(02-20-2015 06:08 PM)ken d Wrote:  I believe they should be making the case that these two sports are unique in that NFL and NBA rules unfairly force athletes to attend college when they have no interest in being there, and may also be inadequately prepared for it.

Unfairly force? Nearly every major company in the country has certain requirements you must meet, academically (college degree) or experience wise in order to be eligible for their high paying jobs. You are saying it is "unfair" that the NBA or NFL have experience or academic requirements? They would be perfectly justified if they demanded that all players must have a college degree to be eligible to be drafted. They would never do that, but it would not be unfair in any way if they did. Using that matrix, simply requiring one, two or three years of post high school experience, which is what their draft rules call for, is more than fair.

(02-21-2015 12:05 PM)ken d Wrote:  Perhaps a compromise. Consider the scholarship for the first year to be a loan. Also add as a condition in the contract between athlete and school that there be a penalty for early withdrawal to play professionally in the sport they received a scholarship for. That penalty could be 50% of their first year pro contract if they leave after one year (plus repayment of the loan), 25% after two years (but the loan is forgiven) and nothing if a player stays for three years.

Such a rue would be blatantly illegal and not even get past the drawing board. On top of that, it is a complete 180 of the primary purpose of college: to get a job. Such a rule, even if legal, would be penalizing someone for... getting a job, which is completely against the purpose of most schools.

(02-21-2015 08:50 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  We can't compete otherwise?
Football in the last two seasons:
2014 CFP Champion Ohio State
2014 Cotton Bowl champs Michigan State
2013 Rose Bowl champs Michigan State

I get what you are saying, but c'mon man. These two bolded were the result of automatic bids, resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

(02-22-2015 03:32 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-21-2015 08:50 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  We can't compete otherwise?
Football in the last two seasons:
2014 CFP Champion Ohio State
2014 Cotton Bowl champs Michigan State
2013 Rose Bowl champs Michigan State

I get what you are saying, but c'mon man. These two bolded were the result of automatic bids, resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

Yes but not an easy 50% chance. The Cotton Bowl was not an auto bid for The Big Ten.

(02-22-2015 05:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 03:32 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-21-2015 08:50 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  We can't compete otherwise?
Football in the last two seasons:
2014 CFP Champion Ohio State
2014 Cotton Bowl champs Michigan State
2013 Rose Bowl champs Michigan State

I get what you are saying, but c'mon man. These two bolded were the result of automatic bids, resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

Yes but not an easy 50% chance. The Cotton Bowl was not an auto bid for The Big Ten.

Yes it was. The highest rated Big Ten team (since the champion was in the playoffs) was guaranteed a spot in a New Year's six bowl. Again not that MSU would not have made it anyway being a top ten team, but that bid was automatic for the conference. And since we are talking about conference accomplishments, and the conference in question was guaranteed to be there, they thus had a 50% chance of achieving both of those goals. That is why I did not include the others, because the Big Ten was not guaranteed a playoff spot, nor guaranteed a Final Four berth. If we were talking about a specific team, totally different argument. But as a conference, the fact that the berth was automatic really does dampen the accomplishment since it was just one game.

(02-22-2015 05:16 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 05:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 03:32 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-21-2015 08:50 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  We can't compete otherwise?
Football in the last two seasons:
2014 CFP Champion Ohio State
2014 Cotton Bowl champs Michigan State
2013 Rose Bowl champs Michigan State

I get what you are saying, but c'mon man. These two bolded were the result of automatic bids, resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

Yes but not an easy 50% chance. The Cotton Bowl was not an auto bid for The Big Ten.

Yes it was. The highest rated Big Ten team (since the champion was in the playoffs) was guaranteed a spot in a New Year's six bowl. Again not that MSU would not have made it anyway being a top ten team, but that bid was automatic for the conference. And since we are talking about conference accomplishments, and the conference in question was guaranteed to be there, they thus had a 50% chance of achieving both of those goals. That is why I did not include the others, because the Big Ten was not guaranteed a playoff spot, nor guaranteed a Final Four berth. If we were talking about a specific team, totally different argument. But as a conference, the fact that the berth was automatic really does dampen the accomplishment since it was just one game.

No, your argument bears weight if you are saying simply making it to the Bowl isn't much of an accomplishment but winning it is. We rate conferences against each other based upon bowl wins at the end of the season.

Nice try.

(02-22-2015 06:04 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  No, your argument bears weight if you are saying simply making it to the Bowl isn't much of an accomplishment but winning it is. We rate conferences against each other based upon bowl wins at the end of the season.

Nice try.

My "argument" was that there was a 50% chance that a Big Ten team would win those two specific games because they were guaranteed to be there, and it is not a big accomplishment. That was what I said. And as such, that is 100% accurate. As even in your attempted retort, you acknowledge as such. You are talking to the wrong poster as I am not the one who was talking down the Big Ten.


Nice try but you failed miserably at trying to respond. Unless you can prove that either a Big Ten team was not guaranteed to be in that Rose Bowl in 2014, or that they were not guaranteed to be in a Contract in 2015, or they somehow did not have a 50% chance of winning by virtue of their being two teams in the game, there is nothing left to debate. My point is correct: yours is no. That is all

(02-22-2015 06:08 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 06:04 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  No, your argument bears weight if you are saying simply making it to the Bowl isn't much of an accomplishment but winning it is. We rate conferences against each other based upon bowl wins at the end of the season.

Nice try.

My "argument" was that there was a 50% chance that a Big Ten team would win those two specific games because they were guaranteed to be there, and it is not a big accomplishment. That was what I said. And as such, that is 100% accurate. As even in your attempted retort, you acknowledge as such. You are talking to the wrong poster as I am not the one who was talking down the Big Ten.


Nice try but you failed miserably at trying to respond. That is all

Yes, my point was perfectly viable despite your miserable attempt to say otherwise.

We rate conference by their Bowl records. Saying that big wins such as those by MSU is small time is simply a joke.

I never went on about whether this was you attacking the Big Ten. I don't care if you are or aren't. Your point is wrong, period. Go back to the original point. It was about The Big Ten competing. You are the one that tried to rephrase it as "big accomplishment". Obviously you were taking a shot at the Big Ten now that you have taken the conversation to this point. The fact that MSU WON those games is absolutely evidence of the point Dexter was making. You are creating a false argument, a strawman, for yourself to argue against. Why don't you explain why you have felt the need to do that?

(02-22-2015 06:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Yes, my point was perfectly viable despite your miserable attempt to say otherwise.

We rate conference by their Bowl records. Saying that big wins such as those by MSU is small time is simply a joke.

I never went on about whether this was you attacking the Big Ten. I don't care if you are or aren't. Your point is wrong, period.

Again, you wanted to step into it. And now you can;t find your wasy out?

Was the Big Ten guaranteed those spots? yes

Were there two teams in each game? yes

As such, does each team have a 50% chance of winning that game? yes

IS anything ADCorbett said on the subject wrong? no


Did H1 make up points that ADCorbett did not make and then attack him for it? yes

Is this conversation over, because the point is well proven? yes.

/case

(02-22-2015 05:16 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 05:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 03:32 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-21-2015 08:50 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  We can't compete otherwise?
Football in the last two seasons:
2014 CFP Champion Ohio State
2014 Cotton Bowl champs Michigan State
2013 Rose Bowl champs Michigan State

I get what you are saying, but c'mon man. These two bolded were the result of automatic bids, resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

Yes but not an easy 50% chance. The Cotton Bowl was not an auto bid for The Big Ten.

Yes it was. The highest rated Big Ten team (since the champion was in the playoffs) was guaranteed a spot in a New Year's six bowl. Again not that MSU would not have made it anyway being a top ten team, but that bid was automatic for the conference. And since we are talking about conference accomplishments, and the conference in question was guaranteed to be there, they thus had a 50% chance of achieving both of those goals. That is why I did not include the others, because the Big Ten was not guaranteed a playoff spot, nor guaranteed a Final Four berth. If we were talking about a specific team, totally different argument. But as a conference, the fact that the berth was automatic really does dampen the accomplishment since it was just one game.

Somewhat incorrect. Michigan State was not guarenteed a birth this year as only conference champs are automatically in when their host bowl is a semi-final (thus only Ohio State was automatically in). If the Rose Bowl hadn't been a semi-final, then yes they would have been automatic, but if Michigan State had been ranked #11 or worse in the committee rankings, they wouldn't have made it in.

(02-22-2015 06:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 06:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Yes, my point was perfectly viable despite your miserable attempt to say otherwise.

We rate conference by their Bowl records. Saying that big wins such as those by MSU is small time is simply a joke.

I never went on about whether this was you attacking the Big Ten. I don't care if you are or aren't. Your point is wrong, period.

Again, you wanted to step into it. And now you can;t find your wasy out?

Was the Big Ten guaranteed those spots? yes

Were there two teams in each game? yes

As such, does each team have a 50% chance of winning that game? yes

IS anything ADCorbett said on the subject wrong? no


Did H1 make up points that ADCorbett did not make and then attack him for it? yes

Is this conversation over, because the point is well proven? yes.

/case

You truly are a slow mind aren't you? Keep running from the fact that Dexter's original point was simply about COMPETING.

Those two games are everything you say BUT they were top level competitions AND Michigan State won in them which proves his point about the team being COMPETITIVE with top level talent from other conferences.

That is what the Bowl Games are you f'n retard that has a serious crush on me. Get over this crazy thing of yours. You are like Quo, you go crazy with your attempts to out do me here. You aren't even addressing the point Dexter made. That is why I jumped in.

Continue on with your retard rant if you like. This truly is done and over. You got nothing as usual.

(02-22-2015 06:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 06:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Yes, my point was perfectly viable despite your miserable attempt to say otherwise.

We rate conference by their Bowl records. Saying that big wins such as those by MSU is small time is simply a joke.

I never went on about whether this was you attacking the Big Ten. I don't care if you are or aren't. Your point is wrong, period.

Again, you wanted to step into it. And now you can;t find your wasy out?

Was the Big Ten guaranteed those spots? yes

Were there two teams in each game? yes

As such, does each team have a 50% chance of winning that game? yes

IS anything ADCorbett said on the subject wrong? no


Did H1 make up points that ADCorbett did not make and then attack him for it? yes

Is this conversation over, because the point is well proven? yes.

/case

Um, the Big 10 was not guaranteed a spot in there at all. Only the conference champion is guaranteed a spot when your bowl is hosting a semifinal. If Michigan St had been ranked 15th instead of 8th, they would NOT have been in the game at all.

(02-19-2015 02:21 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2015/2/...basketball

for both football and men's hoops. Would be an interesting challenge to the NBA's one-and-done rule.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketba...1424372900

This would not be kind news to the Calipari's and World Wide Wes' of the college bball world.