Dr. Pomade

DJ - thanks for the breakdown, homie. Makes complete sense to me. Josh, yeah, I think it's funny how all the talking heads like Joe Schaad were saying how Texas et al were all but certain locks to join the Pac 10. You're right - you never really know until the dust settles. So, I think the Big 12 remaining intact will do a TON for maintaining the status quo with respect to the conferences. In fact, everything now can pretty much carry on as is, and things won't be too dramatically different. However, a few thoughts: - Mizzou has to be feeling weird. Here is seemed like they were going to get asked out by the Big 10 and at the last second the Big 10 - this really hot chick - decided that she only wanted to have sex with Nebraska and forego the threesome. Unfortunately, Mizzou broke up with his longtime girlfriend and was talking shit about how he was going bang this really hot broad. Oops... - What about Notre Dame? I don't seem them joining the Big 10 - why would they? I wouldn't if I were in control of things.

Not sure about Colorado and the Pac10, but Nebraska would beginning playing Big 10 games in the 2011-2012 season. So, not this upcoming season, but the next. I'm with you, though - how is this going to work? I guess it will depend on if the conference splits into divisions. Regardless, though, room will have to be made somewhere - do teams drop a conference game and add Nebraska? I need help here - who knows something about this? For instance, for OSU's schedule for 2011-2012, would we drop someone like Purdue or Michigan State (i.e., not someone we play every year, like Michigan or Penn State) and add Nebraska in their place?

He hasn't really accomplished anything as a head coach. My impression is that he's a very good recruiter - very slick, very polished, and a great closer when he gets into the living room and starts talking up USC to mom and dad. He also had ties to USC, so that made sense in terms of the hire. Also, and this is just my humble opinion, but I think he was one of the few (relatively credible) coaches who would have taken the USC job given the milieu there.

USC is getting everything they deserve - don't listen to the USC homers when they whine and say the punishment doesn't fit the crime. USC has been acting as though it's above the law for years now. Their AD is a douchebag that has essentially given the finger to the NCAA time and time again and now USC is acting shocked when it got the hammered dropped on them? Cry me a fucking river. All you have to do is look at USC's most recent hire to see what their mindset is: Lane Kiffin was on staff at USC when all this shit was going on with Reggie Bush, he got into hot water with the NCAA during his very brief tenure at UT, and then, while USC is under investigation, who do they decide to bring in as their head coach? Oh, yeah, Lane Kiffin. It was like USC said to the NCAA: "Oh, you're looking at us closely, scrutinizing our every move? Well, watch this mother fuckers..."

I swear, I'm not picking you. With that being said, why are you being so dumb? You make it seem as though an institution cares more about its win-loss record than it does the money it could make by changing conferences. Texas A&M - if they indeed go to the SEC - isn't doing it because they think they'll have a better chance of winning more football games. In fact, I'd fathom a guess (backed by a fairly large wager) that NO team bases their opinion to change conferences on the consideration of how many more or less games their football team will win. Consider Rutgers - they'd kick a wheelbarrow full of puppies just to get into the Big 10. Upon doing so, do you think they'd win more or lose more games compared to the Big East? I'd say they'd lose more, and, when they lost, they would get hammered on a big stage. Imagine then getting clobbered the first time they play at Ohio Stadium - they'd likely get worked over in front of a very large television audience. Okay, knowing that, would Rutgers then say, "Hey, guys, thanks for the invite to join the Big 10, but we're going to pass, since we really won't win many games" or something like that? Nope - Rutgers would start kicking those puppies. Texas A&M has a good relationship with the SEC, and in some respects that conference is a better fit for them. Also, they can make a ton of money being in the SEC since, well, the SEC has tons of money rolling in.

Sorry, yeah, I'm basically repeating what you said, but I responded before thoroughly reading what you posted.

No one cares about the small sports except for the people who play them, the parents of people who play them, and the coaches of the small sports. Do you know why no one cares? Because they don't make any money. College football makes money. That's why, in the household of college sports, college football is the dad and calls the shots. College basketball is the mom - has some say, but not really all that much. All the rest of the sports are just annoying household kids - we have to tolerate them, but really they should just be seen and not really heard.

Nebraska was absolutely dominant in the mid-1990s - just ask the Florida team that got annhilated in the Orange Bowl. IIRC, Nebraska won two national championships - and nearly won three - in a row during a stretch in the 1990s. I'd say that it wasn't just a "good year here or there" for them. So, stop saying stupid shit like this. Granted, Colorado hasn't done much, though I think they shared a national championship with Notre Dame in or around 1990.

^yup, that too.

I can't speak definitively on California law, but I could imagine a few reasons why he hasn't been charged with anything. It might be that he hasn't broken a law. Again, I don't know California law, but there might not (yet) be a law speaking to what he did specifically (i.e., sent a naked picture one time to a minor). Or, maybe there is a law, but the prosecutor has decided that they aren't going to pursue charges. Can you imagine what kind of negative publicity the prosecutor would get with a headline that read something to the effect of: "Young man accidentally sends naked picture, gets brutalized and tortured by father, and then gets charged with a felony offense." Or, maybe the prosecutor just hasn't decided to levy any charges yet. The prosecutor may be simply waiting for some time to pass and the metaphorical dust to settle before pursuing charges.

So you're saying it's wrong but we shouldn't do anything about it? Halp me with the understandings.

The Halloway situation is completely different - and I can't disagree with you there.

Who cares? It's outdated, so what. It's just a publisher's suggestion - which, ironically, is covered under the First Amendment.

Yes, you retard. It's excessive. Stop thinking that anything vigilante is acceptable.

Then you have issues. The kid didn't deserve anything even close to that.

Haha, flawless.

I don't care so much that he has a Batmobile replica or whatever it is. I just thought it was chachi and more than a little annoying that he was firing off his Batmogunz in the middle of the Arena District and acting as though it was a really cool thing to do. *shrug*

Damn - so he alternates between doing a bazillion pullups and then breaking rowing records: this dude's back workout > *

Neither Texas nor Notre Dame has any real incentive to join the B10 with the current set up. Offering them $22mil a year - what all the other B10 teams currently receive - isn't very appealing to those two schools, I would imagine, considering how much revenue they already generate. So, you'd have to offer them more. Unfortunately, giving some schools more in the B10 means some are going to get less and that's bound to hurt more than just a few feelings. Still, business is business, and if the B10 is serious, then they just can't add Nebraska and Missouri and silly little Big East teams and think they they'll come out of all of this on top.

He had me at 'RATTATATATTTATATTTATATTTATATTATATATTTTATATATATTTATATTTA."

We were downtown on Saturday and it was parked outside of Social. Someone - who I presume was the owner - walked out and fired off the fake machine guns on it. It was at that moment that I realized that the Batmobile could be more obnoxious. And the dude - again, the owner, I presume - was all chachi about it too, like, "HUH WHAT CHECK OUT MAH MACHINE GUNS ON MAH BATMOBILE LADIES." Haha - we were just like wtf is up with this guy?

For real, B10 started this whole expansion madness and, when the dust settles, they could be on the outside looking in, especially if Notre Dame continues to give them the stiffarm. Maybe someone more intelligent than me can explain why is that the B10 can't change how they distribute the wealth in the B10. Okay, I get it, it's cool, the B10 evenly distributes it's money, including what it makes off the B10 Network stuff, to all 11 teams. Yay for everyone, right? Well, why does it have to be that way? The reason why I ask is the because I would think the only way the B10 gets Notre Dame and/or Texas is to offer a "sweetheart" deal - those teams would be offered more money to join. Let's just say for argument's sake that there is, oh, $250 million to be divided amongst 16 teams in the new B10. Why couldn't it work like this? Texas gets $35 million a year. Notre Dame gets $35 million a year. Ohio State gets $35 million a year Michigan gets $35 million a year. The rest of the 12 teams get to divide the remaining money up amongst them, maybe with some teams (e.g., Iowa, Penn State) taking a larger share than the other teams (e.g., Indiana). Why wouldn't this work?

Dad comes across as psychopathic.

I just wanted to publically proclaim that you are an absolute rockstar. Let me know when I can return the favors: I'll have the ladies and the strip clubs lined up. Thanks again, my good man.

Of those two, I'd say Haiku. Granted, I've only eaten at Sushi Rock once, but it was such an awful experience that I can't bring myself to go back there again. I eat at Haiku about once a month. In my opinion, the best sushi in the metro area is Sushi En in Polaris.