Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

rogue3542

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by rogue3542


  1. I don't buy the "too big to fail" argument here.  I'm in total agreement that the NCAA probably wouldn't hurt any of their cash cows, but this is the FBI, not the NCAA, and they're all about taking down the "too big to fail" guys.  In fact, I'd put good money on it that there are several agents pulling out all the stops to get to those "big fish" as it would be a career-making bust for them.


  2. 12 minutes ago, TheWatShot said:

    If MSU has to vacate, it will be annoying as hell when Purdue fans put an asterisk by this season and claim it was their title.

    Even so, they can only at most tie with OSU for second, and since OSU won the head-to-head, it's more like they finished third than second.


  3. 4 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

    20-27 for 189 yards and a TD in the first half.  That is not "awful."  Your agenda is noted, obvious, and tired.  That was a poor throw.  Happens to every QB who ever played the game, and his next one to Cobbs was terrific.    Get over it.  

    I'll play devil's advocate here.  Lagow was good in the second quarter, but he was equally as bad in the first, and was largely responsible for the first three or four drives stalling.  He's had more than one "poor throw" in this game, though he is currently rolling so I hope it continues into the second half.


  4. Whether the classes were specifically for athletes is largely immaterial.  Many athletes utilized this to stay eligible.  That, in and of itself, is an impermissible benefit.

    What the NCAA should have done is revoked UNC's membership in the NCAA, regardless if they knew it was going to stick or be fought through appeal.


  5. From the tone of the article its pretty clear the agenda of the writer.  He asked leading questions to get the quote he wanted from Noah.  The fact is Noah came to IU and after a year will go very high in the draft.  He was able to display skills on the wing as well as down low.  I think the argument that he would not have played a lot of minutes at center at another school doesn't hold much merit considering other experiences of NBA power forwards in college.

    This is spot-on, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this.  The only story here is the writer's agenda.  With his glaring bias, one cannot expect him to use quotations objectively or to ask questions that do not serve his agenda; rather, he will use snippets of quotes and ask questions which lead him to his purpose: admonish college basketball for taking advantage of players.

×