🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@Kcmatt7

This UK team is going to probably start slow. Duke should win this matchup because there won't be much scouting this early in the season.

You can overwhelm with talent early in the season because you can't take things away without having scouted teams that much. Nobody really has any idea how those freshmen will look on the floor together against legitimate competition. Without that scouting, you can just fall back on talent since those three guys can just go one on one and win against most collegiate players.

But as the season wears on, UK should improve. They have some nice pieces that should make for a strong team as opposed to one or two impressive individuals.

@jayballer73

I didn't see that part of it because I was watching the game in a bar without sound. Like I said though, if he was told to take a knee, he should have just taken a knee.

@stoptheflop

With schedules having to be set well in advance, most teams don't have the flexibility to add or take away an event at the end of the previous season, so doing a revisit of the previous Final Four would probably be impossible, although doing a Final Four, but flipping the semifinalists so that you play the teams from the other semifinal in a two game setup (So KU and Villanova would both play Michigan and Loyola on back to back nights). If the logistics worked, that would be pretty cool, but I don't know that the schedule would ever allow it.

One cool idea I heard suggested from a few years back was to host a regional "tournament" with each P5 conference taking on some of the top teams from midmajors in their region. Basically, it would give mid majors a chance to take on middle of the pack P5 teams at neutral sites to help sort out the bubble later on. Should NC State (for instance) make the field over Old Dominion? Well, ODU beat Wake Forest, who NC State lost to twice (or ODU lost by 15 to Virginia Tech, who NC State beat by 10). It gives a better chance to compare teams hovering around the bubble.

Chiefs have the benefit of having lots of different ways to hurt you offensively, moreso than any Chiefs team I've ever seen.

They can just run it and would probably be an average offense with Hunt and Ware pounding defenses. It wouldn't be exciting, but a run heavy Chiefs offense would not be bad.

They could go to the other extreme and just throw all the time and would have a top 7 offense with all of their receiving weapons.

Mixing the two is deadly.

Nobody can stop Hunt, Kelce, Hill and Watkins all the time. Maybe you can bottle up two of them, or maybe even three. But you lock up on Kelce and Hill in the pass game and Watkins just gashes you. Play back and Hunt runs wild. Play up and Hill and Kelce rip off big chunks down the seam or deep down the field.

If the Chiefs defense can just be top 20, they are a potential Super Bowl champion.

If the Packers told him to take a knee and he didn't, that's one thing.

But generally, returners catching the ball less than a couple yards deep in the end zone run it out. In the moment, I didn't think he made a mistake to run it out, it was more a mistake of ball security to not have two hands on the ball once he got into the crowd.

The key with a guy like Grimes is that he's willing to impact the game in ways other than scoring. That will help him be an even better player because he doesn't have to score, which will help the team since there is so much offensive talent on this team already.

Moore has been excellent in this game. I have zero criticisms.

Dedric Lawson makes basketball look really easy. He's as good as advertised.

BShark said:

Kcmatt7 said:

Newman just needs to go overseas. He won't see time in the NBA. He is too short and just not explosive enough of an athlete to hang. He is a great scorer and would probably flourish in Europe.

Strongly agree with this. No shame in it either. NBA is a freakshow league. Newman will be an absolute stud in a league with slightly lower tier athletes.

Newman could succeed in the NBA, but only in a very specific role, which makes it very difficult. He would have to be a bench scorer leading the second unit in a role similar to Lou Williams. He would have to play with a bench unit that had a good rim protector and a bigger guard that could handle the ball so that he could play off the ball as a scorer, but wouldn't have to guard explosive wings on the other end. That's a lot of things that have to be in place for Malik to succeed in the NBA. Overseas may end up being where he lands if he can't find the perfect situation.

Dallas isn't really that convenient even for the Texas teams, TBH.

Nearly 200 miles to Austin and almost 350 to Lubbock. Fort Worth and Waco are closest, but have the smallest fan bases of the four Texas schools.

OKC isn't as bad, but again, you aren't getting any closer to the Texas schools and the Oklahoma schools are the only ones that are relatively close.

KC is closest to the best traveling fans (KU, ISU), and an easy flight for the Texas fans.

BigBad said:

Hope at some point they do not rule we used an ineligible player and the final four banner comes down.

That would be a tough argument given that, at least according to what we know right now, there were facts that were disclosed only at trial.

Of course, the NCAA has a habit of picking a scapegoat to selectively enforce rules, so nothing is guaranteed, especially since KU didn't win the title last year.

I'm guessing that they will do a review, he will have to pay back some money, probably serve a suspension, and be eligible after Christmas. Worst case, his KU career is over. Best case, he's able to play after Thanksgiving.

mayjay said:

@justanotherfan I think we don't know how good Silvio can be. Last year he stepped into the team cold as a second semester HS senior so those numbers are meaningless. With 9 months of KU coaching and Hudyfying, nonstop peer influence, and probably daily pickup games with and against KU's F4 calibre players, I think his improvement could be far beyond any amount anyone is predicting.

My take on Silvio is that he probably isn't ever going to be a great offensive player. He just doesn't have tons of post moves/ skill. He is already a top flight rebounder/ defender and I think he will continue to improve in those areas. However, to be a star, he would need to improve substantially offensively, and that's something I don't know that he can do because he doesn't have the moves or touch.

Perhaps he develops the ball handling skills and shooting touch, but I just don't see it. With most guys, you see flashes of those skills fairly quickly, even when they are struggling to put them together in a game context. I don't see that with Silvio. I think TRob is probably his ceiling. It's interesting to note that as good as TRob was his last year, he only shot 50% from the field as a post player. That's probably about what Silvio could be as a #1 option. His best case is TRob as a sophomore, grabbing half a dozen boards a game and shooting over 60% as the non primary option off the bench.

BeddieKU23 said:

@justanotherfan

I might be in the minority but I thought Silvio made us a better basketball team and with this roster we have it would be nice to have 100% of this team at Self's disposal

I agree with you that Silvio made this team better. I think there would be a drop off if Silvio wasn't there, but it's not a drop off that KU can't cover with other talent. Big Dave will be another solid rebounder. He won't offer the energy and athleticism Silvio brings, but he can bring that element. If Silvio isn't there, we may lean on the Lawson brothers more, but that's not necessarily a problem if those guys are healthy because they are both just so good.

KU is different without Silvio, but I don't know if that means KU is worse without Silvio.

No surprise that Lawson makes first team AA. If he puts up numbers close to what he did at Memphis while KU wins 30+ games, those numbers make him Big 12 POY and a contender for NPOY.

As for Duke, it all rides on their big 3 staying healthy and co-existing together. Each of those guys is a handful on their own, but there's a question of whether any of them is good enough distributing the basketball to punish the inevitable double teams and slow rotations that come when they do draw the defense. If they do, they will absolutely shred teams with all of the talent they have. If not, though, they will struggle to get good shots and that will be their undoing.

For Kentucky, I think this team has a chance to be better than the last couple versions for Calipari because I think they will defend. The last few UK teams had trouble finding an identity on that end. I think this team will be better on D, which was Calipari's calling card at UMass and Memphis if you remember prior to the OAD revolution - tons of tough minded defense first guys and one big time scorer.

Gonzaga and Nevada are the wild cards - experienced and talented. Maybe not next level superstars, but collegiate superstars that can carry their teams through the college season. I would not be surprised to see one or both of those teams in the Final Four.

In fact, if I had to pick a Final Four right now today, I would pick Kansas, Kentucky (too much talent on both those teams - anything less is a disappointment if they stay healthy), Nevada and North Carolina (gut feeling that they just keep getting better all season). I think Duke fades down the stretch with their big 3 struggling to do something other than just take turns on offense. I think Gonzaga gets a bad NCAA draw because they play in a weaker conference, which costs them a chance to go deep in the tourney. Of course, it's a week before any real games are played. Guys are going to play poorly, get hurt, etc. But that's where I land right now. I reserve the right to change my mind a couple dozen times.

Even if Silvio misses a large portion of the year, with D. Lawson, Azubuike, McCormack and Lightfoot, KU still has an interior rotation that is far superior to most every team in the country. There are really only three guys KU can't replace from a skillset perspective - D. Lawson because of his versatility, Grimes because he's just so talented, and K. Lawson because he can guard almost any position in college basketball with his size/athleticism combination.

Everyone else KU has a solution. Vick could probably even impersonate Grimes' production, although he isn't the scorer or passer that Grimes is.

There's really no adequate match for either Lawson brother, though.

The Saudis outright lied about him being alive, then lied about him being killed in a fight.

It's as if the truth doesn't matter anymore and you can just continue to tell lies if it keeps you in power.

Wait a second...

Two firsts is too steep for the Chiefs. That would hamstring their future flexibility. The secondary has improved somewhat recently.

As @AsadZ said, LB is a big issue that should be addressed. KC needs to be able to stop the run, and also be able to play coverage without having to constantly shuffle personnel to do one or the other.

JayHawkFanToo said:

Cuonzo Martin gets a good season of players he inherits, gets some good prospects and it does not get better. Next year will be his third year at MU and things will start to go South and he will bolt...book it.

!0_1540219956925_upload-f27f6e98-b782-4a41-b9d3-f7ac7682274a ↗

I haven't done a ton of research on his record or expectations, but just looking at the records you posted, it looks like Martin got better every year at Missouri State and at Tennessee. Cal was his first stop where you can honestly say that his third year was a step back from his first two.

I don't think Martin will be a great college coach, but I don't think he's bad by any means.

If you don't have KU, UK and Duke (the three most talented teams in the country) in your top 5, you're doing it wrong. I can't blame people for putting Gonzaga and Nevada high because both of those teams return guys that legitimately could have gone to the NBA.

After that it gets murky because you have some teams that return talent, but can't overwhelm you with that talent, and teams that have incoming talent, but not enough returning.

I agree with the consensus here that KSU will be good. They will be deep and can continue to play their style. If Wade, Brown and Sneed are healthy, they can score, and they will be very good defensively. The challenge for them will be being the hunted rather than the underdog. KSU won't be getting slighted by anybody going into the season. Can those guys keep a chip on their shoulders when they are properly regarded?

If I am KU, I am still looking at mid major head coaches that are good recruiters, preferably from the MAC or Mountain West. I would be hesitant to get a coach from the Sun Belt because they have more local recruiting ground. A coach at FIU or South Florida need only walk a few blocks to run into a dozen or so D1 prospects. A coach in the Sun Belt probably won't have to go more than a couple hundred miles from campus to fill 60% of his roster.

A coach in the Mountain West or MAC, though? They have to recruit those that are overlooked, and may need to find a few diamonds in the rough, rather than just land a local kid or two.

I actually think Cuonzo Martin would be a better NBA coach than college coach. I don't think he has a system that he can implement to get his lesser talents involved and productive on a consistent basis, but I think he could cater to his higher end talent. To be successful in the college game, he really needs to just build around his stars instead of trying to get guys in college to do things they just can't do. That's been his problem at every stop. He asks his third and fourth best guys to do things they just can't do.

In some ways, Cuonzo could end up like former MU guy Quin Snyder, who seemed lost in college, only to end up being a very good NBA guy now.

(edit to add the bit about Quin Snyder)

The exhibitions really are just going to be scrimmages this year, with all of the focus on getting continuity before playing Sparty to start the year. It will be interesting to see what lineups play together and whether Self toys with some of his more exotic options or goes back to his more traditional 3 out, 2 in. There are some creative lineups he could put together with Dedric at the 5, and some equally creative lineups with Dedric and KJ at the 3 and 2. Whether Self does that will tell us a bit about how much he may be willing to push the envelope to create favorable matchups this season with so much depth at his disposal.

Tennessee definitely has more football resources than KU. Another thing to factor in is that someone in the SEC has more local recruiting bases to draw from than a coach at KU. KU really only has one large metro area to draw from, and that metro area is pretty well divided up between KU, Mizzou and K-State already, with Nebraska, Iowa and others regularly getting players from there as well.

Wichita produces some talent, but Oklahoma State is just as close, and Norman isn't too much further. KU really doesn't have a big advantage recruiting there.

The rest of the state just doesn't produce enough talent.

Looking at states like Mississippi and Alabama, they produce more than twice as much D1 talent as Kansas does in state, and those are the smallest states in the SEC. There's just so much talent to go around there, and most of it is local. That isn't the case at KU, and likely never will be. That's one of the reasons Nebraska has struggled more recently. Not enough local talent to go around, and enough of the local programs like KSU, Mizzou, Iowa, Minnesota, etc. all good enough to draw their local talent to keep the Huskers from being the recruiting destination on the plains.

The KU job is a challenging job. You need a coach that can get the most out of his recruits, but also someone that can recruit out of state talent because he can't just rely on local talent because there just isn't enough to fill out a roster year in and year out.

The money is too big. The NCAA wants to make more cash, and that means letting the big time teams slide every now and then, or more often if necessary.

If you want to end the corruption, you have to get rid of the money, or put more money in the hands of the athletes. I don't think the NCAA wants to do either, so corruption will be the rule, not the exception.

Bender continuing to get starts just shows that Beaty is being too stubborn. Stanley has been more productive overall, but Beaty wants Bender to be the guy.

I have been a Beaty apologist in the past, but he has failed this season in every appreciable way. He must go at the end of this season.

@JayHawkFanToo , @Woodrow

I'm not saying the top 100 players will leave. That's not going to happen. We agree on that.

But I can envision a scenario where the top 10 or 12 recruits each year go that route, plus the top 30 or 40 players from the year before also leave for the NBA draft or to go into the G-League.

Basically, each year, 40-50 of the best players in the country are not on college rosters. Basically, take this list ↗ and take the top 35 names off it, plus a handful of others.

That's what college basketball would look like. Does that kill the product? No. But it does change it quite a bit. Top guys like Malik Newman and don't transfer anymore, they just go to the G-League.

Before OAD, the top incoming freshmen would skip college. A restructured G-League would mean not only that the top freshmen would skip college, but that some of the best returning talent would also leave. That's the difference here. It's not just cutting from guys that would never go to college. It also gives guys a reason to leave early and finish their development. College basketball would lose both incoming talent and returning talent. That's the big difference.

And that doesn't even account for the money difference. One of the things likely to come out of this trial is that top players may opt to take paydays from ShoeCos and go to the G-League, supplementing the salary. Because ShoeCos could legally pay those guys to do that, there's not as much need to push money into college athletics. It doesn't mean ShoeCos would get out of college athletics completely, but it changes the financial structure.

That's the biggest change. It's the incremental trimming around the edges. A little incoming talent here. A little returning talent there. A little TV money here. A little ShoeCo money there. Change is coming.

@Woodrow said

I did a quick search and it looks like from 1995-2005 39 players who skipped college got drafted. Some not even first round. That’s like 3-4 a year. Again, people over grossly over estimating the impact that will have.

That's 3 or 4 that were judged to be ready to play in the NBA. So if 3 or 4 per year are ready to play in the NBA, plus another 6 to 8 ready to play in the G-League, plus a couple of projects, plus a slight increase in the number of players leaving college early because they are ready to play in the G-League as well, you get to 40-50 pretty easily.

The talent and development drop off from not having to be NBA ready immediately makes a huge difference.

@Woodrow

My point is that right now it will be a handful. It will be more than that in a few years.

CBB can certainly survive if the top 3 or 4 players go pro and the rest go to college. CBB can even survive if the top 8 or 10 go.

But the G-League is developing an interim step where players don't have to jump directly to the NBA, where they can actually develop while getting paid. You think a guy like Dedric Lawson would be at KU if he could have gone to the G-League last year instead?

If there's a step between the NBA that is a true development step connected to NBA teams (each team will have their own G-League affiliate by 2020), it's more likely that guys with potential will go that route and be developed by an NBA team rather than put into a college system that may not fit their NBA role.

There are, by my count, six guys on this year's KU roster that could definitely benefit from this type of setup - Grimes, D. Lawson, K. Lawson, De Sousa, Azuibuke, McCormack. You could add Dotson and Vick to that list if you wanted to. That's KU's whole rotation minus Moore, Garrett and Mitch. So think about college basketball with KU now having a team built around Moore and Garrett, with a couple of recruits in the 40-75 range. Agbaji would likely be sixth man.

I'm not saying KU would be bad, but the overall quality of CBB would drop because that same thing would be true for Duke, UK, UNC, Arizona, etc.

A guy like Charlie Moore would be a likely conference POY candidate. That's not a knock on Moore, but it's a statement of how much different the talent level could be in CBB come 2023 and moving forward.

Woodrow said:

@justanotherfan you are grossly over estimating how many kids will use this path.

For now, maybe. But remember, OAD goes away in a few more years. This is just the precursor to that. The G-League is designing an alternative path, first for a few kids, but once OAD goes away the G-League will have a full developmental program in place.

This is happening. I have been beating this drum for a few years now, and every time another step is made in that direction someone says I am overstating it. It's coming. 2023 will get here before you know it.

Kcmatt7 said:

@justanotherfan I’m just saying, there is definitely a floor for how far NCAA BB could fall. They aren’t ever going to nationally televise G-League games. I don’t know I can say that CBB will ever have that issue.

The G-League already has nationally televised games. Granted, they aren't on ESPN's top networks (1 and 2), but they are televised. If the top players start migrating to the G-League rather than the NCAA, I could see cable outlets picking that up.

I don't think college basketball will stop being televised, but I do think what that is worth will change. I don't think the next contract is going to be for $1B to televise the NCAA tournament. I know lots of NBA fans that only watch the NCAA tournament right now. For those fans, the G-League would be an easy substitute. I will grant that there aren't many primarily NBA fans here in Kansas, but in places like Chicago, LA, NYC, Miami, etc. there are people that have only a casual interest in NCAA hoops. That affects value, even if it doesn't push CBB off the national television schedule.

@Kcmatt7

This is just the start. Remember, OAD is going away in a few years. College basketball better start preparing now, otherwise they will get caught flat footed.

This changes everything for college basketball because the money simply will not be there in the future for NCAA basketball.

The shoe companies aren't exactly happy that the NCAA is basically hanging them out to dry on the current FBI investigation. That is a story that really isn't getting much ink, but it exists.

If the best players start going a different route, the networks aren't looking to pay big money for a lesser product.

Coaching salaries are going to have to change. Exploding athletic department budgets are going to have to rein themselves in. This is going to happen.

I don't know what that means for KU, but I think looking at how college basketball was in the late 70's and early 80's might be a hint.

@BShark

Just turned it on. Looks like guys are still trying to find a groove tonight. Definitely not in midseason form.

@BShark

Celtics with a nice opening matchup tonight with the Sixers. That should be a good game. Get to see a healthy Hayward, a healthy Kyrie Irving, etc. against a healthy Embiid, a healthy Fultz (maybe) and the rest of their squad, this should be a fun season.

If KU does Champions Classic, plus Big 12/SEC and Big 12/Big East, plus an early season tournament (Maui, NIT, etc.), and a non-con road test, the non conference schedule will be very strong every year. That's not a bad slate.

@JayHawkFanToo

Can you define hearsay under the rules of evidence without looking it up?

@Bwag

If a defendant behaved that way in court towards anyone - a witness, the prosecutor, the alleged victim, their own attorney, the judge, someone in the gallery, etc. - they would be held in contempt.

Attempting to justify Kavanaugh's behavior that way simply isn't true. No matter what the accusation is, you are expected to conduct yourself with a certain level of professionalism and decorum.

If you have followed the news on exonerated defendants (i.e., people that went to prison for crimes they did not commit), you will notice that even during the appeals process, they conduct themselves with decorum - and these are people that are PROVEN to have been falsely accused. Yet at no point can they behave the way Judge Kavanaugh did without putting their entire appeal in jeopardy.

There is an expectation and Judge Kavanaugh fell well short of that in his hearing, and it simply does not matter whether the allegations were true or false. His level of conduct should have remained at a certain level, and it did not.

Mitch as a 10-15 mpg energy guy isn't a bad option. In lineups with another big man, Mitch should be okay. When he has to be the only big, that's where he could run into matchup trouble. With Doke, Silvio and Big Dave all on the squad, Mitch will never be the lone big man on the floor, so he could be more productive this year than he has ever been, albeit in less minutes per game.

@JayHawkFanToo

Fair point.

I guess my point is that justices shouldn't be liberal or conservative - they should evaluate the facts of what's in front of them and rule accordingly, not rule based on a preferred outcome.

JayHawkFanToo said:

approxinfinity said:

@KUSTEVE You do agree that Jay Powell runs the Fed, is a Trump appointee, is a Republican, and is the person who makes the final call on the interest rates, right?

You have to admit that lot of appointments don't turnout the way it was expected.

You make an interesting point on SCOTUS appointees not being "what they were expected to be." The SCOTUS is supposed to evaluate the case before them and rule on that.

Conservatives often focus on outcomes when they look at a nominee - they want someone to overturn Roe v. Wade or rule against gay marriage, for example.

Oftentimes, however, cases turn on application of the facts to the law. Roe was decided not because abortion is a fundamental right, but because privacy is a fundamental right. There's a fundamental right that an individual should be able to make decisions for themselves regarding their body/health, etc. Its right there in the Roe opinion.

Same applies for gay marriage - the state cannot deny it because of equal protection under the law.

So when the SCOTUS ruled on those things, they were ruling that you, as a person that is against abortion, cannot be forced to have an abortion by the government just as much as someone that may want an abortion cannot be prevented from getting one by the government because the government cannot invade your privacy. The ruling wasn't a one way street. It runs both ways. The government cannot force you to do one or the other because you have a right to privacy to choose for yourself.

The government cannot decide that homosexual couples are not allowed to marry just the same as the government cannot prevent mixed race couples from marrying because that is outside the government's view. As long as you are of age to enter into a contract, you can legally marry whomever you want, and the government cannot prevent it. Again, its not a one way street.

If the only outcome you seek is the application of law in a fair and unbiased way, you land on those results every time. If, however, you want a specific outcome (abortion ban, gay marriage ban, etc.) then justice cannot be blind. That's also a two way street.

@Woodrow

Scholarships are a one year thing that can be renewed year to year (but are not required to be renewed). Therefore, if an athlete attends a school for a year and leaves in good academic standing, they will have delivered on what they promised.

In big games, the rotation will trim because in those games D. Lawson is playing 30 minutes, Grimes is playing 30 minutes, K. Lawson and Vick probably get 25 each. That's 110 minutes right there. There just won't be a lot of other minutes to go around because the "Big 4" will eat up so many minutes between them. That will cost someone in the Garrett/Dotson/Moore/McCormack group their minutes in big games (figuring that if Silvio is eligible he will play, and Doke will get minutes no matter what). There's just no way around cutting someone's minutes in that group, probably two of those guys.

FarmerJayhawk said:

I’ve tried, but I really don’t get the objections to immediate eligibility for transfers. I can leave my university tomorrow and start work during the spring semester, but an athlete has to wait a year? Makes no sense to me given how easy the logistics are for everyone.

The NCAA likes to say that the student part of student-athlete comes first, but that's really just fancy PR. If I transfer from one university to another I can compete in any number of academic competitions (even those that give scholarships) without sitting out or losing eligibility.

But for some reason, the student loses that agency when they play a sport.

Open transfer also holds coaches to their word in recruiting. You have to deliver on what you promise, otherwise the student athlete can transfer.

@KUSTEVE

You do realize that part of the reason that the Fed did not raise rates during the Obama presidency was that the economy was in recession when Obama took office, and then was in recovery through 2015. Raising interest rates during the recession or recovery period would have spurred another recession, likely tanking the economy again.

In other words, the conspiracy theory you point out was actually just sound economic policy to aid the recovery. This is not deep state conspiratorial action to hurt the Trump presidency. President Obama took office at the beginning of a recession and oversaw a careful economic policy to end the recession and begin the recovery.

However, economic policy also states that you cannot keep the rates low forever. At some point they must increase. President Trump has touted the recovery. Now he has to deal with the economic policy that comes with it - rising interest rates.

President Trump cut taxes last year to jolt the economy. However, he now has to follow that up with sound economy policy to encourage gradual growth. Cutting taxes or cutting interest rates isn't a forever solution to economic growth because there is a limit to how much you can cut those things.

Additionally, President Trump may have other motivations for complaining about interest rates. His businesses have hundreds of millions of dollars in debt to various banks. As the interest rate rises, Trump businesses also see their debt servicing rise (the cost they pay on their interest to keep their loans current). Because some of Trump's debt stems from bankruptcy settlements, he cannot default further without potentially losing his companies and assets to his creditors.

There are competing interests here. The Fed has to start raising rates because they were as low as they could go during the recession and recovery, and are still lower than they probably should be. Businessman Trump has companies that will see their debt service costs skyrocket as interest rates rise - a quarter point increase on hundreds of millions of dollars in loans gets very expensive very quickly.

The Fed has to run economic policy for the nation, not for Trump businesses.

@mayjay

I heard a podiatrist say once that if you are an athlete having foot problems you should switch shoe brands immediately.

Doesn't matter if you are a weekend warrior or a pro - if you start having foot problems, switch shoes. Not just new shoes, but a different brand because the different brands have different cuts and support, and changing brands may solve your problem without a lot of other expense.

We are on the verge of repeating 2007 and 2008 all over again I fear.

approxinfinity said:

@justanotherfan Thomas did however play the race card, saying he was on the receiving end of a "high tech lynching". In my mind, that was in the same ballpark of impropriety as Kavanaugh saying it was a "revenge job by the Clintons" though not as bad as Kavanaugh's threat of "what goes around comes around", even if Thomas had a bit more composure in his presentation.

I don't agree with what Thomas said during those hearings. However, he maintained his composure. I don't agree with Clarence Thomas much, at all, but he at least acted like he understood how to behave in a Senate hearing. It's a low bar, to be sure.

JayHawkFanToo said:

@mayjay

In the same letter the ABA indicated that the "original rating stands."

There was lot of pressure on the ABA to issue the letter but in the end is just -much ado about nothing- and the rating will stand.

While many consider his demeanor/temperament not what they expected, an equal or greater number saw it as the sign of an innocent man, wrongly accused and vigorously defending his reputation and good name. Different strokes for different folks.

As I said before, I can understand where people come from with innocent man wrongly accused being upset.

However, I struggle with that because I don't think those same people would give that level of benefit to an actual criminal defendant facing actual prison time if they were to behave that way in an actual court of law.

That defendant would have a right to a presumption of innocence, but they would not be allowed to yell at the prosecutor and judge. They might get one warning, but more likely, that type of behavior would cause them to be held in contempt of court!

Kavanaugh is a judge. He knows this. It was, at the very least, poor decorum.

If you want a comparison, compare Kavanaugh's behavior to that of Clarence Thomas during his hearings. Thomas maintained his composure. Kavanaugh did not. Simple as that. I doubt many conservatives would argue that Thomas not screaming during his hearing means he wasn't an innocent man. Instead, it shows that someone can maintain their composure and dignity in that setting, in spite of the allegations facing them.

Beaty didn't help himself by not identifying his best QB (and starting his worst option) for the first several weeks of the season. That may have cost him his job already. He may have blown a 4-0 start by going with the wrong QB. That's not playcalling. That's decision making.

How are they gonna do the 15?

@JayHawkFanToo

Perhaps, but the fact that its an application for waiver for a one time event (at least I hope the Carolina's don't get hit with big hurricanes every year) means that the NCAA can prevent abuse of the rule.

Crimsonorblue22 said:

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/27/gop-senators-outside-ford-questioner-mistake-849246 ↗

It was a bad strategic move to bring in the prosecutor to question Ford, but not allow her to also question Kavanaugh. If this were a criminal proceeding, there would be a question of whether it was fair and appropriate to change who was doing the questioning since the GOP opted to use her to question Ford, but not Kavanaugh.

Since this wasn't a criminal proceeding, there's no violation, but it was bad optics.