Started By
Message

re: Mike Slive against freshman ineligibility

Posted on 3/2/15 at 7:48 pm to
Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 7:48 pm to
quote:

One would think that a practitioner of sarcasm wouldn't be quite so inept at recognizing it in others.


I take statements literally. I also deliver them that way.

"Because Kentucky wouldn't be able to recruit at all if the rule was passed."

and

"It's so unusual to see a dumb statement from an Aggie,"

were taken and given by me with the meanings they literally impart.

Sometimes I can detect sarcasm, but not usually. It's a double-edged sword.

Sorry if I offended.
Posted by Dr RC
The Money Pit
Member since Aug 2011
58052 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 7:54 pm to
quote:

I take statements literally.


Boy howdy, the internet is a great place for you then!
Posted by RT1941
Member since May 2007
30208 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 7:58 pm to
If they want to up the scholly limit to 100 then I have no problem holding out freshmen.
Posted by Hugh McElroy
Member since Sep 2013
17357 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 8:01 pm to
quote:

Sorry if I offended.




No offense taken, friend. While I'm glad you meant it literally when you said that it is unusual for you to hear an Aggie say something dumb, I'm surprised. I know lots of dumb Aggies. Many of them are too stupid to stay away from lives of armed service or farm and ranch work, for example, and far too few are smart enough to enjoy a life of white collar leisure.
Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 8:11 pm to
quote:

Boy howdy, the internet is a great place for you then!


Are you being sarcastic? I can't tell.

Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 8:14 pm to


If I hadn't gone to UK, A&M would be my alma mater. I have always been fascinated with and supportive of the Aggie culture.
Posted by Prof
Member since Jun 2013
42621 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 8:16 pm to
1. Its B1G and PAC Presidents pushing this and this is a critical point in the debate. As someone who has taught both basketball players and football players, rest assured these presidents are talking out of their arse. Those who did teach college or university haven't taught in ages and frankly FAR TOO MANY TAs/GTAs to Lecturers to Profs never had the gift of teaching. BUT very few of admins teach at ALL these days and have zero experience dealing w/today's students.

2. You'd be surprised at how diverse the student body is when it comes to freshman year and even beyond. Schools no longer teach writing and as such student -- both those who went to fancy private schools and those who went to the worst public schools don't know how to write a 5 page paper. They fail to organize their thoughts and its painful. What's more you don't know until they write. I've had every type of student you can imagine from all socio-economic backgrounds and it really is the luck of the draw.

I've taught brilliant football players as well as students in science/math majors who were just terrible at anything out of their field.

4. With a lot of athletes, all it takes is confronting them. Same with other students who are either unmotivated or have been told their not good enough.

5. It's rare to play as a true frosh as is and it's dumb to make a one size fits all rule.
Posted by roadGator
Member since Feb 2009
139983 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 8:19 pm to
quote:

have been told their not good


quote:

Prof


at UT?
Posted by ohiovol
Member since Jan 2010
20828 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

I don't. It's a ploy by the Big X to stop the talent advantage for the SEC.



I also think they want to push the NBA to increase the age limit. Of course, this is dependent on the owners wanting it, too, or they would be taking the risk of simply missing out on the best players altogether.
This post was edited on 3/2/15 at 9:22 pm
Posted by CCTider
Member since Dec 2014
24143 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 10:00 pm to
This is something that I think the nba wouldn't want. They like for their stars to have a name coming in to the league. Although it could possibly help them in the European market, with future nba stars going to there instead of college.
Posted by ohiovol
Member since Jan 2010
20828 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 10:15 pm to
quote:

This is something that I think the nba wouldn't want. They like for their stars to have a name coming in to the league. Although it could possibly help them in the European market, with future nba stars going to there instead of college.


Oh, they won't want it. It's the two years and more evaluation time they want.
Posted by Prof
Member since Jun 2013
42621 posts
Posted on 3/2/15 at 10:56 pm to
quote:

at UT?


No, from K-12 many have been treated as though their only worth is as an athlete. And I've taught at more than one uni, including lecturing for a legit Ivy. Others are fantastic students but it's the ones who've been treated worthless outside of sports and internalized it that bother me. Most are far smarter than that but they don't know it because they've been beat down.
Posted by DoreonthePlains
Auburn, AL
Member since Nov 2013
7436 posts
Posted on 3/3/15 at 12:17 am to
Hey, uh, I'm just gonna be neighborly and help you out, Prof. He was asking if you are a professor at UT because you said, "have been told their not good," which uses the wrong form of the "there, their, and they're" series.

But back to the topic at hand, this idea might actually be a good idea from a developmental standpoint, but the pro leagues would all have to adopt new rules about draft eligibility. Otherwise, the "one and doners" that programs like UK use now would just go to Europe to play for their one year then go pro. The NFL wouldn't be too effected by it since guys would still get 2 years on the field minimum, and they would get to be more physically mature when they see the field for the first time. I'm not sure that college baseball would be too effected since guys that go to college have to wait 3 years to go pro anyway, I think. College soccer would be damaged more (which is honestly a good thing for the sport in the US).

But yeah, this rule change would probably be a clusterfrick. I doubt it happens. There's just too much opposition, and even supporters of it have to realize there will be challenges that have to be ironed out before the rule can be changed. I just don't think all of the challenges can be mutually solved.
Posted by Prof
Member since Jun 2013
42621 posts
Posted on 3/3/15 at 12:29 am to
quote:

Hey, uh, I'm just gonna be neighborly and help you out, Prof. He was asking if you are a professor at UT because you said, "have been told their not good," which uses the wrong form of the "there, their, and they're" series.


Yeah I saw that after I posted it but I was too lazy to correct it. It's late and I'm tipsy so I'll likely make more errors this evening. I'm also slightly dyslexic (it flares up from time to time but mostly lies dormant. Also, I tend not to correct grammar on this board because I used to spend so much time proofing I spent more time proofing than posting.
Page 1 2
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter