Envy and jealousy, make amateurism great again edition

Man, I wish I had the balls to come up with an analogy like this one:

“One-and-done” is college basketball’s version of the wall.

It’s good because it rings true.

Advertisements

39 Comments

Filed under Envy and Jealousy

39 responses to “Envy and jealousy, make amateurism great again edition

  1. CPark58

    Except, you know, one is common sense and the other is completely asinine. I’ll let you folks decide which is which.

    Like

  2. Sides

    “Even if the NBA foolishly chooses to abandon its age limit rule – a rule that has contributed to the league’s rapidly ascending popularity and wealth”

    It’s good to read an informative article from an unbiased source(sarcasm). I don’t think people in this country read to learn, just read to confirm. The author clearly doesn’t mind the nba building wealth and popularity using college as a free development league. I personally don’t think college should become a paid professional development league. College has its place and it is not for everyone nor should people be forced to go to pursue their career. This doesn’t mean I like the NCAA or think it’s fair for the student athletes. A lot of things need to be changed if people are concerned about the kids…

    This is not meant to be a knock on this blog. I sometimes learn more in the comments here than I could ever learn from the “sporting news”.

    Like

  3. Uglydawg

    Well, if you lock your doors, look through the peep hole or window before you open it to a strange knock, then you either have your answer.

    Like

    • Uglydawg

      Well, I was going to make a counter point with “either” and decided against it. More coffee needed.

      Like

  4. Derek

    The analogy fails because Mexico is not paying for whatever replaces “one and done,” amirite?

    Like

  5. ChiliDawg

    Oh, goodie. We haven’t had one of these in awhile…

    Like

  6. Dolly Llama

    I’m not understanding this analogy at all. After reading the linked piece, I’m still not getting it.

    *Block that metaphor … block that metaphor …”

    Like

  7. ASEF

    Decourcy, if nothing else, is really passionate and knowledgeable about college basketball. He cares about it as a game and a sport, probably more than any other writer out there. I don’t always agree with him, and he has an annoying tendency to provide cover for top coaches, I suspect in return for access. But he’s also very good at highlighting NCAA bullshit.

    Rice and her commission have targeted “one and done” for the very simple reason that it resonates emotionally with their audience. Their prescriptions, given a moment’s thought, would do nothing to fix the underlying problems – they would just move the problems to a new place, and all that “reform” would, net effect, have been completely wasted. Which is exactly what the NCAA wants. A show of reform that leaves the underlying model intact.

    Btw, to move the metaphor a bit: China just moved $14 billion in soybean contracts away from US farmers to overseas suppliers. How’s that trade war show going again?

    Like

    • Silver Creek Dawg

      And European imports of soybeans have gone up by nearly the same amount, so I’d call it a wash at this point.

      Like

      • Sides

        Yep, so far so good.

        https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/03/other-countries-filling-void-of-chinas-canceled-soybean-orders.html

        I am no expert on this but I have common sense. China consumes too many soybeans and US supplies too much of the market to move away from US soybeans. They will likely end up buying US soybeans transshipped through other countries to save political face.

        Like

        • Dolly Llama

          Pretty brilliant how Trump gamed all that out.

          Like

          • Sides

            That is why his approval rating is strong. Its nice to see a president with a basic understanding of economics.

            Like

            • Derek

              Very strong. So much support. Everyone say a so. Ask Rep. Conor Long and Sen. Doug Jones about it. So much support. Only trump could get a liberal democrat elected to the senate in Alabama. Unpresidented!

              Like

              • Sides

                Only the republicans would nominate a bible thumping, possible pedophile judge who rides his horse to the polls. I tend to vote R but I cant vote for that. The r party will get hammered in the midterms if trump voters don’t show up.

                Like

        • If we quit importing OPEC oil do you think it would sit there OR would they find other markets, probably at a lower price? Good thing about oil is that it doesn’t rot. That isn’t a quality of most farm goods.

          The bottom line is that the law of supply and demand is a bitch.

          Also, trade wars “aren’t so easy to win” vs. a country that has a dictator for life and we have elections every two years.

          But hell, pat yourself on the back. The one thing we know for sure about you fuckers is that you were lying when you claimed to have standards.

          You’d suffer a traitorous, criminal, serial liar and sexual deviant for a tax cut for the rich. Enjoy the resignation speech.

          Like

          • ChiliDawg

            Supporting the downfall of society and the erosion of the Republic to own the libs.

            Like

          • Sides

            Stick with chasing ambulances. Economics is not your thing.

            Like

            • I never bankrupted a casino that’s for sure. That takes a certain level of stupidity. Of course, it takes an altogether different level of dumb to trust a guy that did that economic issues.

              Like

          • Napoleon BonerFart

            It really sucks when the voters choose the traitorous, criminal, serial liar deviant with the R after his name instead of the one with the D after her name. Because we know that the letter is what makes all the difference.

            Like

            • Sides

              I can’t wait to start voting for the part with a T by its name. Its coming….

              Like

            • ChiliDawg

              Takes like this neglect to acknowledge that voters chose the traitorous, criminal, serial liar deviant throughout a primary process which they had over a dozen other options who were not the shitbag pieces of human garbage that Trump is. There were a hell of a lot more than two options – Trump isn’t just a product of “best of two evils,” he’s who right wing Americans really are on the inside.

              Like

              • Napoleon BonerFart

                As opposed to whom? You think Rubio would have ended the wars and have the most transparent administration in history? Don’t be ridiculous.

                And the Democrats did exactly the same thing. They narrowed down their choices to two scumbags, the voters decided on the one from Vermont, and the super-delegates chose the ultimate scumbag/insider who may have been the only candidate worse than Trump.

                Like

                • Derek

                  “You think Rubio would have ended the wars and have the most transparent administration in history? Don’t be ridiculous.”

                  That may be the most “I don’t know I’m being ironic” grouping of words in the history of human language. You are an impressive sort of stupid.

                  Like

                  • Napoleon BonerFart

                    The 2016 election wasn’t taught in middle school, Derek. That’s why you don’t know anything about it. Ask your parents to educate you. Hopefully, by the time you’re old enough to vote, you’ll have grown out of your complete idiocy.

                    Like

                    • ChiliDawg

                      ask your parents to educate you

                      …says the guy who thinks “the wars” are ended.

                      Like

                    • Napoleon BonerFart

                      You missed the point of my post. You claimed that the Republican primary voters could have chosen from other candidates completely unlike Trump. Now, if you’re referring to inconsequential things like how they use Twitter, then you’re correct. But if you’re referring to consequential things like foreign policy, you’re completely wrong.

                      The wars continue. And the wars would be ongoing regardless of whether Clinton, or Rubio, or Cruz, or Bush were president. That was the point of my post.

                      Like

        • ASEF

          Losing $14 bill in demand is losing $14 bill in demand. I can replace a customer paying me $10,000 with another one, but I’d rather have both.

          Like

          • Sides

            The demand didn’t go anywhere and its not lost. China didn’t quit consuming soybeans. World consumption and production hasn’t changed because of this. Soybeans were not rotting last year and they won’t this year.

            If China now buys all soybeans from Brazil then Brazil cannot supply its other customers (each country is limited in how much it produces). Those customers will be forced to buy from US or other suppliers, making it a wash as stated above.

            Like

            • ChiliDawg

              I don’t think you understand how agricultural commodities work.

              Like

              • In fairness, he doesn’t seem to understand how approval ratings work either.

                Like

              • Sides

                Don’t just be snarky . Try adding to the conversation. You might get more respect that way.

                Like

                • ChiliDawg

                  Fair enough.

                  Refer to this graph: https://www.statista.com/statistics/612422/soybeans-import-volume-worldwide-by-country/

                  Simply put – there is not enough demand collectively worldwide to offset the loss of China as an importer of US soybeans. They import more than the rest of the world combined. Production is not a static number that is capped a certain number of metric tons. That number can and will fluctuate based on market. Farmers grow whatever makes them more money. If China cuts off the US, it will drive the prices for non-US origin soybean up (as the supply is more limited) and farmers in every other country will start growing more soybean to take advantage of that higher demand, which long term will create depression of the market overall so it hurts US farmers both in the short and the long term.It will hurt Chinese consumers in the short term as well, but China is a country with a government that won’t hesitate to make their people suffer in the short term to win the long game.

                  Like