🏀 KuBuckets Archive

From having worked in the financial sector, there are a number of things wrong with what happened to this family.

First, if you need to verify the check, you just call the other bank. Now, sometimes the other bank will not verify over the phone, in which case you can accept the check, but put a hold on the majority of the funds if there is a concern about its legitimacy. All of this can be done very discreetly, so that nobody else in the bank even realizes that there is a potential issue. The guy even says that he was willing to just put it on deposit and let it sit, so it wasn't like he was trying to walk out with cash in hand. So that's mistake 1.

Whoever called the cops is mistake 2. If you are at a bank, unless someone is becoming violent, you do not call the police. It creates too much confusion and makes people think that there is a dangerous situation. Not being able to verify a check is not a dangerous situation, but if there's a police cruiser in the parking lot with lights flashing and they are bringing someone out in cuffs, it better be because they tried to rob the place or became hostile (at least that's what I was taught when I was trained as a teller). If you think the check is a fraud, you take the check, get an ID, request an address and phone number where they can be reached, take a copy of everything and let them go on their way, telling them you will contact them when you are able to verify the check. If the check is legit, you have all the stuff you need to do the deposit. If its a fraud, you have everything you need to locate this person (including what they look like), plus you have the check in your possession, meaning they can't try to pull this ruse on anyone else. Simple. Efficient. Discreet.

If Emprise's policies were followed correctly, their policies need some serious work because that was handled poorly. They caused a scene and violated these individuals' privacy - not because of the news article, but because of the scene at the bank. To everyone that was in the branch at the time (no idea if it was busy or not), it appeared that they had committed a crime when they had not. That is a significant privacy violation. The policies Emprise had should have at the very least protected against that. If they didn't (or don't), that's Mistake 3, and that goes all the way up to the top of the food chain within the bank.

Mistake 4 belongs to the police. Why handcuff them and take them into custody? Why call the child's school? There are much better ways to handle this, particularly if they couldn't verify the check in branch without taking them into custody. If WPD's policies are such that they take people into custody when information can't be verified (but without proof of a crime, or even probable cause) then that's pretty damning as well.

I would love to hear the explanation of why they thought a crime was likely in this case. Many banks (particularly the bigger ones, but certainly not limited to them) will not verify over the phone. They just won't. Everyone within the banking/financial industry knows this. Because of that, it's not probable cause of a crime simply because you can't verify a large check. You need something else. Just a shaky overall situation.

This was just poorly handled on all sides. It never should have escalated beyond the teller level, but once it did, the head teller, or branch manager, or police or someone should have put the brakes on this getting this out of hand. That none of them did is pretty embarrassing.

Each school could, at the beginning of the academic year, list out a set of schools (limited in number - maybe 5-10) that players could not transfer to without having to sit out a year. That would be part of the scholarship "contract" for that year. When you renew the following year, same thing. This way student athletes know going into the academic year what places they can or can't transfer to, schools have some say over things and everything is laid out prior to the start of the year. Student athlete signs, everything is settled. If the student decides to transfer, they already know what the restrictions are and can pick from a broad range of remaining schools.

For example, KU could always list K-State and Mizzou. Duke and UNC could always list each other, etc.

By limiting the number, schools would have to be specific about the restrictions, rather than setting really broad restrictions that offer no choice at all.

JayhawkerRedLegs said:

@AsadZ The other 2 things I find hard to figure out, is: 1) Why dont moderate overwhelming majority do more to stop & discourage these radical factions? No group needs spillover negativity & persecution because of the actions of a few radicals, right?

I agree with you on this point, but let's ask a few questions.

Last month in Charlottesville, a small, radical minority of white supremacists marched and shouted their angry rhetoric. I know that those people are substantially outnumbered by the reasonable voices that I see and interact with on a daily basis. And yet they still marched.

It would be quite unreasonable of me to hold you (or any other white person, for that matter) responsible for the actions of a reprehensible few. You understand that. I understand that. I think we can both agree.

So why do we expect Muslims to control their minority fringe when literally no group on earth can control its minority fringe. Literally no group.

That's why they exist as a minority fringe movement - there's no support among the majority of their group, so they break off, find likeminded people and fester like a sore.

Every population has these people. Its unreasonable (and unfair) to ask why Muslims can't rein in the radical minority among them.

A couple of weeks ago a police officer (now former officer) in Georgia was caught on camera telling a woman that he pulled over (sarcastically, some say) that police only shoot black people, so she had nothing to worry about. He's a police officer, so he was fired, but he worked on the police force for years with either 1) that type of attitude in his heart or 2) an inability to understand what is and is not appropriate to say, even jokingly.

He was fired from the police force. You can't fire someone from being white, or Muslim, or black, or Christian, or Jewish, or Asian, or whatever ethnicity, race, or religion someone happens to be.

If you look through history, you will notice that the Crusades of the medieval era happened where people were forcibly converted or put to the sword. Heck, the British conquested most of the planet like that (so did France, Spain, Portugal, Italy and others).

To now look at Arabs (or Muslims) and angrily decry them ignores the fact that the very maps we pick up every day were drawn based on conquests driven by religion and ethnicity. Most of the continent of Africa is divided based on European conquest. So is much of the middle East.

We cannot undo that history now. The strands of time have wound it far too tightly to be unspooled now. Our only choice is to move forward, focused not on blaming the reasonable majority, but rather by uniting with them in a way that allows us to work together to isolate and irradicate the thinking that begets the type of extremist violence that harms us all.

When someone drives a car into a crowd, or sets off a truck bomb, or commits some other act, all of us (and I use that encompassing everyone here on this board) should stand against that, united, whether the person committing the act was black, white, brown, yellow, red, purple, pink, paisley, irregardless of who they pray to or if they pray at all.

That is our shared responsibility.

The Keys are being evacuated, so that's a sign of how dangerous this thing is. If you're in the path, bunker down or get to safety. It's already killed 10 or more people in the Caribbean. It should lose some steam before getting to Florida, but it's still going to pack quite a punch. Be safe everyone.

We worry about side effects, but isn't that already happening? There's already illegal contact, impermissible benefits, etc. A lot of this happens because everyone knows that once a kid picks a school and goes there, its really hard for them to go somewhere else.

We are only looking at it from a money sport perspective, but this actually has larger benefits for the non-revenue sports, where a lot of the coaching changes and such fly under the radar. Those students deserve some flexibility if they are unhappy with their situation, too. As a student, even if you are on scholarship academically, you can leave one school and go to another with no penalty. For most academic competitions at the collegiate level, that also applies. Debaters don't have to sit for a year if/when they transfer as far as I can tell. This only applies to athletes, yet everyone wants to act as if they are "students first."

Let's just cut to the chase. They make money for the university and the NCAA, so its easier to make sure that money keeps flowing if you put rules in place to restrict the free labor. And since the people making the money are making the rules (rather than the people that are providing the effort) of course the strictest rules apply to the labor.

Transfers would flow both ways.

Think about it like this. If you're Carlton Bragg coming off the freshman season that you had at KU, not playing much, struggling to find your footing, etc. and suddenly, there's an opportunity to transfer to a lower profile school, wouldn't you have to seriously think about that.

There would need to be some tampering rules in place - no contact from coaches or admin until after the Final Four is over, for instance - but other than that, I think it gives kids that haven't gotten what they thought, whether at a low major, mid major or high major, a chance to hit the reset button after their freshman year.

The one other wrinkle I would add is that I would drop the early graduation transfer option. You get the one freebie. After that, you have to sit a year no matter what, even if you have graduated.

I think it gives the students the opportunity to control their own destiny (rather than the other way around). If a coach is recruiting over you, now you can just move on. That means the high major programs may lose bench depth year to year as guys like Andrew White and Brannen Greene transfer out, while low and mid majors see guys moving up to the Power 5. It gives each student athlete a chance to find the right fit for their talent and goals both on the court and off.

Scholarships are one year renewable contracts anyway. Unless they want to make them four years guaranteed, I think this is the best option.

@JayHawkFanToo

Other than Alabama, I'm not sure the SEC is as scary as its made out to be. It just so happens that Alabama may be two TDs better than pretty much every team in the country.

Might as well join in.

Oklahoma State by three touchdowns

K-State grinds out a disciplined win

West Virginia bounces back with a solid showing, winning by two scores.

Iowa beats ISU soundly

San Jose State as a serious crisis emerges in Austin.

Arkansas squeaks by on a late drive.

Kansas in an exciting late win

Ohio State wins a shootout with the Sooners

Baylor wins a shootout as well, but it becomes clear that the Baylor teams of the last several years are not coming back.

The US doesn't have the disaster resources to deal with a massive hurricane hitting south Florida while still dealing with everything that Harvey did. This could be a large scale national crisis as far as recovery funds and resources. It would be a huge relief if this thing turns north and stays out to sea, not just for the safety of everyone in the Caribbean and Florida, but also to make sure the resources that are currently being focused on helping the folks in SE Texas aren't spread thin due to another storm this soon.

I would have liked to see KU be more physically dominant in this game. Part of the struggle ths last few years has been a lack of Big 12 caliber athletes. They have made strides in that area, but still aren't where they need to be as far as being able to athletically blow away a team that should be physically overmatched.

That said, improvement is apparent. KU should compete in every game this season, although wins will be tough to come by. I see a max of four wins, but 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable.

This season is about progress. So far, so good.

15 years ago, T-Rob would have been an automatic rotation guy on a playoff team. 10 years ago, he would have definitely been playing quite a bit.

But in today's NBA, which values floor spacing so much, a 4 man that isn't big, can't handle the ball or step away from the rim and shoot the three, its difficult to find a way to fit a guy like T-Rob in. No doubt, T-Rob has his strengths (rebounding, athleticism), but I'm not sure how he would fit into a modern NBA offense without shooting range out to at least 20 feet, or the ability to put the ball on the floor and slash and distribute. T-Rob has an early 2000's skill set, but in the modern NBA.

I'm rooting for him to catch on. I hope he's added a jumpshot.

Capitalism, in its most natural state, is about exploitation. This doesn't mean that capitalism is automatically bad, just that it has to be regulated and controlled because capitalism, on its own, has no morals. It's only goal is to generate higher and higher profits by driving down costs and driving up prices.

I laugh when people say the market will regulate itself. The market cannot regulate itself if left entirely unchecked. I am not beating the drum for extreme regulation, but there must always be a framework of regulation, because again, the market, left unchecked, seeks to always drive costs down as low as possible, while driving prices up as high as possible, creating the largest possible profit margin. That is the goal of business, distilled down to its most basic level.

We have seen this in practice. Things like child labor laws, safety regulation, 40 hour work weeks, and paid time off were not things created by capitalism. They were things created by regulation to protect children, workers, and families.

A country built on capitalism, then, is a country that must also maintain a strong regulatory framework. Capitalism is an engine, not a steering wheel. An engine with no steering mechanism will just power itself as quickly and as efficiently as possible into oblivion. Why? There is no means of direction to harness the power in any useful way. That is capitalism. It is a powerful engine that can most certainly lift a society or country into global power.

But it is also an engine that could, if unchecked, run through all sorts of civil and human rights because it cares only about making more money. Capitalism says that if you can find cheaper labor somewhere, you pursue it. If you can force people to work more hours with fewer breaks, less safety regulation and lower pay, you do it. That's why manufacturing jobs have trickled into Asia and other places - the conditions for workers in those places are beyond reprehensible.

@jaybate-1-0 asks a question that I believe deserves some illumination - "Are we taking the least awful path to save our freedom?" The path to freedom has always been terrible. It's just been a question of who was doing the majority of the dying, whether it was West African slaves, Irish and Italian immigrants, Native American tribes or those living in inner cities. We are still trying to perfect our union, and sometimes that means examining whether we are okay with the price of the freedom bestowed upon that union.

It remains an open question.

@BeddieKU23

I've seen those. He takes those shots so rarely, it's hard to gauge how good his shot is from there. As you say, he's so big and athletic he dunks everything (which is good), but I can't really tell how well rounded he is because of that. It's the catch 22. He could probably shot 75% from the field in HS with dunks, putbacks and layups, but to really evaluate him, I need him to shot 60% from the field because his shot selection is much more diverse.

Quick scouting report

Physical - he's listed at 6-9, 240. That's an NBA ready body all day long. He's got a lot of lean muscle on his frame, which suggests to me that as he matures, he could easily get to 255 or 260 without losing any quickness or agility.

Athleticism - he is quick off the floor. Not as bouncy as Wiggins or Jackson, but he's pretty close and on top of that, he's easily bigger and stronger than either of those guys. Obviously that matters because he's a 4 and not a perimeter guy, but his explosiveness and strength will make him effective on the glass in college because guys are going to have trouble getting and keeping a body on him. HS players have no chance against him.

Offense - he dunks most everything from in close, which he should with his physical and athletic advantages at this level. He has to continue to do that through more contact as he advances. He has some basic post moves, but he isn't exactly Tim Duncan or Hakeem Olajuwon with the footwork. Finishes well around the rim. I haven't seen any evidence he can step away from the bucket and stretch the defense, so he will have to work on dealing with double teams in the post because college coaches won't just let him use his strength and athleticism to dominate on the block like he can in HS. He can handle the ball a bit, but he is basically a straight line handler. He's not going to shake and bake or initiate the offense, but he can put it on the floor and get to the rim on a straight line drive.

Offense needs to improve - at least a passable jumpshot out to 15-17 would open his game up. A jump hook or turnaround in the post would also help. Some one dribble moves (a face up one bounce jumper or baby hook) would give him some variety in his game to keep defenders off balance so they can't just muscle up against him. Footwork in the post needs refinement. It's not bad, but its a bit inconsistent. I could see him getting dinged for travels with some of his moves on the block at the next level.

Defense - he has the athleticism to be a very good (possibly elite) collegiate defender. He is mobile enough to switch PnR on the perimeter and stay with all but the quickest guards if he is disciplined. He is a good weakside shotblocker. He should dominate the defensive glass with his length, strength, and athleticism.

Defense needs to improve - can he body up with guys as strong as he is? He probably hasn't faced 5 guys with his size and strength to this point in his life. In college, he will see guys that big and strong every other night. Can he hold his spot, or will that strength catch him off guard? Can he keep his hips low for leverage? Can he stay disciplined against quicker and craftier collegiate guards? This is why defense is harder for freshmen - you can't just rely on your physical skills. You also have to be engaged mentally, something that most kids don't have to do when they are that much bigger, stronger, more athletic, and more talented than their competition on a regular basis.

Overall - his floor is an energy, rebounding and shotblocking machine. His ceiling is a primary post scorer, though he needs to add quite a bit to reach that potential. His defense should be at least good, possibly dominant in college. He could be a two year player because he has the opportunity to unlock a lot of offensive potential that could make him a lottery pick.

@kjayhawks

I thought I recognized that, but I can't remember the source, either. lol.

I do know a guy that probably has a hundred guns that is prepping specifically for if the government tries to take his home. I tried to tell him the only thing that would result from him having all of those guns was needlessly getting himself and his family killed. You're better off going to a court of law and fighting it than holing up in your house and sticking an AK-47 out the window. But, some people are convinced that the conspiracy and takeover are coming, and that they will John McClaine their way out of it (or Rambo, or Jason Bourne, or John Wick, depending on your age group and preference).

Definitely good to use well known charities. Natural disasters are one of the biggest sources of fraud in the US. Make sure that any money or items you donate are going to an actual charity and not into some scammers pockets.

Also, make sure when you are donating online to look for the https:// or the "secure" signal to know that the connection is secure before putting in your credit card information. It's sad we have to take so many precautions now, but there are twice as many fraudulent sites out there for "donations" as there are legitimate ones. It makes it very difficult to figure out how to help without getting scammed or defrauded.

No one is coming for anyone's guns, but it doesn't really matter. Look around at the different militias that have tried to oppose the US government over the last two decades. They all have one of two things in common - their leaders are all either in prison or dead.

Why? Simply put, no one can outgun the US government at this point in history. Show up with 100 guys with semiautomatic rifles? The government shows up with 1000 guys with the same guns, plus a tank.

Get a tank? They send in a pair of Blackhawks.

No one is outgunning the government. They're just not. It's impossible at this point. The country is too big. The military is too strong.

At this point, opposition is political, not military - at least if you want to live to grow old. That stuff can only happen in the movies. In real life, the bullets are real and the hero doesn't magically just get missed.

@mayjay

I wouldn't worry too much about the fact that he only talks about offense. Unless he goes to Syracuse, he's playing man to man defense no matter where he goes. Maybe the scheme changes slightly as to whether you funnel drives to the sideline or the middle, but schemewise, the defense that KU plays isn't all that much different from the defense that UNC or UCLA or Duke plays. It's not like going to one place or the other is going to widely change what he's expected to do on that end.

Offensively, however, the systems differ widely, particularly because nobody knows who he would be paired with as teammates at this point, so you can't necessarily say what a defensive scheme would look like at any of those places.

The burden is on everyone else to capitalize on the attention that Armstrong will get. Our other defensive linemen need to punish teams when they double Armstrong so that teams can't always send help to his side of the line. That's the only way that our defensive line play can improve. Having just one playmaker on that unit won't work because you can always double one guy. You need at least one other guy that can beat a one on one matchup because you can't double team two guys on the line without leaving linebackers unblocked every play.

We just haven't had that second guy. We desperately need that second guy to emerge this season.

The depth chart makes me think that next year is the year for Beaty and this group.

There are five seniors on the offensive and defensive two deep. FIVE. That means pretty much everyone on the two deep is back next year, with the exception of probably Dorrance Armstrong. That means just six of the forty five guys listed will be gone next season. 39 players should return, along with Tabor, Durley and Evans, who all should be eligible for medical redshirts.

That means that legitimately, KU could return every single offensive skill guy that gets substantial time this year. A returning starting QB, with a full group of RBs and WRs. KU could return all but one DB that plays significantly. In the pass happy Big 12, that experience will matter.

As @jayballer54 said, only three total senior starters. This is an experience year, with the guys that will contribute to the next KU bowl team getting the game reps they need to turn those close games into wins next season.

@mayjay

There's no lipstick for this pig. They have been terrible, particularly the last two days. Any hope of contention is basically fading away with every passing day. They would need to go on a 10 out of 12 streak to recover at this point, and the way the offense has looked, I can't see them suddenly snapping out of this funk and getting hot.

Bragg needed a change of scenery. He wasn't getting the opportunity at KU, some due to his own actions, some due to circumstances beyond his control. I hope that he has taken care of some of the maturity and decision making issues that held up his development at KU.

He still has the physical tools, something only a handful of people can say. That means he will always have an opportunity as long as his body holds up and he doesn't let his head get in the way.

Getting shut out for the entire series was basically a surrender. This one is done. Thanks for the memories to Hos, Moose, LoCain, Esky and the rest.

Each company wants a regionalized draw.

For Under Armour, it's Maryland on the east coast, UCLA out west and Notre Dame and Wisconsin in the midwest. They also have South Carolina in the south.

Nike is obviously still the biggest, with adidas trying to get a foothold. Unfortunately, because KU football is weak, they are not the preference here in the midwest. Obviously, basketball is strong, but basketball does not get the dedicated eyes that football does (too many different games on at any one time), so its not the advertising draw.

That is the downside, but with football interest and participation declining, we could see that start to shift soon.

Glad to hear everyone is still okay. Sounds like more rain is on the way though, so stay cautious and safe.

My expectation next year would be six and a bowl game. His guys would be RS juniors, RS sophomores, etc. That is when they should produce (if they are going to produce). If they aren't, that becomes clear next year and you have to question if he can get talent. If they blow games, you have to question if he has the coaching chops.

I can accept bumbling away games this year because they haven't been in enough close games to get those reps so far. But next year, they have to be able to make those plays situationally.

I don't think this season should define Beaty. I came into Beaty's tenure expecting him to need four years to right this ship. I'd like to see 3-4 wins this year, but I wouldn't be surprised to see inexperience cost this team a game or two. Given that there's not a ton of margin for error, one or two squandered opportunities could mean we're looking at a 2 win season this year simply because this team may not have the talent to be in more than 6 or 7 games anyway.

Next year is the defining year to me.

Think about this for a second. The ESPN crew arrives on Friday night to do the Saturday game in Charlottesville. Announcer Robert Lee goes to the Charlottesville hotel to check in. The desk clerk, not realizing that his name is actually Robert Lee, wrongly thinks this is some sort of bad prank.

Or imagine Announcer Robert Lee doing his intro for the game - "this is Robert Lee coming to you live from Charlottesville, Virginia, home of the Virginia Cavaliers..."

Given the events that happened, and the impetus of those events, I think it was smart of ESPN to change his game from UVA to Pitt. They save him the trouble of having to check in to a hotel in Charlottesville, as well as avoiding what some may see as poor taste.

I watch MSNBC and I disagreed with them (and many others) that have criticized this decision. It was the right call, and one that was made without a lot of fanfare. The only reason this came out is because a blog set up to criticize ESPN publicized the switch. You have to remember that ESPN generally assigns early season crews in July, so those assignments were made long before any of this other crap happened. No need to stir the pot when there are plenty of other games Lee can do, particularly since they didn't move him out of time zone here (moved from UVA to Pitt). He's not losing a marquee game (it was UVA-William and Mary or Youngstown St. vs. Pitt). They just made a subtle change (it should also be noted that he's based in NY, so the Pitt game is slightly closer than Virginia).

I honestly don't think this would be a problem because the teams would be picked well in advance in large part based on teams that weren't expected to advance (or were already eliminated). In the scenario I put together, the tournament would have identified seven potential players at the start of the tournament - Cleare (not playing), Iwundu (low seed), Forte (low seed), Wainwright (high seed), Adrian (high seed), Morris (good seed), and Mason (high seed). By the time the round of 32 was over, Cleare, Iwundu, Forte and Morris were all available. That's the team right there if you want.

Most of the players that would be picked would be from middling teams that aren't going deep in the tournament, although every now and then a top player on a top team that got upset early would play (think Simien from his senior year). But for the most part, this would be guys from teams that aren't generally in the spotlight, same as the dunk contest and three point contest.

I doubt there's any incentive to lose in the Elite Eight. Rosters for most of these teams would probably be set prior to the Sweet 16 based on players already eliminated. Since it has to be seniors with no remaining eligibility, there's a limited number of players to choose from. For example, the Big 12 team is likely to have guys from KSU, TCU or Texas Tech pretty well locked in as the core of the team, with maybe one spot remaining for a guy from one of the top teams (likely whoever gets eliminated earlier).

For example, here is my guess for last year's Big 12 team:

Wesley Iwundu (K-State)

Phil Forte (Oklahoma State)

either Ishmail Wainwright (Baylor), Nathan Adrian (West Virginia) or Shaq Cleare (Texas)

either Frank Mason or Monte Morris (Iowa State).

Looking at the seedings going into the tournament, it's likely that Iwundu and Ford will be available after the Round of 32. If West Virginia and Baylor both get to the Elite Eight, you fall back to Shaq Cleare as your big man, and then you take the loser of the Iowa State-KU game (should they meet) as your fourth guy.

In this case, the team probably would have been Iwundu, Ford, Adrian and Morris, with Wainwright as the alternate if one of those four weren't available.

@JayHawkFanToo

The IRS is large in large part because of exemptions and credits. If we cut the tax code, it would mean doing away with exemptions and credits for most everything. People are open to that, until they realize that exemptions and credits that they benefit from would go away, then they are opposed.

People complain about EPA laws (a favorite whipping post currently), but are upset when there is not clean water to drink in their area. Guess what? That's what the EPA does (among other things).

Congress could certainly get rid of lots of laws, but many of the protections we take for granted (things like OSHA, labor law, etc.) would likely disappear as a result. Maybe that doesn't affect many of us immediately, but if you are hurt at work, or want to take maternity or paternity leave, or need time off for an illness, or any number of other things, those laws matter, and they matter quite a bit.

I do agree that Congress should participate in health care and social security without a separate plan for themselves. But a citizen legislature wouldn't make government smaller. It would actually require government to get bigger, because citizen legislators would need larger personal staffs in order to have built in expertise when the new legislator gets to town.

I wish there weren't career politicians, honestly. But I know the only solution, having seen what has happened here in Kansas (which is on a much smaller scale than the Federal government) I cringe at what would happen if there were suddenly a loss of legislative expertise, and a simultaneous slashing of government services, leaving a vacuum of knowledge. It happened here in Kansas and as a result we have a corrections system that is understaffed, inspections either not being done, or being done incorrectly, a child welfare system that is in shambles (there will be lots of lawsuits over the next few years about abuses that either were not caught or were not followed up on) and no money to correct most of it any time soon.

The only thing saving us here in Kansas is that the Federal government covers a large portion of the programs here. If this happened at the Federal level, the consequences would be truly scary.

@JayHawkFanToo

The concept of the citizen legislator is nice, but doesn't work well in modern times.

Kansas has a "citizen legislature" and there are times where the lack of expertise and understanding in policy areas bogs down policy discussions because the people that have the final say on issues simply don't understand the risks and benefits of the options before them.

If you have a purely citizen legislature, you have to have a fairly large bureaucracy of policy experts for the citizen legislature to lean on for expertise to explain things like foreign affairs, taxes, energy, conservation, infrastructure, etc. That's one of the things that has hindered Kansas over the last few years as state budgets have been slashed - there isn't enough technical support for the legislature to understand their options. Several bills have passed in the last few sessions with lots of unintended consequences simply because the legislature didn't realize the potential effects of a policy decision.

When legislators stay in the body for a long time, while they may become disconnected to a degree from their constituency (this can be remedied with regular visits to the district, town halls, strong local staffing and district offices), they also gain policy expertise over time. You can't achieve expertise in a single term. It's just impossible, unless each potential legislator spends two or three years learning a policy area or two prior to running for office.

For the two party system to work, both sides must accept that they must compromise.

Right now, both Republicans and Democrats are hesitant to compromise for fear that they could be "primaried" and lose to a more conservative or more liberal challenger if they try to work across party lines. That is the quickest way to hamstring a two party system.

There is political incentive to be obstructionist on both sides. Look at how many GOP house members have built their political career on opposing Barack Obama. Look how many Dems are trying to mirror that now. Look at what is happening as a result - more and more division, less progress.

We have created a government that cannot function because of the division, then incentivized the very divisions that keep it from functioning while in the same breath complaining about the dysfunction. We continue to reward people for being more extreme, and rather than balancing things out, it just creates the gaps that tear us apart.

It can be helped, but the first step is to incentivize collaboration over extremism.

@KUSTEVE

I don't think it's Calipari because MSU only played UK once that year, and Malik had a pretty average game - 14 points on 43% shooting. For the year he averaged 11.3 points on 39% shooting.

It seems more likely that the sort of comment would be made by someone that saw him twice, and saw him play really well once and really poorly once. Ole Miss and South Carolina fit that bill. I could see Frank Martin saying something like that. Andy Kennedy might also, but I could certainly see one of their assistants say that, particularly because the assistants are often responsible for prepping the gameplan for conference games, and the same assistant would have prepped for MSU in both games.

Look at the quote - "Go for 30, be in the dog house all day."

25 points (season high) in 36 minutes in a win at home against Ole Miss.

3 points (tied for second lowest on the season) in 24 minutes in a road loss to Ole Miss.

That's basically exactly what he did against Ole Miss. Best game of the year in one game (carrying his team to the win), one of the worst games of the year in the other (as his team lost).

If I'm on that Ole Miss Staff, that's what I remember about Malik Newman. He beat us in one game, he got his team beat in the other.

I think they are assuming Newman will be feast or famine because that's how he was a MSU.

He played in 29 games.

10 times, he scored 15 or more points. 10 times he scored 7 or less. At times he seemed simply lost within their scheme. He couldn't find shots (or couldn't find good ones) at times.

I don't think that will be a problem for Malik at KU, and with a year under his belt, he will almost certainly have a better understanding of the scheme than he had a MSU (and likely a better scheme to take advantage of his talents).

My guess is the person that said that about Malik is an assistant in the SEC. Malik went for 25 in one matchup with Ole Miss. He went for 3 in the second matchup. Went for 15 against South Carolina in the first matchup, but was shut out in the second. Those are the types of performances, especially if you watch them live, that can put a perception about a player into your head.

This situation can actually be a good learning and teaching tool.

For a lot of these guys, they still are not quite used to being in the spotlight and the attention that brings. For most any other student, this situation is a nothing situation because the accusation probably never even happens. This is an opportunity to sit everyone down and let them know that even when they are relaxing and minding their own business, because they play basketball at one of the biggest programs in the country, the spotlight is always on, and they have to act accordingly.

@Crimsonorblue22

I appreciate the support.

Let's remember that in this situation, Dedric doesn't appear to have done anything wrong. The story initially came out, but the facts as they currently stand suggest he didn't do anything inappropriate.

Now, the practice incident is a problem.

He handled the situation with Tubby Smith very poorly and let his frustration turn into outright disrespect.

The incident during the pickup game is a problem.

Dedric seems to be a fiery guy that needs to understand how to rein those emotions in. In each situation, it looks like his emotions boiled over and he acted rashly as a result. I hope he understands that he has to carry himself with more personal responsibility and accountability. He has a whole year to work on it out of the public eye for the most part. I hope that he does learn how to, not just for basketball reasons, but learning to control his emotions will help him succeed in his personal life as well.

This whole Charlottesville thing has been really tough on me personally. As an African American, it has been difficult to put into words what I have felt over the last several days.

The sight of hundreds of white nationalists walking down the street, proudly in broad daylight is jarring. It's jarring because it used to be that most of these individuals wanted to hide their hateful ideals from the rest of the world. That's no longer the case. They broadcast their hate for the world to see, arguing that they are just proud to be who they are.

Let me stop here and say that everyone should be proud of who they are, regardless of race, creed, color, orientation, ethnicity, religion, hometown or anything else. Diversity isn't a declaration that any one group is better than another. It is a declaration that the differences within each of us make all of us better. Diversity includes everyone, including white people. The reason that diversity offers opportunities for non whites is that generally, white people already have a seat at the table for every discussion. Diversity and inclusion are trying to add a variety to the opinions available.

Let's put this out there right now - the very ideology of white supremacy is that they want to spark a race riot or race war in which all minorities, immigrants, Jews and other "undesirables" (i.e. gays, non-English speakers, non-white supremacists) are either killed or driven from the country. That's the endgame for white supremacists. To have the president act as an apologist to them is not just disappointing as a minority - it's life threatening. That's why you saw the white supremacists show up with guns and body armor. They weren't looking for a peaceful march - they came for a fight.

These groups no longer fear public shame or identification. They are emboldened. As a black man, that puts my very life in jeopardy. That is not hyperbole. That is real life. We saw last week that one man drove his car into a crowd in an act of domestic terrorism. We have seen in the past where white supremacists have tortured and killed minorities who stopped to get gas or groceries at night. If the president is going to decry the MS-13 gang (rightly, because they are a criminal gang), he should speak just as strongly against what happened last weekend, rather than blaming both sides (white supremacy groups are often funded through criminal activity as well - drug sales, robbery, human trafficking, etc.).

This is no longer about politics. This is about human decency. One side wants equality. The other wants suppression. We fought a war 150 years ago and equality won out. Are we really interested in rolling things back, because only one side wants a do-over on that.

@Texas-Hawk-10

Kind of what we have seen from the conference - lots of solid teams, few great ones.

KU as a one, WVU as a 3, Baylor as a 6, Texas is an 8, TCU a 9, Iowa State and Oklahoma are 10's and Texas Tech is a play-in 11. As @Kcmatt7 points out, that means most of the conference is bubble quality teams, which means that the Big 12 could get 8 teams, but also could get only 4 if things break the other way if those bubble teams have an extra non-con loss, or slip up at home against a weaker team, or get swept by the top 3. Those teams are on the razor's edge and could easily fall out of the field.

Sounds like a case of some jealousy.

He's at the bar, his ex sees him with another girl, he pays for his drinks. She gets stiffed on a tab and tries to pin it on him to make him pay extra. Because he's a recognizable figure in Memphis, its easy to get a big story rolling out of something fairly mundane.

I like the flexibility as well. I don't know that we necessarily land a guy like Mitchell Robinson, because a top 10 recruit coming available this late is rare, but it's nice if it happens. We could legitimately have the best frontcourt in the nation with Azuibuke, Preston and Robinson. That's no small feat to go from very thin upfront to the best in the country.

Now that Northwestern has made a tournament, I think every power 5 school has been to the Dance. For the non-Power 5 schools, making it to the tournament is a bit of a challenge because it means winning their conference tournament. If winning the conference (or post-season tournament) were a requirement for every NCAA participant, there would likely be lots of teams with no appearances on their resume.

Mid and low major schools do deserve a platform where they can get a chance to dance.

I would propose a different tournament. Rather than doing a "first four" set of games, the final 4 at large spots are decided in two day mini tournaments. Basically, you have to win your tournament to get to the NCAA's. There are 4 of these going on the week before the regular NCAA tourney starts (Friday and Saturday, with Selection Sunday the next day).

Conference tourneys move up a week to shake all of that out, then the last 16 bubble squads are grouped in "regions" with geography being a factor and they play for the right to advance. You have to win twice to go to the dance, so there's no crying if your team wasn't in the field - they couldn't even make the Big Bubble tournament, or they didn't win their Big Bubble Bracket. No whining about being left out because your squad went 19-14.

It also gives some of the stronger mid majors a chance to put themselves on the map with a win or two against some of the Power 5 bubble teams. We constantly hear that the second place finisher in the Sun Belt would get beaten by the 9th place finisher in the ACC, so that's why that team gets to dance. Well, Georgia Tech (or NC State, or Clemson, or whoever) time to put up or shut up because you're on the floor with them now. There's no hiding behind your quality losses because Duke beat you by 16 in mid February. You have to do it on the floor.

In a perfect world...

@dylans

Here are the top 2 NCAA seed teams during the streak:

2 - Oklahoma State 2005, Oklahoma 2009, Oklahoma 2016, K-State 2010, Texas 2006, Texas 2008, Missouri 2012 (7 total)

1 - None

Williams years

2 - Iowa State 2000, Iowa State 2001, Oklahoma State 1992, Oklahoma 2002 (4)

1 - Oklahoma 1989, Oklahoma 1990, Oklahoma 2003, Texas 2003, Missouri 1994 (5)

I would go on a limb and say the best team during the Streak (probably the 2009 Oklahoma squad that lost to eventual champ UNC) isn't as good as either the 1989 or 2003 OU teams, the 2003 Texas team or possibly that '94 Mizzou team (undefeated in the Big 8 ).

@Texas-Hawk-10

I was reaching back to the Roy Williams years to point out that the Big 8/ Big 12 was stronger during that period than it has been during the Self period.

OU, Texas and Mizzou all had one seeds while Williams was at KU.

OU, Texas, and OSU all went to a Final Four while Williams was here.

OSU went to the FF in 2004. OU went in 2016. That means during the streak, only 1 Big 12 team (not counting KU, obviously) has gone to the Final Four.

No other Big 12 team has gotten a #1 seed during the streak.

The Big 12 is full of good teams, but not many great ones.

@dylans

Not having MU in the conference has aided KU in keeping the streak going. Self was 5-4 in Columbia while in the Big 12. Roy was roughly .500 there as well. That eliminated probably our toughest road trip of the season when they left the conference. That's a huge benefit, especially since we haven't won at WVU in 4 years, and we've been pretty shaky at Oklahoma State during Self's tenure.

MU has zero Final Fours, but they have been a #1 seed in the NCAA tournament. Since the streak started, no other Big 12 team has gotten a #1 seed. OU has had a pair of 2s. That just points again to the lack of national level teams in the conference during the streak.

@dylans

I would argue that the Big 12, in its early days, was stronger than it is currently.

Remember, OU went to a Final Four while Roy was here. Texas did too. Mizzou had some good teams. Oklahoma State went to the Final Four in 2004 and in 1995, and had been good at the national level in those in between years. Iowa State was a top 5 team in a couple of years. Over the last 10 years, I don't think you can find teams as good as the early 2000s Texas teams with TJ Ford, or those late 90's and early 2000s Oklahoma teams, or Sutton's consistent Oklahoma State teams, or even Tim Floyd's ISU squads, and certainly not on a year after year basis.

Again, this is talking about teams being strong national contenders on a year after year basis. That just hasn't happened in the Big 12.

The Big 12 is a strong conference because it has no bad teams. The ACC and SEC are typically top heavy with 2-3 elite type teams and 4-5 bottom feeders. That's not the case in the Big 12.

But because that isn't the case, being an elite team in the Big 12 (a potential national title contender most years) makes KU better every Big 12 team in any given year. Florida has had Elite teams in the SEC. UNC, Duke, Louisville, and Notre Dame have all had elite level teams over the last decade or so. Oklahoma has had only two Elite teams over that same span. Every other program in the conference tops out at "really good." Iowa State was really good under Hoiberg. Texas was really good in different years. Oklahoma State was really good once. Baylor has been really good a couple times. K-State had some really good years. Mizzou, West Virginia, they have all been really good.

But only OU has been to the Final Four since the streak started (2016). None of the other teams have been to the Final Four. Only OU, KSU and Baylor have been to the Elite Eight. The Big 12 is full of a bunch of teams that are Sweet Sixteen level teams. That makes for a strong league. But you don't get the elite level tests.

Language barrier in Europe and China makes it tough for lots of players off the court. Add to that the fact that US players are under a lot of pressure to be superstars because of the way the league rules work. In both Europe and China, each team only has so many "imports" they can have on the team. As a result, the "import" players have to be among the best on the team, if not the best.

In Australia, there isn't really a language barrier, so the culture shock isn't as great. Add to that there's not as much pressure on a US player to be a league MVP level player and it's a better developmental environment.

On another note, are we seriously re-litigating the Diallo vs. Lucas question? Diallo was raw, but better than Lucas. Self picked the steady production (the choice that has won 13 straight league titles) over the potential (the choice that could get you over the hump in March). There's no question who had more talent. There's no question who the better player was. It was Diallo, period.

If Mitchell Robinson comes to KU, there's no reason for him to play only 10-12 minutes. If he even thinks that's a possibility, he will not (and should not) come. For his own development it doesn't make sense to come to KU if he is going to play that little. That's a lost year of development.

Would KU have won 13 straight in either the SEC or ACC? I doubt it, honestly.

The 2006, 2007 (national champs) and 2014 (remember, that team went undefeated in SEC play) Florida teams probably would have won at least one of those titles, if not two or all three. The Big 12 hasn't had a team other than KU as good as any of those Florida teams during this streak other than maybe the Blake Griffin OU team that went to the Elite Eight and possibly the Final Four Sooners behind Hield, although I honestly think all three of those Florida teams were better than either of the OU teams.

Tennessee had a good squad in 2008 (probably on par with those OU teams, honestly). Florida had another good squad in 2011 (an Elite Eight team).

Simply put, the Big 12 hasn't had a program produce any teams as good as the best 2 or 3 Florida teams over the last 13 years. The 2007 Florida team was almost certainly superior to KU over the entire season (KU won the early season matchup, but that Florida team was stronger and stronger over the year). The 2014 Gators were 18-0 in SEC play, and likely would have won the league over the Wiggins/Embiid Hawks if Embiid still gets hurt that season and everything else plays out the same.

The 2008 Tennessee squad loses to the Champ Hawks, but I would guess Florida wins at least 2 titles over the last 13 years, if not 3. So SEC is an almost certain no.

In the ACC, if KU takes either UNC or Duke's place, its still likely that the other remaining squad (either UNC or Duke) still wins at least 2 titles over that span. Other teams - Louisville, Miami, and Virginia, particularly - have had strong squads that I think would have made a run as well.

The key to KU dominating the Big 12 is that KU almost never loses at home. Hosting UNC (or Duke), plus Louisville, Virginia, etc., KU would likely have some home losses, making it likely that the streak would get broken (or would have been broken by now).

Looking at the Big 12 over the last 13 years, other than KU, the only two legitimate Final Four contenders were the Griffin Sooners and the Hield Sooners. Hoiberg had some good squads at ISU, but no Final Four teams. Texas had talent, but no Final Four level squads after the Augustin/James group. The Big 12 has had lots of good teams, but lacks in the great team department.

And that is why KU continues to dominate - year after year, they are the only potentially great team in the Big 12. There's no Florida, or UNC, or Duke to challenge them.