|
Snaq took care of most of the logical inconsistencies, but...
"Now, you throw in a young guy in his twenties and you expect me to believe that there is no problems in the selection process!" What does this comment have to do with the college officials you spuriously use as examples? You are truly the king of non-sequitors!
"You expect me to believe that all is well and this guy earned his way in! You also want me to believe that this is not political." No, I want you to make a coherent argument, preferably one that incorporates logic and relevant examples.
"I have the solution though I doubt if anybody going to listen to me. Complete overhaul of the selection committee and term limits." The reason nobody here is listening to your solution is because you haven't provided a reasonable description of the problem -- innuendo, non-sequitors, sweeping generalizations, and biased half-truths do not convince the audience (except in politics). Furthermore, I was not aware that there was one selection committee for all HS playoffs in the USA. It should be easy to fix the problems if there's only one committee. If there are, as I suspect, at least 50 committees, then wholesale, national change will be difficult, though still none of my business.
__________________
He may be mad, but there's method in his madness. There nearly always is method in madness. It's what drives men mad, being methodical.
|
Sun Mar 04, 2007, 01:37pm
Hybrid Mode
