Snyder was more upset at (what he said were) factual misstatements in an article than the actual criticism. Still, those could have been better addressed than with a lawsuit (which was later dropped).
Regarding the team name, more white people are "offended" by the Redskins' name than the actual Native Americans are. Leave it to the liberal media to talk about a problem that isn't really there. The push to change the Redskins' name is nothing more than an attempt to make America more p.c. If this were the NBA, I'm sure your buddy Adam Silver would have banned Snyder for life by now due to his unwillingness to cave to the p.c. police. You can't tell me that would be a good thing.
Other than maybe Jerry Jones, what "buffoon owners have bumbled their way to titles?" Some guys know what they're doing; most however are best when they don't micro-manage the guys they have in place to help the team succeed. In the Redskins' case, Dan Snyder hurts more than he helps, and it is absolutely a reap-what-you-sow result.
JP, Dan Snyder is simply another example of an owner hurting his team by getting too involved in player personnel decisions. He's not the first and certainly won't be the last. As a result, the Redskins have suffered. The RG III trade is one of the worst (if not the worst) draft trade of all time (and I said that when it happened). It will take years to get over that one. The coaching carousel isn't too surprising given the results of the team. The coach (fair or unfair) usually gets the blame and suffers for it. Other franchises treat their guys the same way too.
The Redskins' woes are more of a reap-what-you-sow. Saying it's karma implies that the Redskins have a poor record simply because Dan Snyder is a bad guy. And that's crazy.
Jay, to be sure, what did you mean by the karma comment?
Wow, just saw you posted the same question about getting paid for stuff. To answer the question, I wouldn't have a problem with that setup. A big issue though would be making sure the dealers (or whomever) are honest about all sales and keep a complete list to determine how much the player will end up getting paid. Should the schools use their lawyers and/or financial advisers to help in this area? Otherwise, the players risk getting burned by the greedy and more shrewd money-makers.
Spot-on, MT. And if you say the payments should be capped, it wouldn't lessen the risk that more would be happening under the table (like they are now).
Is it against NCAA rules for a player to have an agreement to collect money for signed jerseys after he is done with his college career? In other words, sign now, get paid later? I assume it's not permitted, but I think a lot of the players getting paid would rather risk getting the under-the-table cash now instead of having to wait later anyway. However, if there's a loophole in the rules, a little delayed gratification would be better.
Seattle is still a top-5 team. I would put them in instead of Philly. And I might replace the Rams in the bottom 5 with the Jets.
[We blame Daniel Snyder and we credit karma for Washington's continued stinkiness. That is all.]
Karma for what? A refusal to change the team name?
Can't say I'm surprised at how the Vols/Mocs turned out. Not sure how we ended up with 3 more minutes of TOP than the Vols.
No problem with MS St. leapfrogging FL St. to #1 in the polls. FL St. hasn't looked as good as last year...not sure they still deserved to be #1 at this point anyway. Why is there an unwritten rule that the #1 preseason team should stay #1 until they lose? Even if they won it all the prior year? Another unwritten rule I don't like is that a loss takes a team about 10 spots down even if the loss is a close one to a similar opponent.
Chas, AD is on the rise, but he will need to be on a top-10 team at the very least to win the MVP. The Pelicans aren't there yet, but the future is bright. And if KD can get back by the end of the year and stay healthy the rest of the way, missing the early-season games shouldn't hurt his MVP stock that much (if at all).
[Okay, so what is the preferred term for the system in place in college athletics?]
[As for not being able to dig myself out of this hole...now that is something to "lol" about.]
[If the regulars here in the 5@10 all vote that I am bat$&@! crazy...My life will go on.]
Good to know.
[MT, Not slavery per se, he is free to leave anytime he likes. So should we call it good ol' free market economics instead?]
You clearly meant slavery with the plantation reference. So free market economics equates to the plantation now too? Not sure that you can dig yourself out of that hole.
Wow, comparing the NCAA to a plantation owner. Not only is it a bad comparison, it's a slap in the face to the actual slaves that had to endure what they did. Let's see here...Gurley chooses to play football, gets a free ride to play at UGA AND work toward a degree, gets lots of swag, and gets taken care of (certainly more so than the average student). A 19th Century slave had no choice but to live in slavery working in sometimes horrendous conditions with no other chance at doing something else in life. Yeah...sure sounds like the NCAA is just like the ol' plantation owners. Lol.
What's your answer to Mrs. B.'s second question?
TFP cover jinx? In that case, put a big Vols picture front and center on the TFP tomorrow (just in case).
Completely agree on Gurley.
Agreed that players already get paid plenty via scholarships. Must be nice getting to have a free education in exchange for playing a game. I don't think those guys know how good they really have it.
If players want to start getting paid, then let's stop giving scholarships for playing sports. Make them exempt employees and all money received is taxable. The influx of cash will be gone almost as soon as it's received for most of the players. Then, assuming class attendance is optional in this model, the players leave school after their eligibility is gone with no degree and broke, and no chance at long-term success. Remember, 90+% of athletes go pro in something other than sports. I guarantee if the players went this route, they would be begging to have the old system back within 5 years.
Jomo, if the Mocs play like they did in the 2nd half of the Central Michigan game, BL would win that bet. But I agree with you that the Mocs will cross midfield at least once (even if it's the D or ST doing it).
You said Michigan is a top 5 destination for coaches. If so, they can demand and afford a proven guy from a Big 5 school. I doubt they will look first to a rising star from a smaller school like they did when they picked Hoke.