JayHawkFanToo said:
in the first one at the night club’s parking lot, he was charged only with criminal damage to property and NOT with assault which would have been the case if he made threats that made the woman in question feel in danger.
I'm willing to accept that, but I imagine myself in a car being kicked and damaged by several athletic young males and I imagine myself in danger.
So a verbal threat is assault but physically damaging the car I am in is not? Me no understand...
@jaybate-1.0 From what little I read, the argument of the appelate court was "where do you draw the line?" Give an "amateur" a free education and (s)he is still an amateur, but compensate h(im)(er) monetarily and there is not even the pretence of amateurism.
The Supreme Court is asked to hear 100 times more cases than they have time for. They have to make choices.
The kids need to get together and refuse to sign the waiver of digital rights. "They won't stand up for themselves", so they are officially complicit. Being in a "free country" means you are responsible for what you do "freely", even if it's "fake freedom".
@jaybate-1.0 I checked Wikipedia and a few links, which I won't put here because anyone can find them as easily as I did.
The District Court said athletic scholarships could be full cost of attendance, and that athletes could get deferred compensation of up to $5000 a year.
The Appelate Court said yes to the full-cost scholarships but no to the deferred compensation.
The Supreme Court declined to review the Appelate Court's ruling.
The Power 5 conferences now allow full-cost scholarships.
approxinfinity said:
@ParisHawk does it matter that she was a girl?
Yes, somewhat.
How do you know she was being tramautized?
That is a BS question. Picture the scenario, for crying out loud: alone in your car with a gang kicking away at it and shouting at you. You don't think that's menacing?
You use the word "know" to imply that I need to prove she was traumatized. Prove she wasn't.
It seems people want to portray her as some innocent helpless girl. She's a D-I baller in a P5 conference. She's seen stuff, done stuff, understands stuff. And it seems she had a pretty active role to play in the situation. Let's give her some credit in that regard.
This reminds me of the page from an Elmore Leonard novel: one guy says "Did you know once every 7 seconds a woman gets beaten in the US?" and the other replies "Hard to believe so many women get out of line."
I'm not equating JJ's actions to beating. My point is it what she did is no excuse.
Similarly, while Josh is an old freshman, he's still a college freshman. Let's not assume that his decisions now are indicative of his adult character.
I wasn't talking about his character, I was talking about that one action. Not normal, not a "mistake".
Let's look at this through the lens of the current times.
That sentence scares me. More relativism - and worse, graver conflict among everyone concerning acceptable behavior. We who have a common bond here can't even agree that what JJ did was wrong, and wrong enough to be brought before a judge?
You didn't answer my question: was JJ's treatment by the court too harsh for you?
HighEliteMajor said:
what JJ did was not a normal mistake by a kid.
I agree. Whatever "normal" may be, that was not a "mistake".
JJ was one of several angry young men, some or all athletes, who were damaging that car with a girl inside! Anyone have a daughter or sister or niece of college age? If that were her in that car being traumatized what would you be thinking?
Not throwing JJ under the bus. He admitted, got a diversion with appropriate conditions and a good second chance. Anyone think he should have gotten off with less?
We still have Vick. How "normal" is he?
@Texas-Hawk-10 Svi could be a starter and versatile: just move over when needed. Self tends to be loyal to players who stick around for 3-4 years.
@mayjay You are quoting elpoyo, I was referring to highelitemajor
@mayjay He did say "a cause", not "the cause".
It wouldn't bother me if gender were a minor consideration in choosing Hudy for some award or other, as long as she was objectively deserving as well.
I have been "anti-PC" since 1970, but I try to be tolerant of harmless or minor PC tendencies. If we are all mutually intolerant all the time, we'll never get along.
HighEliteMajor said:
The very valid point, that can of course be refuted with facts and info ... is whether perhaps her gender (and being unique in being a female trainer of men) was a cause of her getting whatever recognition.
Several things:
Hudy has been very successful and nationally recognized. At this point, the burden of proof is more on those who would question the validity of her reputation.
Any facts or info to that effect?
HighEliteMajor said:
But the point is what has she done to outshine her competition? We aren't "in the know" so we don't really know. I'm interested.
@HighEliteMajor , you are known for valuing national championships above all else.
From the kuathletics site:
"Hudy was part of eight national championship teams while at Connecticut - two men’s basketball, five women’s basketball and one men’s soccer."
Add 2008 and Hudy has trained 9 national championship teams in two different schools. She has almost as many national championship rings as Self has Big 12 championship rings.
Next.
@Kcmatt7 Yes, I remember Self proposing something similar some years back: a kid can either go pro out of high school, or go to college and stay at least two years.
approxinfinity said:
@chriz surely pulling a mcd frosh big, a lanky guard that was POY in Texas, a big transfer than can play right away and a couple transfers that were beasts in their conference and open up a pipeline to several other ranked family members should be considered a strong class.
No.
The rankings are based on new recruits only, not transfers. The transfers do not belong to the same "class".
Such rankings are meaningless when you have a roster with so many transfers.
I don't know if the other teams in the conference have lots of transfers or JUCO guys: how about Iowa State?
Order obeyed, Sir.
Man, on top of everything else that letter was well written!
Coach, he had the last word.
You say that this team lacks great creators. Isn't that an argument for the hi-lo? Get the ball in the paint by passing to a big, not by driving.
The only thing is the bigs have to be able to pass out to the open shooters. Udoka?
The other thing about driving, so many drives (or cuts to the basket for alley oops) benefited from Lucas screens! We're going to be screaming "drive the f*n ball" and the guards are going to be waiting for the nice driving lanes that they had all the time last year.
The "identity" of next year's team is going to be a very interesting search...
@justanotherfan So during Roy's 15 years, did UNC lay off HS recruits west of the Mississippi? Did they split the country up or did Roy just kowtow to Dean?
approxinfinity said:
@ParisHawk also let me know if this alleviates some of the layout concerns you had.
Nice of you to think of me. My rant was toward overall GUI tendencies these days, not nodebb in particular and especially not this site.
Yes, this theme does grab less real estate across the top of the screen.
Thanks for all your work here!
@approxinfinity You appear to be talking about just "lying", which is saying one thing when you think something else is true. I agree that is very different from simply changing one's mind.
I always understood hypocrisy to mean upholding a strict moral code while not being faithful to it: it's the opposite of "practice what you preach".
Hypocrisy is about our acts versus our words, not just our opinions.
The new look of this site puts more stuff at the top of the screen, so the actual list of topics get less room.
This is a general tendency of web sites in the 2010's.
At the same time, laptops have reduced the height of screens and widened them.
Why oh why are we making sites more vertical and screens more horizontal at the same time ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
If Devonte goes, he will compete with Frank for draft and roster spots. I imagine that, all other things being equal, he would not want to rain on Frank's parade.
@mayjay said:
Maybe our issue stems from part of your scenario that I thought was facetious but perhaps underlies your misgivings. I think no player will go and say, “Hey, just screwing around here–don’t intend to really go pro. So whaddya think?” I think they all declare planning on trying their damnedest to impress if they get invited, and to go pro if they get monster feedback. They all want that Willie Wonka ticket, but some know it isn’t yet very likely yet, so they describe it as testing the waters.
Right. It wasn't facetious.
I understand better why my very minor remark sparked these reactions.
I would rather my remark be dismissed than misinterpreted. So dismiss it.
@mayjay said:
@ParisHawk Do you think teams that want a guy one year will decide not to take the same guy the next, or a teammate, because of a petty feeling of having been stood up?
In any event, the original dispute was over "testing the waters" because you said no one declaring should see it that way, but instead only declare if they intend to go pro if they are told they are ready. I leave it to you to convince the guys saying that how much they are damaging their future prospects. I think your real dispute here is with the rule change that gives early declarants that chance to back out--regardless of how many team want them.
I don't dispute the rule change. Players have that new freedom and I don't want to limit it, but I think like all freedoms it should be exercised reasonably.
The first time after the rule change, Calipari told all his players to declare for the draft. They were indeed "testing the waters". Selden after his sophomore year said he knew he was coming back so he didn't declare. I think Selden was wiser and more respectful of the process.
@mayjay One last time, I defend the idea that instead of disagreeing we are not talking about the same thing.
I never said a prospective second round pick was wrong to declare anyway. Anyone who can get a combine invite and afterwards decides to go pro goes with my best wishes.
I merely said that if a player has no intention of going pro then he shouldn't go to the combine. The risk is that he would be highly rated and the refusal to stay in the draft would be held against him and his coach. I don't see any reply that addresses this point.
Do you really think the NBA personnel at the combine would be happy to hear that a player was just there for the experience and had no intention of going pro no matter what?
And this is so much more important than the regular season?
@JayHawkFanToo said:
I think @mayjay post makes sense, don't you think?
Of course. Again, I think some are misreading my original thought.
I said "if you are told you are ready, you have to go- otherwise they think you (and your college coach) are jobbing the system."
Being told "second round" is not "you are ready".
And when I said "you have to go", read the "otherwise". They don't "have to go" because those are the rules, but to avoid getting a bad rep.
Let me say it another way: going to the combine is not "testing the waters"; going to the combine is not "checking it out". Rather, going to the combine is applying for a job as an NBA player.
Don't apply if you don't want the job.
How does that not make sense?
@Crimsonorblue22 Yes of course. What does that have to do with my post?
My point was if you go to the combine you have to be open to going pro. You can't just go as a tourist. Was that not clear?
@Crimsonorblue22 said:
@BeddieKU23 I'd think they would at least go check it out and not hire an agent. No harm.
The thing about "checking it out" is that if you are told you are ready, you have to go - otherwise they think you (and your college coach) are jobbing the system.
If you have no intention of going pro, you can't go to the combine just for the experience: they will hold it against you.
"Would you like to go the prom with me?"
"All right"
"Well you know, I was just wondering. Actually I'm out of town that weekend. No hard feelings?" Sure...
@Texas-Hawk-10 said:
@ParisHawk Self's been a lower seed in the E8 twice. KU lost as a 4 seed to 3 seed GT in 2004 and beat 1 seed UNC as a 2 seed in 2012. 2 games is not enough to draw any meaningful or trends out of.
Which helps whoever wants to emphasize Self's postseason shortcomings...
@Texas-Hawk-10 Wouldn't it be more fair to mention 2012? What seed were we? How many times have we had that seed? What are the averages?
Maybe Self has overperformed as a non-1 seed: seems fair to say so...
@HighEliteMajor said:
- KenPom Defensive Efficiency: Using a different metric, KenPom’s efficiency ratings, the news doesn’t get any better. No NCAA title winner since 2004 has been worse than 21 in at the KenPom ratings regarding defensive efficiency. KU is now at 30.
-2004: UConn 5
-2005: UNC 7
-2006: Florida 7
-2007: Florida 15
-2008: Kansas 1
The numbers you cite for past years are kenpom's calculations after the tournaments are over.
As of the Purdue game, KU has now moved up to third in the kenpom rankings, and second among teams that are still alive. Offensive efficiency has improved to 3, and defensive efficiency to 23.
KU keeps winning and our kenpom defensive efficiency will move up to the teens without question.
This is not to say your overall analysis is wrong, it's just that the numbers you have only allow you to compare apples with green apples.
@dylans said:
More disturbing to me is Vick getting away with striking a woman. Hooking Bragg up with his ex who then got Bragg into hot water (I might be mis-remembering this one). Aggravating another to the point of getting Josh involved in a mob scene.
MIght be a bit of exaggeration on the middle point. Don't think the girl vs. Bragg was Vick's ex, just someone who targeted Vick before Bragg.
One detail that bothers me: that dorm is supposed to have tight security, and they use biometric security to get in? Of all the dorms / frats at KU, that would be the one where misdeeds are most likely to have a resident as perpetrator or accomplice.
However, timelines estimated on this site appear to place the entire team away from the dorm when all this went down.
Who is Bragg's roommate anyway?
I don't have the URL handy, but I remember Self commenting on last weekend's games:
Norm Roberts did the scouting report on the first game's opponent
Snacks and Townsend did the scouting reports on the second game's potential opponents
Self personally spent the first part of the week on the second game, then concentrated on the first game.
The coaches plan ahead. The players don't practice ahead - at least I have never heard of anything like that.
For me it's a Friday tipoff - at 3 a.m.
We are still DST here, otherwise it would be 4.
@jaybate-1.0 ...and we don't have to play Duke, and we don't have to play both UNC and UK because they would have to play each other first - oh and we don't have to play Louisville.
Pretending to interview Self, he might also be saying "We play very good teams but no great team the second weekend, and we're in KC. No complaints. And once you get to the Final Four, anything can happen."
The second sentence is a real quote.
By the way, how many of each ShoeCo are represented in the Shoe 16?
@dylans Again, keep in mind that there are things called proxies. Anyone working in an enterprise with any security will go through a proxy, and every vote from behind that proxy will have the proxy's IP address.
There may be proxies along the network as well.
If they are throwing away votes based primarily on IP addresses, some legitimate votes will be thrown out.
That is why I suspect the filtering of cheating votes may be more sophisticated.
On another note, if as @drgnslayr says we want to reduce the Gonzaga percentage, then we should vote for Frank and for two other seniors. That will reduce the Gonzaga percentage much faster.
This entire thread is a beautiful read.
I am in awe of Lucas, who just keeps on raising an inch at a time his floor and his ceiling.
One detail on his great go to move: against MSU he generally shot right away, which avoids the double team, but also doesn't give the other team a chance to foul. He does draw fouls in other ways.
To me, drawing fouls is the most important statistic that is not measured. Its true impact is hard to quantify. Imagine giving Swanigan his second foul early in the first half and making him sit several minutes: could be the most important play of the half.
Man, Coleby has been taking LUCAS pills!
@DCHawker and Coleby to me passes the eye test.
Coleby brought his mean pills!
Josh, you can't even give them an excuse to call a foul at TV timeout time.
Hats off to Lucas this half. Svi doing all right. Josh too revved up. Frank not in POY gear just yet.
This mano on mano with Bridges is not to my liking. Make somebody else beat us.
Coach Self, how about some halftime adjustments? Occasional presses, occasional junk defenses? The other guys are freshmen, even if coached by Izzo.
@Texas-Hawk-10 said:
Josh didn’t vervally berate Calvert.
How do you know? The claim was he said he would beat her a**.
Don't change the subject. I said IF everything Calvert claims is true, it's serious.
Saying some of it isn't true is fine, but irrelevant to my point.
@HawkInMizery said:
Making a drunken threat is not the same thing as actually following through or even saying it with any intent.
I'm surprised. Suppose he made the threat and suppose he kicked and damaged her car with her in it. Isn't that "following through" to some extent, or at least "showing intent"?
I can't believe some folks here have such a hard time imagining what a traumatic experience is being affirmed here: NBA-level athlete follows girl to her car, berates her, stops her from backing her car out and damages it with her in it - apparently abetted by a small crowd! Man, put that in a film and I don't want to go see it.
OK, what is being affirmed may not be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Fair enough.
That doesn't allow us to belittle the seriousness of what is being affirmed. Saying "if he said and did all this, so what?" is not a valid defence in my book.
@Texas-Hawk-10 said:
This was not a money issue.
If the issue was being at odds with the AD, I can see leaving. If I'm a successful basketball coach at KU I have leverage. At a football school like OSU I have little to none, so if the AD and I don't get along I may as well hit the road.
@dylans said:
I have no idea how Coach K gets a recruit, that smug, arrogant man. But man can he coach and he sure as heck can recruit.
Maybe the message is a bit like
I only coach the best (Duke, Olympics, World Games) and don't bother with the rest. Are you "best" or "rest" ?
@dylans said:
If Vegas has KU as an 8 pt favorite then that is good sign popular opinion. If the masses think KU is an 8 pt favorite, that gives KU a good chance to win. But KU is horrible against the spread so far this season
The Vegas spread is meant to equalize betting on both sides so the house will make money no matter what. If KU fans bet more than MSU fans, the spread will go up, otherwise it will go down.
I suspect in KU games more money goes on KU, so the spread automatically increases.
@ralster said:
KU’s A-game beats this particular MichState’s A-game.
Sure. But what's the answer to Self's big question: "How do you win when the shots aren't falling?"
Defense, rebounding, 50/50 balls, toughness?
Frank will drive like a maniac and Josh will be all over the floor - oh and Lucas will play at a level that 18 months ago we didn't imagine and that we now take for granted.
I'm more worried about the refs than about MSU...
I don't see Josh or Devonte backing down.
Lucas has forgotten what "backing down" means. Frank never knew.
Coleby needs to bring his mean pills.
@jaybate-1.0 said:
Also, I think plate tectonic theory may have started there.
Good one!
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30059313?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents ↗
1972 publication of two profs at UC Davis