Jump to content

rickyspub

Full Members
  • Posts

    1162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rickyspub

  1. Thanks. It seems what little talent there is has been so concentrated at the top, it wouldn't be too hard to tell who the "diamonds in the rough" are just by looking at conference records. Do Ford and Walton consistently win their conferences? That would at least suggest a higher baseline in coaching than someone like Ericksen who doesn't seem to regularly win his conference, much less always reside in title contention. Like you said, if a coach's one streak of greatness coincided with a single player, I would be hard pressed to see that as a positive when looking for future returns. Especially if the rest of the record is middle of the pack or worse. David Pierce didn't really excite the fanbase coming from being a coach in some crappy conferences, but he won his conference 4 of the 5 years he was HC and was 3rd place in the other year. That consistency suggests a diamond in the rough.
  2. Think you mean they could charge 8.25 pounds or maybe 745 rupees...
  3. I don't follow softball broadly, I just keep up with our team. How high are expectations of G5-level coaches in softball? It seems like other women's sports like volleyball and basketball are pretty much dominated by P5 teams. A quick look through the last 10 WCWS and I only see Hawaii and ULL as the only G5 teams to break the barrier during that period. Lotief at ULL looks like a non-starter. It doesn't look like Ericksen is dominating his conference, so that isn't a great sign, but are there any G5-level coaches that stand out after Lotief?
  4. I believe you mean 'across an entire conference'. If South Alabama gives a recruit a Tic-Tac on an unofficial visit they will get penalized. Georgia passing out rate lists for paying players gets a deaf ear like Joe Paterno and rhythmic slapping noises.
  5. So I am going to guess that if you are privy to such information about documentary evidence of Georgia paying for players, the NCAA has similar evidence. I assume they have 'top' men reviewing it alongside the Ark of the Covenant. Could someone photoshop that crate with the swastika on it from Raiders of the Lost Ark to have a branded SEC logo instead?
  6. So what does the football rule book say about ass to mouth?
  7. And there were a lot of fans that thought the hire was failure. In part because we didn't go Jimbo Fisher on it and part because we didn't make the hire immediately. The timing may not be optimal, but it is what it is.
  8. I'm going to guess aggy is claiming him as a silent.
  9. fify (How could he help it, she left them on the table...)
  10. I knew my patience wouldn't be rewarded!
  11. I don't know the history of the rules but the transfer rules in football have been that way for as long as I can remember. The only time it gets talked about in a negative light is when a coach goes asshole and restricts the transfer to a bunch of schools outside of those on that school's schedule or when the players or those representing them talk about getting paid for their employment and the transfer restriction is held out as something that reveals them to be a different class from the student body. I guarantee you if the rule that was passed had a restriction for transfers to schools on the schedule, the average fan would have shrugged their shoulders and the media would have talked about how this was a great change against bastard coaches. If you dug deep enough you would have found a few articles saying it was weak sauce. That is the reality. The NCAA must be under more heat than I thought because this is a symbolic move meant to push back against athletes being treated as employees. The football player's position has been improved by 0.00001 percent by this rule change.
  12. It has been tradition for ever. If the NCAA rule change were just to stop coaches from making it impossible for a player to transfer anywhere and just limited it to teams on the schedule, the majority of fans and the media would have seen it as a just decision. I am somewhat surprised they went as far as they did. That is all I am saying... Gene's point that it somehow was about players attending a better university is really the untenable point here, as it really has nothing to do with academics. As he follows up and notes, it could be for a girlfriend or whatever. He shouldn't have tried to paint this as a rule change for some noble academic pursuit, when it is just about treating players like other students, which is the key point. This to me is just the NCAA deflecting from doing the right thing and sharing revenue with the players. The transfer restriction has always been held up as one of the unfair ways the NCAA treats players compared to other students and this move strikes me as a way to deflect attention away from treating players as employees. It's to make the NCAA look like they are doing the 'right thing' when it is merely dangling a shiny bauble to the masses.
  13. I think the idea that any but the slimmest minority of players will actually transfer to improve the quality of instruction is silly. In fact, I imagine the transfers we will see will be struggling players at schools like Texas understanding what OU meant when they said they have 'better academics'. I am merely surprised that the rule didn't just codify what most people felt was the somewhat reasonable restriction of teams on the schedule, whether it offers any tangible competitive benefits or not. When they were discussing the change I got the sense it was done to counter the unreasonable restrictions that limited players to almost no FBS options. But this also counters the silliness of limiting the ability of a non-scholarship player, like Baker Mayfield (fuck him and OU), from being able to go where he wanted.
  14. I doubt Stanford is opening the doors to Bama transfers with a 2.5 GPA, even ones that are great football players. This has nothing to do with playing school. I think the new rule is fine and I would have even been OK with it if restricted them from going to any school that was on the schedule in the next year. But even that would put some hardship on players in the Pac who would have few local options without having to drop down to a G5 or below.
  15. I think it is a pretty universal phenomenon at US universities. I wouldn't be surprised if there are no schools that have a better tenured faculty-to-administrator ratio today than they did 10, 15 or 20 years ago.
  16. Call me silly, but I am going to guess he isn't into florals or pastels.
  17. If it will make any of you weepy sorts feel better, just replace 'Hamm' with 'Jimbo'. It's a story as old as time, but it's better when the cuck is a real 8figs rather than a fake 6figs.
  18. Not surprising he is going 0-fer, it's what he does best. Too bad he wasn't 0-fer on his sperm count. #aggyCanProcreateIn30Seconds
×
×
  • Create New...