Cal on Grad Transfers - Bad for the "Kids"

[butchna]

So, more information is better, until you decide it's not. Seems there are arbitrary limits to your care for "the product" or the information.

Look, if this is all just baseless opinion, that's fine. Then don't pretend it's fact, or people will ask what you're basing it on, which is evidently nothing.

This is my opinion. It's well grounded. You disagree as is your right. Sorry you're not as reasonable as me.

 

[NashVol11]

Cost is when you have money EXPENDED. They don't have it yet so it doesn't COST them anything. Better players surrounding great players is a benefit to those players careers. Sorry you can't accept differences in opinions.

Failure to receive something you otherwise would receive is still a cost. Like I said, this is semantics.

So your angle is that one-and-done leads to better supporting casts, and therefore helps star players. You alluded to it before, but I don't see why it's so hard to just come right out and say it, rather than rambling about Grant Hill. I don't agree, obviously, but it's an interesting theory

 

[butchna]

Failure to receive something you otherwise would receive is still a cost. Like I said, this is semantics.

So your angle is that one-and-done leads to better supporting casts, and therefore helps star players. You alluded to it before, but I don't see why it's so hard to just come right out and say it, rather than rambling about Grant Hill. I don't agree, obviously, but it's an interesting theory

Grant Hill is an example of risk on the OWNERS side. Thought it was a nice touch, but it rang hollow with you. What you refer to as alluded was clearly stated...the better the product, the more revenue to share. All's I've ever maintained.

 

[NashVol11]

The transfer issue is about to become a much hotter topic if Gonzaga wins.