Favorite team:Texas 
Location:Los Angeles
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:17
Registered on:4/28/2025
Online Status:
 Online

Recent Posts

Message
Yeah, I mean:

I share safety concerns. I also don’t dismiss the concerns of young women as to what happens in locker rooms before/after events.

With that said:

We are talking about a marginalized population here. I don’t see evidence of widespread bad faith in trying to gain advantage in sports. Just an already “othered” group trying to make the best of their lives. I really do not like being in the way of that.

Years past we’ve had similar debates about gays in the military, locker rooms, gay marriage. Similar. Not the same. But close enough I’m aware of decades of making life harder on people than it needed to be. Just personally, I don’t like being part of that.

I don’t have final answers. But I think we can handle these matters more locally and responsibly more case by case than blanket prohibitions.

And I will add I’m extremely creeped out with the gender check way this often goes for “tough” looking girls with short hair.
Sometime between 2005-2012 HS>>college athletes developed rapidly. The SEC was ahead of it. I think it was that 2012 Bama/Michigan game where it stood out that a premier Big10 school was smaller at every position. Bama just was bigger/stronger/faster everywhere. Lots of athletes like that all over college football today.
That disparity of just games played stood out to me as well. Props to ND too, I guess.
In roughly 100 years of polling Clemson and Georgia have only played the AP#1 team 9 times? (I’m kind of surprised how low a lot of these totals are).
As hard as my dad worked for what he earned, it would have killed me to cost him even a small fraction of this. Nothing my dad could have said would have made me feel worse.

re: Do you contribute to NIL?

Posted by CaliHorn on 4/30/25 at 2:36 pm
If they’re spending any of that on baseball they’re not getting great returns there.

re: Do you contribute to NIL?

Posted by CaliHorn on 4/30/25 at 2:34 pm
I knew they were spending a lot on sports. But I hadn’t heard exactly where it was coming from. They’ve been in the neighborhood before in basketball. And they’re back in the neighborhood now. So maybe it pushes them over the line there.

I think it tests the limits of buying a championship for Tech in football though. Maybe it’s just an old bias against the place, but 5* athletes still will want the blue blood schools, which can pay them, too.

The schools the NIL really helps are probably the bigger/better Big10 schools, because it evens up a geographic disadvantage of not being where the best players are.

re: Do you contribute to NIL?

Posted by CaliHorn on 4/30/25 at 1:17 pm
While I’m sure some small dollar donors contribute, if rosters really are going for $20 million to $40 million, that’s a game for rich men.

It hasn’t impacted my enjoyment of the game. I just think at these figures others are handling payroll and I can find better causes to give money to.
I don’t really agree with this, but…

There was a time when fans got the satisfaction of a championship with just a conference championship, which you don’t really get now.

It’s really hard to relate to it now. But without the ability of settling it on the field, you could settle for the satisfaction of a conference championship.
The absence of any kind of overall commissioner taking into account the interests of all teams from around the country is what got us here. It’s two conferences negotiating with networks and stripping all the major assets from the other conferences.

I liked the old Big 12. Good, competitive conference. Massively underpaid. Stripped of its best parts.

Football will likely continue to concentrate power in the two conferences. I hope they don’t get basketball too.
I remember everyone getting excited because his strength and conditioning coach was going to have players sitting out for injuries digging holes or something dumb like that. You’ll lose guys fast if you’re doing that and not taking care of practicing basic execution.
I was never really sure what things players did wrong. I initially gave Strong the benefit of the doubt. But then the team botched a coin flip and got 3 XPs blocked in a game and I realized he just didn’t know what he was doing.

re: ABC is fine and all

Posted by CaliHorn on 4/29/25 at 2:13 pm
I always thought CBS had superior production values than ABC. But it looked to me like ABC stepped up some this year. Even the ESPN broadcasts looked better this last year. And ABC/ESPN’s bandwidth to give us pretty much all the games is more important.
We are definitely getting a kind of player we weren’t getting for years. Part Sark, part NIL. Big part too is it’s just true the SEC draws better caliber players.
Not to mention which, he’s pretty clearly injury prone. At least this way he was able to make good money putting his physical well being on the line for the school. Lot of guys over the years would have loved that opportunity. It’s the best argument for letting players get paid. The sport is too violent to deny players the right to make money to take the risk.
“If Kiper is so phenomenal at evaluating quarterbacks why hasn’t a team ever hired him as GM?”

Who would rather be a GM than do what Kiper does? Get paid to watch a lot of college football and say what players he likes. We’re all doing that for free.
Also baseball just generally contains a greater element of randomness than basketball/football: whether certain fly balls drop, hits in gaps. You have to be really bad to not find at least a couple of lucky wins over 30 games.