Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 11:03 AM) I just find it silly that someone enjoys college basketball but doesn't enjoy a league where all the best kids from college basketball go to play.... doesn't make much sense. Now, March Madness is different animal in that its a huge tournament single elimination and kind of nuts.... but I'm referring to the regular season. Well that's just not true. Lots of the best college bball players can't make it. And a lot of players on NBA rosters weren't very good in college. The NBA is just a different game because of the athletes involved. More skilled guys are out there that don't make it to the NBA because of athleticism and size alone. One of my favorite players of all time, Dee Brown, is a great example of that. He was probably better than D-Will as a college player. But he's a small 6' in shoes kind of guy that just can't compete in the NBA.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 09:47 AM) Lost was a great great television show. No matter what people would have been dissapointed given the great build up. In regards to Fringe, he's done a tremendous job. Alcatraz (albeit I haven't watched this weeks episode) is an entertaining show but so far it has been more of a CSI show involving Alcatraz. If thats the case I probably won't continue to watch it, however, I'll give it a few additional episodes to create some sort of back-story. Yeah i'm not arguing Alcatraz is some great piece of television. It is WAY too procedural right now. But so was Fringe in the first season. I think the networks don't like shows like Lost that require viewers to watch every episode to know what's going on. With shows like Fringe or Alcatraz, they've made an effort to grab some of the drop in/drop out viewers so they don't ignore the show. Do that for a season and you probably pick up some more dedicated viewers, and then in later seasons you can start to ramp up the episode-to-episode plotlines that require you to watch each episode.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 10:14 AM) Melo was like an 18-year old freshman and did what he did. What would he have done as a 20-year old junior? How many times are you going to change your argument?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 09:41 AM) You don't even need hindsight for this. What would Kobe have done to the college game if he had gone? And this was back when it wasn't so watered down. I think he would have done just as good as a guy like Melo, who did just as good IN COLLEGE like other guys that have failed in the NBA but still ruled the college game. It doesn't equate to each level like you're arguing.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 09:30 AM) Yeah, it really, really is. How? One guy is dropping 35 with crazy shots/drives/whatever, the other is...dropping 35 with crazy shots/drives/whatever. And hell, with the defensive rules it's harder for college players to go off like that since you can cheat over with a double team.

And I'll add too that I'm a huge NBA fan. I watch every Bulls game and anything else that's on ESPN/TNT/NBATV unless Illinois is playing. I also watch a s*** ton of Big Ten basketball games. I enjoy both, but I can absolutely see why people enjoy college more. Hell, if it wasn't for Rose and the Bulls being good again I know I'd much prefer to watch college basketball over the NBA regular season. Not even a contest.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 09:28 AM) I think he's primarily referring to the far lower skill level of college basketball. That's why he pointed out guys who were studs in college ball like Morrison who are terrible in the NBA. But my counter is that Morrison destroyed college basketball, so it's the same thing as watching Kobe. Is Kobe shooting fall away jumpers against NBA competition really that much different than Morrison hitting fall away jumpers against college competition?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 09:22 AM) Curry has shocked most everybody. He wasn't supposed to be this good. Didn't Blake only go to college for a year? I'll give you Turner. Look, I'm not saying college hoops is a joke per se. I just go nuts when college hoops fans take a dump all over the NBA because they're making millions and pump up a clearly inferior product because, well, I don't even know why. I think for a lot of people it's the fact that you've got 82 games of pretty meaningless basketball. It's not must-see every night because they can lose the game and it just won't matter that much. In college basketball, if you're a contender, every single game matters, even the ones against crap teams. Crap teams, btw, that can still beat you.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 09:18 AM) Outside of March Madness college basketball is a joke, I also don't get the argument the NBA is just a a few teams with collections of superstars when college basketball is similar. Kentucky/Duke/UNC/etc. are all the top teams every year because they recruit the superstar recruits. I just laugh at the notion that it's better basketball when one guy goes ISO versus a college team that almost always runs set plays or styles. Obviously not every NBA team does, and there are still set plays. But it's still pick and roll or ISO offense 95% of the time.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 08:58 AM) You might've had a case in the 90's. Today? Disgusting. Adam Morrison? J.J. Redick? Luke Harangody? Tyler Hansbrough? This is the best the college game has had to offer over the last half decade (I'm not including guys like Rose who were forced to go to college for a year)? Lol, your four examples are pretty hilarious. The first two were some of the best offensive players in the history of college basketball, equal to a guy like Kobe playing against NBA competition. Harangody? How is he even in this discussion? He was an average college player for bad teams. And Hansbrough put up some decent stats in his four years at one of (if not the top) program in the country. There's not as much scoring in college because you have a longer shotclock and a shorter game. Obviously they're not as skilled as their NBA counterparts, but they're still entertaining because literally anything can happen. The NBA is much more scripted - oh, you have 2 all starts and we have none? Looks like you're winning, why even watch? Also, there is simply no comparison to the atmosphere of 5,000 crazy college kids near the floor v. a bunch of old rich folk sitting next to the bench. The environment in college bball is second to none.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 08:47 PM) some random googling brought up several law blogs that explained that the onus is on the adult and that ignorance isn't a defense. An adult is aware that fake ID's exist and can't outsource age verification to the bouncer at a bar. Nothing forces or compels you to sleep with a random stranger whose age you cannot readily verify, keeping in mind that official documentation is forgeable. I understand the concerns you're raising here and think that sometimes statutory laws are overly strict and do not allow enough individual judgement for unique and unexpected cases, but I think removing any and all bright line distinctions creates far more problems than it solves. But what societal interest is there to defend a 16 year old who is sophisticated enough to get into a bar illegally and consensually have sex with someone? I'm 100% in agreement with badger here. The black/white laws are good for efficiency but terrible for justice.

This is just embarassing

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 07:37 PM) I'm at the game wtf was the Abrams call? He pushed a guy away. Good actihg by MSU, got the call

Maybe Weber knows this team can't run. Christ that was an awful half. Illinois should have taken advantage with Green out

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:23 PM) The problem is, in almost every version of these cases, the "Victim" (as you use quotes) would say that there was consent. If a 12 year old had sexual relations with a teacher, that 12 year old would probably say that there was consent, unless it was obviously by force...but the real issue is that society has judged, correctly, that under a certain age and in particular in certain situations where 1 side has inordinate power over another, the adolescent doesn't have the mental capacity to give that consent. We make that determination all the time, whether it is charging people for crimes or a 21 year old drinking age. The logic is the same. In the case of a 12 year old, the logic is obvious, the 12 year old cannot give consent. Ohio society has judged that the dividing line is 16, or 18 in the case of a clear superior with undue influence, and that certainly seems a reasonable standard to me. You'd also have the situation where a student says they consent, until what they did would be exposed, and then they clam up and deny it. Then the teacher really gets screwed (ba-dum-ching!)

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 04:55 PM) Who's to say 16/17 year old girls are dreaming of sleeping with hot 20 yo's? Who's to say they're virgins and not fully consenting? What about a 26 male teach and a 16/17 male student? If it's fully consensual I really don't have a problem either way. I'm just thinking girls of that age are more impressionable and would be easier "targets." Guys just don't care. I think the emotional scarring coupled with the physical differences make it less acceptable from a moral/ethical standpoint.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 04:22 PM) What if it's an attractive male teacher sleeping with 16/17 year old students? I think the physical loss of virginity and pregnancy is the real difference. To me it's pretty dumb to have a law denying a 16/17 year old boy from doing what 16/17 year old boys dream about doing every night. If it's a situation where someone is taking advantage of someone or making them do something they don't want to do, then I agree. But if it's just straight up consensual sex, I don't get the beef. If you're old enough to drive a car and get a job, you're old enough to decide if having sex with a hot Bengals cheerleader is a bad thing.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 04:00 PM) I gave him every benefit on Lost and then he proved all of the critics correct with the terrible last season. I think that's a bit harsh. No matter what he did he would be criticized for it. There was literally no ending that would have been satisfactory for as much build up as that show produced. I'd also disagree with the hack assessment. If he was a hack other people would be able to copy what he does successfully. Far as I can tell every Lost-style show since Lost has failed pretty miserably. Edit: Though I guess to be fair, even a show like Fringe, which he produced and wrote and co-created, has been pretty successful.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) He's not nearly 100%. Bruce needs to treat the situation as such. He's not as explosive as he used to be. ******** I think we lose and the season goes more or less down the drain and s*** really starts to hit the fan. Sure hope I'm wrong. At least A Section people who always wear blue will fit in tonight. Unless they hit the sweet 16 or show some real improvement I think Weber's gone. It's gotten to the point where even Weber apologists like Tate are starting to actively talk about him being on the hot seat.

QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:20 AM) Honestly the Patriots way hasn't been very effective the past few seasons.... their defense is below avg. the only good player is a DT taken in the same draft as Tommie Harris and the offense rolls with Tom Brady who probably could dominate with any group of weapons similar to Manning/Brees. Why? Because they haven't won the Superbowl? They're 4 years removed from a 19-0 season but for 1 minute of play. In 2008 they lost Brady for a year but still managed to go 11-5. In 2009 they lost Welker the game before the playoffs started. In 2010 they went 14-2 and had the best record in the league, ultimately losing to the Dirty Sanchez. In 2011 they're back in the Superbowl. If that's "not very effective" I dunno what would be. Fact is the Patriots, Packers and Steelers all have a system that works regardless of the players. Some years it's easier, some years it's tougher, but year in year out those guys get good players and have a winning culture. Yes, there's a lot of props that go to Belichick, but it's still the culture. If the Bears could in some way copy that, why not be all for it?

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 11:27 AM)

So, chances Illinois pulls off another upset of a top ten team at home? I'm going with 45%. I think it'll be close. They've split their games the last two years (home team winning). So long as Illinois plays physical they should stay in it until the end. Hopefully Maniscalco and Griffey play zero minutes.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 09:26 AM) Thanks for the recap balta And Balta I agree that the other episodes make sense, but this one didn't. They got a call to come check out the bank robbery. Why did they get that call in the first place? I don't think it was over the radio. It didn't make sense that they, being two pseudo FBI/San Fran cops, would be notified of a seemingly "normal" bank robbery. It was only after she got the call that someone mentioned that the robber went after specific lock boxes, and that's how they linked it up to the Alcatraz prisoner.

My wife posed an interesting question to me last night about Alcatraz: how do they always get called to the scene of these crimes when Garcia's character, and maybe Neal's character, are the only ones that know of the prisoner's quirks?

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 08:46 AM) I don't think it was thunderous at all. The distance, height, and 'get the hell out of my way' factor were great, but the actual dunk was awkward because he was too far away - only his fingertips brushed the rim. It reminded me of the Howard Superman dunk where he threw it in more than anything. I'll take Pippen vs Ewing. Agreed. I didn't get all the love over his "dunk" last year, when he threw the ball in the hoop. I'll take Taj posterizing Wade over last nights dunk: And Taj's put back dunk there is one of the nastiest. I'll always remember Kevin Johnson's dunk over Hakeem. That's gotta be up there just for the size differences.