Football BCS

Again I see the BCS is trying to placate the fans who want a playoff system...

A PLAYOFF PLAN?

By LARRY LAGE

   The Associated Press

   The Big Ten, which helped squash the notion of a four-team playoff to crown a national champion in college football several years ago, is taking another look.

   BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock said Tuesday night that’s good news.

   “Our process is working perfectly,” Hancock said. “One of the good things about our process is that there’s no timetable so that a deliberate and thoughtful decision can be reached.

   “The tricky part is our 11 conference commissioners and the Notre Dame AD may have 12 different opinions about the direction we should go over the next six to eight months.”

   Hancock, who still expects a conclusion in July, said the group of BCS decision-makers will meet again at the end of this month.

   Michigan State athletic director Mark Hollis said all of the Big Ten athletic directors are comfortable exploring the possibility of a four-team playoff.

   “Four is better than two,” Hollis said.

   Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith agreed and said the discussions stem from feedback “that we need to do something different,” especially after the recent BCS title game between LSU and Alabama drew lower ratings than other championship games.

   “The fans have been loud and clear,” Smith said. “We also recognize that structurally there’s things that we want to try and change with the bowl system — how teams get in the bowls. It’s time to be curious about everything.”

   The BCS title game pits the nation’s top two teams based on poll and computer rankings. The Chicago Tribune reported Monday that one idea before the Big Ten calls for playing the two semifinal games on the campuses of the higher seeded teams, with the national championship held in a city awarded hosting rights — like the Super Bowl.

   The so-called plus-one format — two semifinals plus the title game — was proposed in 2008 by the commissioners of the Southeastern Conference and Atlantic Coast Conference. It was shot down by the leaders of the Big Ten, Pac-10, Big East, Big 12 and Notre Dame.

   “I am pleased to hear there is renewed interest in the plus-one format, the same format we introduced for consideration in 2008,” SEC Commissioner Mike Slive said in a statement to the AP. “There are many details that need to be considered and it is premature to be campaigning for any particular plus-one model.”

   The 11 Bowl Championship Series conferences have already met to discuss possible changes to the system starting in 2014. NCAA President Mark Emmert has said he supports a four-team championship playoff and is strongly against a 16-team format.    Emmert has also said there has been talk of using a Final Four model, a scenario which could have matched LSU against Stanford and Alabama versus Oklahoma State this season, with the winners advancing to the title game.

   Despite the Big Ten’s interest in a playoff, there is at least one big hurdle: The Rose Bowl, with its storied history to two of the nation’s biggest conferences.

   “The Rose Bowl is extremely important to Michigan State just as it is to every school in the Big Ten and Pac-12,” Hollis said. “There are more questions than answers about how any format would work, including where the games would be played and what the bowltype experiences would be like in a championship format.

   “My eyes are always open to explore all opportunities, but I don’t think we want to exceed 15 games.”

   Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon, who is open to any option that includes keeping the conference and Pac-12 tied to the Rose Bowl, said he’s not sure the plus-one model will please everybody.

   “I know a lot of people would love to see one more great football game, but I’m not sure this type of playoff will make it more fair,” Brandon said. “At some point, you have to draw the line. With four teams, there will be controversies about who those four teams should be because it’s usually not clear.”

   Smith said there are too many bowl games, lagging ticket sales and teams are already playing “too deep into January” with players who happen to be students, too. He had reservations about a playoff where students play back to back games.

   Still, he said there was a need to discuss the format now.

   “This is the window of time before we go and do something with another partner, or current partner, we don’t want to just do the same thing without trying to address some of those issues,” he said. “But if we ended up with a plus-one playoff, it would be exciting for fans but there’s a lot of issues around it.”

   Hancock has said 50 to 60 possibilities for various changes were presented during a meeting in New Orleans, where Alabama beat LSU in the BCS title game last month.


They still don't get it.  A four team playoff is not a playoff at all.  It's a four team game schedule.  If you want a playoff system go for it, don't piddle around with four teams.  Here's how:


Take the top 16 teams and have an 4 week playoff, or have a 2 week play off.  Four would be better cause teams could relax a bit before the next game.  Here's how it would work...


Week one:  Team 1 plays team 16
                  Team 2 plays team 8
Week two:  Team 3 plays team 15
                  Team...etc., until in 4 weeks you've reached the top two teams.


God, is it that complicated?  Can't be.  The bball guys have been doing it for years.  So has the NFL.  Let's make the BCS fair.

Gay Bashing in the Press

Just wanted to let you know that bigotry is alive and well in good ol' Nampa.

We shouldn’t be forced to accept gay behavior

   I am distressed that the socalled “gay community” continues to press for legislation which is really an attempt to get public acceptance of gay behavior.  [Gays could care less if you accept their behavior or not.  What they care about is equal treatment as human beings.]

   We have laws now which protect against discrimination in housing or employment based on gender or race. We can’t continue to add more specific additions to the laws already on the books.

   You cannot legislate every behavior without taking away the rights of the majority of the people. In my opinion, homosexual behavior is a choice [like heterosexuality, right?]  that carries with it some isolation from the majority of the people.  [I wonder when ol' Jon Tate 'decided' he was heterosexual?]

   I have great empathy for those who have chosen these paths and do not discriminate against them for their behavior. [You bigoted idiot.  Your first 2 paragraphs show you do discriminate.] This empathy does not extend to socializing with those who commit such acts. [Don't worry, you are definitely not their 'cup of tea.'  They wouldn't socialize with you if you asked 'em to.  They could see your ilk a mile away.]

   I see these actions as condemnation of our society. I do resent the effort being made to promote this behavior as being normal or acceptable to the majority of our citizens.  [Where did you climb out from under?  Nobody is trying to 'promote' any behavior.  The gays just want the same rights you enjoy Mr. Tate.]

   Jon Tate, Nampa


I'm real sorry IPT decided to print this guy's opinion.  I know for a fact IPT is not anti-gay in the least.  It just goes to show you that IPT will have the guts to print things that are odious to others just to keep us informed that these folks are alive and well and living under rocks along the mighty Snake River.  Mr. Tate is a bigot.  That's a given, but he is also a hate-filled person who has problems with his own sexuality, else why would he be gay bashing.  And if you asked him if he thought he was gay-bashing, he would deny it saying he's got nothing against gays except they should not walk the earth with us 'normal' people.  God, what idiocy.

More Republican Crap

Possible tax increases on table this year

   Taxation seems to be a topic of discussion every legislative session, and this session is no different.

   The one difference for this session is that the governor indicated in his State of the State Address that he was proposing a $45 million tax reduction. He did not specify what the reduction would look like but was leaving that up to the Legislature to come up with some ideas.

   Tax issues that will or could be brought forward this year include an increase in the cigarette tax that would raise the tax to $1.25 per pack.

   Cigarette taxes, also called sin taxes, seem to be a topic frequently. Those in favor of such taxes use the argument that cigarettes cause health-related problems that are a cost to society, and the increased tax will help to deter people, particularly youth, from smoking.

   Those on the opposite side will argue that a tax is a tax, and we should not be raising any taxes, especially targeting a specific item. There are some who might vote in favor of the increased tax if it were specified that the increase in revenue would be used for healthrelated issues and not go into the general fund.

   The issue of taxing Internet sales is one that has been mentioned again this year. It is not the first time it has been brought up, and depending on any action, may not be the last.

   The governor has indicated that Internet sales should be taxed, but he has not indicated that he would push the idea.

   This is an issue that elicits lots of discussion. Local businesses can be hurt because must charge sales tax and online retailers don’t, thus giving the Internet sellers an advantage. Internet sales are increasing each year, thus the state loses sales tax dollars.

   Some would argue that it would be a new tax, but others would argue that it isn’t, just one that is just not being collected.

   The Idaho Chamber Alliance supports efforts to collect Internet sales tax. They feel that Idaho businesses are being treated unfairly and the general fund is being adversely affected each year due to non-collection of sales tax on Internet sales.

   Local option sales tax is again being discussed by local entities. The Idaho Chamber Alliance supports local option sales tax authority for Idaho cities and counties. They feel that local citizens ought to have a voice in revenue generation for economic development and needs of the community.

   Some may recall a few years ago local option sales tax passed the House but did not make it out of the Senate. That legislation required a two-thirds majority vote to pass. The House has become more conservative since that vote, so I would expect nothing less than a similar piece of legislation, if anything is to make it out of the House. I would also anticipate that it might also be specific on what the revenue could be used for.

   A piece of legislation was introduced in the House State Affairs Committee that would require a two-thirds vote of both houses to raise taxes and fees. This issue will certainly raise debate, particularly since the temporary sales tax of a few years ago would not have passed under such conditions. This is a bill to watch.


I don't know how many times I've got to say this, but taxes go up when there is a Republican in the driver's seat.  Oh, they are sneaky alright, but the taxes always go up.  The argument that taxing internet sales is fair because the internet can out bid local companies cause they don't pay taxes is ridiculous.  You still pay shipping and the cost of shipping makes the merchandise just about the same cost as local costs.  And raising the sales tax?  It's always a "temporary" tax, isn't it?  Course once you are comfortable paying it, the 'temporary' goes away.  At least Democrats are not sneaky.  If they want to raise taxes they don't do it by cutting budgets, then raising taxes to make up the difference.  That's overt/covert lying.

Poor Poor Insurance Companies

Ads touting health care law stink

   I see a lot of ads promoting the “health” “care” “law.” One night, Channel 2 broadcast it 20 minutes apart. These are paid for by the Department of Health and Human Services, so they are using our money to try to convince us this is a beneficial law. Thank God someone is helping make sense of this law.  Horray for Channel 2.  Keep it up.

   The ad claims you can get a 50 percent discount on prescriptions when you’re in the “doughnut hole.” I wonder what’s the purpose of the “donut hole,” [the doughnut hole is the difference between the $2350 Medicare pays for and $3600.  The difference is the doughnut hole where one pays the 'real' price of the drug.] other than to make Medicare coverage complicated and hard to understand, or an excuse not to pay for the coverage you bought when the government confiscated medicare tax payments from your paychecks all your working life. And they have the nerve to accuse insurance companies of finding ways not to pay. Regardless,someone pays for the 50 percent discount. Drug companies, [Awww, those poor drug companies who make billions of dollars over and above the cost of their medicine costs.] I suspect. Government confiscated? your money out of your paycheck?  Would you like it back?  Then you can pay for your medication and hospitalization when you get old and infirm.  You want that?  Are you a complete idiot?

   You think that’s dandy? It takes 8-plus years of research, testing, complying with regulations to make a new medicine available. There’s no incentive to make new, more effective medicine if we allow the government to force drug companies to sell their product at a 50 percent discount [Let's say you're right--you're not--but say you are.  50% is still a ton of money.  And the Fed will pick up the difference...how?  You pay for it out of taxes just like everyone else.  You're burden is so small I doubt you'll even feel it, so stop bitching.] so that the government can claim the new “health” “care” “law” is doing something for us. Obama said the new law would make health insurance more affordable. My insurance premiums more than doubled [Drop the insurance company, they are gouging you...you have that right, you know.] right after the law “passed.” Everyone else I’ve talked with said theirs went up, too.  Is everyone else you know in the same company?

   This “law” is full of lies everywhere you look. We should hope our Supreme Court does the right thing and declares the whole thing unconstitutional.  Lies?  Everywhere you look?  Are you stupid?  If it was a lie, do you think the congress and senate would actually pass it?

   n Sheila Ford, Caldwell


Poor, poor insurance companies.  They have been gouging us for years.  Denying coverage at a whim.  Refusing coverage for others [preexisting conditions], etc.  And, of course your insurance coverage has increased.  You are paying for all those other people in your company and other companies who don't have insurance coverage.  And 8-years to get a drug on the market?  So what?  A manufactured pill probably costs a penny and they sell the damned thing for five dollars or more.  They make billions on their drug by selling it to us, then when the 12 year protections is up, they put it on the market with less strength and still make a bundle on it.  Who in the world feels sorry for drug companies?  Are you serious?  Ridiculous.\


Finally, I have actually read the law and there are no 'lies' in it.  People who cannot afford insurance can now get it.  And that's no lie!!

How True!

Ain't it the damn truth.

Medicaid

Emotions raw amid pleas for Medicaid funding

   BOISE (AP) — Emotions ran raw, tears flowed and hearts were touched, as crowds streamed into the Capitol auditorium to plead for lawmakers to match budget appropriations with Idaho’s pressing needs.

   The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee held the session Friday, to give the public its say.

   Some wanted $35 million in Medicaid cuts from the 2011 Legislature restored, including parents of children with developmental disabilities and mental health problems who must choose between which conditions should be treated.

   Others wanted Idaho to pay for a suicide hotline.

   Stephanie Clark, who was 14 when her mother killed herself, called it “an issue that affects generations.”

   Not everybody favored new programs or restoration of past cuts.

   Briana LeClaire of the Idaho Freedom Foundation suggested $125 million in tax cuts and dismantlement of the public education “monopoly.”


Are you serious?  Typical.  Let's take from those who can afford it less and can bitch less than any other section of society.  God, I hate the State of Idaho at times.  Run by idiots and rabid Republicans, it has become a desert of mindless decisions.  Take the money from the poor and disadvantaged so we can give it to the rich and privileged.  Typical bullying.  Let's vote these bastards out next term!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trickle Down Economics

How True!!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------