Rex Hudler

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Mar 31, 2005 -> 03:35 PM) http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/03/31...t.ap/index.html :headshake From what I understand, Iraq themselves went out of their way to mislead not only their own people, but also parts of their military. On occasion, even Saddam was lied to by his sons, telling him they had a level of preparedness that wasn't true. So if they don't know or lie to appear stonger, how are we supposed to be accurate? This just doesn't come as a surprise to me.

aboz, I don't know a ton about LCD's other than a friend of mine had a big asses Sony and it was the best TV I have ever seen. He sold it and bought a 42" plasma, which is nice and much smaller in terms of space, but not nearly the TV. Look at the resolution of the TV's. I don't think all LCD's are equal in that regard, but I could be wrong. Also, if you have a bit more space, you might look at some of the new DLP's. I hear they are more economical, yet as good according to some people. Let me know what you end up doing and how you like it. I may be looking for one in the 26" range within the next six months.

QUOTE(Spiff @ Mar 31, 2005 -> 01:56 PM) Shockley can't even play QB in college, so he'll definitely have to switch. We'll see if that is true this year. I don't think the fact that he sat behind David Greene, the winningest QB in college football history says he can't play QB.

Someone on another board said he heard Georgia Tech, which is near where he lives, outside of Atlanta. I had heard about that PG, Davis. Not much about him, just his name tossed about.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Mar 30, 2005 -> 11:51 PM) A minor league system would horribly dilute the college game. Only the most ardent student athletes would attend college. Its a tough option for alot of them to choose, study and attend classes sometimes during the week, or get 35-40k a year to play basketball and improve until being drafted. I like the current system, just imploy a system where they have to attend 2 years of college. Then the type that actually want a degree would be somewhat close to it and could return during summers. Others could mature a little in college and move on to whatever they want to try. Those that have no business being in college can use other routes like the NBDL and overseas basketball. You could even add a free agency for the NBDL players, teams can buy their rights and have them allocated into the NBDL like the NFL does with European players. Instead of buying a 10 day contract from players, they can buy up to 2 years or something of a contract and call them up whenever they deem them ready. I think both ways would work, I just don't want to see the college game devoid of talent, like I believe it would be. Its a very tough decision. I disagree. Especially if they kept it small and kept it to only 7 or 8 players per NBA team as proposed. The Minor League system hasn't hurt college baseball (yes, I know they are different sports). Weather hurts the popularity of college baseball more than anything. In warm weather areas, college baseball is huge. The game is still extremely competitive. I just think that if a player enters a four year school, he should be obligated to stay for three years. I think the college game could actually become stronger in that situation. As much as I love the college game, I hate the fact that some kids get into schools that never would otherwise and stay only one or two years, with one foot out the door the whole time. Even though those players are very talented, I think college basketball would be stronger in the long run either without them or with them in school for a minimum of three years. Think about it..... initially you would see a change in talent (but not competitiveness nor excitement). But after half the kids that skip college to go the NBA developmental route, you would see more go to school. You would also see more go to school if the money coming out wasn't huge like it is today. If they stop paying out huge bonuses until the kids make it to the NBA or make it somehow provisional (they get x amount immediately, and x amount one they get there) then the allure of going to the NBA straight out of school might not be so great. I might not be right, but I think there is merit there..... Both baseball and football have 3-year restrictions, why should basketball be different??

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Mar 30, 2005 -> 10:44 PM) He is one of the best pure athletes in the draft. Jason Campbell is another one of these ubber-athletes. That said, a second round selection of Jones is a reach. A first round selection is downright goofy. If a team falls in love with him (the way Fotop has ) you may see him go in the second round, but I think he is a third-fourth round fit. Some scouts question his hands; others question the impact he can have on an offense. I think he'll be a nice TE/WR hybrid that may or may not be a crucial piece of an offense. Can someone tell me the last ubber-athlete QB gone WR in the NFL? Yikes. In addition to those already mentioned, Heinz Ward would be another.

I just went back and read the article and it was really good. It brought back some memories when watching him play and the compliments of him were dead on. They guy was really exciting to watch. If only he had big time talent around him. I know there were games they lost that he single-handedly kept close. The story Nutt told about the last minute drive against LSU is classic. I remember seeing that drive and just shaking my head, which I did so many times. I'll be honest, I never thought much of him in an NFL sense for two reasons. One, I don't follow the NFL nearly as closely as most of you guys do. I follow it more casually. And two, he was not a classic throwing quarterback. He was a get it done kind of guy, but not someone I envisioned lining up behind center and being a pocker passer. I'll look forward to seeing where he ends up and how good he does become. Like Mortensen intimated, don't be surprised if this guy ends up being able to do huge things.

Living in the heart of SEC country, I saw Matt Jones play many times over the last three years. The guy is big and looks gangly. He looks like he is running in slow motion........... Yet, he is running by everyone as he does so. As a quarterback he wasn't immensely talented as a thrower, but was solid when able to use his running skills to complement. Kind of like a guy who only throws 89, but it seems like 93 because of his other pitches? Jones passing was good because he was a double threat, but he is not a pure passer. The one thing Matt has, besides a serious mane on top of his head, is heart and a competitive nature. The way he performed in the 6 or 7 overtime game against Ole Miss a few years ago was classic. There were times it seemed as he would just will his teams to win, leading them to great comebacks or near misses. I am not sure where he projects in the NFL, but he certainly was fun to watch in college. The game was never boring when the ball was in his hands, I assure you that.

That's funny!!!!

In the FWIW department, the NBA is considering proposing a similar minor league system in the upcoming collective bargaining.....

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Mar 29, 2005 -> 06:33 PM) I hate when kids jump early. I agree some guys are ready for it. But it just seems like the money is pulling these kids out early, whether they are ready or not. I'm biased as hell because i love the NCAA and hate the NBA, so i want everyone to stay. But i guess people have to do what's right for them. I don't like it either, but I have no problem with a guy leaving after his junior year. Here is what I think the NBA should do in a perfect world according to Rex.... 1. Develop a farm system similar to baseball's. Allow kids to be drafted directly out of HS, and place them on farm teams. This system could be as small as 15 teams with two NBA teams splitting the players on each 14 to 16-man roster. 2. Do not allow a player to be called up until he is at least 20 (a possible exception could be made if they chose to expand their roster in the final month of the season, but I don't think they would want to). 3. Do not allow any collegiate players (four year schools) to enter the draft until they have completed three seasons after HS. Junior College players would be eligible after 2 seasons. 4. Pay the players in the farm system, but hold major bonuses until they reach the NBA. There is no guarantee they will make it, just like baseball's system. -- This would allow the NBA to develop some of their own players outside of their 15-man roster and retain their rights while doing so. -- It will allow some kids who have no business attending college an alternative. -- It will keep the colleges from having to deal with the one and done situations. -- It will allow the NBA to develop those kids personally as well as their hoops skills. -- It will take some talented players from the college ranks, but would not hurt the game overall. In some ways it will help because the players that do stay will have to stay for three years. The NBA draft would likely have to be extended. Allow all HS players to be drafted and those that do not sign may retain their college eligibility. They can limit the draft however best fits their needs, to help control the number of players they take on. I am sure the system could use some tweaking, but if you think about it, it could work. Current NBA players would have a little better job security. Future NBA players would be more ready to step in and contribute rather than having to learn on the bench for 2-3 years. The only people who would be negatively affected would be the rare players such as LeBron James, Kevin Garnett and Kobe Bryant. Even guys like Jermaine O'Neal, if I recall correctly, played sparingly for at least a year or two.

Prior's physical appearance hasn't changed since college, so if he's been taking them, he's been doing it for a long time. Bonds has basically played at 38+ years old with the body of a 28 year old. So in a sense, "staying too healthy" applies there.

That's a hell of an idea....... I like it.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Mar 30, 2005 -> 01:53 AM) I just had to put this out here, because it's funny how this argument is ALWAYS brought up when you say Davis and Final Four. I just found it to be an interesting point is all. It's a legit point greasy...... the only reply I would come up with is that both Weber and Williams were previously head coaches with documented success. Weber was an assistant at Purdue for 18 years and successful at SIU. I'd guess their level of experience would be the difference. Then again, if Illinois goes 29-29 over two years time, who knows what will be said.

That may just force an upward movement, taking Pedro Lopez up to Charlotte.

I'll admit, I don't follow all of this nearly as much as you guys, so I am going to claim ignorance here. I do know that Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers seem to be the top two QB's from what I have read, but what about the others? Would some of you mind giving me your ratings for the top 5 or 10 QB's? I have been hearing that Jason Campbell has really been impressing and is climbing the charts, but I don't know how much of that is real and how much is local reporting. If you guys know enough to go 10 deep that would be really cool. Thanks in advance!

I play NCAA Football all the time and got the rosters from one of the companies mentioned. I think it's great. In football, I don't need to see what a player specifically looks like, he's wearing a helmet! I really don't think you will see much change from the way the games are right now. The thing is, the ability for the game companies to create the likenesses of players is getting better and better. All this will do is negate that and keep things pretty much as they are. I don't see this as a big deal at all. If you want the names, you can still get those, you just have to get them separately.

Exactly....... there is no good reason whatsoever to start your own thread and not hijack other people's conversations... Screw 'em I say. How dare they actually want to converse about something the thread was created to discuss????

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 06:04 PM) That's exactly what happened in my neighborhood. They built three houses that each sold for about 400K. That, as our Alderwoman told us will end up raising taxes at least a bit. Before the houses were finished we finished a gut and remodel on our house and that raised the value from 140K (or so) to about 300K (or so). At this point we are some how protected from it going up for another year, but after that we have been told it will go up quite a bit. That's property tax, not income tax. Not the same thing. If the value of your house goes up whether it is because you remodeled, or other houses around you sell for more, a new development pops up nearby and makes your neighborhood more attractive or for whatever reason, then the assessment on your house will go up, meaning increased property taxes. It also means your house is worth more to your net worth and eventually puts more money in your pocket when you sell. That is all very different than what they are talking about with this family. This whole thing is that a few tax "experts" are interpreting the IRS code one way and the company that puts all of this together for the families is interpreting it another way. If the "experts" win, then all of the houses done on the show will be affected. We are talking federal income tax law. The "experts" are saying that the IRS will interpret everything the family received the same way prizes on a game show are taxed. The company that does all of this for ABC set it up so that would not apply. This is strictly interpretation and the only one that matters will belong to the IRS. And I really doubt the IRS will go after this money. I think the PR hit would be way too big for them to do so, because it will affect every other family who has had a makeover, effectively end one of the most popular shows on TV that is doing genuinely good things for people in tough predicaments. I know the government isn't the smartest all the time, but my guess is that if they did decided this is "taxable income" the public outcry would be enough for them to change their interpretation or to rewrite the code allowing such renovations only in very specific circumstances. Just my two cents....

Here is a little clarification and the original article that reported this situation. all of this is based on the speculation of some tax experts as to what the IRS might do. There are varying opinions on whether this would be considered taxable, like game show prizes. My best guess is that the IRS will not want the negative publicity and not seek the taxes. The state said they would follow the interpretation of the IRS. Nowhere has there even been any comment by the IRS, so this is all just speculation. The original article...... Extreme tax bill

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 02:12 AM) Now that my pulse is back to normal let me just say that I am so proud of Michigan State and the Big 10 this year. We constantly get ripped for having a down year, yet when it comes down to it, Illinois and the Spartans win the big game when it counts. Does it get any better than this if you are fan of either program? I think not. So excited for all of the Illini fans who get to see their first Final Four since 89 and also excited for the Spartan fans like myself who get to see a group of guys who were picked by many to lose to Old Dominion in the opening round make a run at this thing. Torbert, Anderson and Hill surely deserve this after the scrutiny they've been under since arriving in East Lansing. What a great time to be a college basketball fan. Good luck Illinois and Michigan State the rest of the way. well said....... As far as brackets go, I have 3 of the Final Four in one of my brackets but I picked North Carolina to win in that particular pool. Now my allegiance to the Big Ten goes up against potential funds. I am not a fan specifically of Illinois or Michigan State, but you can be damn well sure I will root for them and not worry about the money. Can't let money rule over my enjoyment of the games themselves.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 27, 2005 -> 05:06 PM) Rex, Switch it around and see how this could be abused. What if an employer offered a housing makeover and paid $1800 per month for someone's mortgage? That would be a great way to shield income from taxes, and our government doesn't like people to shield income from taxes. Car allowances, company provided cars, are taxable as income. I was relocated and until I could find a house and get my stuff down here and moved in the company provided housing. I paid taxes on that, there was a corresponding write off that may have balanced, but I don't remember. Using the stock analogy, you paid for the stock with taxable income. If the company paid you in stock, and then you turned around and sold it, would you be taxed on the amount at the time it was given to you, the sale amount, or the gain? This seems to fall into the gift arena. There are limits as to the amount you can receive as a gift from friends, family, and even strangers. I see what you are saying, but I just can't see making someone pay tax on money they haven't received. If I give you a gift that is taxable you have that gift. If the value of your home goes up, it could just as easily go down the next year if the housing market bottoms out. All of a sudden I have had to pay tax on money I no longer and in reality never really had. If they put a million dollar house in a neighborhod with $300,000 homes, do you really think the million dollar house is worth that in the true market? You can appraise it as such, but until someone actually pays a million for it and decides to live amongst smaller homes, then it truly doesn't have that value. Like a rare baseball card, its book value is one thing, what someone will actually pay for it is another. Its not black and white, I understand that. On a side note, on tonight's episode, they are emphasizing energy efficiency. I have heard the comments that they don't want to build a house that the family cannot afford more than once.

QUOTE(TheBlackSox8 @ Mar 28, 2005 -> 01:22 AM) i need unc to win it all for me to win my brack contest. But in all reallity i would love nothing but the Illini to win....i'm in a paradox. If UNC and Illinois make it to the final. Do I root for UNC for the money, or root for Illinois cuz I'm a fan?? Easy call....... root for your team. The money is only there to help ease the pain if Illinois loses. Money never comes before the heart. And to go one step further never bet on your heart if you gamble. It's a bad bet. /public service announcement

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 27, 2005 -> 04:36 PM) Michigan State, thought that was pretty well documented around here. It has been. I forget things in my old age. Proceed as usual........

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 26, 2005 -> 11:52 PM) Me? I'm no U of L fan although I am rooting for them in this game considering I live in Louisville. WVA has been throwing in some of the wildest shots I've ever seen in this game, it's been great to watch. Who are you a fan of? Please tell me you are not a UK fan? Yasny is enough for this board, we don't need two!