whitesoxfan101

The other sign this could be, which would be a good thing, is they realize Anderson is more of a KGB type that should be used in pass rushing spots exclusively. And that would be good, as it would be nice to see Angelo come up with an accurate assesment of a player.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 02:39 PM) "The poster who started this thread is a racist in denial of his own hate" You didn't just type that?? I'll let the admins decide if they can some how interpret that to mean something else. Perhaps you need to learn the definition of threat....I did nothing of the sort. I simply said you wouldn't dare call me a racist to my face...and I stand by that. Well first of all, I said the impression I got (reading is a skill) is that both you and Mr. Robertson's thoughts could certainly be perceived as racist. Now that doesn't mean either of you are racist (actually that's a lie, Robertson is racist, but I can't speak for you, you aren't on TV a lot), but it means that your thoughts on the Jena 6 give that impression, that's all. And if you tell somebody they wouldn't say something like that to your face, that implies there is a threat of response from you if I say it. Once again, I cannot speak for you, but I can speak for the implications of your comments.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 02:29 PM) It would appear that I have missed some developments...how was he a "con artist"? I last heard he had some mental instabilities and had fallen off his meds. That's not a development, it's an editorialization (I wonder if that's a word). Almost everybody they have talked to, between his girlfriend and professors here and even friends he has, has been shocked he would do this and is saying he's isn't a monster and wasn't acting strange or anything. The only sign of abnormality to even come out is the medication thing, in fact. To me, a turned out to be mass murderer who had almost no red flags distinguishable to those around him is almost the definition of con artist.

I'm surprised Alex Brown is staying, maybe the Mark Anderson era is coming to a premature end.

You are actually making good arguments Badger, even though I disagree with you, but don't tell me KU isn't a legit National Title contender, or that the Big 10 has a legit contender. That is not accurate and you know it. You are right though, Purdue is a 3 seed if they keep winning, and Wisconsin still has a shot too if they win out.

More at 10. EDIT: It's on nfl.com now and I spelled Muhammad wrong.

First of all, Purdue swept Wisconsin, including beating them at Madison in a game they led and controlled almost the entire 40 minutes, so please. Second of all, there is a reason the Big 10 RPI is so low, and that is the majority of the league is like, mid major bad. As a result, the decent teams look a lot better, even look really good, since a lot of time is spent by them beating on the bad teams in the league. Then of course, you get to best out of conference wins: Indiana: Didn't beat a single NCAA tournament team out of league play, Illinois State is perhaps the closest, or maybe even Kentucky Purdue: Nice win against Louisville (although they weren't nearly the same team then as now), but the losses to very bad Iowa State, Missouri, and Wofford teams wash that out and then some. Wisconsin: The Texas win was incredible in Austin, but they were embarassed by Duke, lost to what turns out to be an overrated Marquette team at home, and their second best OOC win is indistinguishable. Michigan State: The exception to this rule, as Sparty in addition to also beating Texas, beat BYU in Salt Lake City, got a decent true road win at Bradley, even beat NC State when they were ranked and gave a not overrated UCLA a very good game. Also, the Missouri Valley, CUSA, and Atlantic 10 have top 12 RPI teams, which the Big 10 doesn't.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 02:32 PM) I agree. I wouldn't expect them to match the intensity of coverage or anything. Just issue a statement. Acknowledge your mistake. Even if the media makes a blatant mistake, like they did with Duke, they'll never apologize. The media is in the business of viewership and viewership only. Any implication or appearance by the media that they are in the buisness of facts is pure coincidence.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 02:24 PM) Did you just call me a racist for pointing out inaccuracies on a story? Are you f***ing kidding me?? There was a post on here last week about how some people act different online as opposed to in person. Well you just gave the best example of that, cause you would never EVER dare call me that to my face. You have a pretty heavy hand typing on a keyboard. No i'm not calling you a racist, I'm saying you and Mr. Robertson's thoughts on this, that is was basically a hoax, have strong racial overtones. If you think Jena 6 was overblown, your right, but if you think it was a hoax, your not paying attention. And I'd call you a racist in person too, btw, just for your threat towards me, even though I don't think you really are a racist. Anybody who feels the need to play tough guy on the internet like you just did is, more than likely, not very tough.

Well I will agree with you that the big conference teams, as a whole, are down this year. College basketball in fact is watered down as a whole, which is why it wouldn't surprise me if George Mason part 2 happens this year (non BCS team goes to the final 4, and no Memphis doesn't count if they do). I'll actually even agree that every league, outside of the PAC 10, is overrated in terms of BCS leagues. But I can't talk positive about the Big 10, my eyes tell me this is the worst I've ever seen it, and conference RPI tells me it's the worst I've ever seen it (The Big 10 is, rightfully, dead last in conference RPI among the BCS leagues). The one league that is close is the SEC, but even Vandy and Tennessee are both far better than anything in the Big 10, even Purdue. And speaking of which, God bless Purdue, but there is a reason Purdue is almost a revolution in the Big 10 in that they are winning playing a bunch of freshman in that the Big 10 usually has a lot of good upperclassmen to kick the freshman's butt. But not this year.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 12:17 PM) And what is the problem? What should be the final outcome of the Jenna 6? That the poster who started this thread, like Pat Robertson, is a racist in denial of his own hate? That's the only impression I've gotten out of this.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 05:40 AM) I just saw the interview with the girlfriend of the shooter, Jessica Baty. I went to high school and some college with that girl, and further more, she dated my roomate in college. It was wierd to see her on cnn.com I feel bad for her and all the others that knew the shooter. It's bad enough for the mixed feelings they must have due to being close to this guy, but furthermore, they appear to have almost all been conned by him to the point where they still don't realize what a monster he was. It's bad enough when somebody you care about turns out to be a killer, but when he's also a very good con man........yikes.

Come on badger, your smarter than to waste your time like that. I mean, you have seen the games, you know these teams aren't any good with the exception of Purdue.

The Jena 6, in the end, is a sad story of racism on both sides of it's debate, among both races. The handeling of the case by the prosecutors, and the idea that the white kids didn't know the meaning of a noose to african americans, are both total bull s*** (sorry President Bush, your wrong on this issue, which isn't a surprise). However, as it turned out, the african american kids involved, especially the main parties in this case, were not saints either, and in fact were pretty hardened criminals. The Jena 6 is a case of racism, misunderstanding, and general ignorance, and is an example that racism still exists among all races, despite the progress made. That's my best condensed analysis, although an article by somebody as stupid and biased as Pat Buchanon isn't a good start to a discussion. And, off topic, but is the new cool thing to make stupid and inaccurate comparison to the Duke case for shock value? Clemens' attorney did it, and now Buchanon. Do people not remember that case?

UCLA gets USC back with a 56-46 win at the outstanding Galen Center. But the real story is O.J. Mayo's outstanding performance in defeat. 2-8 from the field, 0-4 from 3 point range, 4 points, 9 rebounds, 3 dimes, 10 turnovers. Missed the double double by only 1 rebound. USC also used a deep bench, playing 6 players, 4 of them for 40 minutes, one for 32, and one for 8.

QUOTE(JFields27 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 06:59 PM) I thought that was a pretty nice pic of the decal on the helmets Wow, I had no idea they were doing that today, nice to see that and good to see them playing better. Hopefully they make the playoffs, but obviously the Hawks are set up for a big year next year, both on the ice and with the attendance. That pic is hilarious. Between the "haha I just kicked your ass, i'm sticking my tongue out" look by Burish and the "your an idiot" response from the ref, that's a classic picture is worth a thousand words shot right there.

QUOTE(Brian @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 08:59 PM) 5 guys for Duke, all the starters, fouled out tonight. For once, it's Duke getting the shaft and not their opponent. If they get screwed like they did tonight, every game, for the next decade or so, they it'd be close to even. And for the IU coaching search, what about Scott Drew from Baylor? He has ties to the Hoosier state, and he cleaned up a mess far worse than the Kelvin Sampson phonegate when he got to Baylor, not to mention Baylor has no history of anything in basketball before their really good season this year.

Skiles would never be able to recruit, and I don't see what college connections he has outside of going to a Big 10 school. Not sure why IU would make that hire, they could get much better choices.

QUOTE(fathom @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 10:56 AM) Please describe these incredible talents he has? I saw a 6'6" player who just sits on the wing yelling for the ball. I didn't see a single post move from him the entire night, and he doesn't compete on the boards (please don't relay the stats from the paper, as those are a total joke). The best player for Waukegan yesterday was #30. I can't wait to watch Angel Garcia play at Memphis. He's a rather awkward looking player who tries to play like Dirk. However, he hit an awesome halfcourt buzzer beater to end the first quarter. If you don't think Richmond is really good, I can't help you because he is. He obviously had a bad game last night though and a player like him is going to look really bad if he shoots poorly.

Richmond definitely has an attitude problem (I'm one of the posters you mention that saw him play), but fathom's opinion of Richmond's talent is skewed by seeing him on a bad night. Richmond is an incredible talent and probably will play in the NBA, but he definitely has the attitude problem you see in most great athletes down already.

Of course fathon is negative on Richmond, he's negative about everything and everybody, except the Cubs, who he thinks are going to win the World Series every year. Fathom seems to think that everyday, there is a person running the world that wants to f*** him over. Anyways, NIU's head coach was in Los Angeles visiting c/o 2008 center Krystopher Faber earlier this week. He is widely regarded as down to Minnesota and NIU, and has visited both campuses.

Congrats!!!!

Just because O.J. is a very good playmaker doesn't mean he can play point at the NBA level, because he can't. O.J. is Gilbert Arenas with 2 inches of extra height, he's a pure chucker who makes plays at times passing the ball, almost by accident. But really, you lost me in this argument by using "Ben Gordon" and "good defender" in the same post, let alone the same setence, let alone to describe Gordon against PG's.

Even if you could find enough shots for Mayo and Gordon, you wouldn't be able to find enough shots for the backcourts they'd be "defending". You can't try and play defense with Mayo and Gordon as your guards. Plus, I've seen no evidence that either of the 2 can play point.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Feb 16, 2008 -> 11:31 PM) Well apparently, they were spot on with the White Sox last year. I don't quite remember what their projections for us were. They had our W/L exactly right, and were within a couple games on the Cubs I believe. I can't see them getting us exactly right again, plus I think we're a few to handful of games better than 77 wins.