is playing the same script at USC and has turned that program around in year 1. Sure, it would be great to dominate in all phases, but offensive production rules today's game and the defense will come around if we can start winning more games and pulling in better talent. One big positive I see from Sark - he calls an offensive game with consideration to the defense (not using high tempo when the defense needs a rest, etc.). I don't think he's ignoring the defense, but it's clearly not his top priority and that's fine with me (for now) if he can get this offense to an elite level.
  7. For any playoff shot, TX would obviously have to win out and it would require another conference champ to have 2 losses. Neither of those are likely, but stranger things have happened. We'd probably have a good shot under that scenario with our early losses (unless the other 2 loss champ was SEC, which always seems to trump any logical argument). Very, very long shot. I'd be elated to see a conference championship this year, but I want to see this team play at least one solid road game before I get my hopes up.
  8. A lot, but not nearly as much as another one in the next few years after a 20 year drought. I assume a lot of the big $ folks are not spring chickens. How much would it be worth to see TX win another before you die? Probably some egos in play to motivate them to be "part of the solution" for bringing home another NC (legacy and all the crap). I'm not saying these extreme situations are likely with a Quin or Arch, but at some point all you need to do is sell some boosters on a story of hope. They are just like most of us, they want to believe. And they actually have the power to affect the outcome and essentially become partial team owners/GM's with the purse strings and no salary cap. No need to justify a profit, all decisions based on emotion and hope. What would you spend to cure your child laying in the hospital with cancer? Extreme analogy, but that's been TX football for a long time for some folks. I fully expect NIL to get regulated at some point to prevent this kind of dynamic, but I'm not sure how they do that based on the way it's currently structured.
  9. Yeah, I get that it wouldn't be a "normal" thing, but maybe for unique situations. Let's say ARch takes us to the NC game as a junior (after dominating all year) and gets hurt in the first quarter and we lose a close one. Right or wrong, many would think a NC would be very high probability the next year with Arch and big $ would likely flow if it would make a difference in keeping him another year.
  10. Probably a dumb question - but what happens if NIL $'s get to a point where they equal or surpass NFL #1 pick $'s? I mean if Jimbo is worth $90m to ATM to win the 20xx NC...., is it that crazy to think some boosters would pony up $20m+ to keep an arch or quin in the mix for an extra year if they were playing lights out with a good chance for a NC? I get that it's not the same as a 4 year NFL deal, but you'd think it would make the decision to leave tougher if the kid is loving the college experience. How much would a NC be worth collectively to some of these big $ boosters? In the 10's of millions I'd think, but I don't know these folks and I'm just speculating.
  11. I've tried to forget most of the Charlie era, but this statement lingers. I could see someone paying this gal a visit to check her crazy meter, but it reads like just another stupid fan statement to me. The only thing concerning in the story is that she "had information about the reactor". I'm guessing that is a stretch by the authorities to justify the arrest. If they actually charge and prosecute her just for making that comment, that is unbelievably stupid.
  12. The potential media coverage is worth 100x the investment of time. It was pretty well done.
  13. think fast, run fast.....
  14. He's in pads and throwiing. I still doubt he starts, but maybe good enough to go if things go sideways.
  15. he's throwing the ball in warm up.....
  16. Maybe they snuck out, but I'd bet there is something more going on with these guys. Harris didn't get suspended for that stupid garage stunt, but is being suspended for sneaking out of the hotel? I'd put $ on some kind of conflict (or attempted mutiny) between groups of players or players and staff. Either way, it's glorious.
  17. I typically sign up for a month of Sling to catch the 2 early LHN games. Sometimes they have a free introductory month, but this year it's 50% off for the first month, so I think it was around $20 for the basic Sling package and sports add-on that includes LHN. The offer is only for new subscribers, so you need to create a new account each year. You get the 2 games, plus I usually watch some volleyball and other football content. You just have to remember to cancel it before they charge you for month 2.
  18. It sounds bat shit crazy, but the total number isn't that crazy when you think of the # of people involved. The story said 75 people at one of the dinners. Each of the 9 recruits could bring 4 others. Even if each recruit didn't all bring 4, that's still a lot of airfare and hotel $'s. If you spread that $280k across 50 people, that's "only" $5,600 a person. Don't we all spend that kind of $ on a weekend trip?.... There are some places (I've heard) where that you can spend the kind of money in a few hours, hopefully without a paper trail.
  19. I've seen some fans say the refs were favoring AL (and it did turn out in AL's favor), but I don't think it was favoritism on the part of that crew. It's just complete incompetence and it's par for the course with this crew. As soon as I saw that clown the the huge biceps and safety glasses (scott campbell), I knew the officiating was going to be a joke. I seriously don't understand how he still has a job at this level. To be fair, I don't know how much of the problem is him vs. other guys on that crew blowing these calls, but whenever he's in charge, it's always an officiating shit show.
  20. Yes, you would likely trigger a positive because your hematocrit is likely above 50 (take a look at one of your blood tests, hematocrit is almost always included). Some people have naturally high levels and living at high altitude pushes it up a bit. If you were a world-class athlete subject to regular testing, you would likely have a "passport" that shows where your normal hematocrit levels are. Your normal isn't the same as other people's normal. When you are tested, your hemotocrit is compared to the arbitrary trigger point (50), but also compared to your passport number. So, you might get a pass at a level of 53 (assuming your normal is over 50), while someone else might be suspect at 48 (if their normal level is 41). As you can imagine, this is a very hard thing to test for and it's somewhat arbitrary. This type of testing is not reasonable except at the highest levels of sport, and you can understand how people continue work the system. EPO was a primary drug of choice for Lance during his run of dominance and that's why he never tested positive.
  21. It's basically altering your blood to carry more oxygen to your muscles. EPO is a drug used to do it, but it can also be done via blood transfusions where they use blood with higher red blood cell counts. Athletes are doing transfusions with mini-fridges full of blood in hotel rooms, crazy stuff. Very common in endurance sports (cycling, running, speed skating, xc skiing, etc.), but it's not really going to help with strength and explosiveness like steroids do. It's tough to test for, because a transfusion is still all natural (no illegal drugs). My understanding is that EPO (illegal) doesn't leave a marker or it dissipates so quickly that the chance of detecting it is very low. The benefits last much longer. The testing they do is to detect abnornally high hemocrit levels in the blood. The tricky part is determining what is normal because natural levels vary significantly. I might have natural hemocrit of 43 and use EPO or transfusions to get close to 50 (the limit that triggers a positive), but some people have 50+ naturally.
  22. This. Also a parent of a former D1 athlete. Clearly, opinions vary, I suspect largely based on age. Asking any kid to "do the right thing" while they are watching other kids get bigger and faster is an exercise in futility. For those arguing "just let them all juice", you either don't understand the health impact or you don't care and want to say "they are gladiators, they know what they are doing". Lot's of people think that way and it's their right, but it's a chicken-shit position as far as I'm concerned. As much as I hate all the targeting crap and general wussification of the game as a spectator, it's selfish and dumb to just say "let them play without rules, they know the risks". PED's are no different, you have to protect these kids from themselves and that's what the rules are for. I also don't buy the argument that steroids aren't near as harmful as the general risks of playing the game. There are some PED's that would be considered low risk (more common for endurance athletes), but extended abuse of anabolic steroids is almost always going to cause problems. It's also pretty easy to test for steroids compared to some of the blood doping stuff, so it's just a matter of how aggressively they want to enforce the rules.
  23. He’s also facing a decision and potential legal action w the ncaa. Gotta be careful that whatever he says public ally is consistent with the appeal. Typical legal advice is “don’t say a anything to anyone”.
  24. RB's haven't gotten much bigger, but OL's in the 70's and early 80's were tiny by today's standards. Average would certainly be under 275, probably closer to 260. There were other backs the size of the Earl in his day, but nobody with the speed and punishing running style.
×
×
  • Create New...