Marcus column

[stuball888]

Steve Marcus wrote a great article on NCAA eligability. Was fair and even had nice things to say about Hofstra(not their fault in the Arlen Harris fiasco). There has to be better control in the NCAA so we dont have any repeats of ineligable student-athletes. I am at a loss because I have no idea how this can be done.

[The Bottom Line]

stu, if there is any hope that i can slip through a crack and come in as a freshman this fall, i'll explore the possibilities. not only can i run the option to perfection, but i can save pecora's job with my extreme post-up and perimeter game. then in the spring i'll help get the DUTCH over the hump and finally jettison hopkins from the lax tourney on my way to becoming the next doug shanahan.

my motives are not only athletic. despite all the rewards it may offer, i'm growing awful weary of corporate america, and i could use a few semesters of watching sorority girls run around in the 'accepted' fashion of the new century.

AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE!!!

[stuball888]

Vin I think you need a loooooooong vacation! You have been working too hard. Although your last line has my blessings. :wink:

[il suo mama]

i'm growing awful weary of corporate america,


already???? you are much too young to be growing weary.....time for a job change perhaps! i know of a chauffeur and/or pilot position open for an east coast traveler! lol

Awww...TBL getting weary of the corporate world. Mr. Right-Wing, pro business, climb the corporate ladder guy seeing things for what they are.

I love it...you just made my day!

[stuball888]

You got that right. TBL you are too young to give up on corporate America. You can however go into your own business and show us how it should be done. Still the article does show how schools can be left out in the cold at no fault to them. Reforms need to be made in the NCAA. TBL maybe this is your calling.

[The Bottom Line]

getting weary, you liberal swine, is a helluva lot different than giving up on it. vacations take care of the weariness. there is always a price to pay for what you want out of life, and i've consciously made the decision to pay for it- even if it means riding a subway elbow-to-elbow with liberal pigs every day.

stu, i don't think there's enough money in ncaa reform- and you'd be fighting a battle against more lawyers than you could shake a stick at.

In all honesty, you lose credibility when you call people names like that. Take note.

I can tell you probably listen to Rush or Hannity...but when you talk like them, you sound just as pompus and insecure...

[The Bottom Line]

alex, i could care less how i sound to you. every time you see chance, you're the one to bring up the politics. expect a retort when you take the first shot. i don't need credibility here- this is a freaking message board. ha- i'm about as insecure as reinforced concrete, and some say a head to match.

not like i give a rat's ass, but i hope bush gets re-elected so your nuts can twist in the wind for another four years. i still have my career, and it doesn't hinge on who's in office irregardless of what you perceive.

i don't listen to political debates. i don't get a rise out of it; i just don't care. what i do love is calling you a liberal swine and watching you go nuts afterwards. keep on bringing up your fascination about politics, i think it's you who is insecure.

Its really sad reading your diatribes.

[stuball888]

Here we go again! I guess I could get both of you in a ring. Put the gloves on and charge $50 :wink: a ticket with the winner getting 10% of the purse and loser 5%. The rest will be divided among the rest of us on this board. Or would you guys rather have pistols at twenty paces? :wink:

I'm not stupid...why would I want to fight a self admitted "reinforced concrete head"?

I'll let the "sacrifices" of being "weary" in the corporate world get to him. (God forbid this happen to TBL, but guys in finance usually suffer a heart attack in their late forties...known plenty of them) I know the stresses as well, but at least I don't embrace what they stand for.

[The Bottom Line]

the liberal swine would complain that i wouldn't be taxed enough on my purse since georgie is looking to pass tax cuts.... oh you poor little consultant, cry me a river.

the difference between you and i is that i can find some humor in myself... oh, but that's right, i'm insecure.

you not only DON'T embrace stress, you'll probably sit there and bitch about it. i wouldn't say i embrace it, i more or less accept what goes on and take it with a grain of salt.

There you go with the name calling again...not impressive at all, and doesn't speak well of you.

Don't get me started on tax cuts that go to the rich. I'm going to get back about $330 bucks a year...whhoooopi!!!!! I can buy lunch for 5 days every month!!!! That'll create jobs in the economy all right!!! All the while we rack up another $330 Billion deficeit (on top of the already $300 billion we have now) so that our children, and childrens children will have to pay it back just because Bushies rich friends want to be richer....

Most of the tax cuts are going to capital gains taxes and a reduction and cap on dividends. Again, going mainly to the rich. None to the poorest Americans...

Cheney will get back roughly $96,000 a year and Bush will get back roughly $56,000 a year. Who needs the tax cuts more: Bush and his buddies or middle class Americans who will spend the money on the economy? Supply-side economics is a republican fantasy.

You do the math.

[The Bottom Line]

so could you tell me who pays more taxes each year: the welfare recipients or someone who actually makes money. it's fair because they pay their share of taxes, they have a right to get their fair share back.

would you prescribe that the crackhead baby-maker get the 56K back? come on dude, this is capitalism. those who make money make policy. it's been that way since day 1. love it or leave it, our forefathers started this out. it's incentive enough to improve our own standing, and please don't go into your diatribe about how you didn't come from a well-to-do family, neither did i. but i stell "get it".

Oh I get it...but I don't get it. Get it?

One last quote from someone who is a smarter than all of us put together, a bigger capitalist than all of us put together, and who resides in your industry. Read up.


(Warren) Buffett posed a hypothetical situation in which Berkshire Hathaway, which does not currently pay a dividend, paid $1 billion in dividends next year.

Through his 31 percent ownership of the company, Buffett said he would receive an additional $310 million in income that would reduce his tax rate from about 30 percent to 3 percent, while his office secretary would still have a tax rate of about 30 percent.

"The 3 percent overall federal tax rate I would pay -- if a Berkshire dividend were to be tax free -- seems a bit light," Buffett wrote.

Instead of the Senate's tax cut plan, Buffett proposed that it provide tax reductions to those who need and will spend the money in the form of a Social Security tax "holiday" or a tax rebate to lower-income people.

"Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets," Buffett added.

He closed the piece by saying that the "government can't deliver a free lunch to the country as a whole. It can, however, determine who pays for lunch. And last week the Senate handed the bill to the wrong party."

[stuball888]

Is it just me or isnt it just great that both of you have exactly the same amount of posts(100). I think we should put the two of you in a sitcom. College buddies who have different views in politics, who later become roomates. :P :wink:

[Rob]

I love listening to these two, please keep it up. Seriously.

[The Bottom Line]

when i have as much money as buffett has, i'll feel the same way in terms of saying "hell, i don't need such a large tax break". i don't care if he's republican, donkey, conservative or liberal swine. he's entitled to his opinion just like you, and i'm entitled to mine. i'm even more weary of debating with your knuckle-headed viewpoints than i could ever imagine. i'll let you spew your gospel to the board; i'm done. we'll cancel each other's vote on election day and call it a day.

you are a bitter, bitter person. going to start calling you robin hood.

I'm not the one who sounds bitter.

I'd rather be Robin Hood (one who steals from the Rich to give to the poor) than Bush and Ken Lay (those who steal from the poor to give to the rich).

But that's just me.

[BlueHenBill]

stuball888, I didn't read the article (I would have if a link had been posted) but I have your answer as to how such situations can be avoided. Have admission standards for ahtletes that are at least close to those for non-athletes. As I remember it being reported at the time, Harris was not in good academic standing at UVa at the time he sought to transfer. UD was his first choice, but UD advised that they wouldn't admit him because he was not in good academic standing at UVa. Harris then turned to Hofstra and we all know what happened. I know that for non-athletes, UD generally requires a B average to accept anyone as a transfer from another college. I am not sure how much UD lowers this bar to accept athletic transfers, but probably not by much. At the same time, Harris was seeking to transfer from UVa, a a QB (I can't remember his name) was also seeking to transfer frm UVa. He was also interested in UD and was also not in good academic standing at UVa. Like Harris, he was told that he would not meet UD's requirements to be accepted as a transfer. He transferred to Richmond and had to sit at leat 1 year as academically ineligible.

[stuball888]

Blue hen bill, you might have that answer. From what I understand, his marks were not that bad. When he was at Hofstra, he did enough in the classroom to EARN his degree.I believe he was a B student for his year at Hofstra and a B- student overall. The controversy was over a term paper written while he was at Virginia.