dinosaur

Assuming that legislation of some sort is needed. What would you suggest needs to go into the bill?

To me, some sort of ability for the NCAA to set up transfer rules that can't be challenged by a court, some partial relief of the major income producers from title nine, and some provision for sharing the revenue generated by a particular sport with the people who play that sport. NIL is completely another deal but maybe there could be some legislation giving teeth to the pay for play and not really pay for name, image and likeness deals. I don't have a problem with a kid cashing in on some social media deal but simply buying players has to stop.

Yes I would not like to be that attorney, and this could turn out to be a very big deal.

If the pitching struggles with control like it has lately, it could be a tough season. That was a large part of the problem last year. The last couple of weeks have looked rough. The ability is there but they have to find a way to limit free passes. Good pitching= 20+ wins. Last season's control issues = 12 to 15 wins.

Just like no one has ever told us who was really running the country the last couple of years. No one in the press corps would even consider ask that question.

Has to be a reason for her to review it. Maybe the names are not as clear as we may want, like in some simple code or something. You really don’t want to destroy innocent people when you go after the monsters

I am not much of a Catholic any more, so I could be confused on what I was taught a long time ago, but I thought that the date the world would end was one of the revelations Mary was supposed to have told the children at Fatima and that the Popes since then have kept that date secret.

edited to correct spelling

They would need to win a civil war to do that. And shooting him might bring that on. I expect that they would be disappointed with the outcome.

So in your view it is racist to say, truthfully, that black makes commit more crimes unless we add that there is some vague excuse for it? bullshite

I think that Notre Dame is about as good as they have been in recent years, meaning very good but not great. The main difference in these games is that there is no truly dominant team this year from the SEC. Several good but not truly great teams. I think that Ohio State is also about where they normally are, meaning very good and possibly great. Georgia and Notre Dame were pretty evenly matched and Notre Dame made the plays when they needed them while Georgia make a lot of key mistakes. None of that means Freeman is better than Kelly. And with the transfer portal, anyone can go from pretty good to great in one season if the guys they bring in all work out well.

I would not excuse the poor coaching job over the last six quarters but a really good team will normally have juniors and seniors throughout most of the starting lineup. LSU's older players are mainly leftovers from the prior administration and are somewhat lacking in terms of raw ability. There are just not that many top players in those two classes, and Kelly's first recruiting year was affected by the short time period he had to build the relationships with the kids.

He also had a quarterback that became a truly great player that that guy covered up a lot of the shortcomings in the 2023 team. Fans tend to think that a team's success is not largely based on one player, but I think LSU had that last year. Overall, the defense is a little better than I expected considering the players on the roster but the offense is considerably worse and seems to be getting worse week to week. That is a coaching issue that he needs to address. Judge him by that. Can he get better performance from players who have not been doing well?