JayPfromSB

I would 100% buy that if athleticism meant everything in basketball. It doesn't. I would also buy it if every player was just too dense to adjust to shot blockers. They're not. Athleticism in basketball can be negated by fundamentals and making the athletic players think instead of react. The mismatches that you're banking on for the men becomes a favorable matchup for the women as well. Take UConn. Would Brianna Stewart struggle to defend a 6'10 big? More than likely that would be an iso matchup all day and UConn would have to trap and double team. But flip the script and iso Stewart on that same 6'10 big in space. Advantage Stewart and that big is screaming for help. And you can't just say "oh, I'll have someone else defend Stewart". It's not like you can run that big off the court once he scores. He's going to have to defend someone that's an unfavorable matchup.

Let's not, just because your reasoning is so insane. You do know that most college women's teams practice daily against guys who played HS ball and beat the crap out of them, right? I'm not talking about old men...it's 18-23 year old guys who are attending the same school and played basketball in high school...some who had offers to play ball at lower level colleges. The practice of practicing against boys has flowed down to high school as well. My daughter practices against boys every practice, and every one of the boys she plays against were skill position players on the varsity football team or were cut from the varsity basketball team because of their class and positional needs, so athletically, not slouches. You think a top 10 boys high school team could crush South Carolina or UConn? You really need to get out and see some more boys and girls games in person if you think that's the case.

I was reading this at work, and I considered staying quiet, but I had to say something. I'm going to assume that you haven't played basketball competitively, nor have you played against a female player. First off, a simple layup is one that is completely uncontested...no defenders in the way or running you down, no one rotating over to try to block the shot. Now think about how many times that actually happens in a game. Next to never? Exactly. Every time you go up, you don't know who will contest the shot and how they will contest it. So the majority of shots are contested...not simple, as you say. Oh...and your example...Devereaux Peters? She shot 55% for her career at ND. That's a high percentage, if you know basketball stats. Saying that success in high school equals success in college is insane. Following that logic, every kid who scores 28-30 in high school should easily go on to score 15-20 in college, right? But that isn't the case. Roles change....kids who were scorers in HS may be asked to be defenders, rebounders, or facilitators. The competition gets better...where a kid may have been the big dog on a team, now they're on a team with 11-12 players who are just as good as them, if not better. And the routine changes...where before, a kid went to school all day, had a couple of practices a week and 2 games, now they have class. Study hall. Film sessions. Practice. Traveling to and from games. Strategy sessions. And they still have to work out and shoot more on their own. Did I mention that they may have a shot coach telling them that their form is busted and they're trying to unlearn the habits that got them a scholarship in the first place, or a conditioning coach who is telling them they need to be thinner than they've ever been in their life? But nope...success is easy and a given, allegedly. And before you go bagging on Reimer, how about this: Mercedes Russell of Tennessee was the #1 player in Reimer's class. Averaged 25 points and 12 rebounds her senior year in high school. Last year in college? 6 points and 5 rebounds. Russell is out this year with foot injuries, but I've seen her play in person a couple of times. The girl is a beast. So since you don't know women's basketball, please stay away from the subject. And before you try to test my credentials on women's basketball, I've been watching it for the last 16 years or so. I've been heavily immersed in it for the past 6 years...ever since my daughter started playing club basketball. I'm at HS and college women's games all the time. I know a current WNBA player...not a sub, a starter...played her, and got my butt kicked. I know a handful of current D-1 players. Heck, I even know a former ND player who played for Muffet 8 years ago. So I think I might know a wee bit more about the women's game than you.

Saw this last night. Excellent movie. Hits close to home for me and probably a lot of people. I will just say that I have a close cousin who deployed 3 times to Iraq and Afghanistan, and I'm still waiting for him to come home. The physical body is here, but the goofy kid and wisecracking man he became....I'm still waiting on him to come home.

So now cops only profile for violent criminals...they never profile people and pull people over to catch them for drugs, DUI, or because they're a suspect in a robbery. Oh wait...you mentioned white guy in black neighborhood who was profiled. Contradict much? It's hard to factor percentage of the population when studies have already shown that a black offender is more likely to be charged with a greater crime than a white offender. But I'm sure you already knew that. You have gone out of your way to prove the statement "Whites commit crimes, but only blacks are criminals." Congrats.

@Echo88 - According to the FBI stats from 2011, white people committed 69.2% of the crimes in the US. Black people committed 28.4%. So if a officer was doing profiling according to statistics, he should be more suspicious of pulling over a white male than a black one, correct? Yeah...it doesn't work that way. Blame society for all of their problems? Like what...being charged higher interest rates on loans, or being outright rejected for them? Not getting jobs when they're the most qualified candidate? Being bypassed for promotions? Getting longer sentences for equivalent or lesser crimes than a white criminal? Not sure where you're going. As a white man, you're not profiled 24/7. You're not constantly followed around stores. You've never been detained because your resemblance to the actual suspect is just your skin color. If you're driving an expensive car, you're not pulled over because the car is believed to be stolen, even though there is no record of a car like the one you're driving being stolen. So of course you're okay with profiling! How big of you! @Corysold - so a forearm across the throat and applying pressure isn't a chokehold? Okay...let me do that to you and see if you don't cry out that I'm choking you. I would suggest this as a read. Its an interesting take that may resonate with some of you: http://www.renegademothering.com/2014/12/09/discovered-white/

What's weird is how none of you seem to get the meaning of the statement. "I can't breathe". Start by questioning this...why was a 29 year old police officer utilizing a maneuver banned for 21 years by the department he works for? And better yet...why did said officer and his fellow officers lie on their reports if they were applying correct force? Its funny how you think that if you can talk, you can breathe. Ever seen someone with asthma have a severe attack? They can talk, but they aren't getting enough oxygen. If the situation isn't rectified, they will lose consciousness and could die. The term. "I can't breathe" is symbolic of more than just Eric Garner. Its about all of the African American men who are perceived as a threat by police without doing anything wrong. Imagine living in a country like that...every last one of your actions is overly scrutinized. In essence, you can't breathe.

I can tell you why I don't feel disappointed. I saw a team that went from being blown out in a NC game to being a bad call away from knocking off the defending NC. I saw a defense that was supposed to be mediocre with all of the losses from graduation and injury handle an explosive offense and keep the game in reach. I saw an offense move the ball seemingly at will whether it was through the air or on the ground, despite all of the moving of positions. I know that even FSU can point at the scoreboard, deep down, they know they were whipped. And best of all, I know that this is a very young team. The best running back, and top 2 WRs are just sophomores, and there are good players redshirting and others in the next recruiting class.

Go buy a bag of skinless chicken breasts. Slice them lengthwise in half...thirds if they're huge. Put them in a bowl. Pour in milk, and add a bit of hot sauce, pepper, garlic and onion powder, and season salt. Cover the bowl with saran wrap and put in the fridge for a couple of hours before you get started. Overnight is the best. Now lets get ready. Dip 1/2 cup flour 1/2 cup cornstarch 1 teaspoon baking soda 1 teaspoon baking powder 1 teaspoon sugar 1/2 teaspoon salt 1 egg 2/3 cup ice water Sift together the dry ingredients and set aside. In a medium bowl, beat the egg slightly and mix with the ice water. Add a few drops of food coloring, if desired. Stir in the dry ingredients, stirring only until mixed; the mixture will be slightly lumpy. Set aside. Dredge 2 cups all-purpose flour 2 tbsps salt 1 tbsp seasoning salt 1 tbsp celery salt 1 tbsp pepper 2 tbsps dry mustard 4 tbsps paprika 2 tbsps garlic powder 2 tbsps onion powder 1 tsp ginger 1/2 tsp thyme 1/2 tsp basil 1/2 tsp oregano Sift and set aside. Pull the chicken out and let it start warming back to room temperature. Fill a skillet 2/3rds of the way up (or get your fryer ready to go) Batter 2 cups all-purpose flour 1 teaspoon salt 4 teaspoons baking powder 2 tablespoons white sugar 2 eggs 1 1/2 cups warm milk 1/3 cup butter, melted 1 teaspoon vanilla extract 2 tablespoons cinnamon In a large bowl, mix together flour, salt, baking powder, cinnamon and sugar; set aside. In a separate bowl, beat the eggs. Stir in the milk, butter and vanilla. Pour the milk mixture into the flour mixture; beat until blended. Put a handful of your chicken in the dip, then put a few pieces in the dredge. Make sure they're well coated. Check your oil and make sure it's hot. Put 3-4 pieces in the oil. Get your waffle maker heated(if you don't have one, go hit up Goodwill, a garage sale, Wal-mart..wherever...get one!) and lightly oil it, then ladle some of the batter on the waffle maker. When the chicken gets golden, pull it out. It should only take a few minutes. If you're using a skillet, you'll have to flip it when it gets golden on one side. The waffle should be done slightly before the chicken. Put the waffle on plate. Butter the waffle. Put the chicken on top of waffle. Pour syrup over everything. Done. If you want to get fancy, mix some yellow mustard, a bit of honey, and some cayenne pepper together for a bit of a kick. Drizzle that over the chicken.

He's just a kid..... Who is dumber that a sack of bricks. Racking felony after felony before you can even get out of high school? At this rate, the kid will be getting his GED instead of his actual diploma. He's spending more time in jail than he is in school.

It is badly worded, but the no answer is saying No, Barnett should have went to ND, because he's not as good as he appears and ND will get a better QB, plus other schools will not have as much interest in him.

The yes answer is saying that Kelly sucks and would have never got him to reach his full potential. The no answer is saying that Barnett screwed up, but that ND is in the position to land a better prospect for their needs and QB situation. So I would go with no.

Add in the fact that he signed several documents where he agreed to binding arbitration over his years as a owner, and his lawsuit is just public grandstanding. He and his lawyer are aware of it. I think they're just making this out to be a "big fight" that will last until a $2 billion dollar check shows up.

Be careful what you ask for. It could be a transgendered male who identifies as a lesbian.

Kareem is right though. In California, it is illegal to record someone without their consent, and from everything I've heard, her tone and questions imply Stiviano is baiting Sterling to say more. We can't condemn Sterling and just totally ignore that Stiviano may have broken the law herself. What Sterling said was wrong, but this chick is no dummy and knew her time in the spotlight was fading...a pending lawsuit to take back all of the stuff Sterling gifted her would have broke her just off of legal fees. So she drops this bombshell. It sounds like she worked out a long time ago to get this info, and with her role of being Sterling's "Archivist", she's trying to imply she had his permission to record him. Now she's got her own individual notoriety. Too bad that this type of attention will fade the moment the Clippers are sold to someone else. Then we'll all be subjected to V. Stiviano sex tapes. Yay.