UTDD

Well, I guess we got a little outside help. But Shaka, going to a program with a distant Elite Eight appearance, but years without a NCAA tourney win. I mean, you have to feel sorry for err Marquette being in that sad state of affairs as a program. I would be very surprised if we get Beard...and now Twitter says so. I'd still be surprised.

The only thing I would say is that if that I was the government -- based on our current development as humans -- I sure as hell wouldn't share anything about the high frontier.

Pretty much me too. Such a shame, I really thought he could be a shining star not just based on his play, but his branding as a face of the NFL, etc.

1) optics look worse to some people and 2) better argument that it was coerced if female does not have a history of interest in men.

I really don't know if Ivey is ready to be a head coach, but I'd at least explore the option at minimum to at least appease the Texas NBA players. I'm not sure it's public knowledge just how much Durant likes him, but I think he's on record about Ivey being his favorite teammate. Ivey was even seen as a factor in recruiting KD to the Knicks (but then they blew it with DeAndre Jordan) and I'm pretty sure Durant was a huge influence on getting him hired on the Nets. In a best case scenario, you might have a very strong recruiting program with NBA players more engaged and part of everything. You also don't have to worry about any song/racial issues of any kind either. I'd rather gamble on a low floor/high ceiling potential hire with basketball than football, so maybe this is my bias showing.

I don't think I'll ever get over a team with clear size and talent disadvantages getting 20 offensive rebounds. I mean...just...incredible. I have seen horrible turnover games, and horrible coaching (especially by Texas) but it's been a while since I can remember the disparity of talent to result with that stat.

I thought Leonard's injury was season ending? Or could he be back somehow for the playoffs? (Maybe I am remembering this incorrectly)

All in all, I actually feel better about myself now. Some of these were actually quite good, but quite a few were...not.

Harris led the league at 3s with 47% I think two years ago, and he was at 42% last year. He was already putting up some elite long distance shooting numbers, but yeah...with the gravity of everyone there now, he's probably living in a shooter dreamland right now.

I'm not sure it's a great deal, but we have to see how the cap is impacted in future years and more importantly, how Dak good really is over the length of this contract. I think if you polled every GM in the league, virtually all of them would rate Watson higher than Dak, but their pay is essentially similar now. But QBs get overpaid a little, and it might not be an overpay if the salaries keep escalating. I am skeptical it will end up a great deal, but I object WAY more to Elliott getting 15M than Dak 40M. I'd much rather spend the money on an OL, and just use minimal money for your RB rotation.

The more relaxed and friendly the competition (or taking a very large sample size) I'd easily take Steph. But if it was very serious...I might change my mind as I like Bird when the stakes are highest. But, I have a very high opinion of Bird to be fair. His injuries cut him down a little too soon, but his peak was just incredible. Some people really forget that he could pass a lot like LeBron, but shoot from almost anywhere effectively like Durant. He could also rebound well, and he even made three 2nd All-Defensive teams. And his awareness, moxie, and competitive spirit...just awesome. I honestly never thought I'd ever see another SF (although Bird would be a 4 today in a lot of ways) I would consider greater than him until LeBron James came along. And Durant (who is #3 to me on that SF list right now) is going to have to do a lot more to pass Bird...and I'd love to transplant Bird's brain/mentality to either of those two I just mentioned...scary, scary thought. I love Bird's mind right up there with Kobe and Jordan.

I would agree his recruiting has actually been pretty good, but I have to disagree on a few issues: 1) The way we ended 2019, there is no way we belonged in the tourney, I think we were completely and fairly slotted in the right spot. If we had gotten hot near the end, maybe one can argue it's a different story/closer case but we did the opposite. 2) I think the most obvious thing from many years with his coaching is that Shaka simply isn't an innovative or even average offensive coach. I don't need to regurgitate stat after stat, virtually anyone with the eye test alone probably can agree with that statement. You also have some players that are not elite at something doing that too often offensively, while players elite at something else are not being used that way enough. But for me, the real issue is that the players brought to campus are not developed well enough, and that translates to results never seeming to match the talent level. I could understand a middling record if our talent was subpar, but I just don't believe that has been the case. He's coached Texas recently to 8-10 (6th), 8-10 (6th), 9-9 (Tied for third I think), and right now 9-6 (5th). Granted, this is a very tough conference, but this a 34-35 conference record recently, and anyone can see the recent recruiting Big 12 ranks (2nd, 3rd, 10th because Greg Brown was the only signee, but I'd still say that's solid, and 2nd). So for me, the real question is if we can find another coach that can maintain, improve, or not go down too much with recruiting talent, but actually coach them to a higher level of performance. I'd love to hear who that coach might be, because I admit I am sometimes thinking about this more often than I should (when I am supposed to be focused on other things). Really...love to hear it, lol. We all know we are a football school, but I still think the basketball program can reasonably fight for the Big 12 title a lot of years and be a perennial tourney participant...with occasional deep runs with the right combination of luck and talent, etc. I don't reasonably expect a routine Final Four contender (but it would be nice to end up with a nice Baylor run or in a dream world have two decades of Kansas...) whereas in football I would have higher expectations.

For the latter part of this specific statement, I absolutely encountered people I know well that were very interested in the topic of police reform, but then were completely turned off by the word defund. (which they interpreted most often as getting rid of police entirely) I don't know if that impacted their voting at all, but I do think it influenced how they framed the overall issue of police reform. (better to have police than not at all) And yes, obviously this is not the core truth of this issue at all, but people can wander off to their own interpretations - or be open to outside influences misbranding issues - in how they think if issues are not owned/framed well. I think for the election, I expected a little stronger repudiation of Trumpism that did not happen, and actually fear that the election might very well have gone differently if COVID did not happen and the economy was humming along just fine. I am very worried that someday a Trump like candidate will arise that espouses some of the same nasty ideas/rhetoric I don't like, but instead of being bombastic and foolish...is instead very calculating, intelligent, and strategic while still outwardly showing similar traits as Trump.

Smart to just wait with Durant. The Nets are now playing so well without Durant that there is no urgency at all. I assume the second vote getter might have to do the draft stuff for the All-Star game? Or do they let Durant do it anyway? Or go with top rated by vote weight? Beal? Giannis? And should I even care? (this is the year to not do the game...)

On this specific metric, two names that completely matched my gut reaction (fair or not) before looking at it were Calipari (very high) and Self (very low). I have to add that seeing Izzo at #2 is something I actually should have guessed.

The phrase "be less white" seems really stupid to me as a formal part of corporate training, but it's a private business. They can do what they want with their staff training if it isn't illegal. If employees don't like it, they can leave or take other avenues if they actually feel it's discriminatory or otherwise illegal. If it's a really stupid idea, people can publicize it in a number of ways and push for changes. It appears LinkedIn is changing it, so perhaps it worked itself out. (did not read into it heavily, so forgive my ignorance if there is a lot more to this story)

Wow, surprised that hadn't already happened considering his usage and longevity. 9500ish to 4500ish AST/TO isn't too bad at all. He might hit 40k/10k/10k at the end of everything. Chris Paul at 9800ish/2500ish is incredible to me. Some others since I got curious -- Harden, 5500ish/3100ish, KD 3500ish/2700ish, Westbrook 7400ish/3700ish, I was a little surprised at the last one as I always imagine he's somehow got a much worse ratio than he actually does...he's just so inefficient especially now.

At best Doyle is a very tone deaf hire, and at worst it's obviously something more problematic. I think a side issue with Urban's legacy is going to be his weakness for how he hires/treats certain staff as Doyle is going to try and be connected to our friendly you know who abuser from Ohio State. I personally think Urban's college legacy is pretty secure, and I actually have a much lower opinion of Ohio State as an institution (how they handled everything and still kept on Urban after the fact) than Urban, but maybe that could change if Doyle blows up negatively with Jacksonville.

I'm not a reporter or journalist, but if I was, I definitely would have handled this differently. Did he bother to contact the family for clarification or comment? Like, you know, a real reporter might? Or did he just leak something to get the "scoop?" If I'm the University of Texas, I'd absolutely cut him off as a contact for feeding information. This is almost a perfect example of why many people have low opinions of reporters and the media in general.

I've been very open minded about CDC, and I'm only using my own common sense, but how can the Stoops stuff be defended? If the details out there are accurate (I have no way of knowing this personally to be honest) then I really feel like he is completely out of touch with certain things with this university and program.

Some of this is fair, but Stoops.

Wow, Jarrett Allen 23 pts, 18 rebounds, 5 blocks, one turnover tonight. Nice. I completely admit I have a huge soft spot for him and am always rooting for him given his high school/college.

I agree with you. Strong engagement can translate far beyond just the donations directly given to the university. I can understand an athletic director wanting to not have to rely on BMDs at all, but I don't think that's easy at all. Frankly, I'm not sure that a strong group of highly successful BMDs (perhaps some with decades in the community) might actually be smarter about UT football than a newbie athletic director without deep and lasting ties to the city/community. I mean, didn't CDC allow the idea of Stoops? Would any BMD or frankly most normal people that just know and love the team (and history) in general not realize the folly of exploring that option? Certainly some BMDs are probably more negative than positive, but that's probably something that can be taken case by case I would hope...

It's crazy going from your last game watched being a 96-95 Lakers/Boston slugfest to a 149-146 non-OT game! I mean, Brooklyn knows their current roster issues, they just have to get it done. If they do, they could just overwhelm some teams and they are scary for anyone...but right now, a terrible team scores almost 150. (most shocking to me was Westbrook seemed...what's the word I almost never use for him...efficient?) But huge props for him having a good 41/10/8. Also, no Harden...