Search results

The NCAA could slow this with a couple of simple rule changes including one that would return to a year of ineligibility upon transferring.

Would love to see LeCaptain in that role. I've wondered also how well he'd do as a TE. He can obviously run after a catch. If he's being slotted as a LB, you'd think he could block. I hope he's healthy and gets some playing time.

If by "fundamentally different" you mean an offense that scores TDs when in the red zone, one that can get first downs to run out the clock when ahead, and one that can succeed on third and one 96% of the time, I'm all with you.

You make a good point. So what does Washington do differently from UM?

I agree but I think your view is sunnier than mine.

Agree. I watched North Central v UW la Crosse. Good game played well.

1. Outlaw the use of the word "committed" since it has no meaning. 2. Eliminate eligibility rules, both seasons and academic. 3. Put portal players who wish to play again the following year into a pool from which a draft patterned after the NFL draft is conducted. If they don't wish to be...

Yes, I understand. That's a distinction without a difference. The players are being paid to play football. That's de facto pro football. The effect will be that the best talent will be attracted to the winning schools even more than now. Like so many things in today's society, this old...

Ok. They are paid to play football.

Given that D1 football is de facto professional ball, why are there any eligibility requirements? Let the pros compete for positions as long as they are able. And why retain any academic requirements since they are employees?

60 thousand fans paid an average of about 300 bucks (plus concession spending) to sit in the world's ugliest sports arena and watch the mediocre Vikings play the lowly Bears on a Monday night. I'm betting that a survey of Minnesota sports fans would show that a high percentage of them follow...

An interesting proposal. We've tried more than a handful of coaches since Warmath and none have been able to attract the level of talent needed to be in the top third of the BiG -- why not see if money will get top players to come to Minneapolis? I think the idea has merit, but has no chance...

Why don't we call it by the name it will already have.

I don't know about the losing prediction, but I expect there to be absences.

UMD?

I know you are. My point is that since we didn't play southern schools but rather played Big Ten schools (who would also have been affected when Southern schools began to recruit everyone) why would Southern integration hurt UM more than the rest o our conference. No, Southern schools...

But if affected UM more? So much so that we went from competing for the Big Ten title occasionally to being in the lower half of the conference? Could it be that something else also changed here in the early sixties? Something that didn't happen in the other conference schools?

When did the gophers play southern schools? UM was a big ten powerhouse. They began to fade in the sixties and by the early 70 s they were about like now. As part of the same conference. No, something changed to the gophers in early 60s that did not affect all the other big ten schools.

The Big Ten was integrated and UM was winning the conference. Also, if integration in Southern schools killed the UM why did it not affect the other Big Ten Schools.