PC Board OT Thread Take 4 [No Politics]

[Clyde Frazier]

This Paige Bueckers NIL deal is pretty interesting. On multiple levels. A female college athlete signing a major endorsement deal. The apparent influence she gets to have over her marketing and brand focus. How it might impact WNBA deals moving forward. Her teammate Azzi Fudd also.

Now she is the first collegiate athlete to sign with Gatorade. This woman is going to be a marketing force it appears.

Speaking of Azzi!

Read on Twitter

[eminence]

I appreciate it for the athletes, but how I wish our secondary athletics leagues weren't intertwined with our university system.

[Slava]

Does anyone know why Bronny's team plays wearing chin diapers? If they are required to wear masks while on the bench, can they not safely take them off when checking into the game like NBA players do? It looks absurdly stupid and pointless.

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=ESPN

[penbeast0]

With a name like Azzi Fudd, how could she fail? The Looney Toons tie ins alone are golden.

[MisterHibachi]

This looks great

Read on Twitter

[Goudelock]

Deion Sanders just flipped the #1 recruit in the country from Florida State to Jackson State. That has to be the most shocking bit of recruiting news ever considering how HBCUs were thought of even three years ago.

Read on Twitter

[falcolombardi]

anythingh that challenges a bit the weird caste system of ncaa teams is welcome

as a foreigner i still cannot wrap my mind around Alabama coach being paid 10 millones a year by a public college

[Doctor MJ]

anythingh that challenges a bit the weird caste system of ncaa teams is welcome

as a foreigner i still cannot wrap my mind around Alabama coach being paid 10 millones a year by a public college

Not just a public college, but a college in one of the poorest states with among the worst education funding in the nation.

Of course, in some ways the answer is that Saban gets paid that because he brings enough revenue in to allow the football program to still be a profit center, but it's still pretty mind-blowing.

[falcolombardi]

very random off topic but i have been realizing these days how all competitions or sports seem to go through similar processes

there is always a constant battle between "nostalgia" of thinking everyone was greater in the past and "disrespect" of thinking that older eras were trash compared to today

and there seems to be a pan-revolution of sports analytics that Exploded with moneyball in baseball: soccer, basketball, baseball, football are all undergoing mayor transformations and optimizations .... and all of them getting serious pushback for it

soccer: many people lament the "death" of the 10 position, the offensive playmaker who could be free to position himself wherever he wanted and was not asked to be tall, strong or disciplined in defensive effort

modern soccer is more athletic and táctical with even offensive stars being asked to put a ton of defensive effort and this new rougher, physical game is disliked by older fans

some i have even seen wish the sport changed rules to favor offense by not allowing the defense to touch or be physical with the offensive player,basically asking for defensive "nerfing" to make the game closer to how it was

this is fascinating in particular because is the total reverse of what happens with basketball today, showing that many people will always like more the game they grew up with and dislike the way the gane is now, regardless of what "direction" the shift goes

basketball: we all are familiar with the "death" of post play and midrange, and the rose of small ball and 3 point shooting
undertalked too is the reduced relevance of individual rebounding

baseball: game has been optimized for the most efficienct getting and pitching, to the lament of many fans who liked the more diverse game that included base stealing or ball touches

football: the game has Explode offensively with rule changes and the optimización around long passing instead of running which is surprisingly reminiscent of basketball changes

i am unfamiliar with tennis, golf, rugby or volleyball but i wouldnt be surprised to see similar thinghs there

[Colbinii]

anythingh that challenges a bit the weird caste system of ncaa teams is welcome

as a foreigner i still cannot wrap my mind around Alabama coach being paid 10 millones a year by a public college

Not just a public college, but a college in one of the poorest states with among the worst education funding in the nation.

Of course, in some ways the answer is that Saban gets paid that because he brings enough revenue in to allow the football program to still be a profit center, but it's still pretty mind-blowing.

Well, he brings in enough interest for enough wealthy [predominantly white] people in Alabama and the neighboring States where there is more desire to attend the university, which allows UofA to raise the already absurd tuition rates even higher, allowing for only the wealthiest [Upper Middle Class and above] students allowed to attend the school. Then the Administrators get to pat themselves on the back, give themselves ridiculous raises while the past students [who also happen to be predominantly white and wealthy] donate to the school for tax write-offs [and now the cycle of "Donating this money" never actually moves beyond wealthy individuals as it circles between the wealthy student population who benefit, the wealthy administration and the wealthy alumni--indefinitely]

[Doctor MJ]

some i have even seen wish the sport changed rules to favor offense by not allowing the defense to touch or be physical with the offensive player,basically asking for defensive "nerfing" to make the game closer to how it was

this is fascinating in particular because is the total reverse of what happens with basketball today, showing that many people will always like more the game they grew up with and dislike the way the gane is now, regardless of what "direction" the shift goes

While there's some truth in this, the concern about offensive or defensive advantages hurting a sport is based on something real.

In basketball, the hand check is a great example of defensive abuse. There has never been a time in basketball history where the rules said it was okay to shove a guy as he dribbles the ball, but if you allow the defender to touch the offensive player - hand check - it's very difficult in real time to tell when he does more than just touch. So, repeatedly beginning in the '70s, the NBA has made cracking down on hand check abuse a priority, and whenever they do so, offense improves. I think that's a good thing.

On the other side of things, the way offensive players recently became accustomed to abandoning actual basketball play in pursuit of a foul call was horrible to watch, and so now with their new point emphasis only Chris Paul is allowed to do this.

What I'd note in both cases is that it wasn't necessarily about "too much defense" or "too much offense", but about cracking down on players making non-basketball moves.

I'll also say that I think hockey has really hurt itself by not taking more drastic action against the absurdity of the modern goalie the way the basketball world did in the 1940s when big men became a thing. It was tougher in hockey's case because they probably needed to make their goals bigger, and the traditionalists would howl in protest, but when you go from a time where Georges Vezina was a dominant goaltender at 5'6", to a place where you basically can't play goalie if you're not 6 feet tall, and you're letting those 6 footers where tons of padding, you're literally giving offensive players far less openings to score.

i am unfamiliar with tennis, golf, rugby or volleyball but i wouldnt be surprised to see similar thinghs there

I'll speak some on tennis.

First thing to point out is that tennis is an individual sport where the players are separated by a barrier. This makes it much more clear cut in terms of rules abuse.

In terms of movement toward or away from offense, I'd say the two big things that happened were:

1. The advent of tennis rackets that were far better than the wooden rackets of old, which helped offense, and made rallies shorter.

Followed by:

2. Changes made to faster surfaces to make it easier to return the ball, which helped defense, and made the rallies longer.

These didn't "cancel out" though. What they did is concentrate the height of most players into a range of around 5'11" to 6'2", hurting those without enough power and those without enough agility.

In terms of how the nostalgia crowd works in tennis, actually, it's remarkably positive in modern times. It was once far more cranky. You had people in the '50s saying guys from the '30s were better, and people in the '80s saying guys from the '60s were better. Not too typical any more.

What changed?

I think it's largely about the sports fall from popularity. When a sport is gaining popularity, "ain't like it used to be" guys are tolerated. When a sport is bleeding, it isn't.

So to this day, John McEnroe from the '80s is the greatest male icon the sport has ever had, and you'll find him on broadcasts carrying himself with humility praising the players of today. If he instead belittled the modern game, I doubt he stays on TV.

[Doctor MJ]

anythingh that challenges a bit the weird caste system of ncaa teams is welcome

as a foreigner i still cannot wrap my mind around Alabama coach being paid 10 millones a year by a public college

Not just a public college, but a college in one of the poorest states with among the worst education funding in the nation.

Of course, in some ways the answer is that Saban gets paid that because he brings enough revenue in to allow the football program to still be a profit center, but it's still pretty mind-blowing.

Well, he brings in enough interest for enough wealthy [predominantly white] people in Alabama and the neighboring States where there is more desire to attend the university, which allows UofA to raise the already absurd tuition rates even higher, allowing for only the wealthiest [Upper Middle Class and above] students allowed to attend the school. Then the Administrators get to pat themselves on the back, give themselves ridiculous raises while the past students [who also happen to be predominantly white and wealthy] donate to the school for tax write-offs [and now the cycle of "Donating this money" never actually moves beyond wealthy individuals as it circles between the wealthy student population who benefit, the wealthy administration and the wealthy alumni--indefinitely]

So I gotta say, this isn't how I see it at all.

It's not that I think that money isn't a big driver here - obviously as I said as much - but tuition for a public university like UofA is a pittance compared to an elite private high school, and those who send their kids to elite private high schools are hoping they can then go to elite private colleges.

UofA has 82.7% acceptance rate, and a poor yield rate - meaning that most people who get into the school are using it as a back-up. So if the end goal of winning football games is to make the academics of the school more enticing, it hasn't gotten very far.

Now, UofA has specifically gotten in the news getting an unusual amount of out-of-state students - who must pay higher tuition - in recent years, and I'd be inclined to agree that the football team helps enable this, but this is not what's directly been driving the emphasis on college football in the south.

They emphasize college football first and foremost because they like football, and they never had cities big enough for major pro leagues, so college ball is the only game in town, and a big money maker through ticket sales, merch, etc.

[Dr Positivity]

very random off topic but i have been realizing these days how all competitions or sports seem to go through similar processes

there is always a constant battle between "nostalgia" of thinking everyone was greater in the past and "disrespect" of thinking that older eras were trash compared to today

and there seems to be a pan-revolution of sports analytics that Exploded with moneyball in baseball: soccer, basketball, baseball, football are all undergoing mayor transformations and optimizations .... and all of them getting serious pushback for it

soccer: many people lament the "death" of the 10 position, the offensive playmaker who could be free to position himself wherever he wanted and was not asked to be tall, strong or disciplined in defensive effort

modern soccer is more athletic and táctical with even offensive stars being asked to put a ton of defensive effort and this new rougher, physical game is disliked by older fans

some i have even seen wish the sport changed rules to favor offense by not allowing the defense to touch or be physical with the offensive player,basically asking for defensive "nerfing" to make the game closer to how it was

this is fascinating in particular because is the total reverse of what happens with basketball today, showing that many people will always like more the game they grew up with and dislike the way the gane is now, regardless of what "direction" the shift goes

basketball: we all are familiar with the "death" of post play and midrange, and the rose of small ball and 3 point shooting
undertalked too is the reduced relevance of individual rebounding

baseball: game has been optimized for the most efficienct getting and pitching, to the lament of many fans who liked the more diverse game that included base stealing or ball touches

football: the game has Explode offensively with rule changes and the optimización around long passing instead of running which is surprisingly reminiscent of basketball changes

i am unfamiliar with tennis, golf, rugby or volleyball but i wouldnt be surprised to see similar thinghs there

I think NFL is probably closest to people preferring the new offensive style of play and are in a really strong position. Basketball I'm not sure how widespread the issues with the 3 point spamming style is yet, personally I prefer 2000s basketball and not sure I will ever feel about the NBA that way again, but it may be for similar reasons as why I think things like pop music, video games and pro wrestling all coincidentally seemed to peak when I was in my teens. Baseball I feel it may be a red herring when people criticize the guys swinging for the fences and too much shifting, really there are so many ways to diagnose why baseball is getting less important and stars are less famous, I'm not sure having too many home runs which are normally the sports meal ticket is the real issue. Hockey has less fights/hitting/big slapshot type guys which loses a certain type of viewer but has faster and more skilled offensive players which gains some fans.

I also think culture has changed so much that people's relationship to sports, the internet, etc. is now different. I feel like people's lives and psychology is massively different than just 20 years ago and that leads to unpredictable results on what people get emotionally connected to. Much like how when people changed enough stuff like boxing and horse racing declined. Plus in general there is nothing that says sports has to be equally popular as it always was forever. If sports becomes less relevant/popular something has to lose ground, this may be the biggest reason something like MLB is becoming less popular and more like an NHL type sport where it's either your #1 or you're a casual who might see a few playoff games. People who like NFL and NBA more don't have as much time for a 3rd sport anymore or Skip talking about their 3rd favorite sport, whereas in early 2000s when it was 1 AM and they were watching the same Sportscentre episode for the 3rd time that night they might have more time to actually follow a 162 game regular season and what's happening with the Yankees and Red Sox or whatever. For reasons why it fell to 3 you can blame some structural problems but it also may be things like how African American audience obviously has taken to watching NFL and NBA more than MLB and NHL.

[HeartBreakKid]

Not just a public college, but a college in one of the poorest states with among the worst education funding in the nation.

Of course, in some ways the answer is that Saban gets paid that because he brings enough revenue in to allow the football program to still be a profit center, but it's still pretty mind-blowing.

Well, he brings in enough interest for enough wealthy [predominantly white] people in Alabama and the neighboring States where there is more desire to attend the university, which allows UofA to raise the already absurd tuition rates even higher, allowing for only the wealthiest [Upper Middle Class and above] students allowed to attend the school. Then the Administrators get to pat themselves on the back, give themselves ridiculous raises while the past students [who also happen to be predominantly white and wealthy] donate to the school for tax write-offs [and now the cycle of "Donating this money" never actually moves beyond wealthy individuals as it circles between the wealthy student population who benefit, the wealthy administration and the wealthy alumni--indefinitely]

So I gotta say, this isn't how I see it at all.

It's not that I think that money isn't a big driver here - obviously as I said as much - but tuition for a public university like UofA is a pittance compared to an elite private high school, and those who send their kids to elite private high schools are hoping they can then go to elite private colleges.

UofA has 82.7% acceptance rate, and a poor yield rate - meaning that most people who get into the school are using it as a back-up. So if the end goal of winning football games is to make the academics of the school more enticing, it hasn't gotten very far.

Now, UofA has specifically gotten in the news getting an unusual amount of out-of-state students - who must pay higher tuition - in recent years, and I'd be inclined to agree that the football team helps enable this, but this is not what's directly been driving the emphasis on college football in the south.

They emphasize college football first and foremost because they like football, and they never had cities big enough for major pro leagues, so college ball is the only game in town, and a big money maker through ticket sales, merch, etc.

The top students in the top private highschools are looking to go into Harvard, Stanford, Yale etc naturally.

That doesn't mean that Alabama isn't incredibly expensive, and that most people who go there are probably upper middle class at the very least. It cost 30k USD per year not including housing which most people need because it's in the middle of nowhere and the majority of students aren't even from Alabama.

In state tuition is 11k USD or so, but Alabama is also the 5th poorest state with a disproportionate amount of the poverty existing among latinos and blacks. The average family would be in an incredible amount of debt to attend that university. If you're from Alabama then it's not so bad unless you're black.

People go to Alabama for the social aspect as it is a very atypical "college life" type of university. Academics is not the main sell for them. Kids with money like to have fun too.

[Doctor MJ]

Well, he brings in enough interest for enough wealthy [predominantly white] people in Alabama and the neighboring States where there is more desire to attend the university, which allows UofA to raise the already absurd tuition rates even higher, allowing for only the wealthiest [Upper Middle Class and above] students allowed to attend the school. Then the Administrators get to pat themselves on the back, give themselves ridiculous raises while the past students [who also happen to be predominantly white and wealthy] donate to the school for tax write-offs [and now the cycle of "Donating this money" never actually moves beyond wealthy individuals as it circles between the wealthy student population who benefit, the wealthy administration and the wealthy alumni--indefinitely]

So I gotta say, this isn't how I see it at all.

It's not that I think that money isn't a big driver here - obviously as I said as much - but tuition for a public university like UofA is a pittance compared to an elite private high school, and those who send their kids to elite private high schools are hoping they can then go to elite private colleges.

UofA has 82.7% acceptance rate, and a poor yield rate - meaning that most people who get into the school are using it as a back-up. So if the end goal of winning football games is to make the academics of the school more enticing, it hasn't gotten very far.

Now, UofA has specifically gotten in the news getting an unusual amount of out-of-state students - who must pay higher tuition - in recent years, and I'd be inclined to agree that the football team helps enable this, but this is not what's directly been driving the emphasis on college football in the south.

They emphasize college football first and foremost because they like football, and they never had cities big enough for major pro leagues, so college ball is the only game in town, and a big money maker through ticket sales, merch, etc.

The top students in the top private highschools are looking to go into Harvard, Stanford, Yale etc naturally.

That doesn't mean that Alabama isn't incredibly expensive, and that most people who go there are probably upper middle class at the very least. It cost 30k USD per year not including housing which most people need because it's in the middle of nowhere and the majority of students aren't even from Alabama.

In state tuition is 11k USD or so, but Alabama is also the 5th poorest state with a disproportionate amount of the poverty existing among latinos and blacks. The average family would be in an incredible amount of debt to attend that university. If you're from Alabama then it's not so bad unless you're black.

People go to Alabama for the social aspect as it is a very atypical "college life" type of university. Academics is not the main sell for them. Kids with money like to have fun too.

It's certainly quite expensive to go to any out-of-state college, and yeah, if you're choosing to go to UofA from out-of-state without a major scholarship offer, then you're almost certainly coming from an affluent family. Wouldn't make much sense to pay that kind of money for UofA if money was a major concern.

Only thing I object to is the idea that UofA cares about football primarily because of this.

[falcolombardi]

watching game 5 of the detroit vs spurs finals and DAMN Robert horry really took pistons hearth hearth out, insane stuff at the end of the game (watched the game at random, didnt know how it ended)

takeaways:

Robert horry clutch monster

ginobili made points happen everytime he attacked, his passing after jumping was surprisingly effective and his floater looked crazy good

billups was freaking good, felt like i was watching chris paul, doing everythingh well

Hamilton amount of movement is insane and his changes of direction off ball are crazy, wish he has played in the 3 point era

rasheed was super smooth, i can see why peopke think he could have been much more offensively

prince was a crazy athlete and defender

pistons defended duncan scoring really well but tim still was great in the boards to make a big impact

[Colbinii]

Does anyone else Work From Home? I did for the first year+ of Covid but had to go back into the office this past June. Following Thanksgiving [End of November] I received a promotion and am permanently Work From Home. The Perks are fantastic, especially in a winter wonderland like Minnesota.

[Movics]

What basketball books would you guys recommend? Dream Team, Three Ring Circus, Showtime, When the garden was eden, Loose Balls, When the Game Was Ours, eleven rings, the book of basketball, and Shaq’s biography are in my collection already. I’d really appreciate books that focus on the pre merger times

[falcolombardi]

i have been reading the jordan rules and is pretty interesting stuff to read about

[Goudelock]

What basketball books would you guys recommend? Dream Team, Three Ring Circus, Showtime, When the garden was eden, Loose Balls, When the Game Was Ours, eleven rings, the book of basketball, and Shaq’s biography are in my collection already. I’d really appreciate books that focus on the pre merger times

"From Hang Time to Prime Time" by Pete Croatto is a great book. Delves into the NBA's rise from sports afterthought in the 1970s to the TV superpower it became in the 1990s. And it goes over everything: NBA media, Nike, TV contracts, the effect of race, etc.