The NCAA is terrible, but I don't see how any replacement body will be noticeably better.
Think of Harbaugh out-working everyone with satellite camps, the SEC especially pushed the NCAA to stop them. With the push to pay players, the SEC was the most vocal about not paying players because they were the most successful at paying them under the table. The NCAA has no purpose and perpetuates terrible rules, but if a majority of schools want to push/break the rules for an advantage, SEC schools chief but certainly not alone among them, then any rule-setting organization that's run by those schools is going to be feckless.
This is the first time ever that Michigan has not been at least tied for the record for the most NCAA Division I Hockey Tournament championships.
From the big bang until 1948, Michigan was tied for the lead with all other primordial ooze and/or universities with 0. We then won the first, and after two more schools tied us with their own firsts, we got our second in 1950, and were not tied again until 2022 when Denver matched our 9 championships.
Our early dominance was so much that we got our 6th championship in 1956 before anyone else had 2, having won 6 of the first 9 championships.
In his defense, I think he was saying that soft-batch cookies shouldn't play for him, they should instead use the transfer portal. So someone transferring isn't necessarily a soft-batch cookie--but if someone is a soft-batch cookie they should go away via the transfer portal.
To his offense, or whatever the opposite of in his defense is, he's giving me Josh Gattis vibes. Like he's mad he wasn't feeling appreciated at Oregon, and is trying to burn bridges on his way out of town.
This is why I don't talk about Michigan alumni. If they cared about the university, they'd still be in Ann Arbor, attending classes or working for the university in some capacity.
After Juwan Howard's second year, I had the idea of doing a humorous comparison of Michigan's superstar alumni coaches, and awarding a winner in each category. I had a variety of categories loosely in my mind, but it's crazy how much similarity they had between their lives as superstar college players, solid pros, and broader some cultural impact (though clearly the Fab Five was much greater in that regard).
One category was going to be "best initials" with a tie for the winner.
Another was a "TV Cameo" category comparing the West Wing appearance to the Saved by the Bell appearance (winner: Howard for the better show in its prime, though its not as decisive since Harbaugh got to be himself while Howard had to pretend to be a Duke player).
If Warde said "I think we need to make a change" and the team he reports to pushed back, I get why he'd not make a move.
I don't get the difference between that and Warde saying "I think we need to stay the course" and the team he reports to pushing back and swaying him to fire Howard.
To me, in both cases, Warde has more or less made up his mind about what he prefers, but he doesn't feel strongly enough to go against the stream if there's a strong consensus in the other direction.
I learn so much on the board, I had no idea about the suing for fees thing. However, could the lawyer just turn it over to collections? Probably a pretty similar amount of hassle for the client without the lawyer actually having to sue?
5, unless the Lions are in the way. I'm not going to follow them closely--I don't really watch the NFL--but I'm appreciative to Harbaugh and want to see him continue to succeed. I was pulling for the Ravens this post-season as well, out of appreciation to John and the role he played in our success.
I wish our staff had stayed more intact, but I'm not going to get upset with a coach for assembling the staff he feels is best.
I mean, those are both intended to be humorous. The Western Journal appears as just a full-on propaganda site that puts stuff like this up to get readers.
Yeah, I have installed big-time fandom in two of my three kids, and the youngest is getting there, too. I'm out-of-state and thinking this may have been a poor financial decision on my part, but I love the place.
On a related note, I think that basically nobody pays sticker price, but I have no idea what kind of a discount is actually normal. Is it a trivial (couple grand off of $55k), decent percentage, etc? Are there any resources for making a guess about what would actually be paid?
That's awesome . . . but I'm really confused from the article about how Harbaugh revealed the gender. Was the doc only sending your letter to Harbaugh if baby was a boy, so a response meant it was a boy?
They re-spotted it at the original line of scrimmage (it had been further back after the kneel down) and put time (I think 12 seconds) back on the clock which was the same as before the kneel down. So I think Michigan must have called a timeout before the kneel down, but officials didn’t stop the play in time. In that case, the first kneel down didn’t count (didn’t really happen), and we kneeled down again.
I was hopeful that the new contract would signal Harbaugh staying here for a long time. Definitely disappointing if the rumor is true and we're not very clear that he's staying for the next year.
On the other hand, if looking every year and staying are part of the Harbaugh experience, after 3 years of Big Ten championships and playoffs, I guess I'm on board if that's just part of the experience. I mean, remember when he was hired and rivals all laughed that we'd be grumbling because he could never match our expectations for him and he'd be gone in 4 years anyways? Now he's the third longest tenured coach in the Big Ten. And whenever he decides to go, he'll be leaving Michigan in a much better place than when he started.
Does anyone really think TCU was one of the four best teams last year? Even after they beat Michigan?
The language of "best" is in their mandate, but they haven't followed that obsessively before. The committee probably did pick the four best teams, but I'm totally opposed to the idea that the most deserving teams shouldn't make the playoffs.
I think letting it play out should go with discussing after the play ends what the ruling on the field is, so it could still be declared incomplete on the field.
With 2 or 4 teams, a tougher schedule with more losses might knock you out, with 12 teams I don't think it hurts you as much. And even this year it goes both ways: if Texas didn't play a strong OOC schedule and beat Alabama, I don't think they're in the playoffs this year. Next year we have a gauntlet in the Big Ten, but I'm generally in favor of more real games.
I agree with this take, M, WA, and FSU don't need convincing wins, just wins. They are top-ranked unbeaten conference champions, and even a weak win is not going to keep them out. So then there's just one spot and as you argue, it's hard to put in one over another unless that team is Texas. I think this is the most logical result of Alabama winning, and I'd guess it's actually the one the committee would go with, although I'm not wagering anything valuable on that.
I think this is a crucial point. At Ohio State's peak under Meyer, they would be closer to even against top 5 teams, but judging a team by how well they do against the very best teams is going to look worse than how they are overall for just about everyone. If Day's a step back from Ohio State's peak, it would still make sense that he struggles against top teams and does well against everyone else.
I think there's no doubt that he's a step back from their peak. If he stays at Ohio State, I think it will be interesting to see what happens during the next few years. It's certainly possible that recruiting stays very strong, and OSU stays at roughly their current level, though probably another step or two back. Day will almost certainly start winning some of their big games, but probably not as much as he should with his talent.
But I think what's more likely is that recruiting takes a modest step back as well. And when he's no longer coaching a team that miles more talented than his opponent, I think he's in trouble, and OSU starts dropping more games against #6-15 teams. Which hurts recruiting more, and so on. Ohio State won't give him that much time, but I could very much see him looking like David Shaw where he's mostly able to maintain success but the base it's built on is crumbling.
From my perspective, you shouldn't base last year's 3/4 seeding on anything about those two teams. 1 and 2 were decided, and then once they knew OSU and TCU were the next two teams, they just avoided a Michigan-OSU rematch in the semis. If we had been given the #1 seed, they absolutely would have flipped OSU and TCU to avoid the rematch that way.
Those who stay will get to freely say every last thing they want to about an Ohio State team that fell 22 yards short, knowing that no comeback will suffice.
The smallest of nits, but I found this amusing. Am I correct in interpreting the argument as they fell 22 yards short because we picked them off at the 22? It's not like they ever had the ball at the 22 during the drive, or had a chance to catch it if Moore doesn't make the play.
That's like saying I was 90 feet away from the winning run when I got thrown out at first because I ground out to Ryan Day.
Indiana, but only because it was the first game I've ever taken my sons to. It was cold and wet but they loved every minute, which made me really happy. We were planning to bring my daughter (the youngest) as well, but left her with family when we realized the weather. Hopefully we'll be back with the kids before too long to see another!
The institution end-around to me feels very similar to the Stalions "infraction" (except for CMU if that was him).
There's an argument many have made that Michigan has not had any staff members at opposing games. The Big Ten is dismissing that argument out of hand--there is no question that Michigan has violated NCAA rules, per the Big Ten. I don't know if the argument will work for the NCAA, I think it probably won't, but the Big Ten deems it not worth discussing that Michigan may have violated the spirit of the rule but not the letter of it.
The Big Ten's argument that they are not punishing Jim Harbaugh, they are punishing the institution of Michigan by penalizing Harbaugh, feels very much the same as the above argument about Stalions. Penalizing a person who has not been shown to have done anything wrong is clearly violating the spirit of the rule, even if the Big Ten thinks they can get around the letter of the rule.
It sounded from the beginning like they didn't have these solidly; Michigan hiring multiple PI firms makes it sound like they're trying to fix that, but it's unlikely to have an immediate turnaround.
That's not how Harbaugh works: the winners do stadium stairs.
Harbaugh told the players when spring practice began that the unit that wins a drill or a competition will get the extra running.
Instead of running as a punishment, it became an incentive.
"He explained it well so I felt guys had a good attitude about it," U-M receiver Amara Darboh said Tuesday. "Only the guys that win get a chance to get better."
With a new coach there's rarely resistance anyway but this unconventional approach had an almost immediate effect.
"The first practice we lost and we watched the defense run," Darboh said. "At the end when we broke, we were like, that didn't feel good and just standing there and watching. You feel guilty a little bit, we lost and were just standing there. The next practice we came out and made sure we won and evened things out."
Here's the link, but I won't make it clickable due to freep: https://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2015/03/24/michigan-football-jim-harbaugh/70409924/
Why does it matter when you lose? If you go for two first and you don't get it, you're almost certainly going to lose. If you go for two second and you don't get it, you're almost certainly going to lose. The only benefit of the second scenario is that you don't realize you're going to lose.
To me, this is like getting a raffle ticket at a party that has a 1 in 1000 chance of winning. At the beginning of the evening, someone offers to give me a second raffle ticket, but they're going to tell me right then whether I win or lose. I'd argue it's better to take the raffle ticket and the slightly better odds of winning (albeit still very low). You're arguing that it's better to not find out because I'm probably not going to win, and this way I go all evening without realizing that I've lost.
That was one of my big take-aways from the letter--Michigan is willing to argue that it's not even clear that a rule was violated, which is not the impression I had gotten from previous reporting.
I was also impressed by the strength of the argument that the Big Ten simply cannot act under its rules, which is obviously important both as an argument to the Big Ten, but also to my understanding in asking a judge to intervene if the Big Ten tries to suspend Harbaugh.
If we call it intercepting signals, does that work? Stealing signals in a football game is not a universally condemned act, so the kissing analogy seems closer than stealing the car.
I'm not a fan of the NCAA at all, but I don't see any hypocrisy regarding penalizing the method. Yes, the NCAA is saying that stealing signals is allowed, but not when particular methods are used to do it. The Astros were an extreme example I think most of us agree on: if there's a runner on second, he can relay the signals to the batter, but you may not use video cameras in the outfield to signal the batter. It's not relaying information to the batter that's not allowed, it's the method.
I love that emphatic signal. You would think, normally, that he would watch to make sure that ball doesn’t come out. But he’s like, “nope, it’s Woodson, no way he’s dropping that, I’ve got to do my part to make this highlight even more awesome when it is watched for decades to come.”
Not just a distance away but part of another campus in the state system (University of Nebraska Omaha), which used to be accepted but is not anymore (in terms of counting those research dollars towards the flagship institution).
I'm not sure it was ever totally clear, but the impression was that it was changed to penalize Nebraska for leaving the Big 12.
Is there evidence that the policy was done to help a candidate? In the previous election, was the opposite policy (heavily covering hacked data) followed to help Trump? The outcome of each decision may have been better for one candidate or another, but the policies in 2020 were put in place in response to the media failures in 2016. The decision to take extra caution when data of questionable origin is released with the goal of hurting one candidate.
Even aside from the history, it is clearly reasonable to debate the ethics for a news organization to spread information almost certainly provided by a foreign government attempting to influence the election. I think it was clearly the right decision to not cover the leak breathlessly. I get that you can disagree with the decision, but it's hard to argue that there's not a really important ethical question.
On the other hand, Fox News has been clearly documented as knowingly lying to their viewers because their viewers didn't want to hear the truth, and telling the truth was hurting their bottom line. There's no debate about that ethical question, and thus the two situations are not remotely comparable.
Get rid of the foul-to-save-clock portion of basketball games. A close game with little time left is the best part of every other sport and it's almost unwatchable in basketball.
I'd do that by allowing the team that was fouled the option of running off the shot clock (so if there's 20 seconds left on the shot clock, they take those 20 seconds off the game clock). That way you can't save time by fouling. Probably only apply that when there's not much time left (maybe 2 minutes or under left in the game).
Recent Comments
The NCAA is terrible, but I don't see how any replacement body will be noticeably better.
Think of Harbaugh out-working everyone with satellite camps, the SEC especially pushed the NCAA to stop them. With the push to pay players, the SEC was the most vocal about not paying players because they were the most successful at paying them under the table. The NCAA has no purpose and perpetuates terrible rules, but if a majority of schools want to push/break the rules for an advantage, SEC schools chief but certainly not alone among them, then any rule-setting organization that's run by those schools is going to be feckless.
This is the first time ever that Michigan has not been at least tied for the record for the most NCAA Division I Hockey Tournament championships.
From the big bang until 1948, Michigan was tied for the lead with all other primordial ooze and/or universities with 0. We then won the first, and after two more schools tied us with their own firsts, we got our second in 1950, and were not tied again until 2022 when Denver matched our 9 championships.
Our early dominance was so much that we got our 6th championship in 1956 before anyone else had 2, having won 6 of the first 9 championships.
In his defense, I think he was saying that soft-batch cookies shouldn't play for him, they should instead use the transfer portal. So someone transferring isn't necessarily a soft-batch cookie--but if someone is a soft-batch cookie they should go away via the transfer portal.
To his offense, or whatever the opposite of in his defense is, he's giving me Josh Gattis vibes. Like he's mad he wasn't feeling appreciated at Oregon, and is trying to burn bridges on his way out of town.
Associate (of the) Head Coach for Chipotle Fetching.
This is why I don't talk about Michigan alumni. If they cared about the university, they'd still be in Ann Arbor, attending classes or working for the university in some capacity.
Churchill, but likely apocryphal unfortunately: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/07/04/churchill-preposition/
On a related note, I love this card that I gave to my English major sister-in-law:
I believe a past Prime Minister, no? I have always heard "up with which I will not put" attributed to Churchill.
After Juwan Howard's second year, I had the idea of doing a humorous comparison of Michigan's superstar alumni coaches, and awarding a winner in each category. I had a variety of categories loosely in my mind, but it's crazy how much similarity they had between their lives as superstar college players, solid pros, and broader some cultural impact (though clearly the Fab Five was much greater in that regard).
One category was going to be "best initials" with a tie for the winner.
Another was a "TV Cameo" category comparing the West Wing appearance to the Saved by the Bell appearance (winner: Howard for the better show in its prime, though its not as decisive since Harbaugh got to be himself while Howard had to pretend to be a Duke player).
I don't get the difference between that and Warde saying "I think we need to stay the course" and the team he reports to pushing back and swaying him to fire Howard.
To me, in both cases, Warde has more or less made up his mind about what he prefers, but he doesn't feel strongly enough to go against the stream if there's a strong consensus in the other direction.
I learn so much on the board, I had no idea about the suing for fees thing. However, could the lawyer just turn it over to collections? Probably a pretty similar amount of hassle for the client without the lawyer actually having to sue?
5, unless the Lions are in the way. I'm not going to follow them closely--I don't really watch the NFL--but I'm appreciative to Harbaugh and want to see him continue to succeed. I was pulling for the Ravens this post-season as well, out of appreciation to John and the role he played in our success.
I wish our staff had stayed more intact, but I'm not going to get upset with a coach for assembling the staff he feels is best.
Apparently if you weren't there (Iowa), Carcajous doesn't even consider it a game.
Joking aside, that was an extraordinary series of games, and I'm thrilled to have even made one (I'm out-of-state).
I mean, those are both intended to be humorous. The Western Journal appears as just a full-on propaganda site that puts stuff like this up to get readers.
Yeah, I have installed big-time fandom in two of my three kids, and the youngest is getting there, too. I'm out-of-state and thinking this may have been a poor financial decision on my part, but I love the place.
On a related note, I think that basically nobody pays sticker price, but I have no idea what kind of a discount is actually normal. Is it a trivial (couple grand off of $55k), decent percentage, etc? Are there any resources for making a guess about what would actually be paid?
That's awesome . . . but I'm really confused from the article about how Harbaugh revealed the gender. Was the doc only sending your letter to Harbaugh if baby was a boy, so a response meant it was a boy?
Yeah, but the bummer is that the Coaches’ Poll voted Alabama #1 as a retirement gift.
They re-spotted it at the original line of scrimmage (it had been further back after the kneel down) and put time (I think 12 seconds) back on the clock which was the same as before the kneel down. So I think Michigan must have called a timeout before the kneel down, but officials didn’t stop the play in time. In that case, the first kneel down didn’t count (didn’t really happen), and we kneeled down again.
I was hopeful that…
This.
I was hopeful that the new contract would signal Harbaugh staying here for a long time. Definitely disappointing if the rumor is true and we're not very clear that he's staying for the next year.
On the other hand, if looking every year and staying are part of the Harbaugh experience, after 3 years of Big Ten championships and playoffs, I guess I'm on board if that's just part of the experience. I mean, remember when he was hired and rivals all laughed that we'd be grumbling because he could never match our expectations for him and he'd be gone in 4 years anyways? Now he's the third longest tenured coach in the Big Ten. And whenever he decides to go, he'll be leaving Michigan in a much better place than when he started.
Did someone ask for a metaphor of what is happening to Coach Third Base?
Does anyone really think TCU was one of the four best teams last year? Even after they beat Michigan?
The language of "best" is in their mandate, but they haven't followed that obsessively before. The committee probably did pick the four best teams, but I'm totally opposed to the idea that the most deserving teams shouldn't make the playoffs.
I think letting it play out should go with discussing after the play ends what the ruling on the field is, so it could still be declared incomplete on the field.
With 2 or 4 teams, a tougher schedule with more losses might knock you out, with 12 teams I don't think it hurts you as much. And even this year it goes both ways: if Texas didn't play a strong OOC schedule and beat Alabama, I don't think they're in the playoffs this year. Next year we have a gauntlet in the Big Ten, but I'm generally in favor of more real games.
I agree with this take, M, WA, and FSU don't need convincing wins, just wins. They are top-ranked unbeaten conference champions, and even a weak win is not going to keep them out. So then there's just one spot and as you argue, it's hard to put in one over another unless that team is Texas. I think this is the most logical result of Alabama winning, and I'd guess it's actually the one the committee would go with, although I'm not wagering anything valuable on that.
Haha, username definitely checks out!
That said: surely NeverPunt is not opposed the opponent punting?!?
I think this is a crucial point. At Ohio State's peak under Meyer, they would be closer to even against top 5 teams, but judging a team by how well they do against the very best teams is going to look worse than how they are overall for just about everyone. If Day's a step back from Ohio State's peak, it would still make sense that he struggles against top teams and does well against everyone else.
I think there's no doubt that he's a step back from their peak. If he stays at Ohio State, I think it will be interesting to see what happens during the next few years. It's certainly possible that recruiting stays very strong, and OSU stays at roughly their current level, though probably another step or two back. Day will almost certainly start winning some of their big games, but probably not as much as he should with his talent.
But I think what's more likely is that recruiting takes a modest step back as well. And when he's no longer coaching a team that miles more talented than his opponent, I think he's in trouble, and OSU starts dropping more games against #6-15 teams. Which hurts recruiting more, and so on. Ohio State won't give him that much time, but I could very much see him looking like David Shaw where he's mostly able to maintain success but the base it's built on is crumbling.
From my perspective, you shouldn't base last year's 3/4 seeding on anything about those two teams. 1 and 2 were decided, and then once they knew OSU and TCU were the next two teams, they just avoided a Michigan-OSU rematch in the semis. If we had been given the #1 seed, they absolutely would have flipped OSU and TCU to avoid the rematch that way.
I think the committee will work to create one last Big Ten/Pac Ten Rose Bowl, no matter who the Pac Ten champion is.
I've got to…
I love those.
I've got to say, though, my BPONE was going strong until there were all 0s on that clock.
The smallest of nits, but I found this amusing. Am I correct in interpreting the argument as they fell 22 yards short because we picked them off at the 22? It's not like they ever had the ball at the 22 during the drive, or had a chance to catch it if Moore doesn't make the play.
That's like saying I was 90 feet away from the winning run when I got thrown out at first because I ground out to Ryan Day.
Is there nothing that man can't do?
1. Double post for your first time ever.
2. ???
3. Profit!
1. Hire a PI to find evidence that Michigan is doing the same thing you're doing.
2. Leak the evidence to the press.
3. Complain to the Big Ten until they suspend the opposing coach.
4. Lose to the interim.
5. ???
6. Profit!
Indiana, but only because it was the first game I've ever taken my sons to. It was cold and wet but they loved every minute, which made me really happy. We were planning to bring my daughter (the youngest) as well, but left her with family when we realized the weather. Hopefully we'll be back with the kids before too long to see another!
In fairness, the goal was never to get people to watch Rutgers, just to make NYC cable providers have to carry BTN.
The institution end-around to me feels very similar to the Stalions "infraction" (except for CMU if that was him).
There's an argument many have made that Michigan has not had any staff members at opposing games. The Big Ten is dismissing that argument out of hand--there is no question that Michigan has violated NCAA rules, per the Big Ten. I don't know if the argument will work for the NCAA, I think it probably won't, but the Big Ten deems it not worth discussing that Michigan may have violated the spirit of the rule but not the letter of it.
The Big Ten's argument that they are not punishing Jim Harbaugh, they are punishing the institution of Michigan by penalizing Harbaugh, feels very much the same as the above argument about Stalions. Penalizing a person who has not been shown to have done anything wrong is clearly violating the spirit of the rule, even if the Big Ten thinks they can get around the letter of the rule.
It sounded from the beginning like they didn't have these solidly; Michigan hiring multiple PI firms makes it sound like they're trying to fix that, but it's unlikely to have an immediate turnaround.
That's not how Harbaugh works: the winners do stadium stairs.
Here's the link, but I won't make it clickable due to freep: https://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2015/03/24/michigan-football-jim-harbaugh/70409924/
Why does it matter when you lose? If you go for two first and you don't get it, you're almost certainly going to lose. If you go for two second and you don't get it, you're almost certainly going to lose. The only benefit of the second scenario is that you don't realize you're going to lose.
To me, this is like getting a raffle ticket at a party that has a 1 in 1000 chance of winning. At the beginning of the evening, someone offers to give me a second raffle ticket, but they're going to tell me right then whether I win or lose. I'd argue it's better to take the raffle ticket and the slightly better odds of winning (albeit still very low). You're arguing that it's better to not find out because I'm probably not going to win, and this way I go all evening without realizing that I've lost.
I'll edit my comment out, since I agreed with you and then posted at the exact moment the 3-game suspension was leaked.
This is a common logical fallacy.
A team not filming opponents would be terrible
- does not mean -
A terrible team must not be filming opponents
MSU may very well have been filming opponents and still be terrible.
That was one of my big take-aways from the letter--Michigan is willing to argue that it's not even clear that a rule was violated, which is not the impression I had gotten from previous reporting.
I was also impressed by the strength of the argument that the Big Ten simply cannot act under its rules, which is obviously important both as an argument to the Big Ten, but also to my understanding in asking a judge to intervene if the Big Ten tries to suspend Harbaugh.
It did, it clearly said CFP teams will not be eligible to use it.
If we call it intercepting signals, does that work? Stealing signals in a football game is not a universally condemned act, so the kissing analogy seems closer than stealing the car.
I'm not a fan of the NCAA at all, but I don't see any hypocrisy regarding penalizing the method. Yes, the NCAA is saying that stealing signals is allowed, but not when particular methods are used to do it. The Astros were an extreme example I think most of us agree on: if there's a runner on second, he can relay the signals to the batter, but you may not use video cameras in the outfield to signal the batter. It's not relaying information to the batter that's not allowed, it's the method.
I love that emphatic signal. You would think, normally, that he would watch to make sure that ball doesn’t come out. But he’s like, “nope, it’s Woodson, no way he’s dropping that, I’ve got to do my part to make this highlight even more awesome when it is watched for decades to come.”
I disagree, you should be averaging a post-a-minute.
Not just a distance away but part of another campus in the state system (University of Nebraska Omaha), which used to be accepted but is not anymore (in terms of counting those research dollars towards the flagship institution).
I'm not sure it was ever totally clear, but the impression was that it was changed to penalize Nebraska for leaving the Big 12.
He's a righty in the couple of videos I watched. But the image isn't flipped in the lefty photo because the number and text are not reversed.
Is there evidence that the policy was done to help a candidate? In the previous election, was the opposite policy (heavily covering hacked data) followed to help Trump? The outcome of each decision may have been better for one candidate or another, but the policies in 2020 were put in place in response to the media failures in 2016. The decision to take extra caution when data of questionable origin is released with the goal of hurting one candidate.
Even aside from the history, it is clearly reasonable to debate the ethics for a news organization to spread information almost certainly provided by a foreign government attempting to influence the election. I think it was clearly the right decision to not cover the leak breathlessly. I get that you can disagree with the decision, but it's hard to argue that there's not a really important ethical question.
On the other hand, Fox News has been clearly documented as knowingly lying to their viewers because their viewers didn't want to hear the truth, and telling the truth was hurting their bottom line. There's no debate about that ethical question, and thus the two situations are not remotely comparable.
Get rid of the foul-to-save-clock portion of basketball games. A close game with little time left is the best part of every other sport and it's almost unwatchable in basketball.
I'd do that by allowing the team that was fouled the option of running off the shot clock (so if there's 20 seconds left on the shot clock, they take those 20 seconds off the game clock). That way you can't save time by fouling. Probably only apply that when there's not much time left (maybe 2 minutes or under left in the game).
Even their ads have bad grammar.