Jump to content

SwanderedTalent

Full Members
  • Posts

    6421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SwanderedTalent

  1. 2 hours ago, LCHorn said:

    That idea has popped up every year since the beginning of HornFans-the problem with getting rid of it is that political discussion will leak over to every other board.  It’s a place of quarantine, not for reasonable debate.  

    That's the theory, and I have certainly seen that play out in practice, but I have also (to my everlasting surprise) seen the opposite play out as well, where politics is just not allowed at all and the community gets along fine (better, in my opinion, because instead of those disagreements leaking out to other boards, you don't even know who thinks what politically). 

    I don't go in CR and don't really care, but thought I would point out that it's not a foregone conclusion that you "have" to have a politics board.

  2. I guess Wescott is still rooting for Texas? I thought he had assured us it was futile to do so, at the height of the Kevin Sumlin era at A&M-- A&M was in the SEC, they were in the Top 10, they had a basketball team... it was all too much. 

  3. 51 minutes ago, ztejas said:

    And lol at "you weren't SMU football in the 80s". Yeah, they also weren't Texas or atm or TCU football in the 80s. 

    do you think there's a better figurative to use there? is there a football program more famous for cheating than "SMU in the 80s"? That seemed like an effective way of acknowledging that while Kansas was punished, it wasn't cheating on the level of, say, having a slush fund organized by members of its Board of Trustees the way SMU did.

    What Kansas was punished for was actually comparable to what UT football was punished for-- in the same ballpark, at least. The difference is that we don't have UT fans saying "fuck it, hire Kelvin Sampson, who cares about a little cheating, let's just win" the way our Kansas friend seems to think we should. Sampson's record with the NCAA is prohibitive. He could win his next 200 games at UH and he'd never get a sniff here.

    There is plenty in that article that is more damning than "Larry Brown called the NCAA to say he accidentally stepped in dogshit and they threw the book at him!". That was my point in posting the article. 

  4. 4 hours ago, 76Jayhawk said:

    He gave a kid that didnt even go to Kansas, 364 dollars for a round trip ticket to see his grandmother who raised him and was ill at the time (and she passed away a short time later). He told the NCAA about it, wasn't trying to hide it, then they slapped them with the sanctions. The NCAA did a thorough investigation trying to find a pattern to see if Kansas had been doing that and they never found anything other than what Larry Brown told them he had done.

    aw man, you poor victims!

    here's the article SI wrote about it; let's let people read up on it and judge for themselves

    https://www.si.com/vault/1988/11/14/118850/a-champion-takes-a-fall-kansas-which-last-spring-won-the-ncaas-biggest-basketball-prize-has-now-been-rocked-by-severe-ncaa-penalties

    I"m not saying you were SMU football in the 80s, but the NCAA isn't and wasn't in the habit of gratuitously punishing championship level programs, and your characterization of the reason(s) for the penalty is false.

    • Like 1
  5. 1 hour ago, Focht Up said:

    Why would Nebraska be at 25 to 1?  I think I'd have them at 100 to 1.

    because people will bet on them at 25 to 1

    these aren't predictions, they're propositions balanced between what will generate bets from the public and what Vegas is willing to risk to encourage the bets/risk paying out if the unlikely happens

  6. 18 minutes ago, ztejas said:

    One year of postseason play probation and the loss of one scholarship the next year. ....

    Would you have taken UT's '05 title for a year of bowl probation and the loss of a few scholarships? That's a no brainer to me...

    It was a major probation. Kansas didn't get to defend their national championship on the court because their program was dirty enough to get the somnambulant NCAA's attention. That was either the first, or the first since the early 50s, NCAA champion that was legitimately barred from defending its national title. It was kind of a big deal at the time.

    And no, I would not have wanted to win a national championship by cheating to get it. You might not understand this about the University of Texas, because we're surrounded on all sides by cheaters, but that isn't and has never been part of our DNA, and that will never change. 

  7. 35 minutes ago, deadshank said:

    Goofy sumbitches.  And proud of it. 

    interesting to realize that not only is the whole yell leader concept a jarring anachronism, but even the diminutive we use to make fun of them ("milkmen") is something people only remember even being a cultural thing, nostalgically. I mean they didn't have milkmen when *I* was growing up, let alone millennials. 

    • Like 2
  8. 10 hours ago, ztejas said:

    What a stupid fucking comment. 

    Texas would be lucky to trade a title with a slap on the wrist.

    I mean you can't be serious. Sampson or not.

    I don't understand your response. Kansas did not get a slap on the wrist in 1988.

  9. 7 minutes ago, Parliament said:

    based on the telecasts last year, they'll have him on to analyze coaches' body language and facial expressions

    "right here Lincoln Riley is thinking 'I would rather fuck a dog than watch this goddamn defense try to stop another third down conversion, maybe I can fake a heart attack and get out of here' "

    • Like 1
  10. 17 hours ago, elfenix said:

    When Google maps informs you that the place you're going will close within an hour after you arrive. No shit, that's why I'm going now instead of an hour from now

    maybe Google maps assumes you're taking your wife with you

    • Like 1
  11. 39 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

    He's might actually be one of the cleanest guys in the game  ....  Get sampson at a major school and let him run. 

    you's actually think so?

    And that's fine, you can hire him if you want. You guys did employ Larry Brown and traded NCAA probation for a championship. 

  12. 1 hour ago, ztejas said:

    I put Fozzz on ignore. Not interested in continuing that conversation. 

    What do y'all think of Kelvin Sampson? He's 63 but seems like he's still got it - got to watch UH up close in person last night and they are pretty damn good. A lot of talent and size but they play disciplined defense and clearly have some good chemistry. Only loss is @Temple and they split @Temple, @SMU which are both hard arenas to win in. 

    Knows basketball, but is dirty as fuck, not a candidate

  13. 7 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

    Agreed. It's not even "Duke" or "Baron". Hell, it's not even knighted, let alone anything more than landed gentry. It's not even a baronet.

    It's mostly just... you know... a start.

    it's something like a layabout, or perhaps a gadfly

  14. 8 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

    Am I aware that to obtain a probability of two unrelated events occurring in sequence you must multiply their respective probabilities? 

    That is not what I asked

  15. 10 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

    It's literally impossible to go 5-0 in games in which you will likely be favored?  Is that a serious post or a troll?

    he said "no way in fuck", not "literally"

    and you have to admit the odds of winning all five of those games are not favorable-- any one of them, absolutely, any three of them, maybe, but for this team? Winning ANY of five games picked off its schedule randomly is unlikely, eg Radford

×
×
  • Create New...