@yElff_@BallTalkO The point isn't that these guys could play now. It's that our best athletes aren't playing soccer, and if they dedicated their lives to excelling at soccer, they would be better. Not saying that's right or wrong. But a very different argument than the one you are making.
@PlsVoteNov3rd@sickpodadamrank@adamrank ...why wouldn't the Colts make this trade? They've clearly already given up on ARich as their starter, which pretty much negates any need to value his draft slot.
Bagent > Richardson as a backup seems pretty clear cut.
@djdotmp4 Very nice article. But could you consider your sample size of applicable comparisons too small?
Certainly da Silva and Knecht fit the bill, but everyone before that was prior to the true modern reality of payment via NIL. You mention it but then include players anyway.
@aburks41 But in general, it is wild that people are making that argument for a Michigan team that hasn't even seen it through.
24 UConn is an interesting suggestion for best of the last 20 years. First blush I'd take these over them:
18 Nova
21 Baylor
12 Kentucky
09 UNC
@aburks41 My biggest pet peeve is when someone invalidates an otherwise strong argument by showing exaggerated stats. AK has never been a 50/40/90 guy. There are 5 players on Michigan's roster who shoot the 3 for volume at or better than 2024 AK.
@beerball3r @Michigander1426 And this is the epitome of big talk not being backed up. There is a zero % chance you would do this, just like there is a zero % chance any Michigan fan would do the opposite. Everyone loves talking in absolutes when they don't have to back it up.
@IncreasedOdd@randycharb@benlikessport The reasoning behind it is that you have 10 seconds to get it across half court, hence the 10 second rule. But if you start on the opposing side of the court, you essentially "used" 10 seconds to advance it. Regardless of the reason it went OOB.
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 If you don't understand that distinction, then you are being purposely obtuse because of an inability to admit when you're wrong about something. We don't need to continue going round and round about this.
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 College basketball is the only sport with a separate tournament to determine a conference championship that is made up entirely of the same teams that just played a fairly even schedule of 20 games to determine a championship. And it's separate from the actual playoff equivalent.
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 A CFP Playoff or NCAA tournament is bringing the best teams from different conferences together to see who's best when they haven't had a chance to prove it in a game. That makes sense. A conference tourney are the exact teams you've been playing all year.
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 Think of how absolutely stupid it would be for the NBA to say "okay, regular season is over, now let's do a tourney to determine who wins the Pacific Division, and once we're done, we'll start the playoffs"
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 Ugh.
Its different because it's the EXACT SAME TEAMS. That would be the equivalent of the NFL having an NFC north playoff at the end. And those sports have conferences crowned as part of the greater playoff, not a stand alone event.
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 I understand that you have no interest in actually discussing the merits of this topic, so I'm fine to let us both just go our own way. But if you were honest with yourself, you would realize that the conference tournament is the anomaly here.
@IncreasedOdd @BPage15 I think it's just as easy to say thats why the conference tournament sucks because it's an unnecessary cash grab. Every league with their playoff that you love so much determines their conference/division winners based on a full season, not some made up secondary tournament.