Ryne Ween

There is just a ton of risk and nearly no upside to scheduling more than maybe one good non conference game. If I were an AD I wouldn't do it either. When the talking heads and voters and playoff committee base things on number of impressive wins vs number of losses than maybe teams will shedule tough games. Right now college football is an exercise in not losing, and not winning against quality opponents. When that changes than the ADs will be forced to change. The money is also not there. South Carolina is gonna sell the same amount of tickets for ECU today as they will for Clemson. So what's the point for the football program? If a school like Texas is gonna fire the coach and put the AD on blast for losing 8 games in 2 years (hypothetical example) then why put OSU on your schedule? These guys don't keep the job (or get the next job) by winning, they do it by not losing. How many impressive wins did Boise have under Peterson? A half dozen maybe in ten years? And yet he's the number one coaching prospect for a decade. The value, rightly or wrongly, is on not losing rather than winning. And the same gameday guys will ignore a team with some good tough loses against quality opponents in favor of talking about a UCLA type team that goes 5-0 against bad competition.

I just don't like it as much as college football. There are a ton of reasons why I much prefer college football to the nfl. I like the pomp and circumstance Of the college games. The massive amount of passion from the fans makes it more interesting. The regionalism and geography is interesting. I've been to many many different college games and the gameday atmosphere is on a completely different level than any pro game I've ever been to. The crowds are better, the tailgating is better. People care a lot more. College football has all the things that fascinate me about English premier league soccer. Every week there is usually at least three and sometimes 5-10 very interesting matchups. For instance this week you have a historical rivalry in ND-Mich a very good conference and regional rivalry in USC-Stan an then a matchup of big ten defense and PAC offense in MSU-Oregon. These games in addition to the team I root for. In the nfl I only care about the Bears game. I also much prefer the college broadcasts. I actually enjoy lee Corso and Chris fowler. I absolutely can't stand any of the nfl pre or post game highlight shows. As for the level of play, the college game is still played at a high level. I don't really care that the left tackle and d-end matchup is of two less talented players. I actually find the games more fun to watch because of their unpredictable nature. Also maybe most importantly the games are on Saturday.

This draw couldn't have been more perfect for Fed. Total lack of quality opponents in his path. He should be able to dispatch Cilic an hopefully nishikori and novak push the ball at each other for 5 hours and novak is beat down before the final. This is a great opportunity for federer to add another slam. Djokavich is winning purely on physical prowess at this point. He is playing a retrieving style. I found myself rooting for Murray in their match because Murray was playing great attacking tennis while Djoker was pushing. I've never been a fan of novak and he is becomi. More annoying as time goes on. Allez federer. The women's final should be pretty good. Woz is playing great and Gould give Serena a good match.

I think the ND line is pretty off. It's a -4. I think they paste michigan. ND is a team I really think is gonna have a nice year.

I think Oregon is gonna blast MSU and I'm not sure that there aren't a couple other games this weekend with a similar number of pro prospects playing. Oregon will smoke MSU. I'm looking forward to USC-Stanford at the farm. Teams are back to evenly matched. I don't root for USC but it's more fun when they are good so I was glad to see Sark looks to have a solid team. ND-Mich should be good. Golston looks incredible Saturday. I'm thinking this could be a very good ND team. Horrible loss for the gamecocks last week need to rip up ECU and get some mojo going to try to save the season against Georgia.

Bernstein is incredibly unlikeable. Especially when he strokes off Steve stone when he's on the show.

8 wins for OSU? I could QB that squad to 9 wins with their talent and schedule. Looks they have a 6'1 220lb 4 star redshirt freshman who was a 4 star despite not playing his season season due to injury. I know nothing about this guy but in general the next man up in any good program is better than people expect. He doesn't need to be nearly as good as miller if their defense improves. Still think OSU is a threat to vie for a spot in the final 4.

Yea I gladly shift football to as early in the AM as possible.

They may go an entire season without anybody fouling out.

Simmons is horrible. Maybe the show will be ok. Maybe the show will be ok who knows. I won't watch it probably because there is literally nothing the show can do that will be better than nbatv gametime and it will assuredly be on at the same time as gametime. For highlights live look-ins, player interviews and color commentary game time blows away anything on other channels. The grant land show will probably be like the basketball jones show, and I'm not really that interested in that show which has the advantage of not having Simmons involved

The t wolves might make the playoffs.

Yet now that the game is more global than ever it's somehow less talented than when there were like 4 Eastern Europeans in the league? If Arvidis Sabonis came over in his prime he would have made that list.

I think the 80s era inspired the best basketball player to become really famous and the game took off in popularity. That really doesn't mean anything in terms talent. It's always going I get more and more talented. They didn't even shoot threes from back then and they arranged your position according to height not ability. Only really one country was producing players etc. you could say "most exciting era of basketball" but not most talented. Watch one of those games they look awful compared to today.

Why? Who wasn't eligible for the list that would be on it if you took it to current? LeBron? Duncan? Kobe? Reggie Miller? Who else? Garnett. Chris Paul maybe. Definitely Durant ad Wade. Potentially even T Mac. There are a ton of people that would have made that list if it was created in 2007. Kidd Nash Dirk AI all would maybe make it now I'm sure I'm missing some guys.

I think it's adequate to gauge The level of appreciation for pippens game in his era.

They lost in 7 games in the ECF semis. There are many many teams that have won one playoff series and very nearly won a second. That accomplishment is getting a bit overblown. And let's not forget that the bulls were down 2-0 and losing game 3 with a few seconds left and pippen refused to enter the game. So this is a weak crowning achievement.

My phones doesn't recognize the real spelling as a word so I actual assume it might not be a word. In any event my hyphenated word got the job done I think everybody agrees the NBA is at it's most talented every year.

People compare the best players to Jordan that's why I bring it up. And the power of recent-cy will I think make people think Lebron is the greatest ever I he wins a few more titles. Poor Shaq who is probably the second best player ver but is so annoying people forgot he was an absolute monster who dominated the league.

It's silly to say player X wouldn't win without player Y, because in the modern era no player, obviously, can win alone and also it's impossible for any team to be great like the bulls without other guys putting in top performances. That said in te playoff of the first title Jordan had a 32 PER 60ts% and .333 ws/48. In the final series he averaged 31pts 11ast 7rbs 2.8stl 1.5blks. Taken together with the regular season it's probably the greatest basketball season by a player in the modern era. To say Jordan doesn't win without Pippen is like saying the 2002 Giants don't win the pennant without Jeff Kent. I am a big fan of Pippen and I don't feel like rating him highly diminishes MJ at all. But let's be fair, Pippen made a number of dream teams, made a ton of all star teams, made that one 50 greatest players ever and Bill Simmons had him around 25 in Simmons very popular and highly regarded (by others not me) book. When Pippen is brought up people say the same thing you guys are saying ie "never got his due" "Jordan needed him" etc. Pippen is probably fairly rated or if anything overrated. There are many underrated players but I'm not sure Pippen is one of them. As for Lebron and Jordan, they have both risen above their peers so clearly that in that way they are the same. To choose between them is probably unnecessary, however if you have to; the edge is clearly Jordan's for his team'a ability to clearly rise above the other teams in his prime era.

If Lebron can win 4 titles in Cleveland I think (fairly or unfairly) he will pass mj and be considered the greatest ever.

It's not one year of Love. They have a commitment from him to opt out and sign a 5 year extension. I think (and could be wrong) he's saying that Minnesota was trading 1 year of Love (because he would have opted out and signed elsewhere) for Wiggins et al That's what I meant, Minnesota got extremely lucky to get this haul for Love. Obviously it's not a "bad deal" for CLE because they now have stacked roster with the best player and two legit all stars. My criticism would be "what was the second best deal on the table for Love?" Presumably Minnesota had to deal with a team that Love would commit to long term. What's that 10 teams? Among those teams who could make the salaries work? Among those teams who had young talent to move? What deal out there could have possibly beaten what Cleveland could potentially put together without Wiggins? And why (and I understand the pick is nearly worthless) would they need to add that 1st rounder. Surely Wiggins an Bennett would absolutely blow away any other competing offer. Wouldn't CLE want to keep that first as a sweetener to help them shed a contract or something. Seems like CLE could have dictated this trade and instead gave up more than should have been necessary.

Fantastic return for one year of Love. Minnesota made a great deal with limited buyers. Had Lebron not gone to Cleveland than Minny would have gotten Taj and Butler and a meaningless 1st rounder or trash from LAL. I question this decision by Cleveland. Seems like they are letting Lebron run the team again and that didn't work out last time. Is Love locked in? Whose to say Love decides he wants to be a free agent like Dwight did. If Wiggins turns out to be a star this will look bad.

I believe it's rumored in hank haneys book that the knee injuries were a result of his navy seal training. I also believe that tiger is (or was) a distance runner and it's not hard to imagine his foot issue was related to the running excessively at his build. The other stuff, like the elbow probably happens to every guy on tour. The back issue is much more common and I it were any other golfer, even Rory, it wouldn't be a big headline. The point is we don't know if this stuff was caused by golf or by his training (which by all accounts is excessive). And the nagging injuies are pretty common amongst golfers his age. Bubba Watson missed a month with back injuries this year and Brandt Snedeker has missed lots of time Over the past few years with cracked ribs. Phil Mickelson missed a few evens this year with a bad back. These are three of th biggest names in golf and their injuries are barely discussed while tigers are scrutinized. Every event there are multiple WDs.

I'm not an nba scout. But if I were the Cavs and the scouts and talent evaluators adamantly believed that wiggins projects to be a great nba player. Ie if he projects to belong in the group of number 1 overall players selected before Bennett (rose, Davis, kyrie, wall, griffin) than I would not do the deal for Love. Love is a great player but with Wiggins you have the potential to contend starting next year for the next 10 years. You have basically the potential to contend every year for 12 years. I'd take that chance. Love is good but he's not good enough to completely give up on all these highly regarded players when you already have the best player in the league.

I never really saw the Ware injury. The worst ones I can remember are Anderson Silva's leg snapping, Marcus Lattimore knee dislocation and Willis mcGahee. From what I'm hearing this is way worse and no way I could handle seeing that.