Allen Iverson isn’t broke by any definition!

Allen Iverson can afford to wear nicer clothes than these (Ethan Miller/ Getty).

Over the past few weeks, erstwhile NBA star Allen Iverson has been in the news for money troubles. There were reports that he was completely broke — an amazing idea given he made more than $150 million just from NBA salary — followed by condescending offers from minor sports teams. It was a sad story, a circus, and a cautionary tale all at once.

Except it turns out that the entire story was overblown. According to a new report, Iverson isn't broke at all — in fact, he has millions of dollars in the bank. He just doesn't have access to all of it.From the always trustworthy Peter Vecsey for the New York Post (via SLAM):

He is far from insolvent, at least in the real world, if not in harmony with his "nothing in moderation'' lifestyle. Someone who cared a great deal for Iverson and grasped the extent of his habits, loyalties and generosity protected him to some degree from financial ruination, at 36, at any rate.

A person with a firm grip on the situation informs me Iverson has an account worth $32 million, a principal he is prohibited from touching until 55. In the meantime, it feeds him $1 million annually.

At 45, Iverson is eligible to start drawing on an NBA pension that maxes out at 10 years of active duty, or take whatever's there as lump sum. He will be entitled roughly to $8,000 per month ($800 per x 10).

If at all possible, Iverson will issue a restraining order against himself until he's 62 or so. At that time, I'm told, his lump sum will be between $1.5 million and $1.8 million, or he can elect to take monthly checks of approximately $14,000 per.

To clarify, Iverson doesn't have an unlimited amount of money, and it's very possible that he exhausts his annual take well before the year is out. But that doesn't make him any more broke than a trust-fund kid who spent his $10,000 monthly allowance two weeks before the calendar turns. The problem isn't that he has no money, but that he uses it unwisely.

It's easy to moralize about Allen Iverson — he's been a divisive figure since high school. But, like all athletes (or even just all humans), he's more complicated than what conventional wisdom suggests. He's not broke, or a financial war zone. In fact, he seems to have planned his future with some perspective. If Iverson needs money, it's a temporary problem. There's no need to blow his situation out of proportion for the sake of moralism. He deserves better than that.

BCS BULL****

There is not a single scintilla of doubt that a playoff would be the best way to end this – or any – college football season.

Trent Richardson and Alabama did everything the BCS required of them to earn a rematch with LSU.
(US Presswire)

Sixteen teams, eight, four – whatever. Any of the above would beat the fraudulent BCS system we are stuck with in America.

If it were a four-team deal, Alabama and Oklahoma State would settle the squabbling in one semifinal, while LSU throttles someone in the other semi. Then we’d know for certain who most deserves to play the Tigers for the national title.

But we don’t have a playoff, as everyone knows. And there probably won’t be one anytime soon. It’s an insult to our collective intelligence, but it’s a fact.
Given the system we have, the LSU-Alabama rematch is the right call – no matter how narrow the margin. The best teams will play in New Orleans for the national title.
Stop the whining about a team that didn’t win its conference being able to win the title. Stop the whining about how Alabama had its shot and lost. Stop the whining about how unfair it is for LSU to have to beat the Crimson Tide twice. Stop the whining about the likelihood of another defensive struggle.
Deal with it.
[Wetzel: SEC reaps reward of rejected playoff plan]
People say Alabama had its shot? Well, Oklahoma State had its shot, too. All the Cowboys had to do was win their final two games and they were in the title game. Then they went to Ames and were shocked by 29-point underdog Iowa State.
That invoked a little-known BCS bylaw, rule 10.3.1.14, which reads thusly: Any team that loses to Iowa State is automatically ineligible to win the national title.
Alabama lost by three to the undisputed No. 1 team in the land. Oklahoma State lost to a Cyclones team that finished 6-6. There is no comparison.
But if you insist on using one more yardstick, there’s this: Alabama’s best win was a 24-point beating of Arkansas, which is ranked No. 6 in the BCS. Oklahoma State’s best win was a seven-point escape of No. 8 Kansas State. Advantage, Crimson Tide.
So the championship game — the one that renders the rest of bowl season little more than a sideshow – is appropriately set. But that doesn’t mean the BCS got it all right.
[3 vs. 4: Oklahoma State, Stanford meet in Fiesta]

Frank Beamer's Hokies were blasted by Clemson again Saturday, and rewarded by the BCS with a Sugar Bowl berth.
(US Presswire)

The presence of Virginia Tech in a BCS bowl is an absolute, complete and utter travesty. The Sugar Bowl should be ashamed of itself for taking the Hokies over more deserving candidates Boise State and Kansas State.
What did Virginia Tech do to deserve its bid? It played three games against ranked teams – and lost two of them, by a combined 48 points. The lone victory was against Georgia Tech, a team that was No. 21 at the time but resides well outside all top 25s now.
Aside from the Yellow Jackets, here’s who the Hokies beat to earn their bid: Appalachian State, East Carolina, Arkansas State, Marshall, Miami, Wake Forest, Boston College, Duke, North Carolina and Virginia. They beat nobody ranked higher than 45th in Jeff Sagarin’s computer ratings.
Boise State, meanwhile, pounded Georgia (No. 16 in the final BCS standings) by two touchdowns in a de facto road game. The Broncos’ lone loss was by a single point to No. 18 TCU.
Kansas State played four ranked teams and split those games, defeating Baylor and Texas and losing to Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. The Wildcats’ schedule is ranked 10th-toughest in America by Sagarin, while Virginia Tech’s is 56th.
But Tech gets the Sugar Bowl reward, while Kansas State goes to the Cotton Bowl to play Arkansas and Boise State is shuffled off to the Las Vegas Bowl to play an Arizona State team that fired its coach. Ridiculous.
[Wetzel: Flawed BCS process must be scrapped]
The messages sent by the Sugar Bowl’s decision are as follows:
1. The BCS still caters to the schools from the power conferences and is only interested in the “outsider” schools when forced to be interested. If you thought Boise winning the Fiesta Bowl and TCU winning the Rose Bowl were going to change anything, you’re wrong.
2. Schedule soft. You’ll be rewarded. Virginia Tech long has been among the most fearless scheduling schools in the country, regularly taking on worthy non-conference opponents. (Including Boise State in 2010. You might remember who won that game.) But this season, the Hokies went with a diet of soft foods in September, did not lose and wound up with a padded record. It worked splendidly.
It certainly could be argued that Virginia Tech’s Sugar Bowl opponent, Michigan, is not the most worthy selection, either. The Wolverines lost head-up to rival Michigan State, and the Spartans barely lost in the Big Ten championship game to Wisconsin on Saturday. Still, the smart money says the glory-starved Michigan fan base will flock to New Orleans in big numbers and Michigan still carries its big-name cachet.
That’s the way decisions are made come bowl time. That’s why a team such as Penn State can end up in the TicketCity Bowl, an off-brand game played at noon Jan. 2 in Dallas. The Penn State name has become toxic amid the Jerry Sandusky scandal, damaging the program’s marketability. That’s why the Nittany Lions slid down the Big Ten pecking order.
Bowls have to make business decisions, not necessarily football decisions. That’s why Virginia Tech gets rewarded and Boise State gets shafted. That’s why a playoff would be a far better way.
But we don’t have a playoff. And in the absence of one, at least the championship game pitting LSU against Alabama is the best possible matchup.

WAIT!!! think about it.....

 

   What is a relationship really suppose to consist of? Love, friendship, trust, communication, passion, patience, sex? Take a second and ask yourself if these are all it takes to be in a lasting relationship. This is not something that is taken into consideration to think about on a daily basis, but ever since I have moved to Utah I have seen or heard about more people getting married than I have seen in my whole life.

   What makes me bring the subject up is that most of the people are somewhere around my age. Now all of the points that I stated above are the bulk of what it takes to maintain a lasting relationship, and i know because I'm in one myself and all those points apply to me, but marriage is just not in my mind at this time. On top of those points I believe that there is on more point that may be the one to make or break the relationship. "TIME" is the point that I'm talking about ladies and gentlemen.

   Yes "TIME," and the reason being is because TIME will allow you to gather more info about that person to help you truly decide whether or not this is who you want to be with FOREVER!! While in that dating process always remember that there is no time limit you have to date until the marriage step presents itself. Take that TIME and move in together first, learn each others tendencies so you can know what you don't like about them. Use TIME to figure out how they act around other people when they are not with you. Give each others families TIME to really get to know them, because no matter what anybody says the family does take an affect on whether the relationship will go on or not.

   I ain't trying to tell nobody how to live there live, and I don't know if this early marriage shit just happens this often in Utah but listen when I say that the earlier you get married, the shorter your marriage will probably be. Wait and think about it before you pop that question, I promise the longer you date a person the better your marriage will be when that time comes to make that move. relationships and marriage are things that you want to charish for life but they can be cut short if taken too fast or gone about in the wrong way.

   TIME will make it work, thats the key!!





 

I NEED POINTS 2NITE BABI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thursday night preview: Raiders at Chargers

After getting gashed by the Broncos in Week 9, the Raiders will have to find a way to stop Mike Tolbert Thursday night. (Cal Sport Media)

The AFC West race might not be the prettiest — three teams sit tied at 4-4, with the Broncos a game back at 3-5. The possibility remains very much alive that the division winner will finish at .500 or worse.
Thursday’s game, then, becomes a huge one. The Raiders and Chargers meet in San Diego, with the winner (at least temporarily) taking sole control of first place. These teams meet again in Week 17, in Oakland, so the loser here will have to wait a long time to try to enact some revenge.
The five keys to Thursday night’s game:

1. Can Oakland stop the run at all?
Two hundred and ninety-nine yards. That’s what the Raiders gave up on the ground to Tim Tebow and the Broncos last week in a stunning 38-24 loss. Unless that number comes way down Thursday, it’s hard to see Oakland having a chance on the road.
Mike Tolbert likely will handle the first-team reps at running back with Ryan Mathews still slowed by injury, but the Raiders will have their hands full either way. Getting gashed on the ground early would leave the door wide open for Philip Rivers to put up huge numbers.
2. Will the Raiders miss Darren McFadden?
And while we’re on the subject of the running game …
Oakland will be without McFadden Thursday, robbing the Raiders of one of the NFL’s most dynamic threats. Into the lineup steps Michael Bush, who had 96 yards rushing in a starting role last week. Bush added two catches for 33 yards and a touchdown. He’s more than capable of breaking some big plays, but the Raiders’ offense struggled down the stretch last week — would that have happened if McFadden was available?
3. The hangover factor
Oakland’s loss to Denver last week feels like one of those defeats that could linger for a bit. The same goes for San Diego’s disappointment against the Packers — the Chargers nearly pulled off a thrilling comeback, only to fall just short.
The short week didn’t leave either team a lot of time to recover from those Week 9 letdowns, so the battle Thursday could be as much mental as it is physical. Whichever team is able to refocus in more definitive fashion will have a major edge.
4. Which quarterback will step up?
Carson Palmer threw three picks last week and now has six in just six quarters of play with the Raiders. Rivers hasn’t been any better. He turned it over three times against the Packers, with two going for pick-6s, and has a whopping 14 INTs this season.
For either of these teams to make a legitimate playoff push, the quarterback play has to improve in a hurry.
Palmer can at least blame his slow start on the rust he accumulated sitting out the preseason and first several weeks of the regular season. Rivers has no such excuse.
5. Is Antonio Gates due?
Yahoo’s Michael Silver last Sunday quoted a Chargers’ source, who said Gates looked “old and fat.” While that might not be a fair assessment, it’s clear that Gates, who has dealt with plenty of injury problems lately, has not been his usual, dominant self.
In five games this season, Gates has 25 catches for 297 yards and two touchdowns — far from embarrassing numbers but short of what the Chargers count on him for. He did break through for eight grabs, 96 yards and a touchdown against Green Bay (of course, that’s the performance that got him dubbed “old and fat”), and the Chargers need more of that to excel on offense.

FOOTBALL IS DAMN NEAR OVA HOVA!!!!!!

     ffuccccccccccccccckkkkkkkkkkkkkk!!! The season is coming to an end after a very disappointing year. With two games left on the year everyone on the team including me are only playing for there personal stats. With not being able to make playoffs and not being able to win the conference championship, stats are the only thing there is to play for.

    With coach Mac retiring, the real question is how many players from the team will transfer to other schools to continue there football careers? personally myself I have been thinking about the idea of transferring depending  on who our new coach will be.

   With a new coach to be in office as early as January, it is looking like there will be a lot changes for the football program. Who the hell will this mystery man be, and how will the team react to the new head man I charge? Anyone can come in and play the head coach role, but no one will ever be able to fill the shoes of the Utah legend Ron Mac.