Recruiting Forum Football Talk IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
#176,078
#176,078
And people keep forgetting. It wasn’t Kirkland vs Jumper. The player who was eventually bumped was DILLON BATES. Anyone want to start a GoFundMe over that?
 
#176,079
#176,079
So.ProVOL said:
That's a King Snake..... keeps pesky rodents away. Well not anymore lol.
Click to expand...
Black snakes and green snakes are the superior evolutionary color coats because they don't mimic venomous snakes and that means the worst predator (humans) know to leave them alone. All these other snakes that mimic their venomous brethren have made a serious mistake. They get close to a house or human area and they die. But everyone knows to leave a black snake or green snake alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLSONLY and So.ProVOL
#176,080
#176,080
UTProf said:
It's not really funny tho the disparity. One NBA player could buy an entire team on league minimum. Women's Basketball needs a Pat Summitt. We somewhat equalized the sport here when she was alive and still do because support for the LVs is still very strong. Sell out crowds for women's games. And her personality was so strong that we all loved her and would've followed her to the gates of hell. An upstart sport needs that and the women's game is still in its upstart phase. It will never get there without some Pats but it does also need Britneys.

I mean right now when we look at the WNBA we're looking at an unfinished legacy.
Click to expand...
How is a league that's going on 30 years old still an upstart?

And I don't think what you're saying about UT women's basketball is true. I doubt the lady Vols made more money in their best year than the men's team in their worst year. All women's sports at UT are subsidized by the men's teams, mainly football obviously.

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/the-university-of-tennessee/student-life/sports/#:~:text=UT Knoxville Sports Financials,can vary with each sport.

Women's sports don't make money because no one watches them. Including half the population known as women.

I think sports are great, and have zero problem with how they are currently constituted. But the grand mystery or injustice as to why there is no money in any women's sport is peak silliness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashevillevol, orangejuice, YNWAvols and 8 others
#176,081
#176,081
UTProf said:
Black snakes and green snakes are the superior evolutionary color coats because they don't mimic venomous snakes and that means the worst predator (humans) know to leave them alone. All these other snakes that mimic their venomous brethren have made a serious mistake. They get close to a house or human area and they die. But everyone knows to leave a black snake or green snake alone.
Click to expand...
Are more non-venomous look-alike snakes left alone by all the other predators than are killed by humans? Genetic legacy is a statistical long game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange. and So.ProVOL
#176,082
#176,082
UTProf said:
It's not really funny tho the disparity. One NBA player could buy an entire team on league minimum. Women's Basketball needs a Pat Summitt. We somewhat equalized the sport here when she was alive and still do because support for the LVs is still very strong. Sell out crowds for women's games. And her personality was so strong that we all loved her and would've followed her to the gates of hell. An upstart sport needs that and the women's game is still in its upstart phase. It will never get there without some Pats but it does also need Britneys.

I mean right now when we look at the WNBA we're looking at an unfinished legacy.
Click to expand...

I follow the LV because they are a UT team and I wish only good things for them. That being said, the WNBA is a boring product and people only have some much time and resources to put toward entertainment. They want something exciting in return for their money. The WNBA just isn't what people are willing to spend money on. I don't know if even Pat could do anything for the WNBA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brillovol, berryvol, A.J. and 12 others
#176,083
#176,083
Ten_Titans said:
How is a league that's going on 30 years old still an upstart?

And I don't think what you're saying about UT women's basketball is true. I doubt the lady Vols made more money in their best year than the men's team in their worst year. All women's sports at UT are subsidized by the men's teams, mainly football obviously.

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/the-university-of-tennessee/student-life/sports/#:~:text=UT Knoxville Sports Financials,can vary with each sport.

Women's sports don't make money because no one watches them. Including half the population known as women.

I think sports are great, and have zero problem with how they are currently consituted. But the grand mystery or injustice as to why there is no money in any women's sport is peak silliness.
Click to expand...

Until it finds serious financial security and becomes a real part of our sports culture it's an upstart. A fringe league like the xfl despite NBA branding. Iterations of pro football and pro basketball were around for aeons before their modern versions. It will take icons emerging to draw attention to the sport and given what women's sports face it won't happen overnight.

Half of women don't watch because until the 70s they weren't even allowed to play the game. The constant homophobia doesn't help as women don't want to be called dykes just because they like sports and that drives a lot of women away from sports once they reach high school (and yes I know Brit is a lesbian but that's not the point). And until very recently there's been no financial incentive to play. I knew in middle school it was pointless for me to continue beyond simply loving the sport. The only incentive was the LVs and getting to play in Europe.

We saw women's college basketball built from scratch here in Knoxville and it was a work left unfinished. Until games like LVs vs UCONN become far more normative you won't see a WNBA worth a damn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Devo182
#176,085
#176,085
sjt18 said:
Not really the point of the conversation.

In a nutshell, does Saban get players because they are highly rated or is it more true that they are highly rated because Saban and other top programs pursue them? Which is more true: The recruiting sites would be "as accurate" if they didn't know who made a recruit a priority until after they ranked them or would Saban stop getting top talent if 247 stopped giving high rankings to his recruits?

BOT and others have the cart before the horse and place faith in what amounts to a marketing gimmick. The recruiting sites do not give 4/5* to all of the nation's best players. They INTENTIONALLY don't even try. They set purely arbitrary limits on how many "blue chips" they name. They are selling a product to college football fans who are starving for affirmation of their favorite team.

Here's an example. You have 10,000 ball bearings on a table. To make your product work, you have to divide them using only your senses and input from line workers about the finish, weight, diameter, roundness, etc. You are tasked with dividing them into 5*, 4*, 3*, and unacceptable. If it were a real mfg task then you would be judged by how truly accurate your evaluation was. However if you arbitrarily choose to ONLY give 5* to 30 bearings and 4* to a couple hundred... you can give the illusion of expertise that you really don't have. It is much easier to identify 230 4/5* quality bearings than the 500+ that are actually in the batch.

The recruiting sites are fairly accurate with those they rate highly though not as much as many seem to think based on the draft or team performance. But too many assume gloom and doom over these ratings and rankings. Every year the recruiting sites will miss more actual 4/5* talents than they give that status to.
Click to expand...
I know. That was the point. Your evidence for why getting high-profile classes and blue chip recruit doesn't matter had the 2 teams that had the most highly rated recruiting classes in the national championship game
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNash17
#176,088
#176,088
Ten_Titans said:
How is a league that's going on 30 years old still an upstart?

And I don't think what you're saying about UT women's basketball is true. I doubt the lady Vols made more money in their best year than the men's team in their worst year. All women's sports at UT are subsidized by the men's teams, mainly football obviously.

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/the-university-of-tennessee/student-life/sports/#:~:text=UT Knoxville Sports Financials,can vary with each sport.

Women's sports don't make money because no one watches them. Including half the population known as women.

I think sports are great, and have zero problem with how they are currently constituted. But the grand mystery or injustice as to why there is no money in any women's sport is peak silliness.
Click to expand...
men watch womens sport for one of two reasons. Either their daughter is playing the sport or they want to look at some booty…. Or perhaps both if you’re an Alabama fan
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX and butchna
#176,090
#176,090
UTProf said:
It's not really funny tho the disparity. One NBA player could buy an entire team on league minimum. Women's Basketball needs a Pat Summitt. We somewhat equalized the sport here when she was alive and still do because support for the LVs is still very strong. Sell out crowds for women's games. And her personality was so strong that we all loved her and would've followed her to the gates of hell. An upstart sport needs that and the women's game is still in its upstart phase. It will never get there without some Pats but it does also need Britneys.

I mean right now when we look at the WNBA we're looking at an unfinished legacy.
Click to expand...
Not really. Their salaries reflect more than the revenue they bring in. The NBA has to subsidize the league every year or it wouldn't even exist. They should be happy with what they get its not our fault they want to live a more extravagant lifestyle than they can afford. Pretty much everyone I know would kill to make 200k a year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Orange., KptVFL, Orangeburst and 1 other person
#176,093
#176,093
Orange_Crush said:
Are more non-venomous look-alike snakes left alone by all the other predators than are killed by humans? Genetic legacy is a statistical long game.
Click to expand...

I was joking more than anything but I'd guess that for a very long time those mimics were the winners of the game but since humans have formed permanent settlements and become civilized, we've encroached upon a massive amount of land and territory and we tend to kill mimics.
 
#176,094
#176,094
UTProf said:
Until it finds serious financial security and becomes a real part of our sports culture it's an upstart. A fringe league like the xfl despite NBA branding. Iterations of pro football and pro basketball were around for aeons before their modern versions. It will take icons emerging to draw attention to the sport and given what women's sports face it won't happen overnight.

Half of women don't watch because until the 70s they weren't even allowed to play the game. The constant homophobia doesn't help as women don't want to be called dykes just because they like sports and that drives a lot of women away from sports once they reach high school (and yes I know Brit is a lesbian but that's not the point). And until very recently there's been no financial incentive to play. I knew in middle school it was pointless for me to continue beyond simply loving the sport. The only incentive was the LVs and getting to play in Europe.

We saw women's college basketball built from scratch here in Knoxville and it was a work left unfinished. Until games like LVs vs UCONN become far more normative you won't see a WNBA worth a damn.
Click to expand...


With the keyword list, blaming disparity on homophobia and patriarchal society, let's just go ahead and ask that the men's professional sports' wealth be evenly redistributed so we can just move this **** to the political forum and let everyone have at it there?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange., Ulysees E. McGill, KptVFL and 1 other person
#176,096
#176,096
mr.checkerboards said:
Not really. Their salaries reflect more than the revenue they bring in. The NBA has ti subsidize the league every year or it wouldn't even exist. They should be happy with what they get its not our fault they want to live a more extravagant lifestyle than they can afford. Pretty much everyone I know would kill to make 200k a year.
Click to expand...

Your response has nothing whatsoever to do with what I said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Devo182
#176,098
#176,098
Orange_Crush said:
With the keyword list, blaming disparity on homophobia and patriarchal society, let's just go ahead and ask that the men's professional sports' wealth be evenly redistributed so we can just move this **** to the political forum and let everyone have at it there?
Click to expand...

Yours has even less to do with what I said. Heaven forbid someone want to see a sport succeed. WTF is wrong with some of you? You think everything is politics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brillovol, Bms4880, Devo182 and 3 others
#176,100
#176,100
UTProf said:
It's not really funny tho the disparity. One NBA player could buy an entire team on league minimum. Women's Basketball needs a Pat Summitt. We somewhat equalized the sport here when she was alive and still do because support for the LVs is still very strong. Sell out crowds for women's games. And her personality was so strong that we all loved her and would've followed her to the gates of hell. An upstart sport needs that and the women's game is still in its upstart phase. It will never get there without some Pats but it does also need Britneys.

I mean right now when we look at the WNBA we're looking at an unfinished legacy.
Click to expand...

Actually it is funny. It’s a trash product that loses money. Your average boys high school basketball team would beat a WNBA team.

Have you heard Bill Burr take on the WNBA? It’s hilarious and worth the listen. Maybe they should get some players born male to spice it up 🤷‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulysees E. McGill and mr.checkerboards
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top