RJWGoBulls

NCAA Championship

Compared to last season, I would be happy with the team making the conference tourney, we gotta make baby steps and that CRM is that man to do that

5-4 in the 7th, Hit batter, Got batter out, Lined into the gap and scored

Bulls Win

Still 4-4 heading into the bottom of the 7th

4-4 top of 7th, 2 out, runners on corners

UCF 2 run HR, 4-3 USF 1 out top of 7th, None on

4-1 Bulls after the 6th

USF takes the lead on a passed ball in the 2nd inning

I agree the 16 months is extremly aggressive. Heck it has taken 5 years to build the new wembley stadium, and there is still no guarantee that it will be done by next may, 80k capacity and alot more fancy that the Meccano construction kit, but still...these things take time to build

8-0 End of the 4th

Rain Delay after 3 Innings, still 6-0 BCC....Its not an official game yet so all would not be lost if it is postponed for the day

Game tracker http://www.ncaasports.com/softball/womens/gamecenter/boxscore/13/03

Make that 12-2, 2 outs top of 4th

8-2 USF top of third, 2 outs, At least 5 runs have come with two outs

In February, NBA commissioner David Stern was "optimistic" that owners and players would reach a deal on a new collective-bargaining agreement and avoid a nasty lockout. Recently, Stern downgraded his mood from optimistic to "hopeful." Wednesday, his deputy commissioner, Russ Granik, told ESPN.com that if the National Basketball Players Association doesn't change its negotiating strategy soon, a lockout is coming. The NBA announced in a statement Wednesday that it suspended negotiations with the union and no further meetings were scheduled. Granik claims the union recently reversed positions on several key issues. "The issues that the union has backed away from in the past few weeks will prevent us from reaching an agreement," Granik said. "A deal can't be reached with the union's new positions on all of these points. How can we have further negotiations?" The current collective-bargaining agreement expires June 30. With no negotiations scheduled, does that mean a lockout is inevitable? "We're six weeks away from having to look at that prospect," Granik said. "I don't want to make predictions. But, the situation is alarming." Why the sudden change from optimism to alarm? According to the league's statment, "At the conclusion of a bargaining session on Sunday, April 17, we thought we were very close to a deal, with only a few items remaining to be compromised. On April 19, a day after the Players' Association met with a group of player agents, we were informed that the Players' Association could no longer agree to a previously committed five-year rule on length of contracts. "Then, last week, after promising a written proposal to form the basis of a new agreement, the union instead advised us orally that it needed to backtrack on several other essential terms that had already been resolved." NBA union chief Billy Hunter questioned the league's tactics, calling the approach "repugnant and offensive." "This was the same approach used by the league seven years ago," Hunter told ESPN. "At that time, the word was that [agents] David Falk and Arn Tellum and others were actually orchestrating and managing the negotiations. I thought it was repugnant and offensive at that time, and I think it's even more so now – the fact the inference is that me, as a black man, cannot operate an institution such as the union without having some white man oversee and legitimate whatever it is I'm supposed to be doing." Tuesday, ESPN.com reported the details of that meeting between the agents and Hunter, with SFX agent David Bauman saying, "Billy put us on the spot." "He wanted to know if we had his back, whether we'd tell our players the same thing that we were telling him," said Bauman, whose firm represents more players than any other agency in the NBA. "We all stood up, every one of us, said our names and said we'd reject the offer. The deal the NBA is offering the players right now makes absolutely no sense. I've told my clients that. Every one of them agrees that the deal that's on the table is a bad one." The agents are especially concerned about several major issues. The biggest is the owners' insistence that guaranteed contracts be considerably shortened. Currently, players can sign a contract for a maximum of six or seven years, depending upon whether the player is signing with a new team (six years) or his current team (seven years). The owners have been trying to get that rolled back to three and four years. Three other issues have become sticking points: 1) the owners' proposal to reduce the amount of annual raises in a contract from 10 percent to 5 percent; 2) a "super luxury tax" that would more harshly penalize teams that spend more than a certain predetermined threshold; and 3) the proposed minimum age requirement of 20 years old. The league's release implied that the agents might have taken control of the process. Granik said he didn't know why the union reversed itself on the issues after the meeting. "I don't know why," Granik said. "After I read your column and from other things that I heard, it appears to be a possibility that the agents are responsible for what happened here. I don't have personal knowledge of this." "Regardless of why, they've been backing up on half a dozen things. When you're backing off points that have already been agreed to, it's impossible to make a deal." While the Players' Association had no comment on the league's latest release, a players' source said he was shocked by the league's public announcement. "Stern has been saying for months that nothing is agreed to until the entire agreement is agreed to," the source told ESPN.com. "That's the nature of collective bargaining. How can they say we agreed to anything unless the whole deal was agreed to?" In the NBA's press release, the league contended the players reneged on an agreement to reduce the maximum length of contracts to five years. When pressed on the point, Granik conceded that "agreed" might not be the right world. "As a matter of law, nothing's agreed to until it's all agreed to," Granik said. "As a practical matter, the way you reach agreement is that you eliminate issues and put them to the side." Still, don't be surprised if talks begin soon. Both sides say they aren't that far apart on key issues and that a deal can be worked out in time. "I'm still hopeful," an NBA league source said. "At the end of the day, both sides really want to get a deal done. A lockout is the worst-case scenario. No one really wants it to happen. Hopefully, after the dust settles, people will start making up." If a lockout is imposed and stretches into the fall, many arenas around the country that are home to basketball and hockey teams could go completely dark. The NHL still hasn't settled its own lockout that started last September and wiped out the season – the first time a North American sports league lost a full playing year to labor strife. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&id=2063343&CMP=OTC-DT9705204233

It seems like it is going to be Joel Glazer's plaything with help form his brothers Edward and Bryan

Amen Collin! One thing to note, we dodnt get knocked out of Europe by an inferior side, it was AC Milan, who are in the final to be played next Wednesday against the thieving scum that is Liverpool, so to be knocked out of Europe by the team (hopefully) about to become champions aint all bad. But yeah what is bad is losing to the likes of Norwich, who just got relegated, and Portmouth, who just avoid relegation. There is still hope for the future but a BIG turning point is about to occur which will be the guideing force for the future, it all depends how we replace the older players. We have two of the brightest stars in Europe (Ronny and Rooney) and the best striker (Ruud) but it comes down to finding a solid keeper and we just dont have one, unlike Chelski who have two! You lose a lot less games when the other team doesnt score!!! There is hope but it seems to be diminishing fast

Just so long as they dont mess around the day of the WVU game!

I am with CJL on this one, if this is who he feels is best for the position within the constraints that he faces then he has given the job to the best available, what more can he do? Pluck money out of thin air to go and chase some highly regarded OC?

Thats the hope but as the Leeds fiasco only occured a couple of years ago it is fresh in the fans minds (esp cause leeds are the big rivals) and it has them spooked. If Glazer wasnt coming in with the HUGE amounts of debt he has needed to create in order to buy us I would have thought there wouldnt be as much opposition to the move, esp if he was the Roman Abramovich type of billionnaire who was bought Chelsea with his own cash and was willing to spend money as required, (he has spend over £200m on players in 2 years) something Glazer wont be able to match. Glazer might be a shrewd businessman but many fans feel he is going to run the club for the good of his profits not for the good of the club.

MM - That is quite a good comparison but the oil sheik would be someone without a vast amount of personal wealth other than that tied up in other businesses who had to borrow a third of the cost to buy it but then make this borrowing the ownership of the club and then make the club (the fans) pay it back and not be his personal responsibility. Trip - Yes we COULD just wait and see what happens but there is a terrifying precident of a premiership club who had a large amount of borrowing that the repayments could not be kept upon. This forced the club to offload virtually all their top players at cut prices because the needed to cut the wage bill in order have money available to cover the interest payments, to supplement income they had to sell and lease back their ground and training ground. The club inquestion (Leeds United) crashed from perrenial top half of the premiership with appereances in the European Cup semifinals to the championship/divison 1 (whatever they are calling it atm). Currently they are untertaking a total rebuilding programme having removed the chairmen who caused the problems. This is what we dont want to occur so if we can nip in in the bud before it occurs all the better

I am not sure but what is guaranteed is that now he has over 75% of the club the amount he has borrowed will be transfered to the club an become its problem not his, therefore it is likely that ticket prices will rise in order to cover this cost. I cannot remember the exact figure but the loan has taken out will cost something like £25m a year in interest, the clubs profits last year were about the same, how can that be good for the club? The £25m profit figure was only reached with the team reaching the quater final stages of Europe and getting the TV money that goes with it, what happens if we dont achieve the same? Sell a player to makeup the difference?

Glazer controls Man Utd ESPN Soccernet.com News Services LONDON -- Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner Malcolm Glazer took control of Manchester United on Monday by increasing his stake in the world's richest soccer club to more than 75 percent. Man United fans protest against Malcolm Glazer's takeover bid.(burn an effigy of the man) (NealSimpson/Empics) Glazer bought more shares to take his ownership level to 75.70 percent by the end of Monday's trading, Glazer's Red Football Ltd. said in a statement to the London Stock Exchange. With 75 percent, Glazer can place his personal debt on United's books and take the club off the stock exchange and into private ownership. Manchester United has been listed on the stock exchange since 1991. The NFL, which usually frowns upon cross-ownership, isn't sure if its rules would prevent Glazer from owning a foreign club. The league's finance committee will discuss it during spring meetings in Washington next week. Glazer is expected to submit a formal document to shareholders on Wednesday. Reaction to Glazer's takeover has been mostly negative and defiant. Fans fear Glazer will sell off the club's 67,000-seat Old Trafford stadium and raise prices. They also oppose foreign ownership. Fans groups are calling for a boycott of Man United sponsors and planning demonstrations at the FA Cup final against Arsenal on Saturday in Cardiff, Wales. "We won't do anything that endangers safety, but they may have to draft in the army to police the match," said Oliver Houston, a vice chairman of Shareholders United. "We are calling on all supporters to wear black in Cardiff on Saturday," said Mark Longden of the Independent Manchester United Supporters Association. "If they can get hold of black flags, they should wave them because it represents what is happening to the club." The group is also calling on fans not to renew their season tickets, to cancel subscriptions to Manchester United's in-house television station, and boycott sponsors Vodafone, Nike, Budweiser and Audi. Financial analysts said Glazer could soon raise his stake to 90 percent. At that level, remaining shareholders would be required to sell their stocks to Glazer. Glazer told the stock exchange Friday he would borrow $490 million to fund the $1.47-billion takeover. Glazer said the bid also included $503 million of his own money, and another $509 million to be generated by issuing preferred securities to large investors. Glazer's ownership reached 56.9 percent on Thursday after he bought out joint majority shareholders J.P. McManus and John Magnier, Irish racehorse owners. He previously owned 28.1 percent of the club. Glazer is not the only current NFL owner to take more than a passing interest in soccer. Kansas City Chiefs owner Lamar Hunt owns 3 MLS teams: The Kansas City Wizards, Dallas Burn and Columbus Crew. He also owned the Dallas Tornado of the old NASL. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft owns MLS' New England Revolution and is believed to be backing a consortium that might buy into Liverpool of the English Premiership League. The 64-year-old tycoon is evidently keen to add a Premiership franchise to his portfolio. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=333598&cc=5739

An esteemed moderator of this fine board!