Penn State Rape Scandal

[quote name='davo1224']That's the best you can come up with as a rebuttal?[/QUOTE]

Sorry if it is not exactly what you were looking for. Apart from playing/saving money on video games I am a full time student (double majoring), I volunteer, and work two jobs to pay for my apartment. I don't have all the time in the world to make perfect responses :lol:
 
Oh I've had his ass on ignore for a while, I just saw 5 posts all from him and it's kind of bad manners to do so.
 
[quote name='Clak']Oh I've had his ass on ignore for a while, I just saw 5 posts all from him and it's kind of bad manners to do so.[/QUOTE]

Why do you keep coming back here then to comment? :lol:

Also I told you already but you can stop referring to me as a "he" I am a girl xD
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf-...eh-report-jerry-sandusky-damning-effects.html

"In the end, in the grand scheme, no one person or one scandal, no matter how horrific or high profile, can change the superior academics, quality of life or the half-million alumni the university has created since 1855. Mistakes can be addressed. Victims can be honored. Nothing, however, can slow the energy of young people, guilty only of being failed by their leaders, embracing the life-changing opportunity to live and learn here."
 
[quote name='highoffcoffee496']He admitted he wish he had done more. I would like to believe he means this and did not know exactly what was going on at the time.[/QUOTE]

Wow maybe they should have given him a medal :roll:
 
I got curious and went looking for salary info on my old univeristy. turns out the "head coach" makes more than the president of the school. I don't mean a bit more either, I mean a shitload more.
 
[quote name='Clak']I got curious and went looking for salary info on my old univeristy. turns out the "head athletic coach" makes more than the president of the school.[/QUOTE]

Depending on the scope of your athletic program he most likely brings in more outside money then the President as well.

Who do you think brings in more money in ticket revenue, TV contracts, donations, sponsorships, etc.---The president of an SEC, Big XII, Pac-10 (Insert major conference here) or the school president?

Edit: I'm not saying it's right but looking at other aspects of life (i.e. the POTUS year salary vs any CEO) it isn't abnormal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Clak']I got curious and went looking for salary info on my old univeristy. turns out the "head coach" makes more than the president of the school. I don't mean a bit more either, I mean a shitload more.[/QUOTE]

True most places that are big time in sports. But a lot of it is usually from outside sources. For instance, WVU's football coach gets $2.3 million this year, but only $250K is base salary from the school/state. The rest is supplemental pay from "athletic department revenue and private sources." So it doesn't pull much from the school budget. Our AD turns a profit, and the rest is coming from booster donations and TV/Radio for shows he's required to do etc.

And that's the way it is at most schools. It's still illustrative of the misplaced priorities in society when coaches, athletes, entertainers etc. get such huge salaries. But it's not something hurting funding for education at the big time schools. And at smaller schools coaches aren't making nearly as much. Though still more than most professors and probably more than the president sometimes.
 
I just think it shows mismatched priorities. At that point it seems like the school is more a sports training complex than a school.
 
I only have an issue with it when the athletic department is:

1. Losing money.
2. Using school or state funds for the AD.

Unfortunately either or both of those are true at most schools. But not really for the big time sports schools. A lot of those ADs are turning a profit, and many don't take any school/state funds and get all their budget from boosters, TV/radio contracts, ticket sales and merchandise sales. In those cases I have no problem with it (but agree on the misplaced priority angle).

As I've said before, ADs should simply be required to at least break even. They should never be pulling school funds away from academics by running in the red.
 
There is also the facilities and land that had to be purchased/built though. I'm sure the source of that money varies from school to school as well.
 
yeah yeah yeah.. we get it... jocks = bad


Today in the local paper there was a nice article showcasing how at UMaine (the land grant school in Maine which I'm not affiliated with) graduates 84% of its student athletes in 6 years compared to the fact that just 60% of entering freshmen will graduate in 6 years.

I know I know... student athletes have all these perks and tutors and blah blah blah at their disposal. But then again the average freshmen college student doesn't have 20-40hours a week invested in an extra curricular program.
 
[quote name='Clak']There is also the facilities and land that had to be purchased/built though. I'm sure the source of that money varies from school to school as well.[/QUOTE]

Those generally happen in two ways (or a combination of them).

-Booster donations. That's why most stadiums/arenas are named after someone (person or corporation).

-Bonds/loans that the AD pays off over time.

Seldom does it come from the school or state budget permanently. At least at big schools. Again, outside of the major conference D1 many colleges should reduce or eliminate their sports programs if they can't at least break even.
 
GBA, I wish there was just an automatic ban for saying stupid things. Half of you cretins wouldn't even be here.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']yeah yeah yeah.. we get it... jocks = bad


Today in the local paper there was a nice article showcasing how at UMaine (the land grant school in Maine which I'm not affiliated with) graduates 84% of its student athletes in 6 years compared to the fact that just 60% of entering freshmen will graduate in 6 years.

I know I know... student athletes have all these perks and tutors and blah blah blah at their disposal. But then again the average freshmen college student doesn't have 20-40hours a week invested in an extra curricular program.[/QUOTE]

The strawman attacks aren't fooling anyone. Man you are fucking dense.
 
[quote name='Clak']GBA, I wish there was just an automatic ban for saying stupid things. Half of you cretins wouldn't even be here.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='camoor']The strawman attacks aren't fooling anyone. Man you are fucking dense.[/QUOTE]

So can you explain why student-athletes have a higher 6 year graduation rate then non-student athletes?

You guys are quick to profess you opinion that athletes are held in too high regard, that athletic programs should be downsized or eliminated if they aren't profitable; that more time and energy should be spent on education and the arts (except that some professionals in the arts (i.e. writers, actors, etc.) make gross amounts of money as well).

You claim that society puts athletes on a pedestal like this is some type of new fucking phenomena (ever heard of the Greeks and Romans and the Olympics dipshits)...

it's old. We get it.... you're not athletic; chicks didn't like you; athletes get too much attention.

...yawn
 
[quote name='Clak']GBA, I wish there was just an automatic ban for saying stupid things. Half of you cretins wouldn't even be here.[/QUOTE]

Only one sentence... and it doesn't even elaborate on the stupid things (which happen to be factual) that I said.

strawman arguments.... lol.

Good one. All I'm saying is that right or wrong the salaries of top collegiate coaches are justified. I have a degree in biomolecular science (BMS) and spent only two year doing work in my field until I decided I didn't like the solitary environment but I can promise you that never once did my peers or I get the audience or funding (oh wait---we did get millions in grants from the federal government to repeat results already confirmed...herpaderp) that was brought in by the football program I played for.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']


Today in the local paper there was a nice article showcasing how at UMaine (the land grant school in Maine which I'm not affiliated with) graduates 84% of its student athletes in 6 years compared to the fact that just 60% of entering freshmen will graduate in 6 years.

I know I know... student athletes have all these perks and tutors and blah blah blah at their disposal. But then again the average freshmen college student doesn't have 20-40hours a week invested in an extra curricular program.[/QUOTE]

Just read an article where it states that about 70 percent graduate in football, which isn't bad. However, like you said, they have access to tutors and are on scholarship, so I think a better comparison would be to other students who are also on scholarship, and not just the average student.
 
[quote name='soulvengeance']Just read an article where it states that about 70 percent graduate in football, which isn't bad. However, like you said, they have access to tutors and are on scholarship, so I think a better comparison would be to other students who are also on scholarship, and not just the average student.[/QUOTE]

I'm confused.. are the "other students" who are on let's say an "academic scholarship" are they required to spend 20-40 hours a week doing extra curricular activities? Or can they use that time to.... umm..... study and try to graduate at the same rate as student-athletes who have a much more structured daily schedule.

Let's be honest; there is always going to be that professor that passes a kid or likes a kid because he plays football BUT truth be told those are your communication 101 professors or philosophy 101 instructors. No legit tenured professor, especially those that are chair heads and teach upper level coursework pass failing students because they score touchdowns.

You might have schools like Memphis or Ohio State that pass the 1 and done students (those programs represent such a small precentage of overall athletic departments nationwide), without attending a single class for a year, before they go to the NBA (two years before you can be deemed eligible for the NFL draft) but those students don't count towards the graduation rate anyhow so I'm not sure how that's relevant. Besides most of them are off to greener pastures and that year or two in college could have been better spent taking money management courses so they don't end up the next bankrupt Vince Young or Allen Iverson.

I didn't really feel any anmosity while in college from normal students except when it came time to register for class because student-athletes were allowed to preregister a week before anyone else (and then it went by senority) but giving that practice schedules take precedence to class schedules that always made sense to me and most coaches; at the level I played (Division 1 FCS) were understanding that very few (about 1 or 2 a team) players were going to make a career playing professionally so if a required course (for graduation) conflicted with a practice or meeting you were excused to go to class.

Also I don't think you guys understand how the NCAA works in regard to academic eligibility. I'm sure it's been altered in the last few years but at one point it was set up so you had to pass 12 credits a semester (24 a year; so a student athlete could make up classes in the winter or summer if they were short) as well as progress 20% towards your major each year.

Remember most division 1 athletes red shirt so the NCAA gives a 5 years of eligibility to play four but you can't stay eligible by just taking 100 level classes for 5 years and passing 24 credit a year--you also have to gain 20% completion towards your major each consecutive year that is why it is nearly impossible to change majors after your sophomore year and stay eligible.
 
Found an article, (from 2011, but still applies to the topic at hand), from a Louisville professor who talks about this exact thing:

http://www.whiteoliphaunt.com/duckofminerva/2011/10/graduation-rates.html

Bullet points:

- Athletes have tutors available to them along with other expenses other students don't. So those students (who aren't on scholarships especially) have to spend that spare time you expect them to be studying in part-time jobs to pay for college. Spending that time in a job you hate over a volunteer activity you like definitely makes a difference as well.

- Government also looks at statistics of the same nature, and they find 63% of overall students graduate in 6 years and only 65% of athletes. Far closer difference than the one school you provided. This number also factors in transfer students.

- Nearly 75% of students are part time students due to work, family, etc and means they normally won't graduate before 8 years.

- College is expensive. Those without scholarships can't afford it and drop out.


EDIT: Also adding in a link showing that athletes (mostly male athletes) graduate with a lower GPA.

http://www.middlebury.edu/newsroom/archive/2010/node/266828
 
[quote name='4thHorseman']Found an article, (from 2011, but still applies to the topic at hand), from a Louisville professor who talks about this exact thing:

http://www.whiteoliphaunt.com/duckofminerva/2011/10/graduation-rates.html

Bullet points:

- Athletes have tutors available to them along with other expenses other students don't. So those students (who aren't on scholarships especially) have to spend that spare time you expect them to be studying in part-time jobs to pay for college. Spending that time in a job you hate over a volunteer activity you like definitely makes a difference as well.

- Government also looks at statistics of the same nature, and they find 63% of overall students graduate and only 65% of athletes. Far closer difference than the one school you provided. This number also factors in transfer students.

- Nearly 75% of students are part time students due to work, family, etc and means they normally won't graduate before 8 years.

- College is expensive. Those without scholarships can't afford it.


EDIT: Also adding in a link showing that athletes (mostly male athletes) graduate with a lower GPA.

http://www.middlebury.edu/newsroom/archive/2010/node/266828[/QUOTE]


If college is expensive and those without scholarships cant afford it then why do we have thousands of colleges and universities and hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of students who nearly all are NOT on scholarship?

I like that your article was from middlebury college [liberal college in liberal state is liberal].

And don't forget only Division 1 and Division 2 (not even all of those--the Ivy league and Patriot Leagues don't offer scholarships and many conferences offer significantly less rides or counters then others).

So take a Division 3 school like your beloved Middlebury which is in the NESCAC conference with a bunch of other uber elite, private, expensive colleges (Colby, Amherst, Trinity Tufts anyone?) and explain to me how a student athlete at that school which receives NO ADDITIONAL AID by participating in athletics has the upperhand against some trust fund kid who has never had to work a day in his life and presumably will never work an hour while at college.

And did you stop and think that while many Division 1 student athletes are on scholarship they only get room and board paid for. They do not receive walking around money (Except those that get pell grants) and are prohibited from working (depends on college and division). The student you described who has to work can always take out these things called "STUDENT LOANS" and focus on school work instead of juggling school and work while they athlete has to participate in athletics (and it isn't just a hugging, giggling circle jerk like you describe).
 
All that's true.

But in my view one of the benefits of college athletics is providing scholarships to a lot of kids who wouldn't go to college otherwise, and access to tutors etc. to help kids who often couldn't graduate without the extra help. Especially in football and basketball that have a large number of minority student athletes from lower class families who are less likely to be completely ready for college out of high school--many who may have dropped out of high school if they didn't have the incentive of sports and a potential scholarship to college for sports to keep them going.

Yeah, maybe it's not fair to the kids from the same backgrounds who don't have athletic ability. And we definitely need to do more to help such kids in general. But that doesn't negate that athletic scholarships do help a lot of kids go to college who wouldn't otherwise. And that applies both at the major sports schools, and the lower division schools.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']All that's true.

But in my view one of the benefits of college athletics is providing scholarships to a lot of kids who wouldn't go to college otherwise, and access to tutors etc. to help kids who often couldn't graduate without the extra help. Especially in football and basketball that have a large number of minority student athletes from lower class families who are less likely to be completely ready for college out of high school--many who may have dropped out of high school if they didn't have the incentive of sports and a potential scholarship to college for sports to keep them going.

Yeah, maybe it's not fair to the kids from the same backgrounds who don't have athletic ability. And we definitely need to do more to help such kids in general. But that doesn't negate that athletic scholarships do help a lot of kids go to college who wouldn't otherwise. And that applies both at the major sports schools, and the lower division schools.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much this. Hard for me to completely hate on it for this reason alone.

Sure, it isn't a solution to the problem at hand and just a band-aid, but it gets a lot more resources to those that need them where they otherwise wouldn't even come close.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']I'm confused.. are the "other students" who are on let's say an "academic scholarship" are they required to spend 20-40 hours a week doing extra curricular activities? Or can they use that time to.... umm..... study and try to graduate at the same rate as student-athletes who have a much more structured daily schedule.

Let's be honest; there is always going to be that professor that passes a kid or likes a kid because he plays football BUT truth be told those are your communication 101 professors or philosophy 101 instructors. No legit tenured professor, especially those that are chair heads and teach upper level coursework pass failing students because they score touchdowns.

You might have schools like Memphis or Ohio State that pass the 1 and done students (those programs represent such a small precentage of overall athletic departments nationwide), without attending a single class for a year, before they go to the NBA (two years before you can be deemed eligible for the NFL draft) but those students don't count towards the graduation rate anyhow so I'm not sure how that's relevant. Besides most of them are off to greener pastures and that year or two in college could have been better spent taking money management courses so they don't end up the next bankrupt Vince Young or Allen Iverson.

I didn't really feel any anmosity while in college from normal students except when it came time to register for class because student-athletes were allowed to preregister a week before anyone else (and then it went by senority) but giving that practice schedules take precedence to class schedules that always made sense to me and most coaches; at the level I played (Division 1 FCS) were understanding that very few (about 1 or 2 a team) players were going to make a career playing professionally so if a required course (for graduation) conflicted with a practice or meeting you were excused to go to class.

Also I don't think you guys understand how the NCAA works in regard to academic eligibility. I'm sure it's been altered in the last few years but at one point it was set up so you had to pass 12 credits a semester (24 a year; so a student athlete could make up classes in the winter or summer if they were short) as well as progress 20% towards your major each year.

Remember most division 1 athletes red shirt so the NCAA gives a 5 years of eligibility to play four but you can't stay eligible by just taking 100 level classes for 5 years and passing 24 credit a year--you also have to gain 20% completion towards your major each consecutive year that is why it is nearly impossible to change majors after your sophomore year and stay eligible.[/QUOTE]

Out of curiosity, what GPA needs to be maintained for them to keep their scholarships, only because you see how low some of their grades are like Julius Peppers. I know I had to maintain at least a 3.25 to keep mine, so I would argue if their grade requirements are lower, that would make up for the 25-40 hours a week. I also only make the comparison to students on scholarship because it would seem that would be the most apt comparison, rather then just all students. Also knowing some student athletes, I don't think they do 25-40 hours year round either. My argument has always been that they should just pay them like regular employees, and just get rid of the student part, or make it optional, that way they can choose to use that money to pay for college or not.
 
Pretty sure it's just a 2.0 GPA to stay eligible and on scholarship by NCAA standards. Some schools set higher standards--but not many (if any) of the big conference schools.

You see some who end up below that as they just quit classes once they're final season is done. Spring semester is moot in final year for football and basketball--just have to have made the grades in the fall semester to be eligible for football post season and the spring part of basketball season obviously since spring grades aren't out until May or June.

That's why a lot of people bitch about the NBA now requiring kids to be one year removed from high school before being eligible for the draft. Kids that would have went straight to the NBA before now have to go to college. And since they're only playing one year they just have to get the 12 hours with a 2.0 GPA in the fall/winter sessions, and can just not go to classes in the spring if they know they're going pro and sure to get drafted etc.

Football is a little better since they have to be 3 years removed from high school. So earliest they can go to the NFL is after their Junior year (or red shirt sophomore season), so they have to stay eligible for at least 5 semesters.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']If college is expensive and those without scholarships cant afford it then why do we have thousands of colleges and universities and hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of students who nearly all are NOT on scholarship? [/QUOTE]

Ah, the old covering your ears and closing your eyes and denying that money doesn't come into the decision to remain in college. Just because there are people who can afford it without scholarships, doesn't mean everyone can.

I like that your article was from middlebury college [liberal college in liberal state is liberal].
Click to expand...
I'm glad you read it. Because you would have known the study wasn't done at Middlebury. Please continue.

And don't forget only Division 1 and Division 2 (not even all of those--the Ivy league and Patriot Leagues don't offer scholarships and many conferences offer significantly less rides or counters then others).
Click to expand...

Is this a complete thought? Because normally after a comment in parenthesis, you would continue from where you left off before it...

So take a Division 3 school like your beloved Middlebury which is in the NESCAC conference with a bunch of other uber elite, private, expensive colleges (Colby, Amherst, Trinity Tufts anyone?) and explain to me how a student athlete at that school which receives NO ADDITIONAL AID by participating in athletics has the upperhand against some trust fund kid who has never had to work a day in his life and presumably will never work an hour while at college.
Click to expand...
I'll ignore the "NO ADDITIONAL AID" (despite 21% of athletes receiving scholarships at Division 3 schools), and ask why athletes FOR SURE, don't receive help and have to bust their ass and all non-athletes are trust fund kids with silver spoons in their mouth?

And did you stop and think that while many Division 1 student athletes are on scholarship they only get room and board paid for. They do not receive walking around money (Except those that get pell grants) and are prohibited from working (depends on college and division).
Click to expand...
Please point me in the direction where I said they have extra spending money. I didn't. I said other expenses. Room and Board. Tutors. Meal Plans. All of that is also covered by scholarships. In no way did I mean chillin at Denny's before going to the movies.

The student you described who has to work can always take out these things called "STUDENT LOANS" and focus on school work instead of juggling school and work while they athlete has to participate in athletics
Click to expand...
Athletes don't HAVE to participate in athletics, they CHOOSE to. Let's just get that straight. You also make it sound like athletes don't have the same option of Student Loans available to them. They do. You also fail to think that some of these students could get DENIED financial aid whether it from the get-go or if they don't succeed with the requirements to keep it.

(and it isn't just a hugging, giggling circle jerk like you describe).
Click to expand...
I didn't describe it this way. But continue describing your locker room antics in college. I'm sure someone will get a kick out of it.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Pretty sure it's just a 2.0 GPA to stay eligible and on scholarship by NCAA standards. Some schools set higher standards--but not many (if any) of the big conference schools.

You see some who end up below that as they just quit classes once they're final season is done. Spring semester is moot in final year for football and basketball--just have to have made the grades in the fall semester to be eligible for football post season and the spring part of basketball season obviously since spring grades aren't out until May or June.

That's why a lot of people bitch about the NBA now requiring kids to be one year removed from high school before being eligible for the draft. Kids that would have went straight to the NBA before now have to go to college. And since they're only playing one year they just have to get the 12 hours with a 2.0 GPA in the fall/winter sessions, and can just not go to classes in the spring if they know they're going pro and sure to get drafted etc.

Football is a little better since they have to be 3 years removed from high school. So earliest they can go to the NFL is after their Junior year (or red shirt sophomore season), so they have to stay eligible for at least 5 semesters.[/QUOTE]

Well, to be fair, a lot of the basketball players could play overseas now, so they don't have to to go to college. I'm not sure what other avenues football players have though. CFL? Arena league?:) But yeah, I think having to only maintain a 2.0 more then offsets the the extra 25-40 hours IMO.
 
[quote name='4thHorseman']

I'll ignore the "NO ADDITIONAL AID" (despite 21% of athletes receiving scholarships at Division 3 schools), and ask why athletes FOR SURE, don't receive help and have to bust their ass and all non-athletes are trust fund kids with silver spoons in their mouth?

[/QUOTE]

Really? 21% of student athletes receive scholarships at division III schools. You want to elaborate on what type of scholarships? I ask because I know for a fact Division III does NOT give out athletic scholarships. So any students who receive scholarships would be receiving them for other reasons.

That's not to say that a school like Bowdoin that has a large endowment doesn't give extra financial aid to an athlete but lets not kid ourselves these schools could care less about W's or L's because they don't compete on a national stage week in and week out (unless you consider Trinity Colleges dominating run at Squash---something like 9 consecutive national championships and unbeaten seasons)

I don't know what you need for a GPA to stay eligible but I do know the 24 credits per year and gaining 20% completion towards your degree each year were the standards. If I had to guess I'd say you need to maintain a 2.0 but that would just be a guess.


What Dmaul said is exactly correct; The NBA has fucked colleges. You can no longer go straight to the NBA from highschool so many kids who have no business going to college are just to prep for a year before making the NBA. It is possible in college to play a single year of athletics (this rings true mostly for incoming freshmen) without attending a single class. Former coaches like Bobby Kight have been railing on the system because they see current coaches like John Caliparri (sp) turning Memphis and Kentucky into NBA development leagues and gaining an unfair advantage because most all of their kids are one and dones. And while those students hurt the graduation rates at those schools they have a positive effect on the APR (academic progress rate) because going professional is considered a job placement.
 
[quote name='soulvengeance']Well, to be fair, a lot of the basketball players could play overseas now, so they don't have to to go to college. [/QUOTE]

I doubt that's as easy as it sounds, as I doubt overseas teams are scouting US colleges. So getting an offer to play overseas could be hard, would probably require a lot of self promotion (mailing highlight tapes to teams) etc.

Seems that most US players who end up overseas tend to be solid college players from major programs who weren't good enough for the NBA.

In any case, much easier to just go to college and pull a 2.0 for a semester before going pro than to go overseas and be further away from family etc.

So colleges have really gotten screwed by that rule change. The NBA either needs to go back to letting high school kids come straight in, or go up to requiring them to be 2 or 3 years removed from high school.
 
[quote name='GBAstar']Really? 21% of student athletes receive scholarships at division III schools. You want to elaborate on what type of scholarships? I ask because I know for a fact Division III does NOT give out athletic scholarships. So any students who receive scholarships would be receiving them for other reasons.[/QUOTE]


Nope, you are right. They don't give out athletic scholarships. They disguise them as "Leadership Scholarships" because that can encompass anything that they don't really have to be specific about. Only that they perform it on extracurricular activities. You can call it what you want, but it's not hard to see the school's workaround to give them the equivalent of athletic scholarships.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Posting this because I know a certain somebody will anyway, and will probably agree wholeheartedly with it.

Spanier's lawyers have called the Freeh report a myth, and said he would have acted in 1998, 2001 or any time if he knew a predator like Sandusky was on campus.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top