Skip to content

Jarrett Lee, others may be ineligible for LSU’s postseason

Oregon v LSU Getty Images

As LSU continues its inexorable march to a Jan. 9 date in New Orleans, the Tigers have reportedly found themselves in a similar position to where they began the 2011 season: dealing with off-field issues.

Speculation has surfaced that quarterback Jarrett Lee and unnamed other football players may be declared academically ineligible for the postseason.  In his own unique way, Les Miles addressed the rumors without actually addressing them.

“This time of year everybody responds and comes back,” the head coach said. “It’s time to pick it up. There’s no difference with our football team. Academic issues are private in my mind.”

(Writer’s note: wait… what?)

Of course, there are several key questions for which there are no answers, at least at the moment.  Chief among those is, if the speculation is based in reality, what other players besides Lee are in jeopardy of missing the postseason and how many of them are there?  Additionally, does “the postseason” in this case include both the SEC championship game this Saturday and the BcS title game in early January, or would it merely be the latter?

It’s unclear how soon any or all of those questions will be answered.

Lee started the first nine games at quarterback this season thanks to Jordan Jefferson’s August legal issues.  Jefferson has started the past three games and Lee has seen his role greatly reduced; he’s had just five pass attempts in the games Jefferson’s started.

UPDATED 2:52 p.m. ET: LSU athletic director Joe Alleva has issued a statement regarding the speculation that surfaced earlier today.

“Despite media and message board speculation, no LSU student-athletes have been declared ineligible for post-season competition.  The current semester is not complete and finals are still ahead, so it is grossly unfair to our student-athletes and it is both premature and irresponsible to speculate on the final grades and postseason eligibility of our student-athletes.”

Permalink 144 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: LSU Tigers, Rumor Mill, Southeastern Conference, Top Posts
144 Responses to “Jarrett Lee, others may be ineligible for LSU’s postseason”
  1. thekatman says: Nov 30, 2011 2:20 PM

    What? Sucha travesty that SEC players may be deemed inelligible, considering the SEC has such relaxed educational requirements. Ohhh, the horror!

  2. CBFAN says: Nov 30, 2011 2:25 PM

    No way LSU let’s that happen. My guess is that the grades will magically get better over the last few weeks of the semester.

  3. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 2:28 PM

    Not really sure what this is about, but if these players were academically eligible to play for the entire season, it would be monstrously unfair to rule them academically ineligible for the post-season.

    It’s an unpopular view among academic purists, but I believe athletes should be cut a little slack in these situations. No nonathlete can fathom the pressure on these kids to maintain their grades and their practice schedule while they top the polls with the football world watching. Surely they can work to make up their grades after the championship game.

    For some athletically gifted kids, college is more about getting a shot at a pro career than a degree. They shouldn’t be denied that opportunity because their grades dip anymore than an academically gifted student should lose his scholarship because he can’t run a 4.4 40. If they’d committed some crime or some horrible game-related infraction, it would be different. But if it’s solely about grades, some accommodation should be made.

    Personally, I feel Jefferson is the better QB, but Lee should have the opportunity to play if called upon.

  4. alligatorsnapper says: Nov 30, 2011 2:33 PM

    Speculation? Doesn’t that mean no confirmation, no evidence, no more than rumor? The media obviously does not have enough news to report so now they report “speculation”? How far down has the Fifth Estate fallen? This speculation may or may not prove out to be true or false. It may have been started by some bored cub reporters. (a few I know)

    Family living on campus has not been able to confirm anything, but we do know these players have tutors available which include many graduate students. If there is truth to the “speculation” these players still have time to pull up lower grades. We hope these “speculative” players may receive all the help they need to pull up their grades. The semester is not over.

    Speculation? Sounds similar to the kind of reporting that went forth at the beginning of the season when so much of what was reported was proven to be false.

  5. halo81 says: Nov 30, 2011 2:42 PM

    Are any of these teams who have won national championships lately actually legit?

    Just seems like they all have BS or scandal surrounding them.

    I’m obviously using hyperbole, but man it gets old quick.

  6. baywatchboy says: Nov 30, 2011 2:42 PM

    hahahahahahahaha Ineligible? hahahahahaha
    Like that would happen. ROTFLMAO

  7. baywatchboy says: Nov 30, 2011 2:44 PM

    @halo81

    Of course they’re all legit. They’ve all been won by SEC teams.

  8. brutusbuckeye2011 says: Nov 30, 2011 2:46 PM

    Surprised to hear that Lee has academic issues. Judging by how much he improved his football skills I assumed he had a good work ethic.
    Not relevent to this article, but I wonder if any of you Bayou Bengals have heard any dirt on the possibility of Greg Studrawa (an Ohio native)leaving LSU for tOSU to work for Meyer.

  9. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 3:00 PM

    ROFLLLLLLLL

    Just posting the same opinions I’ve always posted regardless of the team involved. It’s called “good sportsmanship” … a concept unfamiliar term to children who live in fear of rematches :lol:

    ROLL TIDE!!! :D

  10. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 3:07 PM

    Deb – these types of students already get the slack necessary to simply float by the academic requirements with the BS majors that the SEC schools allow them to participate in.

    Jarret Lee’s and Jordan Jefferson’s declared majors on LSU’s own website is “General Studies.” Jordan gets the nod here though with a second degree in battery (literally). I’m sure if you were to check the list of other players, including those most likely on the list to potentially miss the post season, they would fall under similar categories.

    General Studies? In this type of economy what non-athlete would ever go to college and drop a $100K+ in loans thinking they can graduate with a degree and get a job with a degree in general studies? The answer is no one. These kids are there for one reason, football, and the schools have already built the necessary framework to allow them to only focus on that.

    This type of garbage major and the academic curriculum associated with it is where SEC schools get to let their players pass by with no sense of academic responsibilities or obligations and allows the school itself to achieve GSRs good enough to avoid scrutinization.

    If they can’t hack it in these types of academic programs that were built soley for big-time football athletes then they should sit their a$$es on the sidelines come post-season.

    Any requirements less than the miniscule ones they already have would fall under some type of category as majoring in coloring within the lines or counting to 100.

  11. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 3:09 PM

    @halo81 …

    You mean like Miami, USC, Ohio State, and Penn State?

    Oh wait … they haven’t won any championships lately, have they? :D

    I’d hardly call a couple of kids having their grades dip during a taxing season a scandal. Ooooh :roll:

  12. fcmlefty1 says: Nov 30, 2011 3:13 PM

    This finals/ when are you eligible or ineligible debate is a big reason (but far from the only reason) we don’t have a playoff system. The whole football season has to take place before 2nd semester starts. And its not all on the NCAA or schools either: The NFL doesn’t want the top prospects to be in school 2nd semester either, because they want them at thier disposal for the combine, workouts, etc. Thats why any concocted playoff plan that involves the big 4 bowls as quarterfinals is DOA – the finals can’t possibly take place before 2nd semester starts.

  13. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 3:20 PM

    @poopiedumdum …

    First, kudos on that name :)

    Well, you’ve got me. I’ve never checked the majors for any of these kids. Sure, I’ll admit, I don’t know how you get a degree in general studies–and what the heck is “battery”? But here’s where I’m coming from on this issue:

    You’ve got kids out there from the worst situations of poverty and deprivation. The onlything they’ve got going for them is that they’re athletically gifted and motivated to work their bodies to extremes as a ticket out of their misery. Some of those kids may also be intelligent enough to meet the academic standard of these universities. But some of them truly don’t have that intellectual capacity. I just don’t want to see underprivileged kids miss their chance at a pro career because they weren’t bright enough to keep up with the academic requirements when they do have the requisite athletic skills.

    Now that may not apply in Lee’s case. Offenses are more complicated now, and QBs are usually pretty bright. Maybe he just blew off his studies. But it’s still not fair to the rest of the team to pull a key player before a championship if no one complained about his grades during the regular season.

  14. lasseter1113 says: Nov 30, 2011 3:20 PM

    @Deb

    Wow, you actually leave a comment supporting that their players should get to play ‘if” this was true and you get 30 thumbs down (so far). I wonder how many of those came from people who don’t agree with you versus how many people did it just because you are an Alabama fan???

  15. burntorangehorn says: Nov 30, 2011 3:30 PM

    Deb, I couldn’t disagree more. If these kids are struggling academically, their athletic department is failing them if it does not remove the athletic distraction and increase the academic focus.

    That’s the opinion of a graduated student athlete, btw.

  16. billf7095 says: Nov 30, 2011 3:31 PM

    Everyone please relax. This story started when a local newspaper reporter (that is infamous for getting stories wrong) wrote a short snippet on a blog. This is the same guy that two years ago started a rumor that a highly placed source told him that Les Miles was going to be fired. Of course, when pushed he could not/ would not name the source. There is no evidence that this reporter has any clue what is he talking about (again).

    Before everyone works themself up into a lather, the semester ends December 6. Lets revisit this whole situation after that date.

  17. cosanostra71 says: Nov 30, 2011 3:33 PM

    Their grades will be fine. You’d have to be a moron to fail at an SEC school anyway.

  18. infrno says: Nov 30, 2011 3:33 PM

    “no LSU student-athletes have been declared ineligible for post-season competition. The current semester is not complete and finals are still ahead, ”

    ——————————————–

    Read that carefully. Of course they haven’t been declared ineligible….yet. They can’t be until after the semester is over and the final grades are out. This is the first I’ve heard about any other players, but that’s been a strong rumor around here with respect to Lee for weeks. I hope it turns out to be false, but we will see.

  19. bpnbr says: Nov 30, 2011 3:46 PM

    poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 3:07 PM

    General Studies? In this type of economy what non-athlete would ever go to college and drop a $100K+ in loans thinking they can graduate with a degree and get a job with a degree in general studies? The answer is no one.

    You mean as opposed to those students who “drop a $100K+ in loans on such money making majors as English, History, Fine Arts, Trumpet, Anthropology, or any other liberal arts major?

  20. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 3:55 PM

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t grade eligibility determined by the previous semester? Which is why guys can miss the regular season and be eligible for bowl play and vice versa. That would explain why these players would be able to play all season and miss the bowls.

    My best guess is LSU is aware Lee and/or some other players are on the verge of being ruled ineligible WHEN the current semester ends, but until that happens they’re eligible.

  21. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 3:57 PM

    @lasseter1113 …

    It’s a combination of anti-SEC sentiment, genuine disagreement, and hits from the inquisition frustrated because their Salem trials and tag-team verbal slashings were shut down. Mass thumbing is all that’s left to them. :D

  22. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 3:59 PM

    @burntorangehorn …

    But if a kid’s true purpose for being there is to get a shot at a pro career–and he really doesn’t have the chops for, say, a career on Wall Street, how does it help him to take away athletics?

  23. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 4:07 PM

    Deb,

    The “second degree in battery” was a joke in regards to the second degree battery charge Jefferson got for beating up that guy in the beginning of the year. Tasteless? Of course.

    bpnbr,

    although I don’t have and facts to support it, unfortunately the situation now is probably yes. Students who were thinking about being liberal arts majors probably are at the very least considering minors in more job friendly degrees in this economy. For any parents out there don’t tell me if your son or daughter was in college right now and told you she wanted to major in “anthropology” you won’t suggest that maybe they take a few business classes to cover their butts when the real world hits.

    That only further supports my point. Students who were once free to study liberal arts are now forced to study things that aren’t their primary interest but offer a steady paycheck and job security. So why in the hell are athletes still majoring in these bogus programs? Because ol’ ball coach needs them to catch footballs on Saturdays and the University’s need their GSRs to be where they need them to guarantee their next batch of scholarships.

  24. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 4:35 PM

    A general studies degree, also commonly referred to as a “generalist degree,” covers the basics of a university education. It’s a broadly based degree program that demonstrates to employers and peers alike that you have the self-discipline and intelligence to work through a university-level program in a variety of subject areas. Some see it as proof that you’re trainable.

  25. bpnbr says: Nov 30, 2011 4:41 PM

    And, how do you know that they are not taking courses in “job friendly degrees?”.

    Your comments point out two things:

    1. That you are willing to stereotype people whom you don’t know.
    2, You know nothing about the degree requirements for General Studies.

    Often times people don’t know what they want to do, that’s why college kids change majors like adults change underwear. General Studies offers a broad education, something that at one time was admired and desired (think Thomas Jefferson). In addition, with the increasing need to obtain a graduate degree, it offers the individual a diverse education that can be supplemented by specialized graduate training.

  26. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 4:47 PM

    Bozosforall, even if you concede what the descriptions says I still would be skeptical as to what the program really entails. Even if that’s the case then the number 1 football team in the country is putting out a great crop of Sports administrators and “trainable” employees…as well as one guy to manage them all. This is shocking, per LSU’s own website, I went and picked some key position starters:

    Jordan Jefferson: General Studies
    Jarrett Lee: General Studies
    Tyrann Mathieu: Sports Administration
    Reuben Randall: Sports Administration
    Deangelo Peterson: General Studies
    Russell Shepherd: General Studies
    Spencer Ware: Sports Admnistration
    Kendrick Adams: General Studies
    Sam Montgomery: Sports Administration
    Stefoin Francois: General Studies
    Kevin Minter: Sports Administration
    Ryan Baker: General Studies
    Morris Claiborne: General Studies
    Brandon Taylor: General Studies

    Eric Reid: Management (One guy with some sense)

    Any LSU fan out there, and I know there are a lot of them from having to stomach all your diatribes on every post this blog makes, should be flat out embarassed. Its disrespectful to most college football programs that aren’t trying to win national championships but compete and teach their players how to be men that the only emphasis your school places on the players 2-4 years in Baton Rouge is winning championships.

  27. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 4:54 PM

    Care to pick key position starters from other schools to compare their majors? Until you do, you’re speaking about something you have very little knowledge about. For all you know, this is normal for football players across the country.

  28. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 4:55 PM

    The amount of players that are enrolled in these two programs refutes any arguments anyone makes that they are picking these majors for any other reason then to float by. LSU offers 70 different undergraduate degree programs? Why does every single starter pick one of two degrees? It’s almost statistically impossible to go to any college and randomly select 22 players and have the majors be so limited.

    You guys are all full of sh*t, and trying to BS your way out of the reality of LSU’s success.

    It’s an ends justifies the means mentality within that program’s administration. Whatever it takes to keep them eligible and win championships is what they’ll do. You guys are so quick to preach from the pulpit at how great the SEC is yet when the reality of how you get there is exposed you try to get theoretical all of a sudden, as if every single starter is enrolling in these programs because as bpnpr puts it, they want to get graduate degress. *vomit

  29. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 4:57 PM

    @poopiedumdum …

    ROFL … whoosh!! Sorry you’re lil joke just flew right by me. I have heard of some bizarre majors and thought that was another of them.

    @bozosforall and bpnbr …

    Thanks for the explanation on the General Studies degree. I like the idea of having a broad liberal arts education–otherwise, a university would be no more than a technical school. But at the same time, a degree should provide enough specialization to keep a candidate from being a blank slate with no targeted training.

    Again though, in this discussion, it depends on the student’s long-term goals. We all know someone with Cam Newton’s athletic skills is not going to be working 9-5 after graduation regardless of his major.

  30. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:01 PM

    Poopie, until you prove LSU is the only school this happens at, you’re talking out of the same place your name comes from.

    And really, I couldn’t care less what another adult chooses to major in. It’s their life; if they think taking a light load will get them to the pros or make them money after college, that’s their choice.

  31. infrno says: Nov 30, 2011 5:02 PM

    poopiedumdum

    If you think LSU is in the minority with respect to the types of degrees most of its athletes pursue, I’m not sure what to tell you. Why should anyone be embarassed about it anyway? You realize that if not for football the overwhelming majority of them would never attend college in the first place, right? And if they flunk out, there goes their ride. Say what you want about my next statement, but the fact of the matter is that a very large percentage of these guys aren’t ever going to be rocket scientists, so they can either try to become bazillionaires playing ball, or they can maybe give you some fries with that.

  32. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 5:04 PM

    I do agree with others, however, that whatever happens this won’t be any bigger impediment to Lee playing in the championship games than Tyrann Mathieu’s failed drug test was an impediment to him playing in a key game. I’m sure something will be worked out just it was then. (And I supported Mathieu being able to play, too.)

  33. infrno says: Nov 30, 2011 5:09 PM

    @ Deb

    It won’t effect Lee being eligible for the SEC game, but the difference between this and what happened with Mathieu is that in Tyrann’s case, it was actually purely an LSU rule. Hell, they could have decided to scrap the rule or not enforce it in this case had they chosen to do so. No one knows for certain that they were suspended, nor when they actually failed the test (for that matter, I don’t believe it was ever confirmed that they did fail a drug test). My point with that is just that they could have chosen any game to hold them out for punishment, I’m not sure why they chose Auburn.

  34. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 5:11 PM

    nps674, your comment has an undertone that is acceptable if it is normal for other college programs, which is even more sad.

  35. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:17 PM

    Why is it not acceptable? You act like athletes are the only students who wish to skate by. There are tons of students who major in General Studies and other “easier” degrees. Blame whoever allows universities to offer such programs if you have that big a problem with it. The fact is the program is offered and ANYONE can take it.

    If these guys weren’t athletes, would you have a problem with them majoring in General Studies or Sports Administration? It’s their choice. If it doesn’t work out for them, they wouldn’t be the first student that happens to. Many college students around the world fail despite majoring in so-called “legitimate” fields.

    What is the reason for going to college? To get a better job than you’d have otherwise. If majoring in General Studies and taking the chance you’ll be a pro athlete is the path any of them choose, who are we to deny them? Whether they succeed or fail, it’s not our place to make their decisions for them.

  36. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 5:29 PM

    @infrno …

    Okay, I get it. This is one of the NCAA’s 5 million nitpickey rules. :roll:

    Someone mentioned earlier that it’s a semester thing and the grades come out just after the SEC Championship. That means the only kids in college football impacted by this rule are the kids that happen to make the championship game in January. That’s absolutely ridiculous. The NCAA should use their eligibility for the season to determine their eligibility for that one final game. Doing anything else is unfair to the whole team! The season is the season–even if one little piece of it happens to fall into the next semester.

  37. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 5:31 PM

    @poopiedumdum …

    Understand your point, but really … these guys aren’t presidential candidates. They’re kids playing college football. Their majors are no one’s business. Frankly, I don’t think LSU should even list them on the Web site. I know many people who changed majors several times in school, or who graduated then went into entirely different fields. Yes, players are public figures, of a sort. But do they rise to the level that strangers should be debating their majors online?

  38. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 5:33 PM

    I’ll conced every point you have made. Most top football programs do it and it’s anyone’s God given right to choose their major. But why is the percentage so much greater among athletes? See my other points for my response to that question. Here’s the best statistic I could find on short notice from a Atlanta Constitution report ( which supports the fact it happens at all schools which I conceded):

    “In a recent year, 41 percent of Texas football players were majoring in youth and community services, compared to 0.2 percent of all students; 78.4 percent of Michigan’s were in general studies, compared to 1.6 percent of all students there.”

    I’m sure it’s a similar stat for LSU. As it appears 50% of their players are general studies majors and 49 % are sports administration majors.

    You going to argue that that percentage holds for the rest of the student populationat LSU?

    All I am saying is it doesn’t make it right that everyone is doing it and I wish for once instead of getting all defensive, one of you SEC fans would stand up and say, “We’re the best football conference in the country, we have the best football athletes in the country, and we do absolutely nothing to define the players on our teams in any other respect than that.”

    You are demanding everyone else in the country to concede those first two statements yet you refuse to concede the last one.

  39. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:35 PM

    Deb, grades should come out before most of the bowl games. Semesters typically end the first week or 2 of December and the first bowl isn’t until the 17th. So in most cases, the schools should have at least a few days’ notice at the least. Though I agree, it is pretty crappy.

  40. brutusbuckeye2011 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:39 PM

    poopiedumdum has a point about the number of players majoring in the same area. This is nothing new. An old joke was that football players usually major in basket weaving. Maybe more schools should take the approach that an article in a blog known as The Scallion details. Go to:
    http://www.thescallion.org/the-scallion/2011/09/ohio-state-football-team-drops-universitys-academics-program.html
    and see the course tOSU plans to take to eliminate academic issues for football players.

  41. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 5:44 PM

    All I am saying is it doesn’t make it right that everyone is doing it and I wish for once instead of getting all defensive, one of you SEC fans would stand up and say, “We’re the best football conference in the country, we have the best football athletes in the country, and we do absolutely nothing to define the players on our teams in any other respect than that.”

    __
    Which school(s) do you support, poop? Harvard? Yale? Sisters of the Poor?

    Your attempt to disproportionately discredit the athletes at SEC schools is both ridiculously transparent and blatantly riddled with jealousy that the SEC is so dominant. The fact of the matter is that the South produces the biggest and best overall crop of athletes on a yearly basis, so much so that schools from every other part of the country regularly make recruiting swings down there, with little regard as to how academically talented those prospects are.

  42. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:49 PM

    “You going to argue that that percentage holds for the rest of the student population at LSU?

    All I am saying is it doesn’t make it right that everyone is doing it and I wish for once instead of getting all defensive, one of you SEC fans would stand up and say, “We’re the best football conference in the country, we have the best football athletes in the country, and we do absolutely nothing to define the players on our teams in any other respect than that.”

    You are demanding everyone else in the country to concede those first two statements yet you refuse to concede the last one.”

    —————————————–

    Firstly, I know athletes take the easy way out compared to the majority of students. But let’s stop acting like athletes are the ONLY ones who do it. It’s a much smaller sample size compared to the rest of the student body and the fact is, like infrno said, most of these guys wouldn’t even get into college if not for football. So them being chemistry majors or physics majors just isn’t in the cards.

    Answer me this: WHAT IS NOT RIGHT ABOUT IT? It’s a major that is offered by the university; a major anyone can choose.

    I’m not defensive whatsoever about the topic. I simply don’t give a flying crap about what these players do besides football (as far as school goes, anyway). I don’t know any of them personally and my life is completely 100% unaffected by what they do with their lives. If they don’t want to work extra-hard to major in a difficult subject, whatever happens is on them. They’re at these schools to play football; I mean, if they don’t play well, they can lose their scholarship even if they excel in the classroom.

    This is just how college sports work. If any student wishes to not conform to these machinations, they are free to choose any major they want. But if they do so, they must also expect whatever consequences they may endure. If they spend more time on schoolwork than on athletics, chances are it’ll hurt their play/playing time. Fact is, most of them are NOT prepared to accept any consequences that means not playing their respective sport. Again, that’s their choice.

    I have another question for you, poopie: why are you focusing on the SEC? Your last post mentioned Texas and Michigan, but only because those were the statistics you could find. But the rest of your post focuses only on the SEC when, as the stats show, this isn’t a regional issue. Afterall, Matt Leinart stayed in school for his final year of eligibility by solely taking ballroom dancing.

    But so there’s no question of my feelings, I will concede your final statement even if the rest of the country doesn’t concede the first two.

  43. twoody50 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:51 PM

    What’s the surprise. The whole country knows there are no academic standards in the SEC save for Vandy. That is the drawing card for NFL wanna-bes

  44. jrhanchey says: Nov 30, 2011 5:52 PM

    Oh please. LSU had the 2nd highest graduation rate in the SEC last year. It was higher than any Big 12 school, all but Stanford out of the Pac-12, and almost all of the Big Ten and Big East schools. LSU is doing something right on and off the field. Sure, there will always be quirks and issues – when you have that many people involved, there always is – but quit hating and quit judging when you don’t have all the facts.

  45. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 5:55 PM

    If these guys weren’t athletes, would you care about what they majored in? So why do you care at all?

  46. John Taylor says: Nov 30, 2011 5:57 PM

    “poopiedumdum has a point…”

    That might be the greatest opening to a comment in the history of this website. Absolutely fantastic.

  47. brutusbuckeye2011 says: Nov 30, 2011 6:00 PM

    @ John Taylor:
    Glad you like it. Check out the link in my original posting. I’m sure you will enjoy it.

  48. twoody50 says: Nov 30, 2011 6:02 PM

    Football graduation rate at LSU was 7th in the SEC at 60%. That is better than 5 teams in the Big 12 and 3 teams in the Big 10. (scout.com)

  49. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 6:03 PM

    John Taylor says:
    Nov 30, 2011 5:57 PM
    “poopiedumdum has a point…”

    That might be the greatest opening to a comment in the history of this website. Absolutely fantastic.

    __
    Too bad that “point” is on the top of his head.

  50. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 6:08 PM

    @poopiedumdum …

    Well, if that’s all you want, I’ll be happy to acknowledge that SEC schools (other than Vanderbilt) generally make no effort to claim their players are anything other than great players, as opposed to academic scholars. That’s why we chose them: For their football skills.

    But take a look back at the stats you provided from that Journal-Constitution article. You also mentioned Texas, which is a Big 12 school, and Michigan, which is one of the finest academic institutions in the country. So this tendency of athletes to major in General Studies and other less taxing subjects isn’t unique to the SEC.

  51. yogijr13 says: Nov 30, 2011 6:10 PM

    At least 90% of these kids wouldn’t be in college without football. We should be applauding the effort they make in the classroom AND the field, regardless of their major. I’m with Deb, they shouldn’t even post majors. It’s no-one’s business, but those students.

  52. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 6:10 PM

    twoody50 …

    Hon, what is your team? You’re always railing at the SEC, so I’m curious. It’s nice to know the allegiance of the kid throwing the tomatoes.

  53. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 6:14 PM

    I went to Notre Dame and root for them today. I also grew up in Florida for 18 years, my sister and brother-in-law went to UF and I was raised a die-hard FSU fan. I lived in Jacksonville for the past five years which made 98% of my friends there SEC fans and alums so trust me I am quite aware of what goes on in the south and completely agree the best athletes come from there. Most of the people i knew would agree with me, not sure why you guys are so destined to dispute reality.

    If you go to Notre Dame you major either in liberal arts, business, engineering, or science. That’s it. I actually am a believer that in a case like ND that they should lower their academic standards for admission believe it or not. I think that it is the institution’s responsibility to make sure that they have the resources in place to provide student athletes who on face may not be able to handle such a rigorous academic requirements to get through it. Having gone to ND I know that their student athlete resources are the best in the country and can take on that task if the student is willing to put in the effort.

    Schools with bullsh*t majors that just provide a quick fix for low academic skills their players have are what make me angry. It’s like they don’t even try to guide them in a different direction. The vast majority of these kids aren’t going pro, so why not at least try to give them a decent education instead of just pillaging their athletic skills and then hanging them out to dry. It drives me crazy that school’s have just been able to abandon this responsibility and nobody seems to care.

    The hope I have right now is among the high schools in at least South Florida. They are no longer just bussing kids in from the sticks and strapping a helmet on their head. There are a lot of great high schools with strong academic programs. The improvements are being made in the classroom as well as on the football field. They are making them a more complete student athlete prior to going to the college level.

    That helps teams like ND, which recruits nationally but of course likes to pick up a couple of the southern studs when we can. Kelly has done a decent job so far, finding great guys like Aaron Lynch, Stephon Tuit, Louis Nix, Jordan Prestwood – 4-5 star athletes who saw value in a top notch educations well as a great football program. Hopefully in the next cpl years we’ll start to see some dividends but worst case scenario, we’ve got 98% of our kids graduating with degrees from a good institution that they can take to the bank rather than back to the bayou.

  54. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 6:15 PM

    poopiedumdum says:
    Nov 30, 2011 5:33 PM

    “But why is the percentage so much greater among athletes?”

    Because their talents lie in athletic endeavors and not academic ones (e.g., absent them making the leap to the next level, they will never have more than an average at best work career, something that they would have regardless of whether or not they ever played college football).

    “I wish for once instead of getting all defensive, one of you SEC fans would stand up and say, “We’re the best football conference in the country, we have the best football athletes in the country, and we do absolutely nothing to define the players on our teams in any other respect than that.”

    Not true in regards to your third statement. The schools prepare their athletes for the types of careers that they will likely have once their college and/or pro careers are over. The athletes gain much more education than they would have otherwise gotten if they had not been offered a scholarship in the first place and instead had just gotten some HS graduate-level type of job once they finished their prep careers. Attempting to force them to take harder courses, which they aren’t equipped to handle is not only elitist but also just ignorant of each student’s capabilities in regards to their learning abilities. Not every student (athlete or otherwise) is going to get the cush job out of college, so there is no reason why the schools shouldn’t cater to all levels of academic ability.

  55. poopiedumdum says: Nov 30, 2011 6:18 PM

    Arguments I have heard so far…

    Everyone is doing it, so why not us….cop out, that doesn’t make it ok

    At least they are getting an education…cop out, push them as hard in the classroom as you do on the field and they should be able to do better than what we are seeing.

    I got go home, so I’m stepping down from the pulpit, sorry for all the preaching. I’m the son of a teacher, my three sisters are teachers…it’s in my blood.

  56. jrhanchey says: Nov 30, 2011 6:20 PM

    Instead of using sites like Scout.com to get your facts, try federally mandated ones like ncaa.org

    77% Graduation Success Rate at LSU. Not 60%.

  57. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 6:21 PM

    poopiedumdum says:
    Nov 30, 2011 6:14 PM
    I went to Notre Dame
    __
    Sour Grapes from a fan of a program that hasn’t really competed for a national title in over 20 years. An elitist school whose fan base thinks that their sheit doesn’t stink and that they are too good to be in either the Big 10 or the Big East in football (but relies on the charity of the Big East, who lets them compete in the other sports in the vague hopes that ND might someday deign to join them in football too).

  58. jrhanchey says: Nov 30, 2011 6:22 PM

    Oh, and @poopiedumdum, I’m the daughter of two former college computer science professors and a former math teacher myself. It’s in my blood, too. Unlike you, though, so is getting my facts right.

  59. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 6:28 PM

    poopiedumdum says:
    Nov 30, 2011 6:18 PM
    Arguments I have heard so far…

    Everyone is doing it, so why not us….cop out, that doesn’t make it ok

    At least they are getting an education…cop out, push them as hard in the classroom as you do on the field and they should be able to do better than what we are seeing.

    I got go home, so I’m stepping down from the pulpit, sorry for all the preaching. I’m the son of a teacher, my three sisters are teachers…it’s in my blood.

    __
    Meanwhile, most student athletes are sons and daughters of broken homes. Keep those blinders on, poopsie.

    If anything, the schools should make special accommodations for these guys, seeing as they are the ones who create a vast majority of the “school pride” that we see from the geek alums that spend so much time obsessing about what these athletes do on the field, draping themselves in the glory that belongs only to the guys upon whose sweat the programs are built.

  60. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 6:30 PM

    poopiedumdum says:
    Nov 30, 2011 6:18 PM
    I’m the son of a teacher, my three sisters are teachers…it’s in my blood.
    __
    Those who can, do…those who can’t, teach.

  61. brutusbuckeye2011 says: Nov 30, 2011 6:30 PM

    @jrhanchey:
    I’m not trying to pick a fight, but I went to ncaa.org to look up tOSU’s GSR. While there I checked LSU. Poppiedumdum is correct at 60%. Here is the link to verify it.
    http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/NCAA/Academics+and+Athletes/Education+and+Research/Academic+Reform/GSR/2009/841gfw951_2009_d1_school_gsr_data.html

  62. caliguy58 says: Nov 30, 2011 6:44 PM

    It’s been a heck of a long time since I’ve seen such jealousy among college football fans of a college football program, i.e., LSU. And, the remarks made about southern universities and the SEC by fans, who can’t stand to see such good football teams play season after season, fall to the level of idiotic or lower. All college fans should be happy to be able to watch great teams such as LSU play almost perfect college football. Instead, all we get is a continuous stream of negativity from people, who want to see such programs and much worse the student-athletes who play in them, fail no matter how speculative or downright absurd the allegations made against them. This kind of conduct goes far beyond mere competitiveness and amounts to intentional actions purposefully designed to harm the programs and student-athletes at which it is aimed. Of course, this is all a product of the same values and beliefs that are carrying our society and country down the toilet at an ever increasing pace. These types of comments, etc., found all over the internet and elsewhere, and the people who post them, make me sick to my stomach.

  63. imaduffer says: Nov 30, 2011 7:23 PM

    If college student-athletes don’t want to take advantage of getting an education, so be it. If they can find a job and want to work for minimum wage after college it’s their choice. All I can say is good luck after wasting 4 years and making millions of dollars for someone else.

  64. neovenator250 says: Nov 30, 2011 8:10 PM

    Poopie…

    If you think that LSU is the only school that does this then you should be embarrased. Football players are like that just about everywhere. If you follow a major program, then I guarantee you that you can find the exact same thing (worse in many places). Your attempts to discredit LSU are bull****

  65. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 8:30 PM

    Typical hypocrisy of the SEC fan. Lets throw the book at kids who sell /trade items that were given to them by the school or the NCAA but let our players slide by when their grades fall below what the NCAA mandates. Let’s crucify the kid who gets a couple hundred extra dollars in his paychecks over the course of the summer but lets lower the NCAA standards for the fine upstanding gentlemen of the SEC. I heard it many times from SEC fans when all the issues at tOSU were coming to light; “It’s a stupid rule, but it’s a rule”. You can’t have it both ways.

    And besides, if they can’t keep their grades high enough in courses that were specifically designed to keep them eligible (which I’m sure all schools, including tOSU, have), then they don’t deserve to be in college.

  66. trbowman says: Nov 30, 2011 8:32 PM

    “Personally, I feel Jefferson is the better QB, but Lee should have the opportunity to play if called upon”

    I was going to thumb up your comment, Deb, until I read that line.

    Jordan Jefferson blows.

  67. trbowman says: Nov 30, 2011 8:34 PM

    “Sour Grapes from a fan of a program that hasn’t really competed for a national title in over 20 years. An elitist school whose fan base thinks that their sheit doesn’t stink and that they are too good to be in either the Big 10 or the Big East in football (but relies on the charity of the Big East, who lets them compete in the other sports in the vague hopes that ND might someday deign to join them in football too).”

    Hater alert. If Notre Dame is so irrelevant why do they bother you so much? lol.

  68. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:41 PM

    buckeye1nation says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:30 PM
    Typical hypocrisy of the SEC fan. Lets throw the book at kids who sell /trade items that were given to them by the school or the NCAA but let our players slide by when their grades fall below what the NCAA mandates. Let’s crucify the kid who gets a couple hundred extra dollars in his paychecks over the course of the summer but lets lower the NCAA standards for the fine upstanding gentlemen of the SEC. I heard it many times from SEC fans when all the issues at tOSU were coming to light; “It’s a stupid rule, but it’s a rule”. You can’t have it both ways.

    And besides, if they can’t keep their grades high enough in courses that were specifically designed to keep them eligible (which I’m sure all schools, including tOSU, have), then they don’t deserve to be in college.

    __
    ZERO evidence that any school in the SEC has done that in recent times. As opposed to the mounds of evidence that OSU violated long-standing NCAA rules. So until there is any proof that any of the SEC athletes are ineligible, you have nothing to stand on.

  69. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:43 PM

    trbowman says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:34 PM
    “Sour Grapes from a fan of a program that hasn’t really competed for a national title in over 20 years. An elitist school whose fan base thinks that their sheit doesn’t stink and that they are too good to be in either the Big 10 or the Big East in football (but relies on the charity of the Big East, who lets them compete in the other sports in the vague hopes that ND might someday deign to join them in football too).”
    __

    Hater alert. If Notre Dame is so irrelevant why do they bother you so much? lol.

    __
    Someone has to put you delusional idiots in your places. Your program hasn’t won a title since 1988, which makes your fans boasts rather empty. And “irrelevant” is your word, not mine (though I must admit it is somewhat appropriate).

  70. trbowman says: Nov 30, 2011 8:45 PM

    “Someone has to put you delusional idiots in your places. Your program hasn’t won a title since 1988, which makes your fans boasts rather empty. And “irrelevant” is your word, not mine (though I must admit it is somewhat appropriate).

    I don’t boast about Notre Dame football.

  71. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:50 PM

    trbowman says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:32 PM
    “Personally, I feel Jefferson is the better QB, but Lee should have the opportunity to play if called upon”

    I was going to thumb up your comment, Deb, until I read that line.

    Jordan Jefferson blows.

    __
    Last year, maybe. This year, not so. 163.5 passer rating, plus he’s a legitimate threat to run the ball effectively.

    Now if you want to talk QBs that blow, all you needed to see was Crist’s early season meltdown plus Rees’s ineffectiveness against Stanford this past weekend (and lower overall QB rating than that of Jefferson).

    You got no leg to stand on here, blowman.

  72. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:51 PM

    trbowman says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:45 PM

    I don’t boast about Notre Dame football.
    __
    I don’t blame you.

    There’s enough obnoxious ND fans that do though.

  73. trbowman says: Nov 30, 2011 8:54 PM

    “Last year, maybe. This year, not so. 163.5 passer rating, plus he’s a legitimate threat to run the ball effectively.

    Now if you want to talk QBs that blow, all you needed to see was Crist’s early season meltdown plus Rees’s ineffectiveness against Stanford this past weekend (and lower overall QB rating than that of Jefferson).

    You got no leg to stand on here, blowman.”

    lol nice troll job. It’s ok though I’ll turn the other cheek. Have a nice day.

  74. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:54 PM

    buckeye1nation says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:30 PM

    And besides, if they can’t keep their grades high enough in courses that were specifically designed to keep them eligible (which I’m sure all schools, including tOSU, have), then they don’t deserve to be in college.

    __
    They likely add more real value to the school’s image than you ever will. Both in money and in overall national profile. The sports programs are what keeps the supply of little rich kids to Columbus flowing strong.

  75. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:55 PM

    trbowman says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:54 PM
    “Last year, maybe. This year, not so. 163.5 passer rating, plus he’s a legitimate threat to run the ball effectively.

    Now if you want to talk QBs that blow, all you needed to see was Crist’s early season meltdown plus Rees’s ineffectiveness against Stanford this past weekend (and lower overall QB rating than that of Jefferson).

    You got no leg to stand on here, blowman.”

    lol nice troll job. It’s ok though I’ll turn the other cheek. Have a nice day.

    __

    Troll job? I backed my contention with FACT.

    Your contention that Jefferson “blows”, OTOH, was backed by nothing.

    You have a nice day as well.

  76. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 9:11 PM

    @bozosforall, I wasn’t implying that an SEC school did any of that and if it came across that way, I apologize. That was all of the things that MY school did. It has been suggested here that if these kids do not meet the academic requirements that they should be allowed to play. Some even called the academic requirements a stupid rule or something to that affect. Many also called the rule that got “The Ohio State Five” suspended a “stupid rule, but one that needed to be enforced, even if it means they miss the Sugar Bowl”. The academic standard is a rule that needs to be enforced, even if these kids miss the NC game.

  77. texbornlsufan says: Nov 30, 2011 9:13 PM

    Anyone who believes this crap is a IDIOT! Their is not a team of any kind in college sports who doesn’t have a kid or kids who struggle with grades one time or another. Get a life and look in the mirror and see if you see a person who was the perfect student.

    I know I wasn’t and I won’t judge others who MIGHT be!!!!!!!!!!

    Have a great night

  78. frug says: Nov 30, 2011 9:16 PM

    @ bozo

    Meanwhile, most student athletes are sons and daughters of broken homes.

    Really? I’d love to see your evidence of that.

  79. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 9:25 PM

    bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:54 PM

    buckeye1nation says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:30 PM

    And besides, if they can’t keep their grades high enough in courses that were specifically designed to keep them eligible (which I’m sure all schools, including tOSU, have), then they don’t deserve to be in college.

    __
    They likely add more real value to the school’s image than you ever will. Both in money and in overall national profile. The sports programs are what keeps the supply of little rich kids to Columbus flowing strong.
    —————————————————
    @bozo, I never claimed to add any value to my school, other than my annual donation. In fact it is quite the opposite, my school added value to ME.

    This is why it is difficult to have a discussion with many SEC fans(deb and southernpats seem to be at least a couple of exceptions and I’m hoping there are more). When they can’t come up with something intelligent to say, they resort to personal attacks.

  80. trbowman says: Nov 30, 2011 9:34 PM

    “I never claimed to add any value to my school, other than my annual donation. In fact it is quite the opposite, my school added value to ME.”

    Pretty much sums it up but, I don’t know if douchebagsforall will agree.

  81. normtide says: Nov 30, 2011 9:35 PM

    This does not just happen in the South, but go ahead, if thinking that makes you feel better. OSU suspended players for the next year, but not the bowl game, cause they thirsted to beat an SEC team in a BCS bowl. Have you ever considered that maybe, just maybe, we are just better at football then you are?

  82. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 9:45 PM

    Typical hypocrisy of the SEC fan. Lets throw the book at kids who sell /trade items that were given to them by the school or the NCAA but let our players slide by when their grades fall below what the NCAA mandates. Let’s crucify the kid who gets a couple hundred extra dollars in his paychecks over the course of the summer but lets lower the NCAA standards for the fine upstanding gentlemen of the SEC. I heard it many times from SEC fans when all the issues at tOSU were coming to light; “It’s a stupid rule, but it’s a rule”. You can’t have it both ways.

    ——————————————-

    I’m an LSU fan and I have no problem with athletes selling their own personal belongings. I don’t even get exactly why it’s against the rules. If a student athlete gave their jersey to a fellow student, would that student get in any trouble? I don’t think so.

    Really, the only reason I was fine with the application of the rule was because it kept Ohio State winless vs. the SEC ;) But I’m 100% against the rule’s existence.

  83. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 9:45 PM

    “This does not just happen in the South, but go ahead, if thinking that makes you feel better. OSU suspended players for the next year, but not the bowl game, cause they thirsted to beat an SEC team in a BCS bowl. Have you ever considered that maybe, just maybe, we are just better at football then you are?”

    _____________________________

    @normtide, I don’t believe I said it only happens in the south. I’m sure it happens at quite a few places. If the NCAA had declared the five ineligible, then we would have sat them for the game. The NCAA did not declare them ineligible so we let them play. What did we do wrong in that sense?

  84. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 9:45 PM

    buckeye1nation says:
    Nov 30, 2011 9:11 PM
    @bozosforall, I wasn’t implying that an SEC school did any of that and if it came across that way, I apologize. That was all of the things that MY school did. It has been suggested here that if these kids do not meet the academic requirements that they should be allowed to play. Some even called the academic requirements a stupid rule or something to that affect. Many also called the rule that got “The Ohio State Five” suspended a “stupid rule, but one that needed to be enforced, even if it means they miss the Sugar Bowl”. The academic standard is a rule that needs to be enforced, even if these kids miss the NC game.
    __
    I would also agree that IF they don’t meet the academic standards, THEN they shouldn’t be allowed to play. This should apply to all bowl participants though, not just those in the NC game, which might mean that grades should be turned in before the first bowl game begins. Otherwise, the grades should be held out until all bowls are complete. The rule should apply to all or none, IMO. Either way is fine with me in regards to enforcement.

  85. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 9:49 PM

    trbowman says:
    Nov 30, 2011 9:34 PM
    “I never claimed to add any value to my school, other than my annual donation. In fact it is quite the opposite, my school added value to ME.”

    Pretty much sums it up but, I don’t know if douchebagsforall will agree.

    ___
    What you fail to see is that the value that your school added to YOU is greatly enhanced by the national profile that the school has, in large part due to the notoriety that the sports programs lend to the institution (notoriety that is created by the success of the teams involved, teams comprised of these athletes). Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.

  86. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 9:51 PM

    frug says:
    Nov 30, 2011 9:16 PM
    @ bozo

    Meanwhile, most student athletes are sons and daughters of broken homes.

    Really? I’d love to see your evidence of that.

    __
    No statistical evidence, then again no one here is really presenting much in the way of evidence to support any of their points so why should I?

  87. bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 9:53 PM

    buckeye1nation says:
    Nov 30, 2011 9:25 PM
    bozosforall says: Nov 30, 2011 8:54 PM

    buckeye1nation says:
    Nov 30, 2011 8:30 PM

    And besides, if they can’t keep their grades high enough in courses that were specifically designed to keep them eligible (which I’m sure all schools, including tOSU, have), then they don’t deserve to be in college.

    __
    They likely add more real value to the school’s image than you ever will. Both in money and in overall national profile. The sports programs are what keeps the supply of little rich kids to Columbus flowing strong.
    —————————————————
    @bozo, I never claimed to add any value to my school, other than my annual donation. In fact it is quite the opposite, my school added value to ME.

    This is why it is difficult to have a discussion with many SEC fans(deb and southernpats seem to be at least a couple of exceptions and I’m hoping there are more). When they can’t come up with something intelligent to say, they resort to personal attacks.

    __
    And your “personal attacks” of those that “can’t keep their grades high enough” is OK? IMO, it’s even more egregious, given that they aren’t here to defend themselves.

  88. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 9:54 PM

    @nps6724, I agree it is a stupid rule, but it is a rule and they broke it so they needed to be suspended. The NCAA is full of stupid rules, but then again so is life in general and if we break them we have to suffer the consequences.

    I think it is against the rules because it is something that is not available to the rest of the student body, which makes receiving cash or services for it an impermissible benefit. It would be easy for a coach or recruiter to tell a kid “Come to our school. We have a guy that will buy your game worn jersey for $10,000 per.”

  89. glestonsimmons says: Nov 30, 2011 9:58 PM

    I think these guys would fare better academically at some “little sister of the poor” school. Maybe Ohio State or something.

  90. normtide says: Nov 30, 2011 9:59 PM

    buckeye1nation,

    The school planned suspensions, which expressly implies the school knew they had broken some NCAA rules. I am not saying whats wrong or right in either of these situations, it is not a black and white issue. I am saying, OSU did what many here are speculating LSU is doing. I would not consider athletes who earn millions for their schools as ordinary students. What benefits and leeway they receive is up for debate, I have no idea what the answer would be. I have just heard the whole ” the SEC is full of cheaters, that is how they win” line a few times before. I see it as a coping mechanism.

  91. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 10:00 PM

    @bozosforall, I was making a general statement inclusive of all student athletes, not just those mentioned in the story. And I think Joe Alleva, the LSU AD, spoke up on behalf of those students who were mentioned and defended them against the attacks.

  92. 187onsandusky says: Nov 30, 2011 10:05 PM

    Damn frug, beat me to it.

  93. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 10:10 PM

    @normtide, I see your point and to an extent I agree with it. I think tOSU made a mistake by announcing the suspensions, bit I think they were trying to get out in front of the story and put it to bed, so to speak. IMO, what they should have done is put the ball in the NCAA’s court and force them make a decision on the eligibility of the 5. If the NCAA says “let them play” then no one can say it was all tOSU trying to beat the SEC. If the NCAA says “sit them” we sit them and probably get our tail handed to us without our 3 best players. As it is, we made the decision and we are now being blasted for it. Once we made the decision to let them play it was a no win situation for us.

    @bozosforall, The academic standards do apply to all schools. You will soon be hearing of many students are ineligible for the bowl game.

  94. normtide says: Nov 30, 2011 10:19 PM

    Your right. And to be clear, I am not saying OSU was wrong. Like it or not, the money football brings in is huge for the schools. That box has been open, and Pandora herself can never close it. My point is, just consider that maybe we win because we have better players and coaches on the whole. It is always easier to find excuses then to do the things needed to make a change.

  95. twoody50 says: Nov 30, 2011 10:38 PM

    Deb. I am an avid college football fan and have watched it for more years than you have been alive probably. I throw no tomatoes, but i do see a bias toward the SEC in that ESPN has paid billions of dollars to promote the SEC and owns the TV rights to all the BCS games. College football has become totally subjective and therefore will never crown a true champion. Do you think the people that vote are totally unbiased. Nope. The talking heads use facts when it supports their premise, if not, they ignore them, just like this year with Alabama and Okla .St. Check strength of schedule. Should mean something as to who is better.

  96. twoody50 says: Nov 30, 2011 10:42 PM

    Has everyone forgotten the suspensions for drug related use at LSU this year. In the north those players would not be playing anymore. One game was a slap on the wrist. As long as they can play football it doesn’t matter the person they are or will become.

  97. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 10:43 PM

    @normtide, I agree 100% that the SEC right now is the best conference in college football and maybe better than the AFC West. College football is very cyclical. I think the BIG 10 is on the right track and having Meyer at tOSU will help and Hoke is a good coach, so again, I think the conference is on the right track.

    Speaking of money, here is a link to an interesting piece on Self Sustaining Athletic Departments. Only 22 in the entire country.

    http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/06/16/self-sustaining-athletic-departments-more-than-what-meets-the-eye/

  98. nps6724 says: Nov 30, 2011 10:45 PM

    @ twoody50

    Evidence please. Such as a list of Big 12/Big 10 players suspended anytime in the past 5-10 years where they were indeed suspended for the season.

    Also, you must differentiate between NCAA suspensions and school suspensions. Because synthetic marijuana isn’t even tested for by the NCAA. So the suspension was entirely up to LSU since they weren’t even required to test for it.

  99. twoody50 says: Nov 30, 2011 10:56 PM

    ND fans griping? Come on. Your the only team mentioned in the BCS rules, getting an auto bid for making the top 8. All money. Top ten BCS teams should all be in BCS games, otherwise why have the BCS ranking. If the BCS doesn’t believe they are worthy, then don’t let the talking heads put them there.

  100. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 11:09 PM

    @bozosforall,
    One last thing before I call it a night. Is my degree from tOSU now less meaningful to my employer because they went 6-6 this year? Will an MBA from LSU or Alabama now be more sought after than a Harvard MBA (no offense intended to those two schools) because one of them is going to win the NC this year? In the real world, meaning outside of athletics, my schools value was enhanced by those who preceded me there. I hope that someday a graduate of tOSU has someone look at his resume and that person says ” I used to work for a guy from OSU and he was GREAT at what he did” That is how a school’s value is enhanced.

  101. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 11:44 PM

    @twoody50 …

    I’d like to know your fan allegiance because–whether or not we want to admit it–the team we support has an impact on how we feel on various issues. And frankly, I don’t understand the subterfuge. I’m flat-out wild about my Steelers, have the Tide in my blood, and am grateful to Mizzou for a great education. Can’t imagine why I’d feel the need to hide that … as you’re continuing to hide your allegiance.

    As for the sports media … they serve themselves. It took generations for the SEC to be treated respectfully by national sports reporters. The only reason it happens now is because our teams are successful and stations like ESPN make money off us.

    I’ve looked at Alabama’s schedule and Oklahoma State’s and at their SOS rankings. Like OSU’s coach, I believe Alabama is the better team and certainly more likely to give LSU a competitive game. Then again, I’m a Bama fan and want to see my team in the title match. A person would have to be stone-cold crazy to expect any fan to say her team shouldn’t be #2 when they’ve only lost one game by 3 pts. in OT to #1 and no one else is close. But there are a lot of stone-cold crazy people on this blog :D

    No, sir. Northern schools would not have suspended Tyrann Mathieu et al any longer than LSU did. Those are considered internal school matters. No details have even been released regarding those drug tests, and the NCAA leaves it to the coach to determine discipline. I guarantee no northern coach would have pulled his best players from competition indefinitely for smoking pot or some such nonsense.

    And I guarantee there’s not a school in the NCAA–north, south, east, west–where some kid on the football team isn’t getting up to some similar kind of mischief. It’s no more common in the SEC than anywhere else, as the reports coming out of the various conferences demonstrate. You just want to think the SEC is a hotbed of corruption because of your own regional biases.

  102. infrno says: Nov 30, 2011 11:46 PM

    twoody50 says: Nov 30, 2011 10:42 PM

    Has everyone forgotten the suspensions for drug related use at LSU this year. In the north those players would not be playing anymore. One game was a slap on the wrist. As long as they can play football it doesn’t matter the person they are or will become.

    ———————————

    Maybe you should check your facts before making an ass of yourself. #1 there were no official suspensions. #2 the media rumors were that those players tested positive for synthetic marijuana, but again, nothing was ever confirmed. #3 the rule against it was entirely an LSU rule, not an NCAA rule, go GFY with the whole “in the north, they wouldn’t be playing”. If they played at Ohio State, they wouldn’t have even sat a freaking game.

    In most schools, they wouldn’t have missed a snap, princess, and if LSU had chosen, they could have disregarded their own internal rules entirely and you wouldn’t have ever heard of it.

  103. buckeye1nation says: Nov 30, 2011 11:51 PM

    Hey Deb, Not sure how closely you follow Mizzou, but a kid from my home town is a verbal commit to them, Maty Mauk from Kenton, Oh. Just broke his brother Ben’s record for career yards and already hold career TD passes. Playing for a State Title on Saturday..

  104. Deb says: Nov 30, 2011 11:56 PM

    trbowman says:

    “Personally, I feel Jefferson is the better QB, but Lee should have the opportunity to play if called upon”

    I was going to thumb up your comment, Deb, until I read that line.

    Jordan Jefferson blows.
    ————————————————-

    ROFL … I don’t think one more thumbs up would be much help there anyway :D

    I’m not saying he’s Cam Newton, but he maintains his poise under pressure and provides that run threat. Really haven’t paid that much attention, but in the times I’ve seen them both perform, I just haven’t been as impressed with Lee.

  105. Deb says: Dec 1, 2011 12:06 AM

    @buckeye1nation …

    It’s so weird because I’ll be watching Mizzou more often now because they’ll be in the SEC. My first love is the NFL and those games are always on. With college, I watch all Bama’s games and a lot of SEC games. Other than that, I usually just check out some of the big rivalry games. Now Missouri will be right in the thick of things–though I’m so thankful they won’t be playing Bama very often. I’ll keep a lookout for Maty Mauk. All that talk about player grad rates–Missouri’s were the best in the Big 12 and will be second to Vandy’s in the SEC :)

  106. infrno says: Dec 1, 2011 12:09 AM

    @ Deb

    Lee played fairly well until the Bama game, but we would have absolutely lost that game without Jefferson.

    I think what happens here is that Jefferson’s previous performances taint what he has done this year. He’s playing pretty solid (no, he’s no Cam Newton, or Andrew Luck, or whatever), but the only mistake I’ve seen him make this year was the INT to Arkansas.

    I heard some stats today from a local guy that surprised him and me. LSU is apparently #1 in scoring offense in the SEC, but more impressively, they are #1 in pass efficiency and #1 in yards per reception (I think it was in the neighborhood of 13.+).

    Last year we were close to last in total offense in the country, so IMO that is what people are still judging Jefferson by.

  107. infrno says: Dec 1, 2011 12:13 AM

    BTW, for you haters, Jefferson got into a bar fight. I’ve been in one or two of those, but his was blown way out of proportion because of who was involved.

  108. gatorcheme says: Dec 1, 2011 2:24 AM

    With respect to athletes enrolling in ‘easy’ degree programs: that’s their business. They’re the ones who need to live with that decision.

    Thank GOD I wasn’t required to include a full time sports program while obtaining my Chemical Engineering degree.

  109. norcalirish says: Dec 1, 2011 8:31 AM

    Every time I see another headline like this I’m further convinced that this whole NCAA thing is just a joke. You’ve got teams like Stanford, Northwestern, Navy, Army, and, of course, Notre Dame (best overall sports academics for years) trying to do the right thing competing against schools that are simply football factories. I’m sure there are more positive examples out there (Duke, Vanderbilt and Wake Forest come to mind), and kudos for Stanford for the on the field success (even though we beat them in the classroom), but seriously, this is getting ridiculous. I mean, realistically I’m pretty sure the majority of the kids at powerhouse programs couldn’t even GET IN to Notre Dame (see Palmer, Carson), let alone Stanford!

    Maybe it’s time the usc’s, miami’s (and I’m guessing almost the whole sec) just simply go semi-pro and allow actual STUDENT athletes to compete. Until then I guess I’ll just keep on laughing at the seemingly endless scandals coming out of some of these programs.

  110. texbornlsufan says: Dec 1, 2011 10:43 AM

    @ norcalirish

    Your team sucks and it has for several years. Remember we are talking FOOTBALL on here as this site is called Football Talk. Due to your Irish being push overs to most of the other programs you don’t have to be a hater on here. Last year it was all about the new coach and how he was going to bring your team back to life. Now just the same ol poor us! We are Notre Dame crap and trying to make excuses for being bad.

  111. texbornlsufan says: Dec 1, 2011 10:49 AM

    @ norcalirish

    Also don’t forget that your idiot coach put a poor kid up in the air 40ft in a storm to film pactice and got him killed.

    Did you laugh about that?

    I hope not!

  112. Deb says: Dec 1, 2011 12:07 PM

    These discussions get old because football is about football, not about a school’s academic ranking. nocalirish, with all due respect to Notre Dame, which ranks 19th on the list of national universities, public and private, Stanford ranks #11 on the list of best universities in the world. That’s competing globally with schools like Oxford and Cambridge. You’re not quite in their ballpark. And no school that employed Ara Parseghian for so many years can claim such moral high ground.

    Notre Dame is a private institution, but here are how some of the schools being discussed stack up in the 2012 rankings of the best U.S. public schools (several schools tied in the rankings) :

    1. UC Berkeley
    4. Michigan
    13. Penn State
    13. Texas
    17. Ohio State
    17. Maryland
    19. Texas A&M
    19. Florida
    23. Georgia
    28. Iowa
    28. Virginia Tech
    31. Alabama
    36. Auburn
    39. Missouri
    46. FSU
    46. Nebraska
    46. Oklahoma
    46. Oregon
    46. Tennessee
    54. South Carolina
    63. LSU
    65. Oklahoma State
    65. Arkansas
    89. West Virginia
    100. Colorado

  113. gatorcheme says: Dec 1, 2011 1:12 PM

    I say a school’s worth resides in the opportunities it gives its students. Entrance requirements are based on the school’s belief that if it took a student at below those requirements, that student would not likely succeed in the program. Schools base their reputation in a lot of instances upon the quality of the graduates and that can adjust the expectations.

    It’s not so different for sports. We all have our skills. If a school wants a reputation for producing quality athletes, it doesn’t necessarily follow that that student needs to have 1600s on their SATs, 3.9+ GPA out of High School, and a parent with 3 patents on a cold fusion reactor. Priorities are different.

    If an athlete’s realistic goal is the NFL/NBA/MLB etc, the program should reflect that. A lot of these kids even go on to be coaches themselves. It’s appropriate that schools create programs that give them these opportunities to be successful. Hence the term “Football Factories”.

    Most kids won’t make it into professional sports (or those that do, will likely have short careers). So they need to wise up and take the opportunities presented to them: It varies according to the student. But it comes down to being prepared for life.

  114. Deb says: Dec 1, 2011 1:33 PM

    @gatorcheme …

    One thing that frustrates me about the situation with major sports programs is that so many of the ones who do go on to professional sports careers leave school totally unprepared for real life.

    If the NCAA were truly serving their needs, rather than keeping them away from agents, it would be vetting to ensure they were represented early by reputable agents. And the schools would be ensuring these kids took courses in financial management and spoke to athletes who wound up losing their entire NFL or NBA fortunes to bad investments or those who got hurt and ended up out of the league in a year with nothing to fall back on. They’d bring in guys who wound up paying child support to seven different baby mamas.

    Fame and fortune are overwhelming for anyone. College is supposed to prepare you for life. More athletes might be better role models if colleges better educated them in how to manage the pitfalls of bigtime sports careers.

  115. bozosforall says: Dec 1, 2011 1:49 PM

    norcalirish says:
    Dec 1, 2011 8:31 AM
    Every time I see another headline like this I’m further convinced that this whole NCAA thing is just a joke. You’ve got teams like Stanford, Northwestern, Navy, Army, and, of course, Notre Dame (best overall sports academics for years) trying to do the right thing competing against schools that are simply football factories. I’m sure there are more positive examples out there (Duke, Vanderbilt and Wake Forest come to mind), and kudos for Stanford for the on the field success (even though we beat them in the classroom), but seriously, this is getting ridiculous. I mean, realistically I’m pretty sure the majority of the kids at powerhouse programs couldn’t even GET IN to Notre Dame (see Palmer, Carson), let alone Stanford!

    Maybe it’s time the usc’s, miami’s (and I’m guessing almost the whole sec) just simply go semi-pro and allow actual STUDENT athletes to compete. Until then I guess I’ll just keep on laughing at the seemingly endless scandals coming out of some of these programs.

    __
    They should ALL go “semi-pro”, as the elitist schools are really not any better than the rest in this regard (they only pretend to be, because…well they’re elitist).

  116. bozosforall says: Dec 1, 2011 1:55 PM

    Deb says:
    Dec 1, 2011 1:33 PM
    @gatorcheme …

    One thing that frustrates me about the situation with major sports programs is that so many of the ones who do go on to professional sports careers leave school totally unprepared for real life.

    If the NCAA were truly serving their needs, rather than keeping them away from agents, it would be vetting to ensure they were represented early by reputable agents. And the schools would be ensuring these kids took courses in financial management and spoke to athletes who wound up losing their entire NFL or NBA fortunes to bad investments or those who got hurt and ended up out of the league in a year with nothing to fall back on. They’d bring in guys who wound up paying child support to seven different baby mamas.

    Fame and fortune are overwhelming for anyone. College is supposed to prepare you for life. More athletes might be better role models if colleges better educated them in how to manage the pitfalls of bigtime sports careers.

    __
    Any “student athlete” can take whichever course is offered at any given university. There are plenty of non-athlete college dropouts who leave no better prepared for life than athletes who do pretty much do the same once their eligibility is exhausted. The fault lies in which course each student athletes chooses for him or herself, therefore to blame the schools for the players being “unprepared” once they leave is a bit shortsighted. Student athletes are afforded free tutoring, counseling and other such perks that most students don’t have at their immediate disposal. Much of the blame for not being prepared for life falls at the feet of the student athletes, not the schools. If every school were forced to set the bar as high as some elitist schools set theirs (their choice, not one forced upon them), many athletes wouldn’t even get a chance at any sort of education at all. It seems to me that elitist schools want their cake and to eat it too. Sorry folks, but not in the real world.

  117. gatorcheme says: Dec 1, 2011 2:25 PM

    @bozoforall,

    I totally agree with you.

    But to Deb’s point, it’s sometimes very difficult to succeed with a sport (esp. when the coach is telling you that you’ll be an NFL star) AND get a quality degree outside that sport. What is to be done for the star player who blows out his knees in a career-ending injury as a fifth-year senior?

    Solution: I like Deb’s idea of using vetted agents. Also, some schools could probably do a better job at mentoring the athletes for life after sports. Maybe they already do, I’m not that intimate with the programs.

    In any case, it really does start with the individual. We all need to take accountability for our decisions.

    However, we, as fans/boosters/alumni/agents/schools/whatever, also have a responsibility that we don’t exploit these same athletes at their expense.

  118. tide4life says: Dec 1, 2011 3:37 PM

    Oh, the most they’ll get is the Newton Treatment: 18 minutes of double-secret probation that isn’t even made public till later. No worries for the bay-oo bumpkins.

  119. CBFAN says: Dec 1, 2011 4:01 PM

    Wow, look at all these posts. I have to wonder, where is poopie? He started it all and disappeared? Poopie, are you out there?

  120. Deb says: Dec 1, 2011 4:41 PM

    @CBFAN …

    I think poopie said he was going to bed and we haven’t seen him since :)

    @bozosforall and gatorcheme …

    Yes, as gatorcheme says, we do owe more to the student athlete because we’re not exploiting the nonathlete dropout to the tune of billions for which these guys are not paid. Yes, they get a free education. But as you point out, bozosforall, most of these kids are there for the sport and leave when their eligibility expires, degree or not. And as gatorcheme says, the pressure to perform is much higher for a start football player than for the average student.

    Schools are making a fortune off their backs. The least they can do is ensure they’re not fleeced by agent sharks, that they’ve had some life coaching in finance, etc., and that they’ve spent some “scared straight” time with a few big-name pros who fell from grace and wound up broke, addicted, in prison, and so forth. Doing that would cost colleges virtually nothing and the payoff could be tremendous–just in terms of keeping the kids in line while they’re in school.

  121. bozosforall says: Dec 1, 2011 10:16 PM

    gatorcheme says:
    Dec 1, 2011 2:25 PM
    @bozoforall,

    I totally agree with you.

    But to Deb’s point, it’s sometimes very difficult to succeed with a sport (esp. when the coach is telling you that you’ll be an NFL star) AND get a quality degree outside that sport. What is to be done for the star player who blows out his knees in a career-ending injury as a fifth-year senior?

    Solution: I like Deb’s idea of using vetted agents. Also, some schools could probably do a better job at mentoring the athletes for life after sports. Maybe they already do, I’m not that intimate with the programs.

    In any case, it really does start with the individual. We all need to take accountability for our decisions.

    However, we, as fans/boosters/alumni/agents/schools/whatever, also have a responsibility that we don’t exploit these same athletes at their expense.

    __
    I know several former college athletes who get special treatment from alums in their business dealings beyond their college days. Of course, these former athletes need to have pursued some sort of legitimate and sound business enterprise but if they do, they will always have entree into the local business world. And they do get mentoring in their time in school, though many don’t really take full advantage of what is being offered to them at the time.

  122. bozosforall says: Dec 1, 2011 10:18 PM

    Deb says:
    Dec 1, 2011 4:41 PM
    @CBFAN …

    I think poopie said he was going to bed and we haven’t seen him since

    @bozosforall and gatorcheme …

    Yes, as gatorcheme says, we do owe more to the student athlete because we’re not exploiting the nonathlete dropout to the tune of billions for which these guys are not paid. Yes, they get a free education. But as you point out, bozosforall, most of these kids are there for the sport and leave when their eligibility expires, degree or not. And as gatorcheme says, the pressure to perform is much higher for a start football player than for the average student.

    Schools are making a fortune off their backs. The least they can do is ensure they’re not fleeced by agent sharks, that they’ve had some life coaching in finance, etc., and that they’ve spent some “scared straight” time with a few big-name pros who fell from grace and wound up broke, addicted, in prison, and so forth. Doing that would cost colleges virtually nothing and the payoff could be tremendous–just in terms of keeping the kids in line while they’re in school.

    __
    I think that one possible solution that would benefit all sides would be to give college athletes an extra year of eligibility, which would benefit the schools by allowing them to keep more experienced players for longer, while giving each athlete a greater incentive to stick around and complete that degree. The course load could be lighter during the season and then normal during the offseason. Win-win as I see it.

  123. infrno says: Dec 1, 2011 11:01 PM

    tide4life says: Dec 1, 2011 3:37 PM

    Oh, the most they’ll get is the Newton Treatment: 18 minutes of double-secret probation that isn’t even made public till later. No worries for the bay-oo bumpkins.

    ——————————————–

    Spoken like a true Tusca-loser.

    It’s still 5:51 there for ya, sparky. Or as well call it, 9 to 6.

    Reality? They’ll get whatever the NCAA says they have to get.

    You gumps just can’t stand the fact that you’re inferior.

  124. Deb says: Dec 2, 2011 12:02 AM

    @bozosforall …

    Yes, I know former players who didn’t go pro that get opportunities, too. But as you said, they have to be young men with something going for them.

    I don’t think the extra year of eligibility will work for kids who have serious pro aspirations. The reality is that every year they delay jumping to the NFL is a year they risk losing their careers to injury.

    Trent Richardson says he plans to stay next year and finish his degree because he’s the first in his family ever to go to college. Certainly as a Bama fan, I’d love to keep him on the team. But if I’m being completely candid, I don’t think that’s in his best interest. Those rookie contracts are guaranteed. I want him to have his degree and make his family proud, but I don’t want him to risk his future. If I’m that torn about it–considering how much I value a college education–I can only imagine what a difficult choice it is for players and their families.

  125. tide4life says: Dec 2, 2011 11:09 AM

    infrno says: “You gumps just can’t stand the fact that you’re inferior.”

    Uh, yeah, that must be it.

  126. bozosforall says: Dec 2, 2011 3:02 PM

    Deb says:
    Dec 2, 2011 12:02 AM
    @bozosforall …

    Yes, I know former players who didn’t go pro that get opportunities, too. But as you said, they have to be young men with something going for them.

    I don’t think the extra year of eligibility will work for kids who have serious pro aspirations. The reality is that every year they delay jumping to the NFL is a year they risk losing their careers to injury.

    Trent Richardson says he plans to stay next year and finish his degree because he’s the first in his family ever to go to college. Certainly as a Bama fan, I’d love to keep him on the team. But if I’m being completely candid, I don’t think that’s in his best interest. Those rookie contracts are guaranteed. I want him to have his degree and make his family proud, but I don’t want him to risk his future. If I’m that torn about it–considering how much I value a college education–I can only imagine what a difficult choice it is for players and their families.

    ___
    My plan is to benefit the vast majority who DON’T make it to the pros, giving them an extra year to finish their degrees while still having football as an incentive to stick around. Those that can leave early (thereby do get the resources – read money -to buy themselves all the good advice that they can absorb) should take some of that money and invest in their future. The problem is that you assume that “if they build it (some sort of elaborate support program), they will come (they have to care about going before they actually will do so)” will automatically take advantage of the programs (they aren’t even taking full advantage of the tutoring programs that are already in place). Without an inner drive to improve one’s lot in life, there is nothing anyone can do to force a player to do what is needed to make themselves a viable candidate for the post-graduate work force. In my scenario, at least they are in school a year longer, which hopefully will give them that much more time to mature mentally and emotionally so that they can actually make better decisions about their lives post-football.

    One recent example (and one that I have always advocated rookies should do) is how Cam Newton hired Warren Moon to help him refine the things that he was most criticized for in the runup to the Draft. He has already given credit to Moon for helping him exceed the expectations that most NFL pundits heaped upon him as the overall #1 pick. I never was a Newton fan, per se, but I have to give huge props to him for taking the smart path that all NFL rookies (and NBAers as well) should take…pay for good advice from those who have been there.

  127. bozosforall says: Dec 2, 2011 3:10 PM

    gatorcheme says:
    Dec 1, 2011 2:25 PM
    @bozoforall,

    I totally agree with you.

    But to Deb’s point, it’s sometimes very difficult to succeed with a sport (esp. when the coach is telling you that you’ll be an NFL star) AND get a quality degree outside that sport. What is to be done for the star player who blows out his knees in a career-ending injury as a fifth-year senior?

    Solution: I like Deb’s idea of using vetted agents. Also, some schools could probably do a better job at mentoring the athletes for life after sports. Maybe they already do, I’m not that intimate with the programs.

    In any case, it really does start with the individual. We all need to take accountability for our decisions.

    However, we, as fans/boosters/alumni/agents/schools/whatever, also have a responsibility that we don’t exploit these same athletes at their expense.

    __
    As long as the old adage “give a man a fish, he eats for a day…teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime” applies in any sort of program. Too many times, I’ve seen what has amounted to handout programs, instead of ones where the participants are expected to actually work for what they receive, to the best of their ability. When I see athletes working hard on their studies as much as they work on their athletic endeavors, only then do I know that they are showing the kind of effort that merits rewarding them with continued support. Merely whining about not getting enough, when one sits around and just waits for free handouts only earns my scorn.

    As for the fifth-year senior who blows out a knee, most schools honor the scholarship, therefore it’s up to the student-athlete to buckle down and complete the degree. My “extra year” proposal merely allows student-athletes to spread out the courseload to compensate for all of the extra demands that practices and games make on them, as opposed to just regular students. It’s really not that far fetched actually, given all that the athletes bring to the table for athletic programs.

  128. Deb says: Dec 2, 2011 3:33 PM

    @bozosforall …

    Yes, you’re making great points. I’m always thinking you can lead a horse to water and then shove his face into it, but you can’t. He has to be willing to drink. I still think schools should provide more of these programs to protect kids from themselves. But in the end, they will have to be willing to take advantage of the resources. Universities can’t pry open their heads and pour it in. I just feel for the ones who never had much guidance from parents or other adults. Many of them really are clueless about how to do what’s best for themselves. You should read Dez Bryant’s backstory sometime. His upbringing is a good example of that.

    Yes, that extra year would be a good option for kids who can’t make sports a career–as long as the university finances it. Doubt they could pay for it without the scholarship.

  129. bozosforall says: Dec 2, 2011 3:45 PM

    Deb says:
    Dec 2, 2011 3:33 PM
    @bozosforall …

    Yes, you’re making great points. I’m always thinking you can lead a horse to water and then shove his face into it, but you can’t. He has to be willing to drink. I still think schools should provide more of these programs to protect kids from themselves. But in the end, they will have to be willing to take advantage of the resources. Universities can’t pry open their heads and pour it in. I just feel for the ones who never had much guidance from parents or other adults. Many of them really are clueless about how to do what’s best for themselves. You should read Dez Bryant’s backstory sometime. His upbringing is a good example of that.

    Yes, that extra year would be a good option for kids who can’t make sports a career–as long as the university finances it. Doubt they could pay for it without the scholarship.

    __
    The universities would be getting an extra year of playing ability out of the vast majority of their scholarship players (absent those who still left after their third year, like they can now). Plus, the added revenue of the impending playoff system (see what I did there?) would more than offset the extra year’s costs to the schools.

  130. Deb says: Dec 2, 2011 4:27 PM

    @bozosforall …

    That extra year would help them gain some maturity, too, which always helps when pursuing a career.

    Yes, I see what you did there :) They’re going to have to develop a playoff system–sooner than later, I think. Sure hope they come up with something sane. Every time Goodell makes a change, he comes up with something more convoluted than we had before.

  131. bozosforall says: Dec 2, 2011 6:08 PM

    Deb says:
    Dec 2, 2011 4:27 PM
    @bozosforall …

    That extra year would help them gain some maturity, too, which always helps when pursuing a career.

    Yes, I see what you did there They’re going to have to develop a playoff system–sooner than later, I think. Sure hope they come up with something sane. Every time Goodell makes a change, he comes up with something more convoluted than we had before.

    __
    The only “sane” thing is to let all conference champions in (preferably a max of eight 12-16 team conferences) and then the next eight best teams in a 16-team seeded format. Use the biggest bowls as the games in each round, topping out with a rotation between the very top bowls to host the champ game (much like it is now in that regard).

  132. Deb says: Dec 2, 2011 7:15 PM

    @bozosforall …

    This is where I’ll get into trouble. Eight conferences of 12-16 teams is 96-128 teams. That’s a ridiculous number of teams, most of which will never participate in that playoff tournament. I’d just like to see that list pared down to something reasonable.

    As I posted on another thread, some things about the NCAA are like a foreign language to me. One of those is a universe where little teams playing in front of high-school crowds compete with teams like USC and Texas. We need to re-think the ABCs of Division I to keep the big guys together and let the next tier compete with teams in their own niche. That also makes sense from a revenue perspective. The smaller schools don’t draw the audiences, and the bigger schools will be required to play more difficult schedules.

    After that’s done, then we could work out something similar to what you’ve suggested, or take the top 8, 12, or 16 from the rankings regardless of conference. But the rankings need to be computer-based without as much human intervention.

  133. bozosforall says: Dec 2, 2011 7:42 PM

    Deb says:
    Dec 2, 2011 7:15 PM
    @bozosforall …

    This is where I’ll get into trouble. Eight conferences of 12-16 teams is 96-128 teams. That’s a ridiculous number of teams, most of which will never participate in that playoff tournament. I’d just like to see that list pared down to something reasonable.

    As I posted on another thread, some things about the NCAA are like a foreign language to me. One of those is a universe where little teams playing in front of high-school crowds compete with teams like USC and Texas. We need to re-think the ABCs of Division I to keep the big guys together and let the next tier compete with teams in their own niche. That also makes sense from a revenue perspective. The smaller schools don’t draw the audiences, and the bigger schools will be required to play more difficult schedules.

    After that’s done, then we could work out something similar to what you’ve suggested, or take the top 8, 12, or 16 from the rankings regardless of conference. But the rankings need to be computer-based without as much human intervention.

    __
    Those 96-128 teams are already in D-1 now, why should they not be included in any restructuring in the future? Each conference needs bottom feeders anyway, so why not at least let those “smaller schools” both share in the wealth of the big TV contracts and have a decent chance to build their programs if they work hard. If startup D-1 programs like UConn got to do it by virtue of their basketball affiliation in the Big East, then why shouldn’t other teams be afforded the same opportunity. The legacy programs are trading on their past reputation, when in reality, if any school is given the opportunity to recruit on a level playing field, they can upgrade the talent level within a decade. U of Miami proved that as well as teams like Boise State, TCU and Houston. Give those latter teams the additional recruiting tool of being eligible for the NC game and their talent level jumps up another notch. Only schools with heightened academic standards (their choice, not something forced on them) suffer in this scenario, since they have to compete with more schools that aren’t as obsessed with being in the top tier of academia. What you propose is basically protecting the legacy schools at the expense of everyone else. Parity creates more competition, which creates more attention and more revenue. I have watched several smaller schools’ attendance increase as their teams have gotten more competitive over time, so increasing access to the playoffs can only increase the total size of the pie, not limit the number of schools that actually generate revenue (which is what your proposal will result in).

    The only reason why the “smaller” schools don’t draw the audiences is that their fan bases know that they don’t have a shot at winning a title because they aren’t in a BCS conference. Give them a piece of the pie and a bigger carrot to dangle in front of recruits and watch their crowds swell exponentially. Also, try convincing anyone that teams like Duke, Vandy, Northwestern and the like (schools that have smaller student bodies than many other public schools) deserve being in a BCS conference when teams like Houston and Boise State (schools with much larger student bodies) don’t.

    Using rankings involves human bias, as even the computer programs can be finagled to get results that reek of bias.

  134. Deb says: Dec 2, 2011 10:12 PM

    @bozosforall …

    Told you that would get me into trouble ;)

    Well … I’ll admit I don’t follow college ball as closely as I do the NFL. For me, all these itty-bitty teams are like ants swarming at a picnic. (It takes me a long time to notice new NFL franchises, too–and I’m vehemently opposed to league expansion.) So … based on what you’ve posted, I suppose I am a legacy snob. :oops:

    For a guy named bozosforall, you make a lot of sense. But it still seems awfully crowded in today’s Division I :( And can’t we separate out football from other sports? You know, create a D-I solely for football? Good grief, what is UConn doing in here?

  135. norcalirish says: Dec 3, 2011 9:21 AM

    @ Deb

    When I was at ND we were 15th in the country. We normally hover between there and 20th. Stanford is currently 5th, but was closer to 10th during my college years. I’d say a difference of 5-10 spots or so is pretty close to the same level. And regardless of whether or not you agree, I wouldn’t swap my degree if I had the chance.

    That being said, why would you list only the top PUBLIC schools? No disrespect, but thats like listing the top 200 lb girls at prom. The rankings swap a little every year (tough to make headway against the Ivys) but I’m not sure if there’s even a public school in the top 20.

    Anyways, I live 20 minutes from Stanford. I’ve been going there since I was a child, and I used to party in the sororities with friends who went there up until about a year ago. I never applied to undergrad (didn’t want to go there), and will eventually apply there for my doctorate…and so I have great respect for the place. I’m happy that they’re doing it in the classroom AND on the field, and I think they should be applauded. But when I said we beat them in the classroom I was referring not to our overall current academic rankings (5th and 19th according to US News) but to our athletes. Perhaps a bit of miscommunication. See the link for details.

    http://www.und.com/genrel/042911aaa.html

    As for the clowns on here saying that school has nothing to do with college football…honestly, you’re probably right (in your favorite team’s instance). Nice job helping to prove my point. Just end the charade and go semi-pro. It’ll be a lot easier to have your parents shop you around or to get your school to buy you a house without dealing with those pesky NCAA rules.

  136. Deb says: Dec 3, 2011 12:58 PM

    @nocalirish …

    The reason I listed only the public schools is because we’re talking football–you know, because it’s a football blog. And I believe Stanford is the only private university in the top 25. So it would have been a little silly to waste my time listing private universities.

    It’s great you’re happy with your degree. I wouldn’t trade mine either. My major was journalism. Missouri is the oldest school of journalism in the world, and when I attended was considered the best undergraduate journalism program in the nation. That’s why I chose it.

    The nice thing about typing is that it doesn’t require you to remove the silver spoon from your mouth. But most of the athletically gifted kids on these football teams didn’t grow up in a Stanford neighborhood, attend private schools, or have the financial resources to become professional students. Sport is their opportunity to build a career for themselves. I’m glad the nation’s public institutions provide that opportunity.

    No one has said school has nothing to do with football. We’re saying kids who aren’t Stanford material shouldn’t be denied their shot at a pro career because an intellectual snob like you who has never walked in their shoes wants to deny them their chance if their grades dip while they are running two-a-days en route to a title game.

    And the University of Alabama is a fine institution. I know many Alabama graduates who are extremely successful professionals in a variety of fields. You wouldn’t fit in, though. They don’t have a major in pomposity.

  137. bozosforall says: Dec 6, 2011 12:45 PM

    Read it and weep, SEC haters:

    http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-wetzel_sec_reaps_reward_rejection_120311

    Slive proposed a “plus one” several years ago and every other BCS conference besides the ACC rejected the idea out of hand. How ironic?

  138. texbornlsufan says: Dec 7, 2011 9:25 AM

    To go along with all the accolades the LSU football team has been receiving for its performance on the field, yesterday it received high rankings for its performance in the classroom. In a study of 70 Football Bowl Subdivision schools, LSU ranks eighth in Graduation Success Rate and is tied for 12th in Academic Progress Rate. The only school in the SEC with a higher Graduation Success Rate than LSU was Vanderbilt. LSU’s Graduation Success Rate is 77% while Vanderbilt’s is 86%. LSU’s opponent in the upcoming BCS title game, the Alabama Crimson Tide, has a Graduation Success Rate of 69%.

  139. texbornlsufan says: Dec 7, 2011 10:29 AM

    OK my pick is LSU by 8 in NC Game

  140. Deb says: Dec 7, 2011 10:48 AM

    Well, congrats to LSU on improving its graduation success rate. Maybe that will help the university improve its overall academic ranking among the nations public universities. Currently it’s 63rd. Alabama is 31st. :)

    Oh … and here’s the link:

    http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/top-public

  141. texbornlsufan says: Dec 7, 2011 1:24 PM

    @ Deb

    I put this here just to see how you would react and spin it!

    This is a football site not an overall academic site as you are stating above. The story this is attached to is discussing the supposed academic issues the football team was having not the overall student body. There is no doubt Alabama is a fine learning institution but the team is losing in the academic score as well as on the playing field compared to the Tigers .

    How about my prediction? It’s clever huh?

    Geaux Tigers

  142. Deb says: Dec 7, 2011 3:38 PM

    @texbornlsufan …

    ROFL … you knew I wouldn’t leave that unchallenged! :)

    Actually, I saw another list the other day that put Alabama and LSU dead even on graduating football players and showed Mizzou will be second to Vandy when they join the conference. Don’t know which stats are correct. Bama’s numbers are good for athletes overall, but we were really lagging with the football team. Saban has significantly improved their grad rates since he came aboard.

    If you mean predicting I’d have a comeback … nah, that was a given :D You mean your game prediction? I never do that. The last time I called a game was in 2007 (I guaranteed to my friends the Giants would beat the Pats in SBXLII. How’s that for chutzpah!). But even if I were going to predict wins and losses, I never understand where the prognosticators get the scores they throw out. I’d love to meet the guy who actually predicted our last meeting would be 9-6 LOL

    ROLL TIDE!!

  143. texbornlsufan says: Dec 7, 2011 4:21 PM

    There was 8% difference in the report and thats how I got the 8pt spread. LOL

    GEAUX TIGERS !!!

  144. alligatorsnapper says: Dec 18, 2011 10:38 AM

    “Jarrett Lee, others may be ineligible for LSU’s postseason” to relate back to actual topic headline of this story and thread. AD Joe Aleva spoke on the matter early on as JT reported.

    I provide this following update:

    In a recent radio and newspaper interview, Coach Les Miles announced that no player for LSU is inelligible for post-season play, namely for the BCS National Championship game in New Orleans, January 9, 2012. He further related that it was likely that the possibility of playing on a national stage in a national championship game in New Orleans was great motivation to any player who was at risk.

    All grades are in and no LSU football player had any grades which disqualified or would bring inelligibility to any player. No LSU player is inelligible for the BCS national championship game.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!