still waiting for that answer as to your college. being a good athlete is hardly anti-intellectual
Again with the reading problems there Turtle. One would think that maybe you were the stereotypical jock the way you're going. I didn't say being a good athlete is anti-intellectual. I was making fun of a certain segment of the athletics community, namely the dumb ass jocks who get all the privilege because they happen to be great at football or basketball and thus are allowed to coast through the academic portion of University. As a result of said critique, someone called me anti-athlete. In response, once the other made fun of a certain segment of the intellectual/academic community; I returned the favor.
It's really not that tough man, you just gotta give it a moment and think.
we do note you seem to have a hard on for athletes that goes well beyond any valid arguments
still waiting to hear how letting a talented athlete in rather than someone on the margin hurts the school
I am not hard on all athletes. If you could read, you would have noted THAT by now. I have continually said that it is the ones who can't hack the academic work but because of their position in some sport, they can continue. And I've answered your question several times. Please, please, please for the love of all that is holy learn to read. I didn't say it "hurts" the school. I said admitting students to University based on sports is not beneficial on whole to the University, which is the topic of this thread. Wow, you're really a lawyer? Damn.
If could read-shall we compare educational backgrounds?
If could read-shall we compare educational backgrounds?
It doesn't matter where you went, it matters what you actually know. Its entirely possible for someone from UCLA to be more knowledgable about, say, economics than someone from Harvard, Yale or University of Chicago.
but when some guy suggests another cannot read comparing educational backgrounds seems rather appropriate
We can. All hyperbole and whatever else aside, I do think you're a bright person who has worked hard for what you have. But I also believe I have credible criticism of the current incarnation of commercialized college football and basketball and some of the activities which go down. Not only is it academically questionable, but it gives other athletes a bad name because they can be grouped in with football and basketball which has grown corrupt and treated as nothing more than a business.
well I can agree with that but the OP was about giving people with strong sports backgrounds breaks in admissions and I thought they should
You were making fun of intellectuals. When I made fun of certain jocks, I got called anti-athlete or something like that.
By the way, you may want to go back and get a degree in English. I have said many times that there are smart athletes and that my problem was not with them. But rather my problem is with the athletes who cannot maintain on their own the academic standards of the University but are none the less allowed to persist and graduate from University.
A portion of our research grants does go to athletics. The point aside. The question was is it beneficial. To which people said yes because it brings in money to the University. I was merely clarifying that while it can bring in money (depending on the size of the program), that money doesn't go to the University at large; but rather is funneled back into the athletics department. So just because it brings in money does not mean that it is providing a benefit to the University as a whole.
It's a funny thing about that crying football program because our football program does cry a lot. And we give in. They need new facilities, they need an indoor practice arena because outside is cold, they need this, they need that. They don't go out and have a bake sale, they cry to us. And we give in. And student fees go up, and general funds goes down. We all pay more, give them what they want; and the still suck. I think we should get a little something something for our money.
Well in reality, I think that CSU football should be a club sport and our hockey club and or baseball club should be promoted up.
We can. All hyperbole and whatever else aside, I do think you're a bright person who has worked hard for what you have. But I also believe I have credible criticism of the current incarnation of commercialized college football and basketball and some of the activities which go down. Not only is it academically questionable, but it gives other athletes a bad name because they can be grouped in with football and basketball which has grown corrupt and treated as nothing more than a business.
How was I making fun of intellectuals? I was pointing out that many professors don't understand the pressures that student-athletes have and sometimes actually make life more difficult for them. Hardly the same as what YOU are doing...
Is it a good idea to keep admitting students to colleges based on their athletic skills rather than their academic skills?
While I'm not against considering sports as a benefit to a student's resume, I'm talking about recruiting people specifically because of their sports skills.
People always say yes because it brings in money, but almost every college loses money due to sports according to an ESPN article recently.
that might be true-women's sports-due to Title IX I believe-requires a school to have equal varsity sports for women if there are as many women in the student body. women's sports lose money big time
when I was in college,the women's BB team was rather good-the men's team sucked. yet the men's team would draw several thousand fans-even against teams with no real draw-when we played a really good team like Syracuse, the place would almost sell out. I went to a womens game because one of my friends was a starter-other than boyfriends (or a couple girlfriends) of the players and maybe 100 other people, the place was empty. yet the college spent the same on each team
that might be true-women's sports-due to Title IX I believe-requires a school to have equal varsity sports for women if there are as many women in the student body. women's sports lose money big time
when I was in college,the women's BB team was rather good-the men's team sucked. yet the men's team would draw several thousand fans-even against teams with no real draw-when we played a really good team like Syracuse, the place would almost sell out. I went to a womens game because one of my friends was a starter-other than boyfriends (or a couple girlfriends) of the players and maybe 100 other people, the place was empty. yet the college spent the same on each team
People always say yes because it brings in money, but almost every college loses money due to sports according to an ESPN article recently.
Id be interested to see if that report re losing money meant strictly ticket sales. What has to be remembered is that most of the 'cost' of a program is intangible and most of the financial gain comes from university backer dollars and public relations.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?