Started By
Message
re: Mizzou Must Lower Academic Requirements to Compete in SEC
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:20 pm to mizzoukills
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:20 pm to mizzoukills
0
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:20 pm to mizzoukills
quote:
immediately go all in with our resources
Attention, Auburn posters!
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:20 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
MS2 being a Mizzou student shoots holes in your troll attempt. Sorry.
Hey, MS2 might be one of those people who is brilliantly book-smart, but lacking in common sense and social skills. We don't know.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:21 pm to mizzoukills
Georgia and Florida are in the top 50 public schools in the country.
Maybe Missouri just sucks at football?
Maybe Missouri just sucks at football?
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:21 pm to boXerrumble
That's what I was thinking. Yet we are good across the board from football to lacrosse. 
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:22 pm to NonregAg09
quote:
You are bad at sports because you're in Missouri. It's not that complicated.
Hold on a second, NonregAg09. You're going to actually make the comment above with a straight face?
Seriously?
Mizzou's owned A&M for the past decade until this year. Therefore, I can't take your post seriously. Good try, though.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:23 pm to mizzoukills
Killz, while I think this is a noble idea, I think the first order of business should be to start offering more money to recruits. It's hard for us to compete with the paycheck that the Auburn's of the league are offering recruits these days
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:23 pm to Porter Osborne Jr
quote:
I can't speak for all the schools but UGA has turned away a few kids because of this and they have enrolled at other SEC schools.
UGA football isn't in the business of collecting smart college football players. It's in the business of winning.
If UGA turned a kid away under the guise of deficient academics--but he nonetheless qualified under NCAA standards--it's because Richt et al. didn't believe said kid would help the team win.
No program in this conference is consciously tying its hands when it doesn't have to.
This post was edited on 1/17/13 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:25 pm to mizzoukills
quote:
Mizzou must lower academic requirements and expectations to compete in the SEC or risk becoming the annual bottom dweller.
Vanderbilt, Florida, Georgia, A&M, Alabama, and Auburn are all ranked higher academically than Missouri is.
-Google/10
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:25 pm to mizzoukills
quote:
Mizzou's owned A&M for the past decade until this year. Therefore, I can't take your post seriously. Good try, though.
That is the only 6 year stretch you'll ever be able to hold over A&M's head. That's it. Outside of that, you've been owned by A&M. And you will continued to be dominated in the future. You don't have half the potential or resources A&M has. You have a tiny stadium, I'm not sure if you've ever won a major conference title, and you have been A&M's bitch all-time.
Deal with it.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:26 pm to mizzoukills
quote:
Mizzou's owned A&M for the past decade until this year.
That was the anomaly.
The norm is more like these scores:
73-0
51-14
59-29
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:31 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
Entrance standards for student athletes are based on the minimum requirements of the NCAA. Entrance requirements for 'regular' students are wherever the school sets them. Most football players could not go to any of the mentioned schools if they had to meet normal (non-athlete) entrance standards.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:31 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
So, y'all beat us one year in College Station and now we've been owned? That's some funny shite!
By the way, per rant rules you can't use all time numbers. Rant rules specify that anything older than 10 years is too old to count.
Play by rant rules for face banishment.
By the way, per rant rules you can't use all time numbers. Rant rules specify that anything older than 10 years is too old to count.
Play by rant rules for face banishment.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:31 pm to troywew
quote:
Entrance standards for student athletes are based on the minimum requirements of the NCAA. Entrance requirements for 'regular' students are wherever the school sets them. Most football players could not go to any of the mentioned schools if they had to meet normal (non-athlete) entrance standards.
Exactly.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:33 pm to Robot Santa
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:35 pm to mizzoukills
quote:
So, y'all beat us one year in College Station and now we've been owned?
In my lifetime, we're 8-5 against Missouri. All but 1 of those losses came during the "dark ages" of A&M football (i.e. under Bill Byrne's athletic department)
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:35 pm to MizzouSEC2012
This is something that Mizzou must truly consider. If we want to be an SEC player, we need to adjust the academic requirements for our athletes.
They are too high right now. We must view the typical athlete like the rest of the SEC views them...dumb but fast work horses.
They are too high right now. We must view the typical athlete like the rest of the SEC views them...dumb but fast work horses.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:36 pm to semotruman
What the Hell is this SEMO Truman 
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:40 pm to MizzouSEC2012
Semo was trying to give you a compliment while at the same time saving face on the rant. She must protect her rant status which means that she can't 100 percent support you until you've become a man.
Posted on 1/17/13 at 1:48 pm to DWag215
quote:
If UGA turned a kid away under the guise of deficient academics--but he nonetheless qualified under NCAA standards--it's because Richt et al. didn't believe said kid would help the team win.
Not always.
Sometimes a kid will get turned down from UGA for grades and then go to the military prep school. If he gets his grades up, he can enroll at UGA the next year and start competing. It's not uncommon.
Page 2 of 6
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News