if you research Pat's "recruiting" from the early early days, people might find things to argue with you about how she was so way above reproach. Some squirrelly things were a popping! Especially with the transfer players she found.
if you research Pat's "recruiting" from the early early days, people might find things to argue with you about how she was so way above reproach. Some squirrelly things were a popping! Especially with the transfer players she found.
Haven't recruiting rules changed over the years? I think, in the earlier years, transferring was much easier and with fewer restrictions as to playing time. Can't apply yesterday's actions to today's rules for comparison. It wasn't even NCAA in the early years.
It isn't that I can't. It's that I won't. It is impossible to argue with stupid people. It is impossible to argue with unreasonable people. I won't waste my time arguing with you. I could, but I won't. Learn the difference.
Your whole existence on this board, as you have stated a number of times previously, is to call out stupid people with your caustic tone. So, no, the problem isn't that you don't respond to "stupid, unreasonable people", it's that you have been confronted with your own faulty statement and have no way to counter them. So, instead, you crawl back under that bridge, waiting for the next time you can come out and, hypocritically, tell someone else how stupid they are.
But, again, try and respond to the evidence in front of you that demonstrates that this isn't a tougher, more competitive sport than it was ten years ago. You know, something a little more than "it's obvious" to smart people, like you fashion yourself being.