Recruiting Football Talk VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
We’re ready. 😎 Bet the current infrastructure of Spyre gets hired to manage it…if it happens.
It seems like this has all been planned from the start. Spyre's work appears to simply be an interview/resume for them to take over the new structure that's being blueprinted now. . . maybe Spyre was/is training or maybe it is a testing ground to help format the layout of the new pay/NiL model. Maybe it's none of that, but the new info we're hearing makes it look like it could be that.
 
No, I'm talking about baseball having 11.7 scholarships per team when most teams have 35-40 players. So, very few players even get a full-time ride because they break it up among those 11.7.

Tennis only gets 4.5 scholarships, and again can divide them among the team so no single player usually gets a full ride, despite the team having 8 or more players.


My comment is that the money to pay for the scholarships comes solely from the university, so other than the obvious BS excuse of "leveling the playing field" I think the NCAA shouldn't tell a successful school they can't offer more scholarships.
It's really not the NCAA. Title IX is a federal law.
 
I don't really understand how people put Chandler ahead of ZZ...just because of NBA talent bias, or is it because ZZ is so short?

Chandler would work ZZ..Chandler could create his own shot.Finish around the rim and had better handles than ZZ..chandler is probably the one I wish would have stayed the most..paring him with DK would have been scary hours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jlawso21
Also, I really dont mind the 2 minute warning as long as they dont do anything to shorten amount of plays or clock in the game
 
Loved part 1. Saw where he said he was going to "improve on the book" for part 2 and lost a lot of excitement. I'll probably still go, but less excited now that I've heard that from him.

Walked out of the theater with a lot of book fans last night and they all adored it, FWIW. I’ve heard the changes aren’t that huge.
 
Clearly there isn't an answer that will make everyone happy. Like most fan bases, we spend an inordinate amount of time complaining how referees are tainted. That might be by the commish, or Vegas, or personal bias...but according to VN, every ref in every game has an agenda. You will never remove bias from a human ref. Ever.

A narrow AI has the potential to completely remove bias, but of course, then we've lost the "human" element. We've also lost the boogie man that we get to blame for everything that doesn't go our way, so that won't be popular.

I would say "pick your poison", but in the end it will get picked for you. If I were a bettin' man, I'd say it'll end up AI, but who knows. Digital music was too perfect, so now everyone is breaking out the record players and vinyl. I guess pops and crackles makes the music better, and perhaps biased officiating is an important part of the game.
I agree mostly, but I don't see why every ref has to be biased, at least in the way most every one on here defines biased (caring who wins).

Most officials truly just try to make the right call on every play. They don't have a bias as far as caring who wins.

Outside the SEC, it's mostly decent officiating.
 
“This is precisely why a DI meeting room, not a courtroom, is the best place to change NCAA policy.”

Hey, Charlie: Donde made multiple requests for meetings before you leaked that story to Pat Forde, and you refused. So you can take your platitudes and shove them [somewhere].

That snake fits right in at the NCAA.

Edit: for reference - via KNS shortly after Donde’s letter

The public records request included correspondence between Plowman's office and Baker's office.

Susan England, assistant to the chancellor, provided the NCAA with flexible dates and the chance for the meeting to be remote.

Baker declined the meeting.

“I was disappointed,” Plowman said on Wednesday. “He’s busy. You know I get that. But I was disappointed.”
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top