Vick
-
So, trying to bring this discussion to a close, I dearly hope Mr. Bragg, since all lives do indeed matter, isnt making bad choices that will hurt him and his chance(s) to become successful at whatever he sets his mind to. I’ve been hard on him, partly because I have a 28yr old, and an 18yr old, & I just hate to see kids making dumb mistakes, especially the kind that permanently close doors/opportunities for the kid. I hope he turns it around.
RCJH
-
In my layman’s opinion, it would by definition NOT be an ILLEGAL conspiracy to use the rules LEGALLY to stop someone or group in any field of activity. A team plays defense on the court, because the rules allow it. It is not a conspiracy to play defense. Similarly, it would not be a conspiracy to seek out KU violations of rules in order to defend against KU setting a record number of consecutive conference titles. Ergo it would not be conspiracy theorizing to speculate that someone else might be doing what you were concerned about. Instead, it might be called using reason.
The mil-int-media complexes reputed half century long misinformational and mind control use of “conspiracy theory” continues to confuse a lot persons.
I hope we have done nothing wrong warranting taking away a title, if we are lucky enough to set the record.
Rock Chalk!
-
Right on.
I could be wrong… but it just looks like he hasn’t been selective about his inner circle. Hang with a bad crowd and bad things happen.
He really needs our team leader/captain on his arse 24/7. From this moment forward he doesn’t have a personal life… he has a team life… so he is always with another responsible player.
I suspect that he lacks maturity and the ability to say “no” so he needs someone around, 24/7, to say no for him.
-
@drgnslayr said:
I fought girls off every second I was in college. At least… I did in my dreams.
I am sure that in your dreams you no doubt failed to fight them off… Unless you were the odd duck who fantasized about not “gettin’ some”!
-
@jaybate-1.0 said:
Similarly, it would not be a conspiracy to seek out KU violations of rules…
Ah, but it would be illegal to conspire to obtain documents protected as private under the law, or to inveigle (thank you, 30 Days To A More Powerful Vocabulary, circa 1971-72) persons with a duty not to disclose confidential matters to do so.
-
Isn’t a conspiracy by definition illegal? I am not sure you can have a “legal conspiracy”…if it is legal it is not a conspiracy, right?
-
Does anyone remember Vicks short interview not to long ago? He said Frank always calls to check on him, if he goes to the mall Frank calls to see if he made it. And then again to see if he got home. Hmmmm maybe now we know why.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Well, I think it is legal to conspire, as you dream by the fire, and face unafraid the plans that you made, walking in a winter wonderland…
-
Context appears significant. In a legal context it would appear conspiracy would refer to pursuit of an illegal end . Outside a legal context, I would have to guess that maybe the CIA’s attorneys told them that outside a legal context they could use “conspiracy” and “conspiracy theory” in media to mean anything they wanted. But it’s just a guess.
-
Check out the time line
-
Yes, but why would some one commit a felony to prove we violated some eligibility regulation?
Seems an improbable tradeoff.
Hypothetically speaking, the minute they did that then they would be at our mercy.
-
This timeline is not an issue I am qualified to explore fruitfully.
I try to explain things without assumptions of illegalities of conspiracy and let the legal experts handle the rest.
-
Seriously… I was a late bloomer. But I finally blossomed and was stung by my loving bee!
-
“Isn’t a conspiracy by definition illegal? I am not sure you can have a “legal conspiracy”…if it is legal it is not a conspiracy, right?”
To “conspire” is totally legal. That is why you hear charges against a conspiracy explained with a “tail” behind it.
“…conspiracy to commit a felony”
“…conspiracy to defraud the government”
“…conspiracy to kill the President”
I believe only certain, specific conspiracies are crimes in themselves. Conspiring to kill someone (the President or anyone else) is a crime.
You can conspire to do something legal… for example… you conspire with your wife this morning to share a picnic in the nice weather today.
In the dictionary “conspire” is defined first around doing something wrong, evil or illegal. This definition is first since it is usually USED in context with something wrong, evil or illegal.
The second definition is more general… “to act or work together toward the same result or goal.”
-
“He said Frank always calls to check on him, if he goes to the mall Frank calls to see if he made it. And then again to see if he got home.”
That is interesting. I don’t recall reading that.
Maybe Frank is more of a leader for this team than I give him credit for!
-
@drgnslayr probably saw it on spectra sports, old twc
-
Source below which includes Vick’s comment about Frank!
http://www2.kusports.com/news/2017/jan/17/tom-keegan-lagerald-vick-interesting-book-quiet-co/?print
-
@drgnslayr yeah there is a lot of stuff we don’t see. From hearing Bill talk, I think he views Frank as the leader despite his non vocal nature.
-
By definition the term conspiracy applies only when more than one individual act together towards an illegal end. If you are acting towards a legal end then it is not a conspiracy…you agree to go to the movies, you team up…you plan…you schedule…you decide…but you don’t conspire…unless he individuals are minors and plan to sneak In to watch an X-rated movie…which is illegal. Using conspiracy when the end is legal is done frequently but still a misuse of the word.
-
verb (used without object), conspired, conspiring.
- to agree together, especially secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal: They conspired to kill the king.
- to act or work together toward the same result or goal.
However… we just don’t hear it in use for anything besides evil.
-
I think Bill sees this as “Frank’s team.”
I think basketball mimics the culture that surrounds it.
Bill is from Oklahoma. People in the Midwest tend to be “independent minded.”
Bill definitely believes in “team defense” and “team offense” but to just a point. His hardcore support for M2M defense is based most on guys being held “personally accountable.” I’m not trying to say there is an extreme difference, but it just feels like he is a blended philosophy of independent responsibilities along with team responsibilities.
Zone defense is very much a dependent, team-flavored defense. I believe one of the positives of playing zone is that it may help players get into more of a team concept and it might even promote higher motivating moments as a team. I think it feels more like “team defense” over M2M, even though there has to be weak side help to some level to be successful at M2M. And, of course, a high-pressure M2M can involve double-team traps, etc.
This is a bit abstract in thinking.
I’m curious how people in here feel and think about it?
-
@drgnslayr I think your view on zone defense is pretty accurate. M2M is entirely predicated on how well guys can guard one on one. If they can’t then M2M isnt for them.
I want Bill to go to it when he has to, but only then. If we can get a W tonight, Saturday and our two road games next week with M2M, then do it. I feel as though we should only use it to throw our opponent off guard at critical moments, such as in an elite eight game. I know this team has the potential to be a really good zone team, but the element of surprise is always something to consider. Now if we are down ten tonight and we can’t get a stop, then of course we try something different. But until then, I say only use it situationally.
-
@HawkChamp I think if we have to protect ll we go zone
-
@Crimsonorblue22 right, but only if we are in danger of losing. If we maintain a 5-10 point lead through the second half, then there is no need to switch.
-
Actually, the best case scenario for tonight might be that we have LL get in foul trouble and we substitute players and shift defense around to accommodate the situation. It’s good practice and experience for us moving forward because we will always battle with post depth the rest of this year.
I want to see Dwight and Mitch rack up some minutes. They need to face tall, quality bigs.
If we can do all of that and still nail the “W” that sounds PERFECT to me!
