The Price of #Winning

[Tractor]

I dig this plan.

Phase 1: We need to be the first school to implement slut scholarships. If you are any of the following, you're chances of getting admitted to CU increase exponentially.
1. Pacific Islander
2. Eskimo
3. Slut
4. Native American

Phase 2: Every recruit that comes on an official visit gets off the bus and picks up a bunch of

Sees some tatas. He then picks his favorite 6 girls, and puts them in his rented

They all do some blow, throw some cash around, get drunk, go to Taco Bell/Wendy's and commit to us on the spot at 6pm the next day. PROFIT!!!

 

[manhattanbuff]

What is your gaol here manhattan?

1. I am not a fan of another team or someone trying to make CU look scummy. I am an alum of Colorado and love CU football.
2. I read the message boards and see disappointment related to our current recruiting efforts. I look around the country and see the difference between the teams who recruit very well and those who do not. The ones who keep getting the best players lavish them with extra benefits like cash, girls, and cars. If you read the SI article from Andy Staples about this issue, his tongue is in his cheek; but, his words should be read as gospel.
3. A couple of posters have said that the 24 hour news cycle has made it more difficult for teams to cheat. Agreed. Look past the headlines. How do you think Ohio State or Oregon will do this year? How many wins will Auburn have in a rebuilding year? Better yet, in spite of the fact that they were steeped in controversy, Auburn went on to dominate the hardest conference in college football and win a national championship.
4. A couple of posters have said that CU cannot recover if we are mired in controversy. I'm not so sure about that. As I see it, we are currently doing what we can to rebuild the program "the right way". Particularly in today's environment, that will mean that recruiting will not turn around as quickly as we'd like. Wins won't come as easily as we'd like. Eventually we will start to be a more consistent winner -- give our current staff a full class. It'll happen. The people we have are too good at coaching to not have us start getting more wins than losses.

BUT, there will come a day when we are actually "in" on a recruit at the level of Bush, Newton, or James... More than likely, someone around that player will demand payment for handing over the kid. If we pay the kid's handlers in cash and somehow it comes to light because someone didn't get their palms greased, what happens? Not the death penalty. The precedent is already set. Maybe we lose some scholarships? Maybe we don't go to a bowl game for 1-2 years? None of it's worse than the Dan Hawkins era.

I'm reminded of the Grace Hopper quotation "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission" when I look at college sports. It's big business built around not paying the help. How have the best teams stayed the best in the arms race of recruiting? They have facilities; they use hotties to recruit; they show the right people enough cash; they hook up players with boosters who'll take good care of them. As CU fans, it's clear from this thread and the "I'm disappointed with our recruiting" threads that we have not come to grips with this reality.

What's my point? Winning in college football has a big price. When we won big at CU, we played dirty with the best of them. We stopped and our teams have gotten worse over the last twenty years. Yeah, we've had some flashes of awesome. But, we have exactly zero national championships and exactly one conference title to show for it.

My goal in starting this thread is to ask a philosophical question: are we willing to pay the devil for a shot at the glory of being a National Champion in football yet again? It seems like most of you have said no. That's fine. Just know what that decision means: we will never play for a National Championship in anything other than skiing and cross country.

 

[Idot Buff]

Are we willing to pay the devil for a shot at the glory of being a National Champion in football yet again?

We paid Danny and he is gone forever....next question, please.

 

[Del]

Not worth it. Colorado is not big enough to survive a huge NCAA hit like Ohio State and USC are. I'd rather see that money go to the football excellence fund and help getting some needed facilities built. We have the coaches in place that are already getting blue chip guys to come visit and give us a hard look. If we had good facilities we might be in the discussion all the way til Feb.

 

[ThndringHerd]

Trying to decide if Manhattanbuf is Creatini pulling our leg or Dan Hawkins drunk-posting under a nom-de-plume.

 

[RalphieSpeaks]

I dig this plan.

Phase 1: We need to be the first school to implement slut scholarships. If you are any of the following, you're chances of getting admitted to CU increase exponentially.
1. Pacific Islander
2. Eskimo
3. Slut
4. Native American

How does one prove to the school that they are #3? Sure anyone can say they are but maybe they are just looking for a free ride?

 

[dply]

How does one prove to the school that they are #3? Sure anyone can say they are but maybe they are just looking for a free ride?

I can test that.

 

[Darian3Hagan]

I can test that.

[video=youtube;EYlDbv7MqE8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYlDbv7MqE8[/video]

 

[Buffsoldier]

1. Pacific Islander
2. Eskimo
3. Slut
4. Native American

Pics of #3 or GTFO

 

[DeNiro]

I can test that.

Let me know if you are hiring assistants.

 

[Buffsoldier]

Let me know if you are hiring assistants.

[video=youtube;tLXytukNlFM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLXytukNlFM[/video]

 

[Burrito]

Let me know if you are hiring assistants.

He needs a fluffer.

 

[manhattanbuff]

Trying to decide if Manhattanbuf is Creatini pulling our leg or Dan Hawkins drunk-posting under a nom-de-plume.

:lol:

None of the above. As I've stated repeatedly, I'm an alum of CU in Boulder and love CU football.

Hawkins is not the devil. If he were, he'd still be coaching our team because he would've won a road game or two.

Look -- it doesn't take too much looking around to see that the best teams somehow got there based upon shady deals made with uncles, mentors, coaches, street agents, scouts, parents, and audacious kids. A coach or two may get the boot; but, the program endures. Ohio State is still going to beat our asses in Columbus. Matt Barkley will still lay a beating on our secondary like Carson did the last time USC rolled into Folsom. LaMichael James is going to get a couple hundred yards rushing and at least two TDs.

I suppose allbuffs.com isn't the place to ask big questions about underlying problems and the expectation of a winning program without "extra" support. Keep your eyes open. College football is big business. The winners are not the clean and well run programs. The winners have always and will continue to play dirty and fiercely bend the rules.

 

[dply]

I suppose allbuffs.com isn't the place to ask big questions about underlying problems and the expectation of a winning program without "extra" support. Keep your eyes open. College football is big business. The winners are not the clean and well run programs. The winners have always and will continue to play dirty and fiercely bend the rules.

It is a little strange that you just joined and you have only posted in this thread asking us if we should cheat. I won't question your allegiance since you said you are a buff fan but you do see why we might be skeptical right?

 

[Burrito]

:lol:

None of the above. As I've stated repeatedly, I'm an alum of CU in Boulder and love CU football.

Hawkins is not the devil. If he were, he'd still be coaching our team because he would've won a road game or two.

Look -- it doesn't take too much looking around to see that the best teams somehow got there based upon shady deals made with uncles, mentors, coaches, street agents, scouts, parents, and audacious kids. A coach or two may get the boot; but, the program endures. Ohio State is still going to beat our asses in Columbus. Matt Barkley will still lay a beating on our secondary like Carson did the last time USC rolled into Folsom. LaMichael James is going to get a couple hundred yards rushing and at least two TDs.

I suppose allbuffs.com isn't the place to ask big questions about underlying problems and the expectation of a winning program without "extra" support. Keep your eyes open. College football is big business. The winners are not the clean and well run programs. The winners have always and will continue to play dirty and fiercely bend the rules.

Which are you? Cause you're clearly pushing an agenda.

 

[Darian3Hagan]

When did you graduate manhattan?

 

[Buffnik]

It is a little strange that you just joined and you have only posted in this thread asking us if we should cheat. I won't question your allegiance since you said you are a buff fan but you do see why we might be skeptical right?

Well said.

Also, whether there are people here willing to make $100 handshakes or not, it's not exactly something that someone would admit to if he had a lick of sense. In addition, AllBuffs is here for fans to support CU athletics and tries to discourage activities that would get the program into another scandal. So there are logical limits to how much this "big issue" is going to be discussed.

Yes, the programs that give extra benefits gain advantages. But they also pay prices. Texas is supposedly a very clean program. So are Michigan and Notre Dame, among others. They are all-time great programs that secure some of the best recruits in the country year after year. Do they cheat? I have no way of knowing. But I think it's one hell of an assumption to make that all the successful programs are cheating and that CU needs to become a big time cheater in order to get back to being an elite program.

 

[manhattanbuff]

Which are you? Cause you're clearly pushing an agenda.

My agenda is to have CU again win a National Championship in football. To be honest, I don't know if it's "worth" the sacrifice; but, I sure do know how great I felt when I saw our team ascend to the mountaintop of football. It's been a long, hard fall the last twenty years. Don't you all agree?

Why did I join this site recently? A buddy of mine told me about it. I like that it's free. I think it's weird paying for a membership to chat online about CU football.

Why did I post this thread? CU football is something I really want to see do well again. My point to discuss something that I see coming to the forefront of college football: the teams who win big really bend (and often break) NCAA rules to get there. Anyone who reads www.sportsbybrooks.com has probably seen the stuff about the Auburn Tigrettes. Every sports fan knows about how silly the reply is that Cam Newton turned down over $100K to be reunited with one of college football's dynamic coaches in order to play for free. The Ducks are mired in a scandal because their best player and a really dynamic kid from Temple, TX had a good relationship with a "scout". Since Jim Tressel took over at Ohio State, no team has been more consistent a winner. Yet, his best players all had financial hook-ups with people many say he introduced to those players. Need I continue? Because, unfortunately, the stories will keep going because players and the people around them want to get paid. HS kids like feeling baller when a hot college girl gives it up to seal a recruiting trip.

This site contributes to this phenomenon in its own way. It makes stars out of children by ogling their stats and offers. Rivals charges how much per month to talk about the recruitment of kids? The kids and the adults who wish to exploit their talents want in on the financial bonanza that is college football.

Intuitively, it may sound like getting our hands dirty as boosters and fans of CU football is somehow wrong or foreign to our nature. That somehow the only people who'd stoop to such lows are unknown others. Don't want to do it? That's fine -- don't. The questions I've been posing are ones we must answer when we think about what we expect from our football team. My expectations are low because I do think that our new coaches still have their ideals in tact. They see themselves as educators and coaches. They're willing to ensure that the students go to class. They'll work the kids hard in practice. Their process will be a slow one. The examples of LaMichael James, Cam Newton, Reggie Bush, and Terrelle Pryor go a long way to show that the most talented kids don't come without a price.

You may not like what I have to say. It doesn't change the hard truth of what I'm saying: the programs who win high stakes college football believe that "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'".

 

[manhattanbuff]

Well said.

Also, whether there are people here willing to make $100 handshakes or not, it's not exactly something that someone would admit to if he had a lick of sense. In addition, AllBuffs is here for fans to support CU athletics and tries to discourage activities that would get the program into another scandal. So there are logical limits to how much this "big issue" is going to be discussed.

Yes, the programs that give extra benefits gain advantages. But they also pay prices. Texas is supposedly a very clean program. So are Michigan and Notre Dame, among others. They are all-time great programs that secure some of the best recruits in the country year after year. Do they cheat? I have no way of knowing. But I think it's one hell of an assumption to make that all the successful programs are cheating and that CU needs to become a big time cheater in order to get back to being an elite program.

We should discuss these issues neutrally and publicly. As fans, I think it's important that we address the values we place on the process of achieving success for the team we love so dearly.

The examples of Michigan and Notre Dame are really illustrative of my point: top flight kids don't care about tradition. They care about getting their piece of the pie. Michigan has been awful for the last decade. Notre Dame have the sweetest deal in the BCS and haven't played in BCS games much. Texas' supposedly clean program? They haven't gotten caught yet. Having the highest grossing college athletics department in the country doesn't hurt their chances of escaping too much criticism.

Do I want to see CU get in trouble? No. Do I want to see CU win? Absolutely. You are right: big teams who give extra benefits gain advantages like recruiting the best players and attaining high rankings. They get paid. What's the cost? That's the question of the thread. Yes, we want to win. But, are we willing to pay the price of admission? Most respondents seem to answer "no" to that question. In that case, be prepared for more losses than wins over the next few years.

 

[Buffnik]

We should discuss these issues neutrally and publicly. As fans, I think it's important that we address the values we place on the process of achieving success for the team we love so dearly.

The examples of Michigan and Notre Dame are really illustrative of my point: top flight kids don't care about tradition. They care about getting their piece of the pie. Michigan has been awful for the last decade. Notre Dame have the sweetest deal in the BCS and haven't played in BCS games much. Texas' supposedly clean program? They haven't gotten caught yet. Having the highest grossing college athletics department in the country doesn't hurt their chances of escaping too much criticism.

Do I want to see CU get in trouble? No. Do I want to see CU win? Absolutely. You are right: big teams who give extra benefits gain advantages like recruiting the best players and attaining high rankings. They get paid. What's the cost? That's the question of the thread. Yes, we want to win. But, are we willing to pay the price of admission? Most respondents seem to answer "no" to that question. In that case, be prepared for more losses than wins over the next few years.

I was talking about recruiting top players. What you do with them is outside the issue of whether you can get the top players without cheating. Do you deny Michigan and Notre Dame recruit well?

Also, you're assuming facts not in evidence and expect people to go just accept your worldview as the basis for a heady discussion. You don't know that everyone is cheating. We do know that there are several high profile programs that did so. There's no disputing that. But that does not prove that they all do.

And let's look at the 4 biggest examples:

Auburn: booster allegedly paid off a top prospect's dad. Definitely a recruiting advantage if true.

USC: agent who wanted Bush to sign with him once he was eligible gave benefits to the family, Bush refused to sign or pay him back, and USC got nailed. Where was the advantage to USC?

Ohio State: players traded gear for tats after they signed and Tressel didn't want to lose a championship season over it. may have been other stuff going on with a car dealership, but that's not proved yet. Not sure whether advantage was gained since these were benefits after signing. Maybe from the standpoint of current players telling prospects how good they've got it, so most likely an advantage if the car thing is true.

Oregon: paid a street agent for his influence with a player. Definite recruiting advantage.

So how do we have this discussion if I reject your premise that a program has to be dirty in order to get the players needed to win a championship?

Michigan's record when Lloyd Carr was there running a clean program: 5 Big 10 championships in 13 seasons (won or shared), 12 top 20 finishes (6 top 10), overall record of 122-40, 5 BCS bowl games.

With Rich Rod, who we know bent rules: 0 Big 10 championships in 3 seasons, 0 top 20 finishes, overall record of 15-22, 0 BCS bowl games.

Seems to me like building a culture that players, fans and alumni take pride in is the recipe for long-term success... not cutting corners. And if you try to introduce that into a good culture, it fails (at least in this example).

 

[FChairbanks]

manhattan, i think every buff fan on this board agrees with your goals for the program. most of us appear to disagree with you that the path to greatness rests on how we can promote our program's merits related to ass, cash, and cars. maybe that is altruistic but you recall that we are not too far removed from a national media blitz that nearly killed us. nobody wants to see that again.

personally, i think the ncaa sucks. their rules are focused on their own revenue and promoting the "haves" while keeping their thumb firmly up the ass of the "almost-haves" and the "have-nots"...

the system needs to change, imho...

also...unrelated...why did you drop the last f from your moniker?

 

[Burrito]

My agenda is to have CU again win a National Championship in football. To be honest, I don't know if it's "worth" the sacrifice; but, I sure do know how great I felt when I saw our team ascend to the mountaintop of football. It's been a long, hard fall the last twenty years. Don't you all agree?

Why did I join this site recently? A buddy of mine told me about it. I like that it's free. I think it's weird paying for a membership to chat online about CU football.

Why did I post this thread? CU football is something I really want to see do well again. My point to discuss something that I see coming to the forefront of college football: the teams who win big really bend (and often break) NCAA rules to get there. Anyone who reads www.sportsbybrooks.com has probably seen the stuff about the Auburn Tigrettes. Every sports fan knows about how silly the reply is that Cam Newton turned down over $100K to be reunited with one of college football's dynamic coaches in order to play for free. The Ducks are mired in a scandal because their best player and a really dynamic kid from Temple, TX had a good relationship with a "scout". Since Jim Tressel took over at Ohio State, no team has been more consistent a winner. Yet, his best players all had financial hook-ups with people many say he introduced to those players. Need I continue? Because, unfortunately, the stories will keep going because players and the people around them want to get paid. HS kids like feeling baller when a hot college girl gives it up to seal a recruiting trip.

This site contributes to this phenomenon in its own way. It makes stars out of children by ogling their stats and offers. Rivals charges how much per month to talk about the recruitment of kids? The kids and the adults who wish to exploit their talents want in on the financial bonanza that is college football.

Intuitively, it may sound like getting our hands dirty as boosters and fans of CU football is somehow wrong or foreign to our nature. That somehow the only people who'd stoop to such lows are unknown others. Don't want to do it? That's fine -- don't. The questions I've been posing are ones we must answer when we think about what we expect from our football team. My expectations are low because I do think that our new coaches still have their ideals in tact. They see themselves as educators and coaches. They're willing to ensure that the students go to class. They'll work the kids hard in practice. Their process will be a slow one. The examples of LaMichael James, Cam Newton, Reggie Bush, and Terrelle Pryor go a long way to show that the most talented kids don't come without a price.

You may not like what I have to say. It doesn't change the hard truth of what I'm saying: the programs who win high stakes college football believe that "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'".

Thanks for the thoughtful response. Maybe I'm naive, but I like the idea of winning right. I think what I put in bold in your response says it all. You don't even want to pay for a membership for a fan sight, but you support buying a championship? Those ideas conflict. If some booster goes out of their way to slip a player some cash, whatever, but to institutionalize the idea (and I realize this is a little over dramatic) literally starts tearing at society's moral fiber. I can't abide it. It's like being a fan of the guy with loaded dice. It doesn't make you a fan, it's makes you a pussy, cause you're only willing to root for the guy that has the odds stacked in his favor. Being a fan means taking the highs with the lows.

 

[GregInArlington]

Paying players and providing improper benefits is the dumbest idea i have ever heard. Nothing like some good "lack of institutional control" to get you back to the top.

 

[manhattanbuff]

manhattan, i think every buff fan on this board agrees with your goals for the program. most of us appear to disagree with you that the path to greatness rests on how we can promote our program's merits related to ass, cash, and cars. maybe that is altruistic but you recall that we are not too far removed from a national media blitz that nearly killed us. nobody wants to see that again.

personally, i think the ncaa sucks. their rules are focused on their own revenue and promoting the "haves" while keeping their thumb firmly up the ass of the "almost-haves" and the "have-nots"...

the system needs to change, imho...

also...unrelated...why did you drop the last f from your moniker?

Responding to a few messages...

1. FChairbanks -- I was limited to twelve characters when I registered. The system wouldn't let me have the final f.

2. Burrito -- I've been a CU fan for as long as I can remember. I've seen plenty of highs and mostly lows. In my view, we are not playing in a fair dice game. What we're doing is ponying up our dough to a table wherein the only winners seem to be the ones with the loaded dice. Eventually, you get tired of throwing your money away since every time you bet, it's only paid modestly or you crap out. Wanting to play with the big dogs doesn't make anyone a pussy. It makes them ambitious.

3. GreginAustin -- paying players sure worked out swimmingly for other teams. Yeah, they're being investigated or even on probation; but, they keep raking in sweet recruits and are or will be playing for titles. As this trend continues, what shall we do? In my view, what it means is that we shouldn't expect too much out of our program because the teams against whom we compete are busy bending or breaking the rules to maintain unfair advantages.

 

[Burrito]

Responding to a few messages...

1. FChairbanks -- I was limited to twelve characters when I registered. The system wouldn't let me have the final f.

2. Burrito -- I've been a CU fan for as long as I can remember. I've seen plenty of highs and mostly lows. In my view, we are not playing in a fair dice game. What we're doing is ponying up our dough to a table wherein the only winners seem to be the ones with the loaded dice. Eventually, you get tired of throwing your money away since every time you bet, it's only paid modestly or you crap out. Wanting to play with the big dogs doesn't make anyone a pussy. It makes them ambitious.

3. GreginAustin -- paying players sure worked out swimmingly for other teams. Yeah, they're being investigated or even on probation; but, they keep raking in sweet recruits and are or will be playing for titles. As this trend continues, what shall we do? In my view, what it means is that we shouldn't expect too much out of our program because the teams against whom we compete are busy bending or breaking the rules to maintain unfair advantages.

I don't know man. You're not talking about CFB anymore, by committing to that direction it's pro, or semi-pro or whatever you want to call it. I appreciate your even tone in your responses. Welcome to the site. I guess I'm pretty biased. I will watch pro football, but I'm not a fan.

If that's the direction a "semi pro" conference is headed to "play with the big dogs", I'd probably be a lot less interested in that type of football. That mindset, especially when it's not endorsed by the governing bodies rewards cash and poor morals. I can't be a fan of that.

 

[manhattanbuff]

I was talking about recruiting top players. What you do with them is outside the issue of whether you can get the top players without cheating. Do you deny Michigan and Notre Dame recruit well?

Also, you're assuming facts not in evidence and expect people to go just accept your worldview as the basis for a heady discussion. You don't know that everyone is cheating. We do know that there are several high profile programs that did so. There's no disputing that. But that does not prove that they all do.

And let's look at the 4 biggest examples:

Auburn: booster allegedly paid off a top prospect's dad. Definitely a recruiting advantage if true.

USC: agent who wanted Bush to sign with him once he was eligible gave benefits to the family, Bush refused to sign or pay him back, and USC got nailed. Where was the advantage to USC?

Ohio State: players traded gear for tats after they signed and Tressel didn't want to lose a championship season over it. may have been other stuff going on with a car dealership, but that's not proved yet. Not sure whether advantage was gained since these were benefits after signing. Maybe from the standpoint of current players telling prospects how good they've got it, so most likely an advantage if the car thing is true.

Oregon: paid a street agent for his influence with a player. Definite recruiting advantage.

So how do we have this discussion if I reject your premise that a program has to be dirty in order to get the players needed to win a championship?

Michigan's record when Lloyd Carr was there running a clean program: 5 Big 10 championships in 13 seasons (won or shared), 12 top 20 finishes (6 top 10), overall record of 122-40, 5 BCS bowl games.

With Rich Rod, who we know bent rules: 0 Big 10 championships in 3 seasons, 0 top 20 finishes, overall record of 15-22, 0 BCS bowl games.

Seems to me like building a culture that players, fans and alumni take pride in is the recipe for long-term success... not cutting corners. And if you try to introduce that into a good culture, it fails (at least in this example).

I had a response to this message sent over last night. Apparently, it was lost.

1. I do deny that Michigan and ND recruit well. Over the last 5-6 years, their recruiting classes have only been propped up by subscriber based recruiting services. I look at what they produce on the field. It hasn't been anywhere near elite. You can chalk it up to coaching. I chalk it up to the fact that the best players have better opportunities elsewhere.

2. Thankfully, this isn't a trial. So far, the only evidence of winning in recent memory proves my point. You haven't given any evidence to support the idea that "winning the right way" is feasible in today's environment of college football. That's hard to prove (much in the same way that proving EVERY winner is a cheater). I'm just looking at the trends in the winner's circle.

3. The Lloyd Carr example is really illustrative of my point. You fail to mention why, in spite of the record you correctly cite, Michigan fans chased his ass out of town: Jim Tressel. The name "Lloyd Carr" became a punch-line to the question "do you know what Jim Tressel drives?". The Vest did lose his job because he couldn't tie all of the loose ends together. Ohio State will endure because they're still loaded with tons of awesome players. Check back with me in a few months after the beating their scrubs will administer on our starters. They're still going to compete for a Big 10 (now 12) title. BTW, Rodriguez didn't pay players. He held practices that were too long. He pissed people off because he wasn't a "Michigan Man". It seems to me that the people at Michigan want their cake and eat it too. They want a "clean program," but they also hate losing to the cheaters.

4. I'm a little confused about your assessment of USC. Are you saying that the Pete Carroll USC teams were clean, except for a non advantage gained from the Reggie Bush stuff?

 

[manhattanbuff]

Perhaps the question of this thread ought to be posed differently. Would you choose to be on probation for a 2-3 years in exchange for a 4-5 year run with one national championship and multiple BCS appearances?

And yes, I know you'd rather not have to make the choice. But, if you did have to chose, what would your choice be?

 

[rodrigo]

Perhaps the question of this thread ought to be posed differently. Would you choose to be on probation for a 2-3 years in exchange for a 4-5 year run with one national championship and multiple BCS appearances?

And yes, I know you'd rather not have to make the choice. But, if you did have to chose, what would your choice be?

No. Because that's simply not the type of society I want to live in. You couch your logic in objectivity and cold rationalism but in the end the Darwinian world you claim is inevitable will swallow you whole.

 

[Burrito]

Perhaps the question of this thread ought to be posed differently. Would you choose to be on probation for a 2-3 years in exchange for a 4-5 year run with one national championship and multiple BCS appearances?

And yes, I know you'd rather not have to make the choice. But, if you did have to chose, what would your choice be?

I'd rather not be a little bit prego.

 

[GregInArlington]

My view is that it is getting extremely hard to do things under the table these days without getting caught. With more high profile cases than ever, I think these recruits will start dishing dirt on programs that offer them or their friends extra benefits. Now is not the time to start - I think we missed the boat.