Quote from: Stone Cold on April 27, 2012, 08:23:36 PM
We're coming off back to back S16. I'd let Buzz handle discipline until someone gets arrested.
I can see why buzz is getting perturbed.
There's a reason Buzz was really close to taking the SMU job. They are messing with his happy, and even worse, it has nothing to do with the off the court incidents. That MIGHT be a bit understandable, but for things that are out of a players control?? Shameful.
so muguru said it's one of: (academics, discipline, recruiting issue),
and muguru said "out of the player's control"
That rules out academics and discipline (off the court) since these are in the players control.
How can it be a recruiting issue that is the blamed on the player but out of the player's control?
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 07:42:07 PM
I will say this once more. What i said was, that if the reason gets out that the player(s) that are being "forced" to transfer, that will result in "hiroshima". And it should. If people aren't absolutely livid about it, then I wouldn't know what to say. FWIW, Jamail will NOT be the only transfer.
Liar. You will say this at least 8 more times.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 08:41:06 PM
so muguru said it's one of: (academics, discipline, recruiting issue),
and muguru said "out of the player's control"
That rules out academics and discipline (off the court) since these are in the players control.
How can it be a recruiting issue that is the blamed on the player but out of the player's control?
Yeah, what...? Can we stop P-footing around and just say wtf is allegedly going on?
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 08:49:22 PM
Yeah, what...? Can we stop P-footing around and just say wtf is allegedly going on?
We will all know more in a couple weeks.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 08:41:06 PM
so muguru said it's one of: (academics, discipline, recruiting issue),
and muguru said "out of the player's control"
That rules out academics and discipline (off the court) since these are in the players control.
How can it be a recruiting issue that is the blamed on the player but out of the player's control?
Just remember this.....new admin, new rules.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 08:53:13 PM
We will all know more in a couple weeks.
Will you explain everything after the other transfer?
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 08:53:13 PM
We will all know more in a couple weeks.
FYI - A player from MU will transfer after the 2017-18 season. Mark it down. You heard it from me first.
"Redeem themselves" If not off court issues, then what did the players do that they have to redeem themselves.
Is it just me, I don't understand that concept. Redeem means to make up for a cause lost or an action/misdeed conducted. Only misdeeds were the off court issues and the players were.............?
If academics, then apply the necessary tutoring that has been described in detail via the media and put out by MU's staff. So, doubt that.
Recruiting violation, impossible. The recruits don't recruit themselves and they are already onboard.
If muguru is correct, what on this planet could a student athlete done have that causes the MU staff to get rid of them. Just makes no common sense.
It is a mid-year change in Athletic Department academic policy.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 08:54:24 PM
Just remember this.....new admin, new rules.
JUCO's.....perhaps...
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 08:34:30 PM
There's a reason Buzz was really close to taking the SMU job. They are messing with his happy, and even worse, it has nothing to do with the off the court incidents. That MIGHT be a bit understandable, but for things that are out of a players control?? Shameful.
so if it doesn't have anything to do with off the court incidents, then it has to be on the court issues?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:05:04 PM
It is a mid-year change in Athletic Department academic policy.
what was the change? unfortunate that it's going to effect one of the guys on the team. though, you would think the coaches/players/tutors would be informed of the change and work toward being compliant.
http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncb/story/_/id/7864558/larry-brown-tells-several-smu-mustangs-players-team
At least Larry Brown has the balls to tell it like it is.
so, do you really think MU administration would really enact a rule to kick-off a player that really deserved to be there?
if so, do you think Buzz being the person he claims to be, would stand for it..
kind of goes against the mission of the school and the person Buzz is...
perhaps said player did something that shows he should not be on the team / enrolled at MU...
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 08:41:06 PM
so muguru said it's one of: (academics, discipline, recruiting issue),
and muguru said "out of the player's control"
That rules out academics and discipline (off the court) since these are in the players control.
How can it be a recruiting issue that is the blamed on the player but out of the player's control?
Boneheaded Booster. If this were to be about Juan's having to leave because he caught a Brewer's playoff game, wouldn't you piss you off? Just an off the top of my head example to answer your question, not anything my sources have told me. All my sources have to say is "You ain't got no fraggin' sources, LittleMurs." Sadly, I believe that they are right.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 08:54:24 PM
Just remember this.....new admin, new rules.
I have been keeping out of this, but this is stupid. if you have something to say, say it. If not, wait until "it" happens and then come on and tell us all "I told you so". you just sound smug/annoying with all these veiled comments so stfu unless you are actually going to make a definitive statement(you too sultan).
And if the issue is with the admin changing the rules, and not the players doing something wrong, who are you protecting by doing this?
Quote from: nyg on April 27, 2012, 09:24:15 PM
http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncb/story/_/id/7864558/larry-brown-tells-several-smu-mustangs-players-team
At least Larry Brown has the balls to tell it like it is.
"Brown Out'ed"
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 27, 2012, 09:21:50 PM
what was the change? unfortunate that it's going to effect one of the guys on the team. though, you would think the coaches/players/tutors would be informed of the change and work toward being compliant.
My understanding is that they upped the academic qualifications to continue to play...it is an athletic department wide policy. It will be a near miracle for it not to affect one player...and may affect more.
Quote from: nyg on April 27, 2012, 09:00:55 PM
"Redeem themselves" If not off court issues, then what did the players do that they have to redeem themselves.
Is it just me, I don't understand that concept. Redeem means to make up for a cause lost or an action/misdeed conducted. Only misdeeds were the off court issues and the players were.............?
If academics, then apply the necessary tutoring that has been described in detail via the media and put out by MU's staff. So, doubt that.
Recruiting violation, impossible. The recruits don't recruit themselves and they are already onboard.
If muguru is correct, what on this planet could a student athlete done have that causes the MU staff to get rid of them. Just makes no common sense.
What if you got hired at your company, and everything you did was completely acceptable under their standards and you did what you were supposed to?? Then suddenly, your company changes hands, and all of a sudden wants to implement new standards, and the standards that you met to get hired originally were no longer acceptable under the new regime, would that be out of your control??
Phew, at least now my diploma will be worth more.
so you saying academics then as Sultan is....
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on April 27, 2012, 09:35:40 PM
"Brown Out'ed"
Wow, it's April 27th and he's telling his starting point guard to take a hike. Somebody knows of still available recruits somewhere. This is only a guess, but I'm guessing that SMU will not be elevating academic qualifications for the foreseeable future.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:37:49 PM
My understanding is that they upped the academic qualifications to continue to play...it is an athletic department wide policy. It will be a near miracle for it not to affect one player...and may affect more.
This is it. The new admin has implemented new academic policies for ALL the athletic programs. Which is fine, except IMO you HAVE to let kids then meet those new standards and at least "grandfather them in". Not happening with this admin.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 27, 2012, 09:41:16 PM
Phew, at least now my diploma will be worth more.
Too late, it's fully depreciated by now.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:43:12 PM
This is it. The new admin has implemented new academic policies for ALL the athletic programs. Which is fine, except IMO you HAVE to let kids then meet those new standards and at least "grandfather them in". Not happening with this admin.
Why did it take so long to just say that?
ok - so after all the cloak and dagger it is academics...
and yes, changing the standard, there should be a grace period...
surprised Buzz would allow it or stay here if he disagrees and they force it...
spill the beans... how many?
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:43:12 PM
This is it. The new admin has implemented new academic policies for ALL the athletic programs. Which is fine, except IMO you HAVE to let kids then meet those new standards and at least "grandfather them in". Not happening with this admin.
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 09:45:38 PM
Why did it take so long to just say that?
+1 Did we really need to go through three weeks of Hiroshima II speculation to get here?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:37:49 PM
My understanding is that they upped the academic qualifications to continue to play...it is an athletic department wide policy. It will be a near miracle for it not to affect one player...and may affect more.
One more step to becoming Portland and irrelevant in basketball.
We may be getting more traditionals after all.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:43:12 PM
This is it. The new admin has implemented new academic policies for ALL the athletic programs. Which is fine, except IMO you HAVE to let kids then meet those new standards and at least "grandfather them in". Not happening with this admin.
Was thinking the same thing. I have no problem with higher academic standards but if an athlete is meeting the standards but the standards get raised without him/her having a realistic opportunity to "catch-up," it's basically an attempt to weed some people out.
It all started with Cottingham getting scapegoated. Now we got Domers and Hoyas trying to make us irrelevant in b-ball like ND in football through academics. I suggest Pilarz look at his Hoya's standards.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 09:46:20 PM
ok - so after all the cloak and dagger it is academics...
and yes, changing the standard, there should be a grace period...
surprised Buzz would allow it or stay here if he disagrees and they force it...
spill the beans... how many?
I said when we went through the whole Buzz to SMU thing that LW wanted to do things "the Notre Dame way". Well, here it is. Why do you think Buzz almost took the SMU job?? Not sure how many, one for sure, could be more I believe.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:43:12 PM
This is it. The new admin has implemented new academic policies for ALL the athletic programs. Which is fine, except IMO you HAVE to let kids then meet those new standards and at least "grandfather them in". Not happening with this admin.
I don't know when the policy was changed and how it was implemented. For instance, if it changed prior to second semester, and is based on only second semester grades, I don't think it reaches "Hiroshima-like" levels of unfairness.
"trying to make us irrelevant in b-ball"
and we know this how?
What exactly are the standards for athletes at MU? were they different for basketball - officially or un-offically?
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:51:24 PM
I said when we went through the whole Buzz to SMU thing that LW wanted to do things "the Notre Dame way". Well, here it is. Why do you think Buzz almost took the SMU job?? Not sure how many, one for sure, could be more I believe.
Who's the one?
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 27, 2012, 09:50:17 PM
It all started with Cottingham getting scapegoated. Now we got Domers and Hoyas trying to make us irrelevant in b-ball like ND in football through academics. I suggest Pilarz look at his Hoya's standards.
Think higher...Pilarz reports to a group of people. And Cottingham had to leave.
by limiting the pool of players we can have at MU. Above and beyond NCAA standards.
I blame Doc
Why do you think Buzz almost took the SMU job??
If Buzz truely disagreed with what Larry wants to do (the Notre Dame way as you say), do you think he would still be here?
Think there be may more to the story or not as extreme as you say...
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:53:47 PM
Think higher...Pilarz reports to a group of people. And Cottingham had to leave.
I understand the BOT but I didn't realize at the time exactly why Cottingham was going now I know it was part of a larger process. Buzz will be next to leave, imo.
Get up, get up, get out of here, gone
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 09:54:57 PM
Why do you think Buzz almost took the SMU job??
If Buzz truely disagreed with what Larry wants to do (the Notre Dame way as you say), do you think he would still be here?
Think there be may more to the story or not as extreme as you say...
When a good job opens up, he gone. No one in their prime wants to go to friggin SMU.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:43:12 PM
This is it. The new admin has implemented new academic policies for ALL the athletic programs. Which is fine, except IMO you HAVE to let kids then meet those new standards and at least "grandfather them in". Not happening with this admin.
So, there is no wording such as "Commencing on _____" ??????? The Administration is just implementing a new academic standard with no retroactive/grandfather clause aspects?
Meaning if a player had a sub-standard GPA last semester, then he is no longer qualified as a basketball player. Is he qualified to continue to be an active MU student?
Crazy.........
If a student is failing, ok and understandable. Not meeting a GPA as set forth by the athletic department, mid-stride is not the way to accomplish goals. The student athletes need to know what is EXPECTED of them first, then proceed.
If true, then they better do a new video/media report on their "Elite" tutoring program.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 27, 2012, 09:55:23 PM
I understand the BOT but I didn't realize at the time exactly why Cottingham was going now I know it was part of a larger process. Buzz will be next to leave, imo.
Cottingham left because of the incidents that occurred last year and because of the policies that he helped to be develop ran afoul of Department of Education rules. The BOT used the Presidential change, and the AD change, to encourage some changes.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 09:52:51 PM
"trying to make us irrelevant in b-ball"
and we know this how?
What exactly are the standards for athletes at MU? were they different for basketball - officially or un-offically?
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html)
I have a feeling I'm gonna despise this admin. Losing will eventually seep in then after about 15 years of sucking they may again be ready to play big boy b-ball.
Let's play the process of elimination game. Is it a male? Is he a bb player? Is he a brother or traditional? Does he start? Is he a rising junior? Is he from Madison?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:58:46 PM
Cottingham left because of the incidents that occurred last year and because of the policies that he helped to be develop ran afoul of Department of Education rules. The BOT used the Presidential change, and the AD change, to encourage some changes.
I know the reasons that they gave and I understand the "encouragement" angle which is what I meant by larger process. But if Wild was still active this wouldn't have happened to Cottingham. Swarbrick had the support of the ND admin even after similar or worse allegations.
Bummed out. I loved Jamail even though he never really produced. He just seemed like a special talent that never found his groove. With that said, this is probably best for both parties. I sincerely wish him nothing but the best and I hope that he finds a good situation at a high major.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:56:02 PM
Someone significant.
Yep....or someone(s). This shouldn't be hard to figure out if people see what position Buzz has been recruiting hardest.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:53:47 PM
Think higher...Pilarz reports to a group of people. And Cottingham had to leave.
All part of the Manhattan Project
Not to pick on MU, but this kind of info always happens on Friday's, late afternoon. Every year my Bears season tickets get jacked up, news comes out like clock work on aFriday afternoon. PR 101, bury bad news on a Friday afternoon.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 27, 2012, 10:00:37 PM
Let's play the process of elimination game. Is it a male? Is he a bb player? Is he a brother or traditional? Does he start? Is he a rising junior? Is he from Madison?
Sultan said significant. Vander isn't a significant loss, imo.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 09:56:02 PM
Someone significant.
Ha, seriously? Like listening to a 12 year old....
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:59:12 PM
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html)
Hold on...is the *new* policy a 1.8 GPA entering the second year, 1.9 the third, and 2.0 the fourth?
If so, then I don't have much of a problem with that.
However, I can see why changes mid-stream could be considered unfair.
are these the new standards or the old standards?
either way - holy crap, they are minimal... I have no issue with kicking off a player who cant meet these...
if these are the new standards - wow, MU academic standards for the basketball team may have been bad as the badger folks say they are...
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:59:12 PM
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html)
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:02:41 PM
Ha, seriously? Like listening to a 12 year old....
Look, I'm not going to post the guy's name. First of all, I don't think it is fair to the kid for it to be public. Second, he still has the opportunity to improve his grades well enough to return.
So Vander's role has been recruited the hardest? If there is an opportunity to meet the new standard, they why all the angst which might be for not...
again - if anyone cant make a 1.9, does not deserve a scholarship...
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:01:37 PM
Yep....or someone(s). This shouldn't be hard to figure out if people see what position Buzz has been recruiting hardest.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 10:02:49 PM
Hold on...is the *new* policy a 1.8 GPA entering the second year, 1.9 the third, and 2.0 the fourth?
If so, then I don't have much of a problem with that.
However, I can see why changes mid-stream could be considered unfair.
I'll agree with that, especially with only having to take 12 credits. If they can't do that, so be it.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 10:02:49 PM
Hold on...is the *new* policy a 1.8 GPA entering the second year, 1.9 the third, and 2.0 the fourth?
If so, then I don't have much of a problem with that.
However, I can see why changes mid-stream could be considered unfair.
I believe that is what the "current" academic standards are. the "new" ones have not yet been announced. Again, I also don't have a problem with higher academic standards persay, but you can NOT change the rules in the middle of the game and not give kids a chance to get up to those standards.
But also remember as someone mentioned earlier, this now will limit the types of kids Buzz can recruit, and with the NCAA changing the Juco requirements.....Is it that far fetched to think MU could become SLU?? A bunch of great students playing BB, just not at a particularly high level.
Program is going to have a ton of turnover going forward. That should help our APR rate.
If the athletes are not meeting academic standards, whether they are the ones listed or newer standards, then they are being dismissed from the team for academic reasons.
They are not being "forced out".
if they have yet to be announced - how the hell do you know who will or will not meet them - especially if they have this semester to make the grade....
awful lot of implied certainties for a lot of unknowns then...
starting to smell like another overblown crock of sh&t like the Buzz leaving rumors...
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:06:55 PM
I believe that is what the "current" academic standards are. the "new" ones have not yet been announced. Again, I also don't have a problem with higher academic standards persay, but you can NOT change the rules in the middle of the game and not give kids a chance to get up to those standards.
But also remember as someone mentioned earlier, this now will limit the types of kids Buzz can recruit, and with the NCAA changing the Juco requirements.....Is it that far fetched to think MU could become SLU?? A bunch of great students playing BB, just not at a particularly high level.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 10:04:48 PM
Look, I'm not going to post the guy's name. First of all, I don't think it is fair to the kid for it to be public. Second, he still has the opportunity to improve his grades well enough to return.
Then stop posting about it. There's zero value in your input unless you provide some actual input. And if there is opportunity that this player may ba able to improve his situation, why play all this out?
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:10:49 PM
Then stop posting about it. There's zero value in your input unless you provide some actual input. And if there is opportunity that this player may ba able to improve his situation, why play all this out?
Well, you asked to stop kitten footing around...the nature of the issue is the change in academic policy. That is the nature of the "Hiroshima" talk and the nature of the conflicts between Buzz and the new administration.
You don't think that is actual input? Well...tough.
Quote from: nyg on April 27, 2012, 10:10:18 PM
If the athletes are not meeting academic standards, whether they are the ones listed or newer standards, then they are being dismissed from the team for academic reasons.
They are not being "forced out".
They aren't??? Even if these new standards were raised without prior warning, and relatively no chance to work up to those standards?? You think that's fair?? They were good enough when they were admitted, now they aren't, and it's "too bad, so sad"?? Shouldn't they be doing everything they can to help the kid, rather than just saying "oh well"?? If you implement the standards starting next year or something, ok, plenty fair, but to implement them essentially immediately, without prior advanced warning??
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:10:49 PM
Then stop posting about it. There's zero value in your input unless you provide some actual input. And if there is opportunity that this player may ba able to improve his situation, why play all this out?
Why don't you stop posting. You've added nothing. Sultan basically told us the low down, if you can't connect the dots then tough. Sultan has his threshold.
It is not a player....I have it on a good source that Buzz, while trying to actually earn his degree, flunked Fr. Donnelly's World History class. My source is the ghost of a brother of a Jesuit priest who died in a horrible deep fried cheese accident after a party at the Jes Res.
Sheeesh.....chill dudes....if a cat can't pull a 2.0 gpa in a major like general communication studies than so be it.....ask Stanford's football program if their academic standards have hurt their program and this "new" rigor can't be even close. Upping the academic standards is not a death sentence for the program. If one or two players can't cut it in the classroom under the BOT's vision for a student/athlete....then transfer to Baylor and enjoy reading Dr. Seuss for the rest of your life. If it is truly an issue of "culling the herd" and using new standards to do so for reasons other than pure academics, then that brings a more complicated nuance to the discussion BTW,. I remember taking a fluff class my senior year (1988) to fill an elective requirement and half the basketball team was taking the same class.....I think I attended 3 classes the entire semester....opening day, mid-term, final....and passed without blinking and half drunk. I think Pop Sims may have written his essay in crayon...
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:10:49 PM
Then stop posting about it. There's zero value in your input unless you provide some actual input. And if there is opportunity that this player may ba able to improve his situation, why play all this out?
It's my understanding that this particular player has NO chance to meet the new standards. Others might get there.
Quote from: murobrob on April 27, 2012, 10:14:38 PM
It is not a player....I have it on a good source that Buzz, while trying to actually earn his degree, flunked Fr. Donnelly's World History class. My source is the ghost of a brother of a Jesuit priest who died in a horrible deep fried cheese accident after a party at the Jes Res.
Sheeesh.....chill dudes....if a cat can't pull a 2.0 gpa in a major like general communication studies than so be it.....ask Stanford's football program if their academic standards have hurt their program and this "new" rigor can't be even close. Upping the academic standards is not a death sentence for the program. If one or two players can't cut it in the classroom under the BOT's vision for a student/athlete....then transfer to Baylor and enjoy reading Dr. Seuss for the rest of your life. If it is truly an issue of "culling the herd" and using new standards to do so for reasons other than pure academics, then that brings a more complicated nuance to the discussion BTW,. I remember taking a fluff class my senior year (1988) to fill an elective requirement and half the basketball team was taking the same class.....I think I attended 3 classes the entire semester....opening day, mid-term, final....and passed without blinking and half drunk. I think Pop Sims may have written his essay in crayon...
Stanford had Andrew Luck the past 4 years. Ask Notre Dame about raised standards in today's sports world equaling irrelevancy. Look I don't mind upping standards a touch and if a 2.0 throughout admittance is fine. But I've got a feeling they're going to put the hammer down on the program, leading to our pool of recruits becoming Portland/ND esque. Above Hoya-esque standards.
well stated murob -
I think Hiroshima actually refers to the stupid over hyping of the unfairness of a potential dismissal (but maybe not dismissal) of a MU player who cant make ridiculously low academic standards...
Quote from: murobrob on April 27, 2012, 10:14:38 PM
It is not a player....I have it on a good source that Buzz, while trying to actually earn his degree, flunked Fr. Donnelly's World History class. My source is the ghost of a brother of a Jesuit priest who died in a horrible deep fried cheese accident after a party at the Jes Res.
Sheeesh.....chill dudes....if a cat can't pull a 2.0 gpa in a major like general communication studies than so be it.....ask Stanford's football program if their academic standards have hurt their program and this "new" rigor can't be even close. Upping the academic standards is not a death sentence for the program. If one or two players can't cut it in the classroom under the BOT's vision for a student/athlete....then transfer to Baylor and enjoy reading Dr. Seuss for the rest of your life. If it is truly an issue of "culling the herd" and using new standards to do so for reasons other than pure academics, then that brings a more complicated nuance to the discussion BTW,. I remember taking a fluff class my senior year (1988) to fill an elective requirement and half the basketball team was taking the same class.....I think I attended 3 classes the entire semester....opening day, mid-term, final....and passed without blinking and half drunk. I think Pop Sims may have written his essay in crayon...
Quote from: murobrob on April 27, 2012, 10:14:38 PM
Sheeesh.....chill dudes....if a cat can't pull a 2.0 gpa in a major like general communication studies than so be it.....ask Stanford's football program if their academic standards have hurt their program and this "new" rigor can't be even close. Upping the academic standards is not a death sentence for the program. If one or two players can't cut it in the classroom under the BOT's vision for a student/athlete....then transfer to Baylor and enjoy reading Dr. Seuss for the rest of your life. If it is truly an issue of "culling the herd" and using new standards to do so for reasons other than pure academics, then that brings a more complicated nuance to the discussion BTW,. I remember taking a fluff class my senior year (1988) to fill an elective requirement and half the basketball team was taking the same class.....I think I attended 3 classes the entire semester....opening day, mid-term, final....and passed without blinking and half drunk. I think Pop Sims may have written his essay in crayon...
This is why I though the "Hiroshima" talk was a bit of hyperbole. Because I must admit that I am conflicted...I *want* the players to be successful in the classroom. I want our graduation rates that we are all proud of to actually mean something.
However I do want to win too.
And I do think that muguru is right that implementing a new policy late in the game is unfair. Give the kid some steps to get there. Allow him to progress up to that new level over the course of time. Cura personalis.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:14:00 PM
They aren't??? Even if these new standards were raised without prior warning, and relatively no chance to work up to those standards?? You think that's fair?? They were good enough when they were admitted, now they aren't, and it's "too bad, so sad"?? Shouldn't they be doing everything they can to help the kid, rather than just saying "oh well"?? If you implement the standards starting next year or something, ok, plenty fair, but to implement them essentially immediately, without prior advanced warning??
Have you read my previous posts in the last hour???? If not go back and read. I agree. Using the word "force" in my opinion has nothing to do with academics.
Does this relate to the rash of suspensions in the first half of the year as well?
wow - we should be real proud of our highly competitive basketball team that can not hold a 2.0....
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:15:47 PM
It's my understanding that this particular player has NO chance to meet the new standards. Others might get there.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:06:55 PM
I believe that is what the "current" academic standards are. the "new" ones have not yet been announced. Again, I also don't have a problem with higher academic standards persay, but you can NOT change the rules in the middle of the game and not give kids a chance to get up to those standards.
But also remember as someone mentioned earlier, this now will limit the types of kids Buzz can recruit, and with the NCAA changing the Juco requirements.....Is it that far fetched to think MU could become SLU?? A bunch of great students playing BB, just not at a particularly high level.
see slippery slope....I mean...really? Buzz will only be able to recruit kids who starred in "hoosiers" under the new academic standards? I respect your outlook and opinions and have no doubt you have good insights into the program from people closer than most....but to go right to high academic standards equalling mid-major quality basketball is just plain sensationalism. Seems like Duke has done pretty well, no? Our hated N.D. fields a pretty competitive team now and then, no? Even according to your insights, this may affect 1, 2 or 3 current players (or more?).....doesn't affect all which means many current players can meet the new (yet to be determined) criteria, no?
sorry, I may sound like an a-hole....just typing my thoughts out loud...usually Lagavullin chills me out :)
Quote from: MUBurrow on April 27, 2012, 10:20:11 PM
Does this relate to the rash of suspensions in the first half of the year as well?
My understanding is no.
Quote from: murobrob on April 27, 2012, 10:21:11 PM
see slippery slope....I mean...really? Buzz will only be able to recruit kids who starred in "hoosiers" under the new academic standards? I respect your outlook and opinions and have no doubt you have good insights into the program from people closer than most....but to go right to high academic standards equalling mid-major quality basketball is just plain sensationalism. Seems like Duke has done pretty well, no? Our hated N.D. fields a pretty competitive team now and then, no? Even according to your insights, this may affect 1, 2 or 3 current players (or more?).....doesn't affect all which means many current players can meet the new (yet to be determined) criteria, no?
sorry, I may sound like an a-hole....just typing my thoughts out loud...usually Lagavullin chills me out :)
ND and Duke have a lot more to offer academically than MU. We won't get the upper crust of the traditionals academic all american pool.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 27, 2012, 10:14:30 PM
Why don't you stop posting. You've added nothing. Sultan basically told us the low down, if you can't connect the dots then tough. Sultan has his threshold.
You're right, I will not claim to know what is going on inside the program, nor will I post as if I do. Btw, We all could connect the dots on most of this without the three of you hinting at dramatic problems that amount to... Not much... Not saying there won't be another transfer soon, but if you know, say it. Or stop. Is that unfair?
Crean was slick and clean cut and charmed the BOT. Buzz doesn't have that same marketing ability that Crean has. So the BOT isn't in love with him and his players.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 10:21:00 PM
wow - we should be real proud of our highly competitive basketball team that can not hold a 2.0....
I am.
And I can say that because if you read the policy, it requires them to step up their academic progress over the course of time to meet the university's graduation requirements.
Here's what i don't know though....If the player is not meeting academic standards, are they just revoking his scholarship, or kicking him off the team and essentially out of school altogether?? For instance, what if they paid their own way as a "walk on" would they still allow that?? Or would that be too "creative" and "circumventing" the new admin's rules??
I liked when Crean sat Trend down until he turned it around. I'd be more concerned with dumping a kid without a fair warning chance to redeem themselves vs. Buzzcutting. Hardly fair. That said, four strikes and you are out.
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:25:05 PM
You're right, I will not claim to know what is going on inside the program, nor will I post as if I do. Btw, We all could connect the dots on most of this without the three of you hinting at dramatic problems that amount to... Not much... Not saying there won't be another transfer soon, but if you know, say it. Or stop. Is that unfair?
Because nothing is set in stone yet because THE SEMESTER HASN'T ENDED!!!! That is why muguru is saying to wait a couple weeks.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 10:19:14 PM
This is why I though the "Hiroshima" talk was a bit of hyperbole. Because I must admit that I am conflicted...I *want* the players to be successful in the classroom. I want our graduation rates that we are all proud of to actually mean something.
However I do want to win too.
And I do think that muguru is right that implementing a new policy late in the game is unfair. Give the kid some steps to get there. Allow him to progress up to that new level over the course of time. Cura personalis.
Feel the same conflict Sultan...you stated it very well. I love the rise of the program and the potential for increased prominence on the court.....yet....feel sqeemish watching schools like Kentucky becoming one-and-done factories for for the NBA with no real connection to the actual mission of the university. Anyway...appreciate your outlook on it as my feelings are very very similar.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 10:27:25 PM
Because nothing is set in stone yet because THE SEMESTER HASN'T ENDED!!!! That is why muguru is saying to wait a couple weeks.
Good idea. Wait till later and then I'll tell you if what I'm hinting at is accurate or not.
I read the policy - looks very much the same as UW-Madison's
wow, so they have to progress from a 1.8 to a 2.0 by the time they graduate - holy crap, that's unfair...
Bucky's policy:
2011–12 • During Year 1
1.80 GPA after second semester
Pass 6 degree credits each semester
Pass 18 credits during the academic year
Complete 24 credits
2012–13 • Begin Year 2
1.80 cumulative GPA to compete
24 earned credits in residence
Pass 6 degree credits each semester
Pass 18 degree credits during the academic year
2013–14 • Begin Year 3
1.90 cumulative GPA to compete
Declared a major or have pre-major approval on file
40% of the degree requirements complete at the start of the fall term
Pass 6 degree credits each semester
Pass 18 degree credits during the academic year
2014–15 • Begin Year 4
2.0 cumulative GPA to compete
60% of degree requirements completed
5-year graduation plan verified and signed by major advisor
Pass 6 degree credits each semester
Pass 18 degree credits during the academic year
Can be enrolled in fewer than 12 credits if the campus advisor verifies in writing that
the student will graduate at the end of the term
2015–16 • Begin Year 5
2.0 cumulative GPA
80% of degree requirements completed
5-year graduation plan verified and signed by major advisor
Pass 6 degree credits each semester
Pass 18 degree credits during the academic year
Can be enrolled in fewer than 12 credits if the campus
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 27, 2012, 10:25:51 PM
I am.
And I can say that because if you read the policy, it requires them to step up their academic progress over the course of time to meet the university's graduation requirements.
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 09:59:12 PM
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/acad-comp/spec-rel/070110aaa.html)
It looks like Chris Otule has beaten the system, there are no six year student athlete rules.
Anyone know if or when MU will announce the new academic standards?
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 27, 2012, 09:59:22 PM
I have a feeling I'm gonna despise this admin. Losing will eventually seep in then after about 15 years of sucking they may again be ready to play big boy b-ball.
We just need to go through our SMU period.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 10:21:00 PM
wow - we should be real proud of our highly competitive basketball team that can not hold a 2.0....
If only MU could offer some of the joke classes offered at Madison, and widely enrolled in by the football team and basketball team. John Clay and Ron Dayne sure hit it out of the park in their Agricultural Journalism stuides/majors..
And..the academic standards listed are those of the NCAA as minimums - and likely the same ones used at every high major D-1 school. By all indications the whole team is currently meeting those standards...but now they are being raised...
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:26:09 PM
Here's what i don't know though....If the player is not meeting academic standards, are they just revoking his scholarship, or kicking him off the team and essentially out of school altogether?? For instance, what if they paid their own way as a "walk on" would they still allow that?? Or would that be too "creative" and "circumventing" the new admin's rules??
Usually, again usually, if an athlete is under the grade/academic standards, they are suspended from athletic involvement and then there is a timeframe to get the grades in order. If the athlete continues in not achieving the standards, the scholarship is most likely revoked. Most athletes probably cannot afford the tuition and they leave. If a walk-on, the athlete would have to meet the University's overall academic standards to remain.
If any athlete fails in academics, not on the "bubble", they are gone as any other regular student.
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:10:49 PM
Then stop posting about it. There's zero value in your input unless you provide some actual input. And if there is opportunity that this player may ba able to improve his situation, why play all this out?
I appreciate your critiquing of Sultan's input, and your not allowing him to get away with posting at a level of input that you find unacceptable. By the way, exactly what "input" have you ever provided?
Quote from: Ners on April 27, 2012, 10:35:04 PM
If only MU could offer some of the joke classes offered at Madison, and widely enrolled in by the football team and basketball team. John Clay and Ron Dayne sure hit it out of the park in their Agricultural Journalism stuides/majors..
And..the academic standards listed are those of the NCAA as minimums - and likely the same ones used at every high major D-1 school. By all indications the whole team is currently meeting those standards...but now they are being raised...
Don't tell murobrob or madtown that, they've already decided that these are the new standards, and we should be happy to lose the numskulls who can't make them.
Just sayin...MU's 91% graduation rate compares to
- SLU's graduation rate = 67%
- Bucky's = 50%
- Gtown's = 70%
Can MU be more like SLU? Maybe MU would make it to the F4 then? Maybe this is why Buzz was po'ed...felt MBB was singled out while they have been been successful handling it within prior. Who had his back? Who had the pitch forks?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/03/in-different-college-basketball-bracket-study-finds-gap-in-graduation-rate.html
at the Basketball banquet, all the players profusely thanking Adrienne for the academic support, maybe Adrienne needs to step up her game....
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 27, 2012, 04:04:22 PM
Friday afternoon seems to be the time to let bad news slip out for the Marquette Sports Information folk.
I don't see this as bad news for MU hoops, and probably isn't bad for Jamail in long run, either.
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 27, 2012, 10:58:32 PM
Don't tell murobrob or madtown that, they've already decided that these are the new standards, and we should be happy to lose the numskulls who can't make them.
huh? shoot the dog dude....shoot the dog.
can't carry a 2.0 in the classroom - > probably explains the low basketball IQ many on this board complain about...
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 27, 2012, 10:58:32 PM
Don't tell murobrob or madtown that, they've already decided that these are the new standards, and we should be happy to lose the numskulls who can't make them.
Quote from: MU82 on April 27, 2012, 11:01:55 PM
I don't see this as bad news for MU hoops, and probably isn't bad for Jamail in long run, either.
I didn't say that you did. Evidently, Marquette released it so that it would have less of an opportunity to be noticed, so MU must view it as something that puts in university in a negative light.
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 27, 2012, 10:58:32 PM
Don't tell murobrob or madtown that, they've already decided that these are the new standards, and we should be happy to lose the numskulls who can't make them.
Maybe MadtownWarrior should change his handle to MadtownBadger.
Quote from: murobrob on April 27, 2012, 11:04:11 PM
huh? shoot the dog dude....shoot the dog.
LOL. It took years, but finally someone said it.
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 27, 2012, 11:08:22 PM
LOL. It took years, but finally someone said it.
I notice the details, brother, I notice :)
have a good night....I don't post much but appreciate the discussions...it is all good as we all do have a passion for MU and MU Hoops.
I'll tell you what will (and should) start a shytstorm around here. If Vander and/or others are stytcanned but can tranfer to other D1 programs because they are meeting UW, Indiana and N Carolina type standards we all should be up in arms. It would mean a death knell for the program in addition to being retroactively unfair to the student athletes we recruited, accepted and allegedly gave a shyte about.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 27, 2012, 11:20:11 PM
I'll tell you what will (and should) start a shytstorm around here. If Vander and/or others are stytcanned but can tranfer to other D1 programs because they are meeting UW, Indiana and N Carolina type standards we all should be up in arms. It would mean a death knell for the program in addition to being retroactively unfair to the student athletes we recruited, accepted and allegedly gave a shyte about.
IMO, it would be nothing less than the BOT
using student athletes to try and score a PR coup.
I am stuck in a foreign country with many dollars. I can only get out if you send $1000 to me. I will share my fortune with you for your trouble.
I'm fairly certain this will work as people here seem to believe everything they hear, no matter how insane.
I'm sad to see him go, bit I can't say it was much of a surprise. I hope he sees time at a school that is a good fit for him. He always had a great attitude considering his high h.s. ranking and getting stuck with a bench role here. Best of luck to you jamailman.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on April 27, 2012, 11:48:16 PM
I am stuck in a foreign country with many dollars. I can only get out if you send $1000 to me. I will share my fortune with you for your trouble.
I'm fairly certain this will work as people here seem to believe everything they hear, no matter how insane.
Please message me your address, is it okay if I make the check out to "Cash"?
Quote from: JTBMU7 on April 27, 2012, 10:29:20 PM
Good idea. Wait till later and then I'll tell you if what I'm hinting at is accurate or not.
I mentioned the name to four Scoopers in PM. When it is announced, I am sure they will be able to verify if I was correct.
I don't have an issue with the raising of academic standards for the athletes as long as the academic standards are raised for all students as well. Hell, who can argue against that? However, what I suspect has happened, particularly under Buzz' watch, is the caliper of student athlete recruited, has been dummied down. All select academic institutions have athletes who don't match the profile of the university. Happens at Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, etc. Its all relative.
Marquette is a middle of the road school. Nothing wrong with that. But, if the vision of Pilarz and BOT is to rise the school's profile in the eyes of U.S. News, then the new student athlete standards must follow in lockstep. Obviously, this makes Buzz' job that must tougher. Something's gonna give. Wishing both MU and Buzz the best of luck.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 28, 2012, 06:45:48 AM
Marquette is a middle of the road school. Nothing wrong with that. But, if the vision of Pilarz and BOT is to rise the school's profile in the eyes of U.S. News, then the new student athlete standards must follow in lockstep. Obviously, this makes Buzz' job that must tougher. Something's gonna give. Wishing both MU and Buzz the best of luck.
I don't know...it's hard to argue against tougher academic standards, but we graduate 91% of our basketball players and 80% of African-American basketball players. I can't imagine 10-13 scholarship athletes that are graduating at that rate are going to have any measureable negative impact on our overall academic statistics.
It's a drop in the bucket and we're already doing very well in regards to the academic success of our basketball team. Really not sure tougher standards are needed there.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 10:05:42 PM
again - if anyone cant make a 1.9, does not deserve a scholarship...
it's never that easy...which is why i hate black and white rules.
some kids do have learning disabilities....higher rate from low socio-economic background.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 27, 2012, 10:05:42 PM
again - if anyone cant make a 1.9, does not deserve a scholarship...
They are getting an athletic-grant-in-aid to play basketball....not a scholarship based on their academic performance.
Got a feeling that this is not going to end well. We are going to lose player(s) and maybe our coach.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 07:59:10 AM
some kids do have learning disabilities....higher rate from low socio-economic background.
Really going there? So this is now a program for the learning disabled (so long as they're a Top 60 prospect)?
There is balance in everything. I take pride in all that is MU. Hoops and academics. I'm believe in the notion that acceptable grades and real progress toward one's degree is a prerequisite to athletic participation. Trust me, acceptable grades and progress toward one's degree is a constant refrain in my household where I now write two tuition checks to our beloved institution. If MU leadership felt that academic standards had slipped and therefore needed to bump (or more vigorously enforce) the threshold a bit, I fully understand. But I do agree with the notion that individual student athletes should be given some time to meet the new standards.
i thought they were "student-athletes" or are you saying it's just now "athletes"
you suggest I should become a badger fan - I don't like the badgers but I think I now understand where badger fans get their material for academic jokes about MU basketball now...
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 28, 2012, 08:08:11 AM
They are getting an athletic-grant-in-aid to play basketball....not a scholarship based on their academic performance.
Quote from: ATWizJr on April 28, 2012, 08:09:04 AM
Got a feeling that this is not going to end well. We are going to lose player(s) and maybe our coach.
I suppose that depends on the definition of 'ends well'.
Look. Back in the day, Glen went to class, studied for and passed his exams and ultimately earned his degree after making the choice to head for the NBA one year early. This year he was named MU alumni of the year. More recently, Wes was featured in the annual hardcover basketball publication proudly holding his diploma. Jimmy and Joe walked across the stage in December. Jimmy's making a mint playing for the Bulls and just as importantly Joe has landed his first professional job down in Texas. Those stories ought to be the norm, not the exception.
First to the topic of the thread, I'm sad to see Jamail go. I've always been optimistic about him and thought he had the body, athleticism, and game to be a pretty good player. He just didn't seem to get it defensively and that may have hurt his confidence. Hopefully wherever he goes, he can put it together. I'll be rooting for him.
As far as the current topic of the thread, I'm pretty angry if true. The academic standards seem to be pretty low, but that's consistent with everywhere as shown earlier in the thread. With all the help the players get, unless they have a learning disability, they should be able to meet those with no problems. However, the part I'm really mad about is if it is true that they changed these mid-year and you have to get there by the end of the semester. It isn't always easy to drastically change a GPA in one semester.
I don't think it is any secret that many of the basketball players probably wouldn't be admitted as normal students. However, I can't help but think of Al's quote, "Use basketball, don't let it use you." A lot of these kids come from pretty tough childhoods. They also don't necessarily get a great education growing up and may be behind. For a lot of kids (not just at Marquette), basketball is a means of getting a great education and bettering their life. It may allow them the exposure to go pro, but most importantly, they get a degree. Look at Joe Fulce's quotes in that article from CNN. He was able to get a job in Dallas due to his Marquette education.
Now the increased academic standards may be a way to do an even better job of the above, but to kind of pull the rug out from under kids as it seems, is just wrong and seems to go against what I thought MU was about.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 28, 2012, 06:45:48 AM
I don't have an issue with the raising of academic standards for the athletes as long as the academic standards are raised for all students as well. Hell, who can argue against that? However, what I suspect has happened, particularly under Buzz' watch, is the caliper of student athlete recruited, has been dummied down. All select academic institutions have athletes who don't match the profile of the university. Happens at Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, etc. Its all relative.
Marquette is a middle of the road school. Nothing wrong with that. But, if the vision of Pilarz and BOT is to rise the school's profile in the eyes of U.S. News, then the new student athlete standards must follow in lockstep. Obviously, this makes Buzz' job that must tougher. Something's gonna give. Wishing both MU and Buzz the best of luck.
Agree with a lot of what you write here - but the irony is that Marquette's profile nationally will slide if the hoops team goes to crap. Most Americans can't place Marquette in Milwaukee as it is, and the way most Americans know Marquette is - Oh, they always have a good basketball team, right? Same with Gonzaga. BOT and Pilarz better realize MU is never going to be Duke, Stanford, Notre Dame, Northwestern - and reducing the profile of the basketball team/national awareness through the tightening of academic standards for athletes/basketball players - is only going reduce the number of applications of interested students coming to MU. The fewer applications, the fewer bright minds enrolling at MU (to an extent).
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 28, 2012, 08:41:19 AM
you suggest I should become a badger fan - I don't like the badgers but I think I now understand where badger fans get their material for academic jokes about MU basketball now...
From the the Badgers 50% basketball graduation rate? This is not just a MU problem. In fact MU is better than most. I doubt that anyone is questioning the move to raise the bar...just when they are moving it. First generation college students have a higher hill to climb as is known and has been published. Many schools are adding in special programs to help these kids and their families adjust...it usually takes a couple of years to assimilate. Saw Mrs. DJO at NCAA's walking up the stands after a MU win and fans were congratulating her on her son's win. She was patting the young kids on their head as she went telling them to study in school. She will be proud in a couple of weeks and so will I.
Quote from: jsglow on April 28, 2012, 08:59:01 AM
I suppose that depends on the definition of 'ends well'.
Look. Back in the day, Glen went to class, studied for and passed his exams and ultimately earned his degree after making the choice to head for the NBA one year early. This year he was named MU alumni of the year. More recently, Wes was featured in the annual hardcover basketball publication proudly holding his diploma. Jimmy and Joe walked across the stage in December. Jimmy's making a mint playing for the Bulls and just as importantly Joe has landed his first professional job down in Texas. Those stories ought to be the norm, not the exception.
our players are graduating at a high clip though. Would jimmy and joe have graduated with these new standards?
Quote from: madtownwarrior on April 28, 2012, 08:41:19 AMyou suggest I should become a badger fan - I don't like the badgers but I think I now understand where badger fans get their material for academic jokes about MU basketball now...
You do? Is it from their 50% basketball graduation rate (MU is at 91%) or the 29% black basketball student-athlete graduation rate (MU is at 80%). Or maybe the laughable assertion that their curriculum is "harder", hence why they are rated better academically (when the actual reason is their research programs that have zero bearing on the average undergrad)?
The Badger fans get their material from being ignorant and uninformed. Their academic jokes about MU are just that -- a joke that shows how idiotic they are.
FWIW, graduation rate and thew new academic standards are a somewhat apples to oranges comparison. The new standards would make it harder to graduate, but (I'm sure the idea is that) those new, tougher standards would raise the reputation of MU and the value of the degree. Now I certainly don't see this coming to fruition as the BoT, Pilarz, etc might. But to reference the high graduation rate is question begging, when the implicit accusation from the higher ups is that MU is just pushing these kids through. Their counterargument to the conversation here will undoubtedly be that while the grad rate is high, that doesnt mean anything when the standards are so low that kids are graduating without ever having to rise to the level of knowledge that should be requisite for their degree.
Not sure I agree with the above, but its important to recognize that the grad rates don't speak to the issue at hand.
Does everyone remember when Pilarsz came in, he had that "outside" firm do a "peer" review?? That's where this all started. If you remember(and I'm not sure i do completely), but weren't the outside people there from Notre Dame, Penn and some place else?? They were all prestigious academic schools I know that. Didn't Pilarsz then hire the AD with Notre Dame ties?? I'm just sayin'.
How long do you suppose it will be before Jesse and Al show up to call racism on MU's new academic policy.
But even that wouldn't be Hiroshima; heck, it wouldn't even be a Nagasaki.
Hiroshima would be finding out Larry Williams is a Bruins fan with a Twitter account. Everything else is a Kokura, at worst.
Guru
More importantly it comes down to what Fr. P thinks of Buzz. I do not believe, from I hear, this is a LW issue but starts higher up. Buzz is not for everyone and Fr.P probably wants a different face of the program. Wish him luck on keeping program at this level if he makes major changes.
"Fr.P probably wants a different face of the program"
know something or speculating?
Madtown
Speculating from things I have heard. I think by now it is common knowledge that things are not the same with the MU and Buzz relationship. How deep the problem is only can be answered by parties involved and doubt if that ever comes out. Guru probably is correct that real reasons why things happen probably will never be known. I said awhile back that I think school wants different identity and time will tell. I personally like us being known for ball program and think it represents school very well for most part.
Basically the end effective outcome will be more white players and less JUCOs, imo. That will be the identity Pilarz wants, less dreads more crew cuts. And as the "poor, tated" kids leave so will the off the court problems.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 10:53:31 AM
Basically the end effective outcome will be more white players and less JUCOs, imo. That will be the identity Pilarz wants, less dreads more crew cuts. And as the "poor, tated" kids leave so will the off the court problems.
Stone, your comment is possibly the most irresponsible thing I have ever read on this board. You essentially called Fr. Pilarz a racist. You are WAY out of line, sir.
Quote from: muguru on April 28, 2012, 10:33:06 AM
Does everyone remember when Pilarsz came in, he had that "outside" firm do a "peer" review?? That's where this all started. If you remember(and I'm not sure i do completely), but weren't the outside people there from Notre Dame, Penn and some place else?? They were all prestigious academic schools I know that. Didn't Pilarsz then hire the AD with Notre Dame ties?? I'm just sayin'.
He also hired the woman from Penn/Notre Dame.
http://www.marquette.edu/president/letters-appointment-distanislao.php
Go back and look what happened when MU tried to become Notre Dame in the 1950's. Moon Mullins was the AD with Notre Dame ties and hired ND assistant Johnny Druze. It resulted in a 2-26-1 three year record and a year after Druze left, Marquette dropped the sport.
Quote from: jsglow on April 28, 2012, 10:56:08 AM
Stone, your comment is possibly the most irresponsible thing I have ever read on this board. You essentially called Fr. Pilarz a racist. You are WAY out of line, sir.
That's the resultant effect as I see it. Pilarz wants his increased standards that's what will happen. Reality of the basketball world and socio-economic statuses.
Quote from: Goose on April 28, 2012, 10:38:42 AM
Guru
More importantly it comes down to what Fr. P thinks of Buzz. I do not believe, from I hear, this is a LW issue but starts higher up. Buzz is not for everyone and Fr.P probably wants a different face of the program. Wish him luck on keeping program at this level if he makes major changes.
It will be impossible to maintain it at the same level. For whatever reason Fr. P cannot and doesn't comprehend the fact that right or wrong, the BB program is THE face of the University. It drives everything. That goes down, so does the image of the University. It's just a fact.
Ego's always get in the way of things. New guys means new ideas and often change. Funny thing is I have enjoyed the direction Buzz has taken program more than any coach since Al. He is recruiting the exact kind of kids I have wanted us to recruit for 35 years. My guess is Fr.P wants to sleep at night and not worry if a problem is going to happen, basically reduced risk and unfortunately reduced reward for alums that want winning program.
Guru
There are people out there that do not think the BB program is the face of the school and that is flat out crazy. Very few outside of regional folks know much about MU and most everything they know is because of what Al started and others tried to maintain. We are a basketball school first and a good regional university second. I love MU and honest say what we are, at least IMO which is based off talking people about MU.
Quote from: TedBaxter on April 28, 2012, 10:56:46 AM
He also hired the woman from Penn/Notre Dame.
http://www.marquette.edu/president/letters-appointment-distanislao.php
Go back and look what happened when MU tried to become Notre Dame in the 1950's. Moon Mullins was the AD with Notre Dame ties and hired ND assistant Johnny Druze. It resulted in a 2-26-1 three year record and a year after Druze left, Marquette dropped the sport.
astute observations from guru and yourself. Never thought of it in that context. This process was started a long time ago. Cottingham first casualty, then the players, then Buzz. Pilarz will be satisfied then when the Bill Carmody's of the world are all who will come here.
Quote from: Goose on April 28, 2012, 11:03:02 AM
My guess is Fr.P wants to sleep at night and not worry if a problem is going to happen, basically reduced risk and unfortunately reduced reward for alums that want winning program.
And then reduced alumni donations. Money talks. If there are big-time donors that don't like the apparently new direction, hopefully they are speaking with their checkbooks and pulling donations until things are rectified.
"Messing with happy" goes far beyond Buzz.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on April 27, 2012, 11:48:16 PM
I am stuck in a foreign country with many dollars. I can only get out if you send $1000 to me. I will share my fortune with you for your trouble.
I'm fairly certain this will work as people here seem to believe everything they hear, no matter how insane.
Yes, appears the "Pilarz and Williams are hell-bent to destroy MU basketball and turn it into SLU" paranoia/freak-out is back. Based on ZERO evidence, just some folks inhaling the constantly wafting, bulls*** scented ether from this board in DEEPLY. Foil hats and free John Birch Society membership for everyone!
Quote from: muguru on April 27, 2012, 10:15:47 PM
It's my understanding that this particular player has NO chance to meet the new standards. Others might get there.
Do you mean no realistic chance or truly no chance? If a sophomore has 36 credits with even a d going into this semester that's 36 points. He could've taken 6 blow off classes and busted his ass for As. That would make a total of 108 gpa points for a 2.0 gpa. So either the player wasn't willing to do everything possible to reach the academic goals or he had less than. 1.0 gpa and which point he should not be on the team.
And to your analogy earlier, if a new boss saw I was doing the absolute bare min at my job, I'm pretty sure I would be fired immediately. It would suck but that doesnt mean I shouldn't have been fired.
Quote from: lab_warrior on April 28, 2012, 11:24:39 AM
Yes, appears the "Pilarz and Williams are hell-bent to destroy MU basketball and turn it into SLU" paranoia/freak-out is back. Based on ZERO evidence, just some folks inhaling the constantly wafting, bulls*** scented ether from this board in DEEPLY. Foil hats and free John Birch Society membership for everyone!
If there is legitimate cause to be concerned, then I hope that money talks and donors pull out until things change. If this does turn into a big pile of nothing, then that'd be good for all.
One thing that I will take away from this discussion is that we all want a successful, happy program. If there is no cause for concern at the end of this, we all will hopefully take a deep breath and be happy. I know I will.
Quote from: lab_warrior on April 28, 2012, 11:24:39 AM
Yes, appears the "Pilarz and Williams are hell-bent to destroy MU basketball and turn it into SLU" paranoia/freak-out is back. Based on ZERO evidence, just some folks inhaling the constantly wafting, bulls*** scented ether from this board in DEEPLY. Foil hats and free John Birch Society membership for everyone!
So multiple posters who have track records of inside knowledge are saying the same thing and that's ZERO evidence?
I think this story connects enough dots that I fear its true.
However if true it is Hiroshima because it means the following things:
-We will be turning our backs on Cura Personalis because we are potentially hanging players out to dry
-We will be harming our own APR which will get more PR than raised GPA standards
-We are sacrificing athletic success potentially for some unquantified benefit of being an "academic" university
-The people driving the situation have no realization that basketball has driven the growth that has allowed things like the new buildings on campus, etc.
-We have added new non-revenue sports which they are expecting basketball to fund, but if this is true basketball will lose revenue b/c I think Buzz will be gone and it will be tough to get someone close to the same caliber given the situation as it appears
LabWarrior
How are you certain you are correct? Please share your evidence that everything is fine. I am sure everyone would like to hear your positive news.
You guys have taken this and drawn up all sorts of nightmare scenarios. Knowing this policy exists, or soon would exist, Buzz still went out and got a verbal from the likes of Duane Wilson, who is looking more and more like a BE caliber player. This isn't the end of the world.
Lab -
Do you mean that you think this is meaningless panic because you don't think the new academic regulations will come to fruition, or because you think everyone is overreacting to what the fallout from those standards will be?
Quote from: lab_warrior on April 28, 2012, 11:24:39 AM
Yes, appears the "Pilarz and Williams are hell-bent to destroy MU basketball and turn it into SLU" paranoia/freak-out is back. Based on ZERO evidence, just some folks inhaling the constantly wafting, bulls*** scented ether from this board in DEEPLY. Foil hats and free John Birch Society membership for everyone!
You forgot to add that there are Penn and Notre Dame graduates involved, and therefore MU hoops is screwed.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 10:59:37 AM
That's the resultant effect as I see it. Pilarz wants his increased standards that's what will happen. Reality of the basketball world and socio-economic statuses.
So highering standards means less jucos and less black athletes? I'm sorry THAT seems racist. Unless there is some ultra high standards being issued I don't think most athletes will notice in the future. Mu will just push them harder in the future.
Quote from: mu03eng on April 28, 2012, 11:43:24 AM
So multiple posters who have track records of inside knowledge are saying the same thing and that's ZERO evidence?
I think this story connects enough dots that I fear its true.
However if true it is Hiroshima because it means the following things:
-We will be turning our backs on Cura Personalis because we are potentially hanging players out to dry
-We will be harming our own APR which will get more PR than raised GPA standards
-We are sacrificing athletic success potentially for some unquantified benefit of being an "academic" university
-The people driving the situation have no realization that basketball has driven the growth that has allowed things like the new buildings on campus, etc.
-We have added new non-revenue sports which they are expecting basketball to fund, but if this is true basketball will lose revenue b/c I think Buzz will be gone and it will be tough to get someone close to the same caliber given the situation as it appears
The "evidence" that we have right now might be correct, but it doesn't lead to the conclusions some have made.
MU
MIGHT be raising the academic standard, therefore, we can conclude that Pilarz wants more white players? WTF is that?
I think the whole white player thing is crazy talk. But, think higher standards limits the talent pool way too much for MU. Not a good enough school to play at a disadvantage to competition.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 28, 2012, 11:47:34 AM
You guys have taken this and drawn up all sorts of nightmare scenarios. Knowing this policy exists, or soon would exist, Buzz still went out and got a verbal from the likes of Duane Wilson, who is looking more and more like a BE caliber player. This isn't the end of the world.
+1
AGREED. COMPLETELY. Oh, and he went and offered Diamond Stone, too. Guess Buzz is super concerned about the new "policy" affecting the program. Kkeep thwarting Pilarz and Williams relentless quest to destroy MU basketball, Buzz!
Quote from: Goose on April 28, 2012, 11:55:48 AM
I think the whole white player thing is crazy talk. But, think higher standards limits the talent pool way too much for MU. Not a good enough school to play at a disadvantage to competition.
MAYBE... but we don't know what the standard is going to be.
Honestly, how many guys are barely getting by right now? I was always given the impression the players were decent students (like 2.5+).
Maybe I'm wrong.
Let's find out if there is a "new standard" before we freak out about ND people, crew cuts, white guys and no jucos.
C'mon guys.
I had heard about this right around the time muguru had posted, had exchanged PMs with both him and Sultan.
I have not been able to confirm what the changes are or will be, so speculating on the effect it will have is pretty futile. I also agree with Sultan that naming the players is unfair to them.
We'll all find out when the semester ends. No news would be the best news.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 28, 2012, 11:50:21 AM
So highering standards means less jucos and less black athletes? I'm sorry THAT seems racist. Unless there is some ultra high standards being issued I don't think most athletes will notice in the future. Mu will just push them harder in the future.
Look at the rosters of ND, Duke, and Stanford. Black athletes will have less opportunity at Marquette. The pool will shrink.
Lab Warrior
Buzz is a recruiter and always be a recruiter. Do you think if he is thinking about leaving he gives up recruiting for a year? You are an idiot. offering a freshman is good PR for him if he stays or not. The kids come to play here because of him and relationships formed today work in his best interest regardless of who signs his check.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on April 27, 2012, 11:48:16 PM
I am stuck in a foreign country with many dollars. I can only get out if you send $1000 to me. I will share my fortune with you for your trouble.
I'm fairly certain this will work as people here seem to believe everything they hear, no matter how insane.
+1
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 12:03:25 PM
Look at the rosters of ND, Duke, and Stanford. Black athletes will have less opportunity at Marquette. The pool will shrink.
Yet they still win at a high level. Stanford has more titles than anyone in the country in sports except UCLA.
You keep predicting a drop off, why?
Ultimately if what you say is true, then the irony is that Buzz messed with his own happy. MU expects to win but win without the bad press. There are plenty of programs that win consistently (if not more consistently than MU) over the years without the bad press.
If what I have read here is correct on the 1.8 GPA, we should be embarrassed that our guys can't meet those levels. With all the help MU has for tutoring and academic resources, there is no way a student athlete should not be able to hit those marks.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 10:53:31 AM
Basically the end effective outcome will be more white players and less JUCOs, imo. That will be the identity Pilarz wants, less dreads more crew cuts. And as the "poor, tated" kids leave so will the off the court problems.
Probably wants an identity of winning without the negative press. You and others here are predicting impending doom as if this can't happen.
Didn't MU go to a Final Four in the last ten years with far less negatives off the court? Hasn't Wisconsin been a better overall program the last 15 years than Marquette without all the negatives off the court?
It can be done. Have you ever thought that MU could raise their academic profile even more and start to land some of those same kids that are going to Vanderbilt, Duke, Wisconsin, UCLA, Stanford, etc?
Wisconsin fans have every reason to laugh at our academic standards if what you and others are reporting in this thread are true.
Quote from: MUBurrow on April 28, 2012, 11:48:24 AM
Lab -
Do you mean that you think this is meaningless panic because you don't think the new academic regulations will come to fruition, or because you think everyone is overreacting to what the fallout from those standards will be?
About the "policy" what's the best way to text/emoticon a "I don't know, or better yet,
care" shoulder shrug? Like most common sense people, I'll form an opinion about it, you know, WHEN IT ACTUALLY HAPPENS, as opposed to nervously crapping my pants about hypotheticals.
About the overreacting to its effects: A resounding YES.
Refresh my memory, did Buzz take the SMU job? There was plenty of "evidence" and "sources" whipping up a poop tornado here saying that he was. And it was a whole steaming bag of wrong-o.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 12:06:29 PM
Yet they still win at a high level. Stanford has more titles than anyone in the country in sports except UCLA.
You keep predicting a drop off, why?
Ultimately if what you say is true, then the irony is that Buzz messed with his own happy. MU expects to win but win without the bad press. There are plenty of programs that win consistently (if not more consistently than MU) over the years without the bad press.
If what I have read here is correct on the 1.8 GPA, we should be embarrassed that our guys can't meet those levels. With all the help MU has for tutoring and academic resources, there is no way a student athlete should not be able to hit those marks.
Have you played college athletics? The tutoring and academic resources get them back to neutral at best considering how much time they are not actually in class and are on the road/playing/practicing. They have to have a 2.0 to graduate(right now) I don't have any issue with that whatsoever especially if we are competitive enough to put players into Europe and the NBA playing ball so their GPA isn't critical. Plus we are giving educational opportunities to people who otherwise wouldn't have that chance why would we want to turn our backs on those folks?
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 12:06:29 PM
Yet they still win at a high level. Stanford has more titles than anyone in the country in sports except UCLA.
You keep predicting a drop off, why?
Ultimately if what you say is true, then the irony is that Buzz messed with his own happy. MU expects to win but win without the bad press. There are plenty of programs that win consistently (if not more consistently than MU) over the years without the bad press.
If what I have read here is correct on the 1.8 GPA, we should be embarrassed that our guys can't meet those levels. With all the help MU has for tutoring and academic resources, there is no way a student athlete should not be able to hit those marks.
We are not ND, Stanford, or Duke academically. We'll be left with the sloppy seconds academic all-americans. When Pilarz does the actual hardwork and gets us there as an instution, I will be all for those academic standards athletically.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 28, 2012, 11:47:34 AM
You guys have taken this and drawn up all sorts of nightmare scenarios. Knowing this policy exists, or soon would exist, Buzz still went out and got a verbal from the likes of Duane Wilson, who is looking more and more like a BE caliber player. This isn't the end of the world.
Depends upon if Buzz has the transcripts of Wilson or not. He may have spoken generically or asked for the transcripts. I do not know that he has asked for or received them or not.
Looks like Chicos is back to fan the flames...uh..I mean Hoop. I'm sure none of the guys on the 2003 team, or Wes, Rel and Dominic ever went out to bars or clubs in Milwaukee. Sure none of them ever got in a fight...Dominic? Rel? Our current players weren't even drinking at the dang bar they were ticketed for being underage in...give me a break...like no underage athletes at Stanford, Duke, IU or UW...go to bars. Hell the national story that came out on ESPN on this, the comments from people below the story were essentially: "This is ridiculous. Big deal."
The bad ink MU has gotten has been the result of a witch hunt by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Chicago Tribune. Expose stories, intended to sell copies and win Pulizters. No charges were filed in the assault cases. MU followed its long standing policy on sex assault policy. The basketball program/staff didn't make up the policy for how such things were handled. Keep in mind, the sex assault allegations began as consensual, but then mid thrust apparently turned to non consensual.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 11:07:50 AM
astute observations from guru and yourself. Never thought of it in that context. This process was started a long time ago. Cottingham first casualty, then the players, then Buzz. Pilarz will be satisfied then when the Bill Carmody's of the world are all who will come here.
The comparisons of MU football in 1960 vs MU hoops in 2012 are so off base. You lose credibility even sniffing in that arena. Not even remotely close. Look at MU football the previous two decades
1936 was the last formidable team we had and the year we went to the Cotton Bowl
1940-1944 One winning season
1945-1949 No winning seasons
1950 - 1954 Two winning seasons (including against "powers" Boston U, Detroit, South Dakota State, Santa Clara, North Dakota State)
1955-1960 No winning seasons
They are not remotely comparable on any level to basketball.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 12:09:22 PM
Probably wants an identity of winning without the negative press. You and others here are predicting impending doom as if this can't happen.
Didn't MU go to a Final Four in the last ten years with far less negatives off the court? Hasn't Wisconsin been a better overall program the last 15 years than Marquette without all the negatives off the court?
It can be done. Have you ever thought that MU could raise their academic profile even more and start to land some of those same kids that are going to Vanderbilt, Duke, Wisconsin, UCLA, Stanford, etc?
Wisconsin fans have every reason to laugh at our academic standards if what you and others are reporting in this thread are true.
What negative press has there been around academics? If this is academic related than that has no bearing on the off the court issues. This can't have anything to do with the off the court unless the BOT has drawn the conclusion that those with perceived academic issues are also causing trouble.
I was talking about their observations of Pilarz bringing in Duke, etc. administrators to tell Pilarz where he needs to take the athletic department.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 28, 2012, 07:38:03 AM
I don't know...it's hard to argue against tougher academic standards, but we graduate 91% of our basketball players and 80% of African-American basketball players. I can't imagine 10-13 scholarship athletes that are graduating at that rate are going to have any measureable negative impact on our overall academic statistics.
It's a drop in the bucket and we're already doing very well in regards to the academic success of our basketball team. Really not sure tougher standards are needed there.
Graduation rates may not be the best way to look at it, or at least not the only way. Year by year most of the team picks the same major and we all know what that major is. Is a 70% graduation rate at UCLA in economics, history, political science the same at 91% in communications? Not all majors are created equally.
Quote from: mu03eng on April 28, 2012, 12:14:21 PM
Have you played college athletics? The tutoring and academic resources get them back to neutral at best considering how much time they are not actually in class and are on the road/playing/practicing. They have to have a 2.0 to graduate(right now) I don't have any issue with that whatsoever especially if we are competitive enough to put players into Europe and the NBA playing ball so their GPA isn't critical. Plus we are giving educational opportunities to people who otherwise wouldn't have that chance why would we want to turn our backs on those folks?
Have you? Do you have four family members that have at major DI athletics at schools FAR better than Marquette that won national titles and still pulled in fantastic grades, including two that made academic all conference? It can be done.
This just goes to show you that you can't skip a day this offseason. More exciting around here than the regular season. Finally all of the wild speculation has some firmer ground to stand on, but that still didn't prevent 4 pages of wild speculation and overblown doomsday scenarios. Good stuff.
As for the news, if the administration feels that new higher standards for athletes are the best for the school, then so be it. It may have an effect on basketball success, but the disaster scenarios presented here are humorous. If the admin is applying the new policy "unfairly" as has been wildly speculated here, that would suck, but it would be a 1-2 year problem max and then no big deal after that. "Hiroshima" this is not...
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 12:18:21 PM
We are not ND, Stanford, or Duke academically. We'll be left with the sloppy seconds academic all-americans. When Pilarz does the actual hardwork and gets us there as an instution, I will be all for those academic standards athletically.
Right, because from 2000 to 2008 we sure couldn't compete and had all kinds of off the court problems. ::)
More than likely, Father Pilarz and LW are saying get good athletic kids that will keep us out of the news and represent the university well. If you want to take a chance on a kid or two every year that is fine. Taking a chance on 4 kids every year so a roster has more than 10 may not be so fine. I do not know if that is what they are saying, but that seems to be what you and other are implying. My belief is that it will be something in the middle where it comes down to quantity.
At the end of the day, Buzz could keep on recruiting his type of kids if they kept MU out of embarrassing situations. His kids didn't do that and there comes a price to pay for that.
If you remember back there were probably 20+ posters here including two or three that really got under the skin of some posters here about the squirminess going on. They implied other things were never even reported. Based on what you and others are saying about the actions coming down from the university, maybe those posters were right and knew a lot more about what was going on then people here cared to admit.
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 12:24:40 PM
I was talking about their observations of Pilarz bringing in Duke, etc. administrators to tell Pilarz where he needs to take the athletic department.
Great point.
I'll add that to the list of schools that MU admin. should never talk to.
ND
Duke
Penn
Are there more?
Georgetown?
Boston College?
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 12:32:22 PM
Right, because from 2000 to 2008 we sure couldn't compete and had all kinds of off the court problems. ::)
More than likely, Father Pilarz and LW are saying get good athletic kids that will keep us out of the news and represent the university well. If you want to take a chance on a kid or two every year that is fine. Taking a chance on 4 kids every year so a roster has more than 10 may not be so fine. I do not know if that is what they are saying, but that seems to be what you and other are implying. My belief is that it will be something in the middle where it comes down to quantity.
At the end of the day, Buzz could keep on recruiting his type of kids if they kept MU out of embarrassing situations. His kids didn't do that and there comes a price to pay for that.
If you remember back there were probably 20+ posters here including two or three that really got under the skin of some posters here about the squirminess going on. They implied other things were never even reported. Based on what you and others are saying about the actions coming down from the university, maybe those posters were right and knew a lot more about what was going on then people here cared to admit.
Pat Hazel stealing and James Matthews committing assault didn't happen?
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 12:27:51 PM
Have you? Do you have four family members that have at major DI athletics at schools FAR better than Marquette that won national titles and still pulled in fantastic grades, including two that made academic all conference? It can be done.
Yes I have and yes it can be done because I did it myself.
However I also fancy myself, humility aside, as very intelligent from a solid educational background before playing going to school. Not everyone is going to have those same standards and capabilities. Congrats to your family being able to pull that off, but I would argue they are more the exception than the rule....Academic All-American award is big deal because its very difficult.
All I'm saying is being a D1 revenue sport athlete is not easy and the university is using them to make money to pay for fancy new buildings. However they are apparently willing to overlook all that because they have some high and mighty viewpoint.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 28, 2012, 12:33:20 PM
Great point.
I'll add that to the list of schools that MU admin. should never talk to.
ND
Duke
Penn
Are there more?
Georgetown?
Boston College?
Bring in a couple schools that match our actual academic profile as an institution. You want to change the standards for athletics that don't match us as a school yet? Ask Duke, ND how to get there as an institution first.
Ok .. I've tried to do a little re-pruning after Rocky dropped the bomb on this thread. Cut out the beginning JJones stuff, cut out the end Ners/Hoop bs.
I'll probably regret this.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on April 28, 2012, 03:56:57 PM
Ok .. I've tried to do a little re-pruning after Rocky dropped the bomb on this thread. Cut out the beginning JJones stuff, cut out the end Ners/Hoop bs.
I'll probably regret this.
Well as long as soccer is kept out, how bad can it be..?
Quote from: Stone Cold on April 28, 2012, 12:34:07 PM
Pat Hazel stealing and James Matthews committing assault didn't happen?
What happened to those players? That should answer the question for you in terms of how it was handled. They were removed from the team.
Quote from: mu03eng on April 28, 2012, 12:34:41 PM
Yes I have and yes it can be done because I did it myself.
However I also fancy myself, humility aside, as very intelligent from a solid educational background before playing going to school. Not everyone is going to have those same standards and capabilities. Congrats to your family being able to pull that off, but I would argue they are more the exception than the rule....Academic All-American award is big deal because its very difficult.
All I'm saying is being a D1 revenue sport athlete is not easy and the university is using them to make money to pay for fancy new buildings. However they are apparently willing to overlook all that because they have some high and mighty viewpoint.
It is not easy. Depending on your background, it can be even more difficult. The next question then is whether there are enough student athletes that can succeed athletically and be successful academically? The answer to that is yes, in my opinion.
I'm also fine with continuing down the current path, but Buzz has to get his guys to understand the consequences of their actions. Do they get it? Do they understand that they put their university and their coach at risk with some of the things the press has reported about? If Buzz can keep things contained, then go for it. If he can't, then the president and AD have every right to protect the university's image in a manner they see fit.
Quote from: jsglow on April 28, 2012, 08:20:51 AM
Really going there? So this is now a program for the learning disabled (so long as they're a Top 60 prospect)?
There is balance in everything. I take pride in all that is MU. Hoops and academics. I'm believe in the notion that acceptable grades and real progress toward one's degree is a prerequisite to athletic participation. Trust me, acceptable grades and progress toward one's degree is a constant refrain in my household where I now write two tuition checks to our beloved institution. If MU leadership felt that academic standards had slipped and therefore needed to bump (or more vigorously enforce) the threshold a bit, I fully understand. But I do agree with the notion that individual student athletes should be given some time to meet the new standards.
the thought of balance in college hoops or football is a joke. the balance has nothing to do with what's best for kids, but instead what's best for the university (financially). so the balance is how much mu is willing to let its standards slide to field a solid bball program that fuels millions of dollars to the university each year. to think there's any balance in what mu does for its bball players in comparison to what they do for the school is a joke. i'll believe in balance when college hoops/football balance how much they make off the kids with what they provide for the kids, and we stop making millions off of them.
Thanks for taking the time topper.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 04:49:21 PM
It is not easy. Depending on your background, it can be even more difficult. The next question then is whether there are enough student athletes that can succeed athletically and be successful academically? The answer to that is yes, in my opinion.
I'm also fine with continuing down the current path, but Buzz has to get his guys to understand the consequences of their actions. Do they get it? Do they understand that they put their university and their coach at risk with some of the things the press has reported about? If Buzz can keep things contained, then go for it. If he can't, then the president and AD have every right to protect the university's image in a manner they see fit.
Again, I'd be ok with it if they were going after behavior issues, but they aren't they are going after academics by all accounts. And behaviorally, I still don't things are any worse now than they were before. There was one incident that pulled back the curtain so to speak and so its all out in the open. Now there seems to be this academic red herring as a proxy for the behavioral issues. If the BOT wants to go this route and turn away kids that could use what MUBB has to offer that's their call, but I think one that is counter to everything the university should stand for especially with a player already in the fold.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 28, 2012, 04:49:21 PM
It is not easy. Depending on your background, it can be even more difficult. The next question then is whether there are enough student athletes that can succeed athletically and be successful academically? The answer to that is yes, in my opinion.
I'm also fine with continuing down the current path, but Buzz has to get his guys to understand the consequences of their actions. Do they get it? Do they understand that they put their university and their coach at risk with some of the things the press has reported about? If Buzz can keep things contained, then go for it. If he can't, then the president and AD have every right to protect the university's image in a manner they see fit.
So getting better academically will also improve behavior? Can you explain/prove that correlation? Like others have said, I have no problem with punishing players who have had behavioral issues. I also have no problem with MU wanting to improve the academic requirements of athletes. But I'm confused how the two are related.
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that just a few weeks after so many here puffed out their chests and crowed with pride following a CNN story about MU's academic success from athletes, some of you people are ripping the administration for demanding - gasp! - academic success from its athletes?
Seems to be a disconnect here ....
Quote from: Pakuni on April 29, 2012, 10:26:38 AM
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that just a few weeks after so many here puffed out their chests and crowed with pride following a CNN story about MU's academic success from athletes, some of you people are ripping the administration for demanding - gasp! - academic success from its athletes?
Seems to be a disconnect here ....
Disagree. The two are completely different. CNN praised MU for succeeding under the current NCAA and Marquette standards. The outcry is over changing those standards and not making allowances for those already in the process. The impression I get is that under current standards, our student-athletes are for the most part all doing fine under the current requirements.
Changing the rules mid-stream is unfair. These guys were given standards to meet and they've been meeting them. If you want to change the rules for new recruits not yet here, that's one thing, and I think most could accept that. It would limit our ceiling, but it's not unacceptable. But for guys that have been here 1, 2, or 3 years to meet new standards overnight, especially if some of those are mathematical impossibilities, it's simply unreasonable. When they were recruited, the standards we put before them were essentially Marquette's contract. Those should be honored for guys already here, especially when that story you cited is evidence that we've been succeeding where other schools (UW, UConn, etc) have been failing.
If you worked at a widget factory and your boss told you when you started that you had to make an average of 20 widgets per day to keep your job, that'd be their prerogative. So you do that successfully, but after 3 years, the new boss says you have to average 25 widgets a day to keep your job, and it's retroactive to when you started. So even if you could make 25 widgets a day, you'd have to make 40 a day to offset the 20/day you made during your first 3 years.
I believe that is the issue some are having with this.
Quote from: Pakuni on April 29, 2012, 10:26:38 AM
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that just a few weeks after so many here puffed out their chests and crowed with pride following a CNN story about MU's academic success from athletes, some of you people are ripping the administration for demanding - gasp! - academic success from its athletes?
Seems to be a disconnect here ....
That's a great point, and as a follow-up:
#1 How many athletes are barely getting by right now? I thought most of the players were closer to 2.5+GPA than 2.0GPA.
#2 Is the admin. changing the entrance requirements, or just the GPA requirements while they are in school? If it's the former, certainly that can change recruiting. If it's the latter, I'm not so sure, and it will certainly depend upon how hard the new standards are. Again, how many guys are getting 2.0GPAs?
Before I go Hiroshima, I'll need to know these things... but after that... Pilarz will get destroyed!
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 29, 2012, 10:54:36 AM
Disagree. The two are completely different. CNN praised MU for succeeding under the current NCAA and Marquette standards. The outcry is over changing those standards and not making allowances for those already in the process. The impression I get is that under current standards, our student-athletes are for the most part all doing fine under the current requirements.
Changing the rules mid-stream is unfair. These guys were given standards to meet and they've been meeting them. If you want to change the rules for new recruits not yet here, that's one thing, and I think most could accept that. It would limit our ceiling, but it's not unacceptable. But for guys that have been here 1, 2, or 3 years to meet new standards overnight, especially if some of those are mathematical impossibilities, it's simply unreasonable. When they were recruited, the standards we put before them were essentially Marquette's contract. Those should be honored for guys already here, especially when that story you cited is evidence that we've been succeeding where other schools (UW, UConn, etc) have been failing.
If you worked at a widget factory and your boss told you when you started that you had to make an average of 20 widgets per day to keep your job, that'd be their prerogative. So you do that successfully, but after 3 years, the new boss says you have to average 25 widgets a day to keep your job, and it's retroactive to when you started. So even if you could make 25 widgets a day, you'd have to make 40 a day to offset the 20/day you made during your first 3 years.
I believe that is the issue some are having with this.
Yes, I certainly will be disappointed if that is the approach MU takes.
Retro-active standards would be unfair. However, raising the standards (in general) may not damn MU to a "SLU" like existence like has been claimed.
There are several posters around here who are extrapolating this to the Nth degree, and now the water is muddied.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 29, 2012, 10:54:36 AM
Disagree. The two are completely different. CNN praised MU for succeeding under the current NCAA and Marquette standards. The outcry is over changing those standards and not making allowances for those already in the process. The impression I get is that under current standards, our student-athletes are for the most part all doing fine under the current requirements.
Two points:
1. Do we have any actual verifiable prooof that changes are being made/enforced retroactiviely, without allowances, etc.? I mean, I know Internet rumors are 100 percent accurate and all, but do we have anything more substantive than the breathless reports of the usual chicken littles?
2. Does anyone really believe changes would be made if MU were maintaining the academic success that was spoken of in the CNN report? Remember, the numbers used in that report were from 2000-08. It's 2012. Lots can change in four years.
Just my opinion, but we all come off a bit hypocritical when we brag about MU's academic success then get angry when the schools demands high standards in the classroom.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 29, 2012, 11:07:52 AM
Yes, I certainly will be disappointed if that is the approach MU takes.
Retro-active standards would be unfair. However, raising the standards (in general) may not damn MU to a "SLU" like existence like has been claimed.
There are several posters around here who are extrapolating this to the Nth degree, and now the water is muddied.
This is how I feel. I have faith in Buzz and the various programs in this country that do well and have higher academic standards than the NCAA minimums
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 28, 2012, 11:35:01 PM
So getting better academically will also improve behavior? Can you explain/prove that correlation? Like others have said, I have no problem with punishing players who have had behavioral issues. I also have no problem with MU wanting to improve the academic requirements of athletes. But I'm confused how the two are related.
That is my feeling that the adminstration believes this to be the case. The thought process is something like this:
better academic results = kids that are maturer, more responsible, understand the bigger picture, right from wrong, etc.
Whether there is a true correlation is something for Williams, Pilarz, higher ed folks and sociologists to determine, but that seems to be the thinking
I may be selfish, but I'm not willing to give up the next 15-20 years of potentially great basketball so that Fr Pillarz and LW can launch an experiment that assesses whether or not MU basketball can compete using the Stanford/ND model. I'm also not sure if that will create a better situation for the university overall.
I don't want criminals on the team, but I also think that basketball in its current format adds a lot more to the university than any negatives it might produce. If they institute a program that runs off Buzz and a handful of players due to overly restrictive conditions, I know I'm a lot less likely to throw my donations MU's way in the future.
Quote from: Pakuni on April 29, 2012, 11:11:47 AM1. Do we have any actual verifiable prooof that changes are being made/enforced retroactiviely, without allowances, etc.? I mean, I know Internet rumors are 100 percent accurate and all, but do we have anything more substantive than the breathless reports of the usual chicken littles?
No. That's why this is all speculation. We'll see what happens in a few weeks, but this is the nature of rumor. We just hope it isn't as bad as some are speculating. But trying to compare the doomsday scenario (whether true or not) and being proud of good graduation records is still apples and oranges.
Quote from: nyg on April 27, 2012, 09:24:15 PM
http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncb/story/_/id/7864558/larry-brown-tells-several-smu-mustangs-players-team
At least Larry Brown has the balls to tell it like it is.
Leslee Smith, one of the cut players, was a high school teammate of Junior Cadougan's
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 29, 2012, 10:54:36 AM
But for guys that have been here 1, 2, or 3 years to meet new standards overnight, especially if some of those are mathematical impossibilities, it's simply unreasonable.
That is something that is very important but we will never know. If a player is kicked off to the new standards, was it because he didn't do enough to get it up or mathematically impossible based on GPA and when he was informed of the new policy. A lot of people will say "he didn't get a chance to improve his grades" but that doesn't mean it is impossible.
Whats the new standard? Say 2.25? Say he was meeting the old standards? at 1.80001 (which I wouldn't feel bad if he got cut cause you should be better than the standards) after 36 MU credits (65 GPA points). IF he had known before the semester (big if), he could've loaded up on classes (15 credits), ended his season early to focus on studying, and got a 4.0. That would put him at 2.4 and he would have been safe for his final 2 years at MU. It would suck, but not completely impossible.
The only way I see it as mathematically impossible is if they told him after the semester has started, he was only enrolled in the min classes and he started the semester off poorly. But I have been hearing these rumors for a month and a half, so it makes me feel he knew before the semester and just didn't perform enough in the classroom.
To ask a player that got a 1.8 to then get a 4.0 is just unfair. To ask him to get a 2.2 is fine IMO. That is how they should apply it.
Actually a careful read of the current policy already demonstrates the 'step up' required between Sophomore and Junior year. One must begin Sophomore year with a 1.8 GPA, enroll in 12 credits per semester and successfully complete not less than 24 during Sophomore year with a max of 6 during the summer. Well, let's say that the student athlete takes 4 classes in the Fall and gets 3 Ds and one F. The student athlete's cumulative gradepoint will have gone down and (s)he would have only achieved 9 credit hours of the 24 that needed for the year. He or she would certainly then need a bunch of Bs in the Spring just to balance. The next measurement point is the beginning of Junior year when a 1.9 is required under the existing published policy and a certain number of credits and percentage of the major must be completed.
Now I pose this to the reader. Let's assume for a moment that the ONLY change to the current published policy is that one has to start Junior year with a 2.0. Unreasonable? Please recall that it takes a 2.0 cumulative GPA to graduate. Would that make Fr. Pilarz or LW unreasonable? Or would we be more disappointed in the student athlete for not holding up his/her end of the bargain?
Quote from: kmwtrucks on April 29, 2012, 06:52:45 PM
To ask a player that got a 1.8 to then get a 4.0 is just unfair. To ask him to get a 2.2 is fine IMO. That is how they should apply it.
Well, in the situation above, it would've bumped him to a 2.5. That was an extreme scenario where is was previously doing the absolute min and it would only really take a 3.0 to bump it up to like a 2.1. There are enough classes at MU with enough built-in points that a B average is possible for even the worst students. Show up, do all the homework and you will get B in a lot of classes. With academic advisers and tutors, I don't think it is too extreme for 1 semester of B-work. Again, I also said the player should have sat this semester out to focused on school if he knew he was this close to getting booted.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 29, 2012, 07:56:07 PM
Well, in the situation above, it would've bumped him to a 2.5. That was an extreme scenario where is was previously doing the absolute min and it would only really take a 3.0 to bump it up to like a 2.1. There are enough classes at MU with enough built-in points that a B average is possible for even the worst students. Show up, do all the homework and you will get B in a lot of classes. With academic advisers and tutors, I don't think it is too extreme for 1 semester of B-work. Again, I also said the player should have sat this semester out to focused on school if he knew he was this close to getting booted.
Is that even an option? These guys are on athletic scholarships. Can they just go to Buzz and say "I'm gonna sit this semester out and just be a student"?
I guess where I'm coming down is this isn't a 'sky is falling' situation and if a student athlete can't even make a minimal standard then are they really a student athlete and aren't we becoming UConn or Kentucky if we somehow look the other way?
We know Buzz sits in living rooms and promises mothers that their son will get a legitimate education. I'm certain he means it. Then, it's up to the young man to do his part, especially with all the support built into the system.
Quote from: jesmu84 on April 28, 2012, 11:35:01 PM
So getting better academically will also improve behavior? Can you explain/prove that correlation? Like others have said, I have no problem with punishing players who have had behavioral issues. I also have no problem with MU wanting to improve the academic requirements of athletes. But I'm confused how the two are related.
Your confusion stems from the fact that you're misusing/misunderstanding the term 'correlation.'
Improving one's academic standing won't
cause improvement in behavior. But good academics and good behavior are
correlated. In other words, you can generally improve overall behavior by bringing in academic-focused students. But generally you can't improve an individual's behavior by forcing them to do better academically.
Quote from: Benny B on April 29, 2012, 10:14:14 PM
Your confusion stems from the fact that you're misusing/misunderstanding the term 'correlation.'
Improving one's academic standing won't cause improvement in behavior. But good academics and good behavior are correlated. In other words, you can generally improve overall behavior by bringing in academic-focused students. But generally you can't improve an individual's behavior by forcing them to do better academically.
I can also correlate the fact that people who smoke weed also drink milk. Does this mean milk drinkers are more likely to smoke weed? Academics usually only change the level of bad behavior, if anything. Perhaps what people here are really debating is socio-economic status determining behavior (and that may even be tenuous).
I just don't see why if they want better behavior they want to raise the intellectual barrier. It is well documented that higher iq and higher intelligent levels lead one to be more likely to be involved in illicit drug use. So are they trying to create a culture of drug use.
Quote from: forgetful on April 29, 2012, 11:46:55 PM
I just don't see why if they want better behavior they want to raise the intellectual barrier. It is well documented that higher iq and higher intelligent levels lead one to be more likely to be involved in illicit drug use. So are they trying to create a culture of drug use.
(http://images.pesfan.com/smilies/laugh.gif)
Someone figured out the
real agenda.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 30, 2012, 05:58:05 AM
(http://images.pesfan.com/smilies/laugh.gif)
Someone figured out the real agenda.
yeah, a lot for crockett and tubbs lookalikes will be wondering around campus.
Quote from: JakeBarnes on April 29, 2012, 10:55:00 PM
I can also correlate the fact that people who smoke weed also drink milk.
Can I see your scatter plot for this? It would help explain some other research I've been doing.
Quote from: Warrior's Path on April 30, 2012, 08:40:02 AM
Can I see your scatter plot for this? It would help explain some other research I've been doing.
You can make up correlations to prove anything... the correlation between people who know this and Scoopers is .40.
What are they raising the minimums to?
2.25? - I don't think that is a big enough bump to scare off potential recruits and damn MU to basketball purgatory.
In fact, I would hope most/all of the guys are above 2.2GPA right now.
If MU raises it to 3.5 or something, then I think you'll see a different looking roster in a number of years.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 30, 2012, 11:04:43 AM
What are they raising the minimums to?
2.25? - I don't think that is a big enough bump to scare off potential recruits and damn MU to basketball purgatory.
In fact, I would hope most/all of the guys are above 2.2GPA right now.
If MU raises it to 3.5 or something, then I think you'll see a different looking roster in a number of years.
What's the current minimum for "regular students" at Marquette? Is it fair that the general student body have lower thresholds than the basketball team?
Moving away from the fairness issue, would it hurt us competitively if our requirements go from = to Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana, etc. to >those same schools? Duh.
As to your last statement, forget about Marquette. If Harvard raises minimums to 3.5 you'll see a different looking roster - and it won't take a "number of years".
Raising GPA by 0.40 is a big deal when recruiting kids to play at high level, which hopefully is our goal. I am still confused on this whole topic. Does anyone have facts on new standards or just speculation?
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 30, 2012, 11:04:43 AM
What are they raising the minimums to?
2.25? - I don't think that is a big enough bump to scare off potential recruits and damn MU to basketball purgatory.
In fact, I would hope most/all of the guys are above 2.2GPA right now.
I'm not sure exactly what it is, but the player involved was struggling under the old system, so the change will make it that much more difficult.
I don't necessarily have a problem with bumping up the minimums. But doing it midyear, and expecting a player to improve that much more in a short time frame is a bit ridiculous.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 11:25:50 AM
Moving away from the fairness issue, would it hurt us competitively if our requirements go from = to Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana, etc. to >those same schools? Duh.
I'd have to know how many guys are currently barely getting by before I can agree with this.
If most of the guys are already getting 2.5GPAs, then a slight adjustment up to X GPA isn't really a big deal. If a lot of guys are barely getting by with 1.9GPA, then you are right... it could hurt MU.
Quote from: MUfan12 on April 30, 2012, 11:34:32 AM
I'm not sure exactly what it is, but the player involved was struggling under the old system, so the change will make it that much more difficult.
I don't necessarily have a problem with bumping up the minimums. But doing it midyear, and expecting a player to improve that much more in a short time frame is a bit ridiculous.
Yea, the mid-year thing is weird, but it's all internet rumor so far, so I'm not sure that is actually what is happening... we'll have to wait and see.
As far as the current player who is struggling, you are right, he would probably struggle with the new standards.
However, that's 1 player our of 12, so I don't know if this is some sort of basketball genocide that some are predicting.
I guess I'll have to wait and see what is really going on before I go nuts. The stuff that has been rumored and the impending doom that has been predicted don't exactly make sense to me.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 11:25:50 AM
What's the current minimum for "regular students" at Marquette? Is it fair that the general student body have lower thresholds than the basketball team?
Oh, as far as this point is concerned, I think you can slice it anyway you want.
It's not really "fair" to have higher standards for basketball players.
However, hoops players get a lot of things the average student doesn't (special meal plan, gym access, tutors, separate dorms, etc.). In fact hoops players get a lot more things than any other team (look at the locker rooms).
I think the basketball players bust their ass and deserve everything they get, but it's hard to talk about "fair" when comparing them to the average student. It's apples to oranges for me.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 30, 2012, 11:47:31 AM
As far as the current player who is struggling, you are right, he would probably struggle with the new standards.
However, that's 1 player our of 12, so I don't know if this is some sort of basketball genocide that some are predicting.
A significant % of top high school players fit "this 1" player's profile. If he flunks out, the fallout will be minimal. If he "flunks out" by MU's standards but tranfers as a student in good standing to another D1 program then parents, coaches and athletes will all take notice. If a coach has a great player from a crappy high school who's an indifferent student why encourage him to go to a school with more difficult requirements and furthermore evidently ok with changing them in midstream.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 30, 2012, 11:43:04 AM
I'd have to know how many guys are currently barely getting by before I can agree with this.
If most of the guys are already getting 2.5GPAs, then a slight adjustment up to X GPA isn't really a big deal. If a lot of guys are barely getting by with 1.9GPA, then you are right... it could hurt MU.
You're limiting discussion to our current team. I'm talking about where this goes over time. The best basketball players in the country are predominantly urban and African American. They are disproportionly from poor and single parent households. Their grammar schools and high schools are mostly seriously substandard. Considering that they also have full time jobs while in college, it's not surprising that guys struggle. If you want to eliminate possible strugglers, fine, but assuming it won't have consequences is naive.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 01:09:38 PM
You're limiting discussion to our current team. I'm talking about where this goes over time. The best basketball players in the country are predominantly urban and African American. They are disproportionly from poor and single parent households. Their grammar schools and high schools are mostly seriously substandard. Considering that they also have full time jobs while in college, it's not surprising that guys struggle. If you want to eliminate possible strugglers, fine, but assuming it won't have consequences is naive.
How many hoops players have been barely getting a 2.0GPA at MU (say over the past 20 years)?
Is it 100 players? Is it 2 players?
If it's 100 players, you are absolutely correct, MU is going to fall hard. If it's 2 players, we won't really notice a precipitous drop as people have predicted.
When all is said and done, I still think it's a stupid idea (if true)... but I don't know if it is the end of MU hoops as we know it.
Not enough information for outrage. Give it time though. I'm prepared.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 12:45:35 PM
A significant % of top high school players fit "this 1" player's profile. If he flunks out, the fallout will be minimal. If he "flunks out" by MU's standards but tranfers as a student in good standing to another D1 program then parents, coaches and athletes will all take notice. If a coach has a great player from a crappy high school who's an indifferent student why encourage him to go to a school with more difficult requirements and furthermore evidently ok with changing them in midstream.
You're right, but I'm not sure the impact/fall-out is going to damn MU to basketball purgatory... AND I don't know if Buzz is even recruiting guys who aren't interested in school. Buzz seems like he is pushing these guys to do well in the classroom, so I'm not sure it would be a big deal.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 30, 2012, 01:38:22 PM
How many hoops players have been barely getting a 2.0GPA at MU (say over the past 20 years)?
Is it 100 players? Is it 2 players?
If it's 100 players, you are absolutely correct, MU is going to fall hard. If it's 2 players, we won't really notice a precipitous drop as people have predicted.
When all is said and done, I still think it's a stupid idea (if true)... but I don't know if it is the end of MU hoops as we know it.
Not enough information for outrage. Give it time though. I'm prepared.
I have no idea as to how many players, past or present, would be affected. If it's an insignificant number, though, what's the point of the change?
Agree that as of now not enough info for outrage - yet - hope it turns out to be much ado about nothing.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 01:55:25 PM
I have no idea as to how many players, past or present, would be affected. If it's an insignificant number, though, what's the point of the change?
Agree that as of now not enough info for outrage - yet - hope it turns out to be much ado about nothing.
I don't know what the details are, or the motivation from the BOT. There might be a super great underlying reason we don't know about. Or, maybe it's just a bush league rule put in place by some rich honkies.
I don't really know why they are doing it, and I'm not really in favor of it.
I just don't agree with some alarmists that think this is some sort of huge deal that is going to send MU hoops back to the stone ages.
Too early for that kind of talk. We don't really know if this is a big deal or not. I know this isn't a "fun" opinion, (more fun to RAGE!!!), but I think it's reasonable.
One thing that I find odd is BUZZ makes all the player's goto class. 2 years ago in late march or early april a Graduating Mo Acker had a unexcused class absence and he made the whole team meet and run Killer's. This was a SR that was on pace to graduate who exhasuted his eligiblilty.
So I think Buzz takes school for his players very seriously. My general feeling is that like most predictions this will come and go with nothing happening.
If the AD boots a BBALL player off for going to class and getting C's, I would voice my displeasure as loud as I can.
Can someone share with me one iota of evidence that this is going into effect??
This reminds me of our last 100 page created by another chicken/goose little
A few points (and I realize I may be repeating comments, but 9 pages deserves an in-thread summary somewhere):
1) Considering the speculation that the academic bar being raised is the crux of the issue (and it is speculation at this point), I find it hard to believe that anyone at MU would not allow a student-athlete to "right-the-ship" rather than create a threshold that was unattainable within a current or upcoming term for a given individual or individuals. Such may not be the basis for any legal action, but such a travesty would not sit well with university appeals board or the NCAA.
2) If the bar was set in a way that it would be unattainable for an individual, why hasn't that been brought to light by the "victim"? If I find out about a new standard in February and figure out a couple days later that there's no way for me to comply under any circumstances, you better believe I'm screaming to any media outlet that will listen as soon as the season is over. (If I'm the coach, you better believe I'm taking that SMU job strictly as a matter of principle.)
3) If there is an individual that is being targeted (and I don't, even for a second, believe there is), then there has to be much more to the story as to why that individual is being targeted... yes, even more than you, I, Goose or Don Walker knows; something that, if brought to light, the University wouldn't have to defend its decision -- the decision would inherently defend itself rendering the academic issue a moot point.
4) If anyone who would otherwise be non-compliant under the new standard cannot bring him/herself into compliance within a reasonable & achievable time frame, then I have no sympathy for that person. There isn't a kid on the basketball team who can't pull C's just by showing up to class and doing homework; how much harder can it be to pull down B's for a semester??? (Unless he isn't showing up and doing his homework.) Bear in mind these kids have the best tutors and academic advisers at MU watching over them. I don't care what your background it... to not be able to get a 3.0 in at least one course of study (*cough*communications*cough*) with those resources at your disposal means you're either lazy, apathetic or perpetually high --- neither of which should elicit any sympathy from anyone.
5) If we're hearing about this now, then the student-athletes heard about it months ago, i.e. those most affected aren't likely to be caught off-guard by all this. And as soon as the coaching staff would have heard or known who could be affected, you better believe that every last one of them started busting their own posterior to get those kids in line.
6) The conclusion that improved academic standards are being employed predominantly as a reaction to or an effort to stem behavioral issues is one of the most uneducated things I've heard... I don't know who came up with that theory, but I bet it was a communications major.
In essence... those promoting or forecasting a major upheaval need to check themselves. There's nothing wrong with improving academics amongst student-athletes when reasonable and fair. If someone finds himself on the short end of the alleged new threshold, then the only person responsible is the kid getting cut.
(My apologies to all MU Comm majors... even including those related to me. I needed an example, and you all know damn well you're the best one there is. Take heart, though... we all agree you're much more edumakayted than those studying "HIST501 -- History of Kentucky Basketball (2011 to present day)" .)
Canadian Dimes
What evidence do you have that Lenny is wrong? Not sure why your opinion outweighs another posters. I would love to hear evidence that Lenny or Muguru are wrong. Do you have any or are you just stating your opinion? Please, please, please provide credible evidence with source and prove them wrong. Everyone on here would be very happy if you put the fire out.
BennyB
I have no opinion on the topic other than speculation. I have never stated any player was targeted or going to be forced out. I do not believe that "forced" transfers are coming. Please read my posts before using me as a source on this topic. I HAVE NO EVIDENCE to prove either side correct on this topic.
Quote from: Benny B on April 30, 2012, 03:27:46 PM
A few points (and I realize I may be repeating comments, but 9 pages deserves an in-thread summary somewhere):
1) Considering the speculation that the academic bar being raised is the crux of the issue (and it is speculation at this point), I find it hard to believe that anyone at MU would not allow a student-athlete to "right-the-ship" rather than create a threshold that was unattainable within a current or upcoming term for a given individual or individuals. Such may not be the basis for any legal action, but such a travesty would not sit well with university appeals board or the NCAA.
2) If the bar was set in a way that it would be unattainable for an individual, why hasn't that been brought to light by the "victim"? If I find out about a new standard in February and figure out a couple days later that there's no way for me to comply under any circumstances, you better believe I'm screaming to any media outlet that will listen as soon as the season is over. (If I'm the coach, you better believe I'm taking that SMU job strictly as a matter of principle.)
3) If there is an individual that is being targeted (and I don't, even for a second, believe there is), then there has to be much more to the story as to why that individual is being targeted... yes, even more than you, I, Goose or Don Walker knows; something that, if brought to light, the University wouldn't have to defend its decision -- the decision would inherently defend itself rendering the academic issue a moot point.
4) If anyone who would otherwise be non-compliant under the new standard cannot bring him/herself into compliance within a reasonable & achievable time frame, then I have no sympathy for that person. There isn't a kid on the basketball team who can't pull C's just by showing up to class and doing homework; how much harder can it be to pull down B's for a semester??? (Unless he isn't showing up and doing his homework.) Bear in mind these kids have the best tutors and academic advisers at MU watching over them. I don't care what your background it... to not be able to get a 3.0 in at least one course of study (*cough*communications*cough*) with those resources at your disposal means you're either lazy, apathetic or perpetually high --- neither of which should elicit any sympathy from anyone.
5) If we're hearing about this now, then the student-athletes heard about it months ago, i.e. those most affected aren't likely to be caught off-guard by all this. And as soon as the coaching staff would have heard or known who could be affected, you better believe that every last one of them started busting their own posterior to get those kids in line.
6) The conclusion that improved academic standards are being employed predominantly as a reaction to or an effort to stem behavioral issues is one of the most uneducated things I've heard... I don't know who came up with that theory, but I bet it was a communications major.
In essence... those promoting or forecasting a major upheaval need to check themselves. There's nothing wrong with improving academics amongst student-athletes when reasonable and fair. If someone finds himself on the short end of the alleged new threshold, then the only person responsible is the kid getting cut.
(My apologies to all MU Comm majors... even including those related to me. I needed an example, and you all know damn well you're the best one there is. Take heart, though... we all agree you're much more edumakayted than those studying "HIST501 -- History of Kentucky Basketball (2011 to present day)" .)
A summary of this post:
1.Anything and everything done by the Marquette administration was (I guess always is) warranted and in the university's best interest.
2.Any student who doesn't get a 3.0 at MU (no matter their educational or socio-economic background or the fact that they're working full time) is lazy, a moron or both.
Quote from: Goose on April 30, 2012, 03:27:56 PM
Canadian Dimes
What evidence do you have that Lenny is wrong? Not sure why your opinion outweighs another posters. I would love to hear evidence that Lenny or Muguru are wrong. Do you have any or are you just stating your opinion? Please, please, please provide credible evidence with source and prove them wrong. Everyone on here would be very happy if you put the fire out.
You want evidence to disprove something that hasn't even happened yet?
Quote from: Canadian Dimes on April 30, 2012, 02:54:08 PM
Can someone share with me one iota of evidence that this is going into effect??
This reminds me of our last 100 page created by another chicken/goose little
Now what did I do?
Quote from: Benny B on April 30, 2012, 03:27:46 PM
6) The conclusion that improved academic standards are being employed predominantly as a reaction to or an effort to stem behavioral issues is one of the most uneducated things I've heard... I don't know who came up with that theory, but I bet it was a communications major.
Actually an engineering student with degrees from both MU and Purdue came up with that gem.
Quote from: Goose on April 30, 2012, 03:27:56 PM
Canadian Dimes
What evidence do you have that Lenny is wrong? Not sure why your opinion outweighs another posters. I would love to hear evidence that Lenny or Muguru are wrong. Do you have any or are you just stating your opinion? Please, please, please provide credible evidence with source and prove them wrong. Everyone on here would be very happy if you put the fire out.
Goose
I have never said that muguru's claims were true. My point is that IF they're true it would be very, very, (I can't say very enough) bad news for MU, both now and in the future.
Without regard to any NEW standards, what if there is a player (or players) who are LIKELY to not meet the current standards and will be academically ineligible? Maybe such a situation might cause the player to transfer (some might say, drop out) in about 2 weeks or so, maybe?
Lenny,
Sorry..I know your stance and simply meant the guru side of the debate.
Quote from: leever on April 30, 2012, 04:11:12 PM
Without regard to any NEW standards, what if there is a player (or players) who are LIKELY to not meet the current standards and will be academically ineligible? Maybe such a situation might cause the player to transfer (some might say, drop out) in about 2 weeks or so, maybe?
Correct. We will find out shortly.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 30, 2012, 04:14:52 PM
Correct. We will find out shortly.
Sultan,
Is there a reason why this unnamed "players" haven't announced his/their impending transfer already?
My assumption is that they are actually trying to stay in school... but some people have said they have no shot, in which case I would think they would announce their transfer now. It's not like MU can really stop them, can they?
Didn't we go through something like this back in the '80s when Bob Dukiet had an entire recruiting class fail to get into the Communications program?
I shudder to think we're even considering a slight move back in that direction...
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 30, 2012, 04:27:10 PM
Sultan,
Is there a reason why this unnamed "players" haven't announced his/their impending transfer already?
My assumption is that they are actually trying to stay in school... but some people have said they have no shot, in which case I would think they would announce their transfer now. It's not like MU can really stop them, can they?
1. Because they are trying like hell to stay in school and nothing is for certain until the semester ends.
2. No one is really in trouble despite the suggestions otherwise.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 30, 2012, 05:02:17 PM
1. Because they are trying like hell to stay in school and nothing is for certain until the semester ends.
2. No one is really in trouble despite the suggestions otherwise.
OK, well, this is believable.
A student(s) are behind some sort of academic standard (whether it is "new" hasn't been confirmed), and they are working towards staying eligible.
The situation isn't final, and is fluid. Provided the athletes do the work, they can play.
Doesn't seem like the end of MU hoops as we know it.
I hope they use every tool available to make it, including music montages of them studying.
Is this all bein' done to increase the basketball IQ of our team on the court?
Quote from: humanlung on April 30, 2012, 04:32:14 PM
Didn't we go through something like this back in the '80s when Bob Dukiet had an entire recruiting class fail to get into the Communications program?
I shudder to think we're even considering a slight move back in that direction...
I seem to recall that. I was living overseas before the internet so I have nothing more than Rumint on this. It was the end of Dukiet.
4ever
If it happens I think to keep us in the sports page and not front page.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 30, 2012, 05:02:17 PM
1. Because they are trying like hell to stay in school and nothing is for certain until the semester ends.
2. No one is really in trouble despite the suggestions otherwise.
I'm also wondering aloud why a student athlete wouldn't also have the summer sessions? My read of policy is that specific measurement takes place at the start of Soph, Jr., and Sr. year . . . call that Labor Day. Now I do know that one can only take 6 summer credits according to the rules.
I think the guys are required to be in residence during summers, no?
Quote from: warthog-driver on April 30, 2012, 07:44:17 PM
I think the guys are required to be in residence during summers, no?
Sure, I suppose. But if player x is struggling to get to his fall grade-point hurdle, then wouldn't summer be his real 'last chance'? Maybe you're saying he needs to be in residence at the NEXT university he's attending.
Quote from: jsglow on April 30, 2012, 07:52:19 PM
Sure, I suppose. But if player x is struggling to get to his fall grade-point hurdle, then wouldn't summer be his real 'last chance'? Maybe you're saying he needs to be in residence at the NEXT university he's attending.
Out of fairness to the person, you can't leave them hanging until the end.
If MU's standards are higher than the NCAA's and they would still qualify by NCAA and other universities standards, the minimum MU could do would be to allow them to catch on somewhere else. Otherwise they are faced with decisions such a Mbakwe's Miami Dade Community College.
I don't think they are changing the standards for existing players without a realistic opportunity to cure for those deficient. Hell, I am not even sure they are changing the standards (which is that of the NCAA.)
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 03:58:45 PM
Actually an engineering student with degrees from both MU and Purdue came up with that gem.
Many years ago I was a student.
I didn't come up with it. This is the argument that is currently being made by some on the MU campus in the administrative ranks. I merely offered it up from what I heard is the line of thinking. Whether there is a correlation or not, I yield to the sociologists and higher ed types to figure out.
Here's a poll question:
If Buzz's teams had stayed out of trouble, however severe it truly was is not the point because it generated tremendous negative press for the school, would circumstances be different? If they had stayed away from it, would the school be considering changes to the academic policies for student athletes or would things be left where they were?
Quote from: Ners on April 28, 2012, 12:20:52 PM
The bad ink MU has gotten has been the result of a witch hunt by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Chicago Tribune.
Don't forget DePaul is behind it. Were ESPN, the AP, WTMJ, WISN, etc also part of the witch hunt? More likely the answer is that we have a prominent program and a number instances in a short amount of time occurred. They will get reported by the news, it is what they do. Stay out of trouble and things don't end up in the news.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 03:53:07 PM
A summary of this post:
1.Anything and everything done by the Marquette administration was (I guess always is) warranted and in the university's best interest.
2.Any student who doesn't get a 3.0 at MU (no matter their educational or socio-economic background or the fact that they're working full time) is lazy, a moron or both.
As usual, you are mischaracterizing and exaggerating.
:D
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 30, 2012, 11:25:50 AM
What's the current minimum for "regular students" at Marquette? Is it fair that the general student body have lower thresholds than the basketball team?
Moving away from the fairness issue, would it hurt us competitively if our requirements go from = to Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana, etc. to >those same schools? Duh.
As to your last statement, forget about Marquette. If Harvard raises minimums to 3.5 you'll see a different looking roster - and it won't take a "number of years".
Regular students need a 2.0 to graduate from Marquette (Accounting students a 2.5 in certain courses).
http://www.marquette.edu/cps/adult_degrees_graduation_req.shtml
Sent a "Chief Crowder" tee shirt (size L) to Fr. Pilarz. Hope he wears it. I would have sent one to LW, too, if I knew his size.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 30, 2012, 10:41:17 PM
Don't forget DePaul is behind it.
Were ESPN, the AP, WTMJ, WISN, etc also part of the witch hunt? More likely the answer is that we have a prominent program and a number instances in a short amount of time occurred. They will get reported by the news, it is what they do. Stay out of trouble and things don't end up in the news.
Lets be honest, one incident got a lot of attention which then made local news sources interested in peeling back the onion.....however a lot of incidents happened under Crean too, he was just much better at smoothing those things over than Buzz is apparently. Once you get enough attention on the local level the national stuff will pick up on it....besides how much did ESPN actually cover the issue. Plus, and I know this has been debated ad naseum, but MU's inept PR capabilities at a minimum didn't help and may actually have made all this worse than it could have been.
Quote from: mu03eng on May 01, 2012, 07:40:42 AM
Lets be honest, one incident got a lot of attention which then made local news sources interested in peeling back the onion.....however a lot of incidents happened under Crean too, he was just much better at smoothing those things over than Buzz is apparently. Once you get enough attention on the local level the national stuff will pick up on it....besides how much did ESPN actually cover the issue. Plus, and I know this has been debated ad naseum, but MU's inept PR capabilities at a minimum didn't help and may actually have made all this worse than it could have been.
I like to blame the Zizzo Group for many of MU's foibles over the last decade.
Also, regarding Williams shirt size: body size - XL. Neck size - to fit around his head - XXXXXXL
Quote from: mu03eng on May 01, 2012, 07:40:42 AM
Lets be honest, one incident got a lot of attention which then made local news sources interested in peeling back the onion.....however a lot of incidents happened under Crean too, he was just much better at smoothing those things over than Buzz is apparently. Once you get enough attention on the local level the national stuff will pick up on it....besides how much did ESPN actually cover the issue. Plus, and I know this has been debated ad naseum, but MU's inept PR capabilities at a minimum didn't help and may actually have made all this worse than it could have been.
I wouldn't say that the PR capabilities are inept... every time MU does something positive, I hear about it in an email, newsletter, magazine, etc. In that respect, I think they do a good job; however, the problem is that MU apparently doesn't have any damage control practitioners on staff.
Everyone wants to spread rays of sunshine, but when the brown hits the fan, nobody wants to clean it up.
Quote from: Benny B on May 01, 2012, 09:38:28 AM
I wouldn't say that the PR capabilities are inept... every time MU does something positive, I hear about it in an email, newsletter, magazine, etc. In that respect, I think they do a good job; however, the problem is that MU apparently doesn't have any damage control practitioners on staff.
Everyone wants to spread rays of sunshine, but when the brown hits the fan, nobody wants to clean it up.
Agreed
From a college search site, what went on at Scranton while Fr. Pilarz was president.
...When the parties started to get busted up by the police it became very unsettling to him and every student on that campus. The police were using unnecessary means to catch the underage drinkers and according to him and his roommate the police were using tazors to ensure that running kids could not run. This is absolutely horrendous behavior on a college campus whose main goal, outside of the academics, should be to keep students safe. There were weekends when there were close to 100 underage citations issued according to him. Students were getting randomly breathalized on their way back to dorms and the overall feeling on the campus was miserable. There were dogs brought in to go through the freshman dorms to sniff out drugs and this too added to the overall feeling of things being out of control.
Quote from: newsdrms on May 01, 2012, 03:47:00 PM
From a college search site, what went on at Scranton while Fr. Pilarz was president.
...When the parties started to get busted up by the police it became very unsettling to him and every student on that campus. The police were using unnecessary means to catch the underage drinkers and according to him and his roommate the police were using tazors to ensure that running kids could not run. This is absolutely horrendous behavior on a college campus whose main goal, outside of the academics, should be to keep students safe. There were weekends when there were close to 100 underage citations issued according to him. Students were getting randomly breathalized on their way back to dorms and the overall feeling on the campus was miserable. There were dogs brought in to go through the freshman dorms to sniff out drugs and this too added to the overall feeling of things being out of control.
Sounds like a wonderful environment in which to spend the best years of your life.
Quote from: newsdrms on May 01, 2012, 03:47:00 PM
From a college search site, what went on at Scranton while Fr. Pilarz was president.
...When the parties started to get busted up by the police it became very unsettling to him and every student on that campus. The police were using unnecessary means to catch the underage drinkers and according to him and his roommate the police were using tazors to ensure that running kids could not run. This is absolutely horrendous behavior on a college campus whose main goal, outside of the academics, should be to keep students safe. There were weekends when there were close to 100 underage citations issued according to him. Students were getting randomly breathalized on their way back to dorms and the overall feeling on the campus was miserable. There were dogs brought in to go through the freshman dorms to sniff out drugs and this too added to the overall feeling of things being out of control.
A little vague here. Fr Pilarz was unsettled by the underage drinking or was unsettled by the SPD's response to underage drinking? Was FR Pilarz on board with SPD?
Quote from: newsdrms on May 01, 2012, 03:47:00 PM
From a college search site, what went on at Scranton while Fr. Pilarz was president.
...When the parties started to get busted up by the police it became very unsettling to him and every student on that campus. The police were using unnecessary means to catch the underage drinkers and according to him and his roommate the police were using tazors to ensure that running kids could not run. This is absolutely horrendous behavior on a college campus whose main goal, outside of the academics, should be to keep students safe. There were weekends when there were close to 100 underage citations issued according to him. Students were getting randomly breathalized on their way back to dorms and the overall feeling on the campus was miserable. There were dogs brought in to go through the freshman dorms to sniff out drugs and this too added to the overall feeling of things being out of control.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 01, 2012, 04:40:25 PM
Sounds like a wonderful environment in which to spend the best years of your life.
I'm assuming that post was supposed to be teal, right?
You know what I love about the interwebs? That you can backtrack all of this laughable bulls*** like this posted above. Also, this afternoon isn't too busy, so hell, let's do a bit of googling this story, which on it's face, anyone with common sense would know is in no way true.
So let's see here...apparently newsdrms cherry-picked the ONE NEGATIVE post, buried in a sea of other POSITIVE posts on this particular "College Confidential' message board (oh, and also cherry picked the quote, too. How very STEVE DOOCY.) OH, and they're all from one very bitter human being, whereas the positive reviews were from 4-5 pages worth of everyone else.
BUT I'm sure this account completely and accurately reflects Scranton. And I'm
sure Pilarz turned the place into the Post Apocalyptic Thunderdome hellscape laid out here. I get it though, you all hate Pilarz and Williams, they're out to destroy MU basketball and turn it into SLU, yada yada yada. Duly noted...AGAIN.
FYI, here is one of the LEGION of other positive, complimentary quotes about Scranton and Fr. Pilarz.
...Son recently did overnight visit at Scranton.
While he was going to classes and doing the student thing, I gave myself an extensive tour off the standard tour path and these are my observations-
Faculty and students were friendly, nice, always holding doors and such. Facilities are in excellent order and pretty much spotless.Many new building with 2 under construction - science center and new residence hall with 400 units and new fitness center.The U. has spent about 190 million on new construction, upgrades and beautification. Was really looking up. They recently closed off 2 streets and made them part of the campus with walking paths. Gave the U more of a campus feel.
Student Center is 1.5 yrs old and really nice. Dining facility offered everything my kid eats and was good tasting. I did not go into the dorms but son told me Condron Hall was very spacious, and well planned. He loved the fact the cleaning service comes in 1x a week.
Overall he had a great experience, and it remains a leading choice for him.
Merit aid will have influence on decision as his other top 2 choices were Fordham and Loyola MD. Don't think he will get nearly as much from them and we will be in wait in see mode.
Heard the U. has 80 acres in Spring Brook, about 10 min. away with the plan to build athletic facilities (baseball, softball fields, new turf, lights, parking) with Phase I, possible starting in 2011. They are putting their money where their mouth is so I will give them that.
University President, Fr. Pilarz, will be leaving after spring 2011 for Marquette University. Looks like a nice promotion for him so the U looking for a new president.
Seems Pilarz was very proactive in pushing his agenda to upgrade the U and it's students. I liked the direction the U is headed and hopefully the master plan will not be effected much.Spoke to random students. All seemed very content and happy with school and education.Last, the City of Scranton. It is not NYC or Boston but then you are not in the country either.
I did drive the surrounding areas and beyond the 5-6 block radius it does get a little seedy and the economic down turn is more apparent in commercial and residential alike. I will say that this is the case for neighborhoods around many good schools.
Kind of reminded me a bit of Worcester but smaller. Holy Cross is in a residential area, U of S is walking distance to downtown, a small mall,
and a bunch of restaurants.
Security just got "Police" status and are now armed. Again, a wait and see how that works out. Should be a plus.
Overall, I was impressed with the people first and second, what they are doing to upgrade everything. I would think in a short time they will be where Fordham is now and that the middle 50% admission mark will be climbing.
Quote from: lab_warrior on May 01, 2012, 04:58:39 PM
FYI, here is one of the LEGION of other positive, complimentary quotes about Scranton and Fr. Pilarz.
...Son recently did overnight visit at Scranton.
While he was going to classes and doing the student thing, I gave myself an extensive tour off the standard tour path and these are my observations-
Faculty and students were friendly, nice, always holding doors and such. Facilities are in excellent order and pretty much spotless.
Many new building with 2 under construction - science center and new residence hall with 400 units and new fitness center.
The U. has spent about 190 million on new construction, upgrades and beautification. Was really looking up. They recently closed off 2 streets and made them part of the campus with walking paths. Gave the U more of a campus feel.
Student Center is 1.5 yrs old and really nice. Dining facility offered everything my kid eats and was good tasting. I did not go into the dorms but son told me Condron Hall was very spacious, and well planned. He loved the fact the cleaning service comes in 1x a week.
Overall he had a great experience, and it remains a leading choice for him.
Merit aid will have influence on decision as his other top 2 choices were Fordham and Loyola MD. Don't think he will get nearly as much from them and we will be in wait in see mode.
Heard the U. has 80 acres in Spring Brook, about 10 min. away with the plan to build athletic facilities (baseball, softball fields, new turf, lights, parking) with Phase I, possible starting in 2011. They are putting their money where their mouth is so I will give them that.
University President, Fr. Pilarz, will be leaving after spring 2011 for Marquette University. Looks like a nice promotion for him so the U looking for a new president.
Seems Pilarz was very proactive in pushing his agenda to upgrade the U and it's students. I liked the direction the U is headed and hopefully the master plan will not be effected much.
Spoke to random students. All seemed very content and happy with school and education.
Last, the City of Scranton. It is not NYC or Boston but then you are not in the country either.
I did drive the surrounding areas and beyond the 5-6 block radius it does get a little seedy and the economic down turn is more apparent in commercial and residential alike. I will say that this is the case for neighborhoods around many good schools.
Kind of reminded me a bit of Worcester but smaller. Holy Cross is in a residential area, U of S is walking distance to downtown, a small mall,
and a bunch of restaurants.
Security just got "Police" status and are now armed. Again, a wait and see how that works out. Should be a plus.
Overall, I was impressed with the people first and second, what they are doing to upgrade everything.
I would think in a short time they will be where Fordham is now and that the middle 50% admission mark will be climbing.
Sounds like a wonderful place in which to spend the best years of your life.
Quote from: lab_warrior on May 01, 2012, 04:58:39 PM
Dining facility offered everything my kid eats and was good tasting.
They must use SAGA
Lenny - who does the name calling?
Quote from: Lennys Tap on April 27, 2012, 11:07:22 PM
Maybe MadtownWarrior should change his handle to MadtownBadger.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on June 05, 2012, 02:52:25 PM
Lenny - who does the name calling?
Talking about "verbal abuse" on a message board over the argument of Tinfoilers who believe Pilarz / Williams out to destroy the program versus the Sunshine Pumpers who claim all is okay with the program..
give me a break - you're a real (removed to not verbally abuse Lenny)...
lol