GP1

To me, this says to take the value of your house and multiply it by 2 to get the amount of money you should bet on the Zips.

How much money would have to be thrown into the "building process" to increase the foot-candle output of the lighting in the Convocation Center to make it look like it isn't lit like a high school gym?

@ Dave, I just want to make sure I have this correct. All of the starters were removed and the subs brought the team back?

Looks real good guys. Well done!

He was sulking around on the court prior to his disappearance. If this writer even took a minute to do some background on this column, he would have found out that there was no question he was not practicing with the team and there was in fact uncertainty from the head coach as to his return. How do I know that, I read it in a George Thomas article. Upon hearing the rumors, George picked up his pen and writing pad, went to the arena and performed this action called "reporting". While "reporting" he asked the coach about Trees return and he said, "no comment". KD calls it like it is. If Tree was coming back, he would have said so and not thrown out a "no comment". Given the uncertainty of the head coach, how could anyone do anything other than speculate as to his disappearance and questionable return at the time?

Link Andrew Sullivan, in my opinion, is and has been the smartest blogger on the internet for quite some time now. He has some links here to the pros & cons of the debate. Good reading. This union debate has actually made the debate over the nature of athlete-students interesting again. Really a smart move by the players at NWestern. There is a reason they got into school there.

Stevens is a great coach who got out just in the nick of time. The truth is, everyone who ever thought going to the Big East was the answer should take notice and admit how in error their thinking was. I'm not sure we would be any better than Butler right now.

My guess is they worry more about the three freshmen, one sophomore and one junior who play the majority of the time.

I have a bias towards liking true centers in games. For a long time, I thought Pat should start and play a lot. He is a productive guy and was last night, but not what the Zips need in the starting line-up.

CK, I know you speak for many on this board and I'm trying to stay humble about this. All I can say is....you're welcome. Enjoy the run up to another MAC Championship. I love a good butt kicking and Akron dished one out last night. Great job guys!

Deadspin Great article on why the ncaa should embrace the union. History shows it has been great for sports leagues. The title of the article should be titled, "Student-Athletes Smarter Than The Average AD". All the members of the ncaa have to do is admit there is a work relationship between the players and the coaches. Anyone with half a brain already knows it. They are just making it official. I'm sure the schools can dip into the Mt. Everest pile of cash schools are making on college football TV rights and make things right. The should dip in now before the lose a couple of games due to a strike and lose some real money at that point. All a school like Clemson would have to do is cut their offensive coordinators salary in half and there would be $7,000 per each player on scholarship. The OC isn't earning the money anyhow. If they have $1.2 million to pay an OC, they have plenty of money to fund some programs for the players.

Why are you frightened of the unknown? What we do know is very good. There is no reason to believe the rest will not be the same if not better.

If Northwestern wins this case and they are the only school with bargaining rights, it could make NW a huge attraction for a lot of players. You can make the NFL from NW just as easily as you can from tosu. Why not go to a school where you get more than a scholarship? If this case could make NW a great program for a few years while other school caught up, wouldn't the school make much more money than they would have in terms of merchandising, etc. than they would have before? This could be a win-win for both parties.

Lots of people having fun with this and that's great. In reality, this tread can still be a good place for those who wish to have a serious conversation about statistics to visit and discuss a game without turning every game into a research project for those who just want to read and discuss the opinions of others.

I have no problem with schools making money off of the games. I have a huge problem with the money that has been created over the past 2-3 decades and the players aren't even allowed to get a small percent of it while there are offensive coordinators making over a $1 a year. Why do we have to live through the farce that since the name of the player is not put on the back of a jersey, they aren't actually making money off of the player. Put the name on the back and give the player a percent of the sales just like they do in the NFL. This is what I mean by players profiting off of their fame. They should not receive money directly from the schools, but should share in some of the revenue produced. It's all of the silly tricks the ncaa goes through to try to hide what they are actually doing that is insulting. The members of the ncaa will have nobody to blame but themselves when the little world they created for themselves comes falling down.

You should lay off of the LSD for a while.

I had trouble getting on the board this morning. Got a Chrome rejection. The Board looks better than before this afternoon. Did you guys do something to it?

Some might say they are thoughtful and some might say they are down right moronic. Without careful analysis of every letter written can we never really come to a conclusion.

Marquette Law Review Article Almost as boring as reading about average minutes played for basketball players, but it illustrates the point. Basically, when the term "student-athlete" had legal precedent put around it, it was in the 1950s. Legal precedent is hard to overturn but not impossible. Especially if the court sees past rulings not serving a purpose in modern times. I would argue that the 1950s were before the NCAA members realized they could use television to back up the Brinks truck to their schools and rake in the cash. The players today really shouldn't have to live under the now outdated court rulings. I have a solution. Work frequently involves creating a product. I argue that there is a product being created (a game) and paid for in terms of tickets, television, etc. It's simple, make it so the product is free. Make it free to attend games and put the games on PBS. If nobody wants to do that, then they have to admit the players are employees producing a revenue producing product. If it makes it hard to pay coaches and ADs, then they can go get jobs making millions of dollars somewhere else in another industry.

This is no different than going to work somewhere and later unionizing.

@zen, Good angle on the 1st Amendment. I think the key to this case will be simple...Are the players performing work? If you look at what they do, it sure looks like work...They are required to show up on time to perform their tasks...They create a product (a football game)......People pay for the product (tickets, ads, etc.)...They have supervisors (coaches)....Here is the big one, Are they compensated for what they do? Interesting...Are they compensated? Very interesting indeed. Those who are against paying college athletes say they are already compensated for what they do with a free scholarship. Those who are for them getting paid say, rightly so, the scholarship is easily absorbed into the schools budget and not of the value said to be in reality. So, in reality, those in favor don't believe the scholarship is enough and the players should be compensated. If those against it say they are receiving compensation, doesn't that make the players employees given everything they have to do to receive the money and since they are receiving compensation, they have the right to unionize as any American worker does? Unbeknownst to them, those who have argued for years against paying athletes have been making the case for them. Either way, they have a right to organize.

Link Interesting. One of the comments in the comments section makes a good point. Northwestern is a private school and unionization at a private entity is different than at a public institution. Most D1 schools are public. I have a question for those who would oppose this. If unionization of college athletes is a stupid idea, why are they attempting to unionize at one of America's great academic institutions?

Just a couple of thoughts on this. If you divide 200 by 2, you get 100 minutes. If you divide 100 by five, you get 20 and ironically, that's the exact number of minutes in the first half of a basketball game. Additionally, the closest prime numbers to 200 are 199 and 211. Interestingly, if you round Treadwell's average minutes per game down to 31, you would have a prime number, but if you round it up to 32, you no longer have a prime number.

My guess is nobody has tried. The lack of original thought across the spectrum in the college athletics administration is appalling at best. Once someone actually thinks about it, the immediate concern in their mind will be how it would impact their chances to one day get a job at a BCS level school. If there is a 1% chance that it would, they would never bring the idea up. Fear will be the ultimate motivation and at the end of the day, the non BCS schools will suffer from their fear.

Very simple, he has 20 years in the Ohio retirement system working for various public institutions. He is padding his retirement. At this point, the salary is insignificant as he will get a percent of an average of X years of service. The more he works in Ohio, the more the percent of the average goes up. I'm sure he made a decent income at YSU so his average salary for 2-4 years is probably real high. Bio Sometimes, things are not as complicated as they appear.