Wrestleknownothing

Despite how credible the Starocci accusations seem I would think there would need to be charges at a minimum before the NCAA got involved.

Isn't that an NCAA thing? Only Davis is under NCAA perview.

Clearly they all happened. But I am of the opinion that the fifth one is irrelevant for deciding Mt. Rushmore status. And now I feel a little icky about the other four.

You must have read a different thread than I did.

Don't drag me into this unseemliness.

I was just looking at that. Zero Takedown Matches In the two years prior to the rule change (2022 -2023) there were 13 matches where the winner had 1 point (i.e. no takedowns). In the two years since the rule change (2024 - 2025) there have been 76 matches where the winner had 1 or 2 points (20 with a single point, 56 with 2 points). One Takedown Matches In the two years prior to the rule change (2022 -2023) there were 51 matches where the winner had 2 or 3 points (i.e. one takedown). In the two years since the rule change (2024 - 2025) there have been 352 matches where the winner had 3, 4, or 5 points. Even if you expand the 2022-2023 scoring to include 2, 3, or 4 points for the winner, based on the assumption most 4 point matches involve one TD, one or two escapes, and zero or one riding point, the total is still only 281 matches. No matter how you look at it there has been a substantial uptick in zero (+485%) or one takedown matches (between 24% and 590%). I think by any metric it is clear that the 3-point takedown has had the opposite effect to what was intended.

It is hard to take anything you say seriously when you do not know the definition of the words you use to make your arguments. Almost like someone who spent his time playing video games instead of going to school.

That was not skipping. That is holding back. You really have zero idea what you are talking about, but boy it never stops you from talking.

Skipping a grade is the OPPOSITE of what you are talking about. You have even confused yourself.

We don't care. You care. You care sooooo very much. Some might say obsess. Some might find that more weird than skipping a grade.

Your AI is hallucinating (the AI industry's attempt to rebrand "making shiit up"). There is no way 20% are 15 or under.

It is equally gross that people continue to give him information so that he can squeeze in.

You are assuming a frictionless world. But in reality they deny first and count on the insured not having the will, the means, or the knowledge to sue to enforce their rights. And they play the numbers. If they deny Ben, and everyone like Ben, then maybe Ben will sue and win, but the rest won't. Net win. It is a cynical, but effective strategy.

And those are just 2024-25 numbers. Per The Athletic, Caleb Williams' estimated NIL/endorsements for his final 2 seasons was $10 million.

Are you really trying to claim you have not seen credible statements that the vast majority of all NIL money goes to football, and that QB's, WR, and DE's get the vast majority of that? Who is being naïve now?

It doesn't give raw numbers because the author doesn't have any. It doesn't measure variation in outcomes among groups. It measures variation in expectations among groups. Those are two VERY different things. And it states BIPOC expectations are 1.6x higher than white athletes. Nothing to do with outcomes. And the gap in expectations cited was $400 between men and women based on an $800 expectation for men. What they measure is not even rounding error. I did not mention the others because after clicking on this one I did not feel the need to click on the others. One bad example was enough. I have cited nothing of my own because the only claim I am making is that the claim you made is not supported by the study you cited.

Worried? I choose to brag when I hurt his feelings. And they are very delicate feelings.

Because the study has no information on what they receive. And because the study is massively under-represented in the sports that receive the most. Another point the author makes is that for non-revenue sports it is important to have a social media presence, but that does not seem to matter for revenue sports. The obvious reason is that with a huge television presence, revenue sport athletes do not need social media to cash in. Then it comes down to what positions are most valued. Quarterback, wide receiver, rush lineman. So whatever the intersection of racial mix and on-field production for those positions are, is the real determinant. Any study that does not cover or account for those things is deeply flawed.

they got pinfalls over on that X thing?

Pat Mineo is bad for the sport. @PMineo22, if this is you, I wanted to make sure you knew my thoughts on the topic as I am not on Twitter.

Why would you want to?

Your first link specifically says: "Even though this study demonstrates BIPOC athletes are involved with NIL deals at higher rates than white athletes, it is unclear if that means they are having the same level of “success.”" Another damning point about this study is it does not come close to representing where the NIL $s are spent. While there are some basketball players (7% - 8th most by sport) and a handful of football players (2.1% - 16th most), it basically ignores where the money is actually spent. Finally, it is a study of expectations rather than actual deals.

The story says he was 17. Signed while in the Dominican, but suing under California laws. They are alleging predatory tactics, but no detail behind that.

Tatis is now suing to get out of his deal with BLA. The updated figures in the story are that he was paid $2 million up front in exchange for 10% of future major league earnings. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/45571919/padres-fernando-tatis-jr-sues-big-league-advance-void-future-earnings-deal-signed-minor-leaguer Not sure how the House settlement will impact BLA's NIL plans.