My List of the dumbest things in sports

[candycorn]

That's an awful lot of typing to say absolutely nothing.
I will try one last time since you clearly don't have an education, fine or otherwise.
Football is self-sustaining - it pays for itself. If you eliminate it, it would have NO EFFECT on tuition.
And calling you dumb ass is not "profanity", it is simply a fact as can be clearly seen in your pathetic attempts at logical argument.

"According to the American Council on Education (ACE), the notion that college sports makes money is a myth. Even where football does turn a profit, that money often goes to cover expenses associated with other sports. According to the Texas Tribune, "a successful football team can prop up an entire athletic department." However, more often than not, college athletics programs are not fully self-supporting, even with football money."

Lifestyle | LoveToKnow

teens.lovetoknow.com

 

[candycorn]

I've never seen a game with 20 min of video review.

In total. 20 minute reviews in total during a game. But hell, lets say it's 10 minutes. Still 10 minutes too much.

I've seen 5-10 minute reviews, and they're annoying, but one that's super long only occurs once if at all in a 3+ hour presentation.

During that 18 total minutes of action during a football game, that's a lot.

How Much Football Is Even In A Football Broadcast?

NFL telecasts include a smaller share of game action than in any other major sport -- even MLB.

fivethirtyeight.com

I'm talking about static standards that all are held to, not an amorphic strike zone where the same pitch by 2 pitchers can be called differently. That's stupid because it's inaccurate, and easily fixable.

We've had umps calling games for 100+ years. It was fine the way it was.

Soccer has it the most correct of any of the major sports (and it sucks there too by the way). The VAR official will call down to the referee on the field and tell them to go to a monitor on the sideline and give something another look. Coaches can't appeal. It truly sucks but this is the best idea of all of these silly video reviews.


What is truly hilarious is that even with video review, there still are massive amounts of complaints about referees and calls.

 

[Unkotare]

"According to the American Council on Education (ACE), the notion that college sports makes money is a myth. Even where football does turn a profit, that money often goes to cover expenses associated with other sports. According to the Texas Tribune, "a successful football team can prop up an entire athletic department." However, more often than not, college athletics programs are not fully self-supporting, even with football money."

Lifestyle | LoveToKnow

teens.lovetoknow.com

And merchandizing, and recruiting, and alumni support, and maintaining a sense of community, etc.

 

[Jarlaxle]

It's kinda cute that you think that is a rebuttal.
But since you clearly don't have one, I will use my previous example.
Penn State football brings in $60+ million to the university every year; out of that the coach gets paid $7.5 million. There are then the costs of running the program to include stadium upkeep which also come out of that $60 million.
Which part of that are you struggling with?

Does the overall costs include the settlements from paying off people the kiddie-diddlers raped while being protected by the university?

 

[Jarlaxle]

I used feel the same about a human umpire being able to see a 3 dimensional plate

But the more I watch the game, it needs a computer defined strike zone

Umpires differ from umpire to umpire and a pitch that is called a strike to one batter will be a ball to another. The box on TV shows how inconsistent umpires are

Batters and pitchers get frustrated because there is no consistency in the strike zone

Let a computer define the strike zone so that a pitch in a certain location is always called a strike. That way, a pitcher can practice against the computer and know which of his pitches are called strikes and which are outside the zone

The "box" on TV is often WRONG. A pitch in the same place can EASILY be a strike to one batter, and a ball to another. The strike zone is NOT static, it varies batter to batter and always has.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Calling something "mostly pointless" is pretty silly but there is nothing that can change your mind. For example, you'll never admit to liking a movie that I bring up. But someone went to college to learn how to light the scene, the costumes the actors were wearing were researched, historians were sometimes consulted on the facts that you see on screen. Often times the movie is based on a book. The author...most likely went to college to learn how to write well. Music...? Design? Its just mind numbing talking to conservatives who think, somehow, all we need in the society are folks who generate a tangible deliverable when they can't see other tangible deliverables in their daily life.

Making non-college attendees subsidize farm systems for the NFL and NBA also doesn't make sense.

Actually, several of my favorite authors either did not attend college at all, or went for something having nothing to do with writing. (One has a masters in history.)

I've never seen a game with 20 min of video review.

I've seen 5-10 minute reviews, and they're annoying, but one that's super long only occurs once if at all in a 3+ hour presentation.

I'm talking about static standards that all are held to, not an amorphic strike zone where the same pitch by 2 pitchers can be called differently. That's stupid because it's inaccurate, and easily fixable.

You do not understand how the strike zone in baseball works.

 

[candycorn]

Actually, several of my favorite authors either did not attend college at all, or went for something having nothing to do with writing. (One has a masters in history.)

Of course. And some others persons favorite authors did. Its more than likely they did than did not. Of course you'll argue otherwise even though you know it's true.

You do not understand how the strike zone in baseball works.

Its worked for over 100 seasons.

If you put the laser box or whatever into effect, all you'll get is more complaints. Just like you have now. Football reviews everything. Have people stopped complaining about refereeing? Nope. Just get rid of all video reviews and let the umps on the field umpire the game.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Its worked for over 100 seasons.

If you put the laser box or whatever into effect, all you'll get is more complaints. Just like you have now. Football reviews everything. Have people stopped complaining about refereeing? Nope. Just get rid of all video reviews and let the umps on the field umpire the game.

I was not addressing you. Either you do not understand the strike zone, or you do not understand that the tv "BOX" is often wrong.

 

[Ralph Norton]

"According to the American Council on Education (ACE), the notion that college sports makes money is a myth. Even where football does turn a profit, that money often goes to cover expenses associated with other sports. According to the Texas Tribune, "a successful football team can prop up an entire athletic department." However, more often than not, college athletics programs are not fully self-supporting, even with football money."

Lifestyle | LoveToKnow

teens.lovetoknow.com

Do you have a point?
If you've forgotten, we were discussing Penn State/ Big Ten football which does turn a profit - as almost all Power 5 schools do.

 

[Ralph Norton]

Does the overall costs include the settlements from paying off people the kiddie-diddlers raped while being protected by the university?

That's very clever. You're a clever guy.
Anything else from 2012 you want to bring up?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

In total. 20 minute reviews in total during a game. But hell, lets say it's 10 minutes. Still 10 minutes too much.
During that 18 total minutes of action during a football game, that's a lot.

There's a give and take in sports between continuous play and stops that build anticipation. I guess either isn't for everyone.

How Much Football Is Even In A Football Broadcast?

NFL telecasts include a smaller share of game action than in any other major sport -- even MLB.

fivethirtyeight.com

We've had umps calling games for 100+ years. It was fine the way it was.

Soccer has it the most correct of any of the major sports (and it sucks there too by the way). The VAR official will call down to the referee on the field and tell them to go to a monitor on the sideline and give something another look. Coaches can't appeal. It truly sucks but this is the best idea of all of these silly video reviews.


What is truly hilarious is that even with video review, there still are massive amounts of complaints about referees and calls.

A lot of the complaints are over:
- Clear calls that aren't reviewable.
- Plays that are reviewed but don't add up due to clear bias from the league to protect the supposed integrity of the refs.
- Pass interference and Roughing the Passer... it's maddening in that it's different every game, and for different players.

 

[rightwinger]

The "box" on TV is often WRONG. A pitch in the same place can EASILY be a strike to one batter, and a ball to another. The strike zone is NOT static, it varies batter to batter and always has.

The box can easily be adjusted when the batter steps to the plate
What won’t change is the width of the plate

 

[rightwinger]

OK, another thing that bothers me is blows to the head in Football.
Makes a lot of sense, you don’t launch at the guys head.

But what I hate is when the defensive player aims for the QBs waist and the QB slides down so that his head is now where his waist was. 15 yards

Another one I hate is the QB starts to run and then pulls up at the line of scrimmage to pass. The defensive player has already started his tackle on a runner and then gets called for roughing the passer

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Actually, several of my favorite authors either did not attend college at all, or went for something having nothing to do with writing. (One has a masters in history.)



You do not understand how the strike zone in baseball works.

I do, and there's 2 suggestions

The "strike zone" as we know it is supposed to be from the letters to the knees, thus different for every batter. The modern strike zone isn't at all what the rule book says, so that needs to be changed as a start. However, I'm sure you've heard of the old story of the manager who put a little person up to bat to get walked, because his strike zone was so small. If you wanted to keep a strike zone that catered to a player's height or dimensions... it would be easy to apply a laser grid from the plate mixed with sensors placed on the player's chest and knees, creating a laser cube that would be the strike zone.

However, It's pretty dumb to have strike zones cater to a player. In basketball, the rim is 10 ft whether you are 7 ft tall or 5ft 3" like Mugsy Bogues. Thus, a strike zone should be static, and whatever you are, however tall you are... you have to face the same zone all others do.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Millions of people are employed in those fields. They pay income taxes, own homes, pay property taxes, employ millions of others through spin-off industries.

If you don't think that benefits the nation directly...you're simply a fool.

They don't provide something that the nation directly benefits from. It's weird that you don't get the difference between providing food and medical for someone vs. providing them entertainment.

'I don't take responsibility at all'--your god.​

Please quote in the bible that statement.

Meanwhile, you refused to answer for the point that stands: There's a system that exploits whimsical, misled people to make horrible life choices... and you want to pass legislation to support this.

Wow, you mean and 18 year old made a poor choice? Incredible.

Nice to see you admit it happens. We shouldn't incentivize poor choices... your system does.

PS: there have been people who have flamed out at the STEM jobs too and realized they didn't want to be an engineer or math teacher.

That's nice.. it doesn't change that if a country needs talent and capital in certain industries, they would subsidize qualified people to participate.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

OK, another thing that bothers me is blows to the head in Football.
Makes a lot of sense, you don’t launch at the guys head.

I've entertained the idea of instead of making helmets safer, which allows recklessness... go back to minimal helmets, leatherhead style. You'd probably see players far more likely to keep their heads away from danger or other players heads if the vulnerability was there.

But what I hate is when the defensive player aims for the QBs waist and the QB slides down so that his head is now where his waist was. 15 yards

You'd think refs would be a little smarter than that.. but I'm guessing the league is so paranoid of player safety that they don't want to be accused of violating it, and refs underneath know this, so they call it in a hypersensitive manner out of fear of their job.

 

[Oddball]

Hardest for an amateur maybe, but for robotic pros it offers the greatest advantage if you hit the sweet spot, which is a skill in itself but clearly today's irons are far superior to 30 years ago.

Tour bladess are virtually unchanged from 30 years ago....So-called "game improvement" irons have changed a lot.

Instead of spending millions updating golf courses, just govern the clubs and balls.

As I pointed out, the only significant change that has significantly affected distance are the new drivers....The rest of the game is mostly the same.

I saw a short documentary of how average drive on the PGA tour went up 6+ yards with the release of the proV1.

That doesn't explain the entire picture, although it's a factor.

Pro balls can only be compressed by players with very high clubhead speeds, which have been brought about by the better physical condition that today's players are in.

I'm not just pulling this stuff out of my ass....I caddied for 20+ years and play the game today.

 

[candycorn]

Do you have a point?
If you've forgotten, we were discussing Penn State/ Big Ten football which does turn a profit - as almost all Power 5 schools do.

Almost? Interesting.

You're making my point for me. Not every football enterprise makes money for the school or taxpayers and certainly can't offset the expenses of other athletics or even their own department.

Again...make money/lose money....not the point.

Let the Raiders (who desperately need help) start a farm team and develop players.
Let colleges educate kids.
Let the tax payers get out from subsidizing he former and focus on the latter.

 

[candycorn]

There's a give and take in sports between continuous play and stops that build anticipation. I guess either isn't for everyone.

LOL... okay.

A lot of the complaints are over:
- Clear calls that aren't reviewable.
- Plays that are reviewed but don't add up due to clear bias from the league to protect the supposed integrity of the refs.
- Pass interference and Roughing the Passer... it's maddening in that it's different every game, and for different players.

So the net result is a tainted product anyway. So why have the reviews at all. This is my point.

The zebras get it right most of the time.

 

[Unkotare]

Almost? Interesting.

You're making my point for me. Not every football enterprise makes money for the school or taxpayers and certainly can't offset the expenses of other athletics or even their own department.

Again...make money/lose money....not the point.

Let the Raiders (who desperately need help) start a farm team and develop players.
Let colleges educate kids.
Let the tax payers get out from subsidizing he former and focus on the latter.

Let YOU screw YOURSELF, and let colleges decide which athletes to offer scholarships to. As a 98lb weakling, you probably never knew that most student athletes do not receive scholarships and most DO get a very valuable EDUCATION.