Moneyball version of the movies: get young stars before they are stars! Or Star-Lords!
Well played. *golf clap*
Moneyball version of the movies: get young stars before they are stars! Or Star-Lords!
I agree with that.Being able to admit YOU (as in yourself) are wrong is not a bad quality to have..
I said this in another thread a week ago. Every dynasty ends at some point for one reason or another.How did it ever come to pass that the once dominant UConn is now just another good team?
One objection I have to many news stories is that they are written as if the world is static and nothing ever changes. They will write about some state of affairs (e.g., OU's dominance of softball right now) as if that will never change. I sort of thought the same about Alabama football not too long ago and things clearly have changed.
I don't suppose OU is going to suck any time soon, but I wouldn't bet on the next ten years being like the last ten years.
I started watching hockey when we won the gold in 1980. That passion followed the Islanders winning four straight Stanley Cups. I thought it would never end. Boy, was I wrong.I said this in another thread a week ago. Every dynasty ends at some point for one reason or another.
Rad just call it "pay for play" to satisfy everyone.I agree with that.
For final clarification,,,,,,,
in this discussion I was commenting on the cause and effect the situation nil money is creating. yes I commented on how the big money impacts making programs stronger. I did include post #37 nil money making an imbalance.
My apologies that I did not expound further and did not reference the impact on the Lesser programs earlier. Actually did not see the need to reflect on the impact on the Lesser programs while I was commenting about where and how nil money is making programs stronger. But so be it clarification was needed.
On one end is big money on the other end is the Moneyball effect.