Another Rumor

CAARHawk said:
They are. Iowa has the top 50% rule, so so kids from shaky rural schools come completely unprepared, but they were in the top 50 in their bad school. That being said, there are athletes admitted that don't meet that standard.

Now, I taught some great students who were also football players at Iowa. And it isn't like a southern school where reading and writing are optional ;), but I did teach some athletes who wouldn't have been accepted as a general student.

Not sure of any other student group that gets preferential admissions treatment, unless perhaps for diversity issues, but I am not sure where UI stands on that now.
Click to expand...

They get breaks in classes as well, or at least football and men's basketball players do. I have a friend who got into one of the "special" sections of a course that I took last year. The level of work expected from the students in this class was ridiculously low. Almost no homework, and the inmates ran the madhouse. Don't want to take the quiz today? Okay, we'll push it back to next week. Forgot to write your paper that was due today? No problem, turn it in in a few day.

That's not to say all of these athletes NEED those breaks. But many likely would never be able to carry a REAL 12-hour (or however many hours they take) course load.
 
There's no way that Iowa scholarship athletes in the money sports are 'typical' students in any sense of the word. Some of the local ones are excellent students, who likely would have gone to college even if they hadn't played sports.

However, many of the recruited non-local athletes would not be in college anywhere, anyhow, if it weren't for football or basketball. For them, there are two priorities: play football/basketball, and STAY ELIGIBLE. What they study is almost immaterial. The focus is on staying eligible, somehow, some way.

They do not lead lives like typical students. They may have a few core courses to take with the rest--like Rhetoric--but for many of them, they have tailor-made schedules with ONE purpose in mind: STAY ELIGIBLE. Their majors often center around that philosophy, ie Sports and Leisure Studies, and others. I would venture that some of these courses could simply be retitled "Staying Eligible 101".

They have their own study center, their own tutors, their own personal academic advisers. They get to sign up for classes earlier and separately. They have their own places to dine and train. They live, in many ways, in a cloistered world separate from 'normal' students.

And I do think that, when it comes to admissions, every help is given the open the door for an athlete (to a point). There are limits, of course, but those limits are stretched taut to get someone in, if possible. They not only can take summer courses to stay eligible, many athletes have five years to graduate, so on average many do not have to take anywhere near a full course load (and I'd bet plenty take the minimum, without a thought of whether they truly will graduate or not).

That's the system, and I'm not even sure that anything I'm saying is all that controversial or debatable anymore--we all know it happens this way, and either you're willing to accept that or you're not. I am, but barely anymore. A good first step would be to make freshmen ineligible again, but I suppose that's a debate for another thread.
 
Golfer said:
I'm going to proceed carefully here. Views, I believe, are generally derived from one's experiences.Academics and education, are sometimes different. The administration's view, and sometimes the tenured professor's views, and skewed as well.I listened, before a football game to a "shake down" with respects to Hancher Auditorium a couple of years ago. "Horrible" mold growing throughout the building, notwithstanding the fact it is a steel/concrete and glass construction, and I had a flooded wood frame building, where mold is much more prevalent than in concrete, and a simple spraying of sporacide solves the problem.I also had to listen to a statement made, that although possibly, and maybe even probably true, rubbed almost all of the donors the wrong way. To wit, the only good thing that came out of the flood, is that Hancher had to travel. These travels exposed Iowans, WHO WOULD NEVER BE EXPOSED TO CULTURE OTHERWISE, to culture.We all have opinions. Hancher is a great treasure. I walked out feeling the administration was clearly out of touch, as was almost every professor in attendance.I guess when most of the time is spent talking about the Provost taking a job at an east coast institution and their fundraising efforts, I don't much see where they care greatly about the education of either the student athletes, or the disadvantaged rural areas.With respects to enrollment. It has increased, and I've heard two Presidents at the U of I give at least partial credit to successful athletic programs.If you google Iowa's enrollment, and it hasn't increased, this would mean either the internet is not accurate, or I get lied to, by the president of the U of I, on a regular basis (which is to say, once a year, in my case).In the state of Iowa, it is fairly easy to find out the assets of the Board of Regents, and their unwillingness to share this information with our elected officials.
Click to expand...

Uh, what?
 
Re: Golfer

Please, we are only in a "pickle" or in a "crisis" until the new coaches and coordinators are chosen, announced and the Hawkeye media spin their stories of grandeur for all the new blood. Also, what does the president of the university have to do with Norm retiring or KOK leaving? I am sure that Ferentz gets as much leeway as any coach in the country. Maybe KOK went on these sites and read all the love he has been receiving over the years.

This transition is what it is. Retirement and simply moving on to the NFL. No conspiracy theories involving the president or tiffs within the athletic department.

I say welcome to all experienced coaches that bring new recruiting contacts and areas that can increase our talent level! Exciting times but nothing to see here folks until the new coaches are announced.
 
bwsmoney said:
English translation?
Click to expand...
.

Not everyone at the higher levels was really happy with how Marcus Coker was treated. It's not over yet.

I read through the last couple of posts again. I guess other people must have some better relationships, and insight than I, so I'm probably wrong!:p
 
I thought that Iowa and the rest of the BigTen was different than the SEC as far as class requirements etc for athletes. If some of what I read here (above) is true, it seems to me that we are the same as the SEC; we just don't get as good of players. It does make one wonder why there isn't just a minor league for football.
Also, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I don't quite understand what "Golfer" is trying to say. I am not in any way close to what has been going on in Iowa City so maybe that's why I dont' understand what he's saying.
Lastly, my brother in law teaches at an SEC school and he says the same things about many of his rural students as some of the posters above have said.
 
Last edited:
I was bored. So I looked up freshman admission standards, and then looked up the student athlete handbook as it regards academics, and admission standards.

In any event, I couldn't find two different sets of admission standards, not to say they don't exist, in writing somewhere, but I did find the way a student athlete's gpa is figured, is more stringent than a student's gpa. For example, an incomplete for a student athlete is factored in at a 0.00, and as a normal student, it doesn't count at all.

I'm a funny guy. Sometimes I like things in writing, just in case some delusional, tenured professors, teaching our youth liberal anti-American garbage decides to argue.

The last sentence is NOT directed at the two gentlemen in this forum that are educators.
 
Last edited:
Golfer said:
I was bored. So I looked up freshman admission standards, and then looked up the student athlete handbook as it regards academics, and admission standards.

In any event, I couldn't find two different sets of admission standards, not to say they don't exist, in writing somewhere, but I did find the way a student athlete's gpa is figured, is more stringent than a student's gpa. For example, an incomplete for a student athlete is factored in at a 0.00, and as a normal student, it doesn't count at all.

I'm a funny guy. Sometimes I like things in writing, just in case some delusional, tenured professors, teaching our youth liberal anti-American garbage decides to argue.

The last sentence is NOT directed at the two gentlemen in this forum that are educators.
Click to expand...

what the crap is this crap?
 
This "rural" argument is just plain stupid. I know, I went to a very small rural school. Here is a quote from one of my old teachers.
"I ordered IQ tests for an average rural community – the results showed I had a room full of geniuses. I called the area agency and was told, "…many of the farmers in that area had a college background and many had married teachers who came to teach there. Therefore, the quality of reading material in the homes was varied and plentiful…."

Or

"Our high school scholastic standing was always among the highest in the state and in the country at the time, and looking back, was much better than that of most schools today."

Or

"Our class received a 99% ranking in both the state and the nation on ITED tests all four years of high school."

So dont give me that "rural" load of bs your selling. If you want to blame anyone blame the teachers and communities, but it applies across the board and is not dependent on the size. It does have to do with community involvement, parent involvement and getting good teachers.

As for how Coker was treated, I have no idea. If you care to explain, fine, otherwise it's a non issue, because we dont have enough facts to judge if it was correct or not.
 
bcl20 said:
what the crap is this crap?
Click to expand...
.

As I said, it isn't directed at anyone in this thread. Although, I have sat in on a course at the U of I, where the professor explained to us, as fact, all about inappropriate American intervention, including Pearl Harbor, etc, and drew the conclusion that 9/11 was in fact, our fault.
 
kmurp said:
I thought that Iowa and the rest of the BigTen was different than the SEC as far as class requirements etc for athletes. If some of what I read here (above) is true, it seems to me that we are the same as the SEC; we just don't get as good of players. It does make one wonder why there isn't just a minor league for football.
Also, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I don't quite understand what "Golfer" is trying to say. I am not in any way close to what has been going on in Iowa City so maybe that's why I dont' understand what he's saying.
Lastly, my brother in law teaches at an SEC school and he says the same things about many of his rural students as some of the posters above have said.
Click to expand...

There is a minor league for the NFL it is called the "SEC". They are in competition with Verizon wireless in their "Pay as you go family plan".......ROFLMAO.......tears!!!
 
Last edited:
Golfer said:
.

As I said, it isn't directed at anyone in this thread. Although, I have sat in on a course at the U of I, where the professor explained to us, as fact, all about inappropriate American intervention, including Pearl Harbor, etc, and drew the conclusion that 9/11 was in fact, our fault.
Click to expand...

I'm more referring to political diatribes in the football forum.
 
bcl20 said:
I'm more referring to political diatribes in the football forum.
Click to expand...
.

Understood. I tie the U of I, and its' administration's non-articulated, behind the scenes athletic policies, to the football program's lack of succession plan for coaches, citing lack of funds, and the athletic department 'losing money".

Some others disagreed, citing bending over backwards for student athletes, and no relationship to the exposure the athletic programs bring the university, and increased enrollment.

It started going down hill from there.
 
Golfer said:
.

As I said, it isn't directed at anyone in this thread. Although, I have sat in on a course at the U of I, where the professor explained to us, as fact, all about inappropriate American intervention, including Pearl Harbor, etc, and drew the conclusion that 9/11 was in fact, our fault.
Click to expand...

Wow .... I guess if you are going to indict the entire education system at a great university becasue of one guys opinion .... that tells me a lot right there.

We all know that if ONE of 'em are like that ... they all are.:rolleyes:
 
I'm not sure I indicted an entire education system?

Cited one example. Not a broad sweeping generalization such as this one for example:

"This posting logic is why people on the Right are considered brain dead"

Can't remember who posted this one, can you?

When can I be a HN Legend?
 
I think what Golfer is saying is that multiple people are dropping multiple balls at the U of I, partly because athletics isn't as profitable as it should be, limiting what can be done in areas like easing Norm into retirement, and transitioning to new coaches.

I think I follow that argument, but I don't quite buy it. I think a better analogy is the old 'Boys Club," where you have a bunch of insiders running things, and they don't really have to listen to the outsiders. KF kept Norm on past his time because he wanted to, and he could. KF keeps his asst coaches on board for the same reason, and no one can tell him if and when to fire any of them. I don't see athletic revenues playing a role here (unless Golfer can elaborate with specific examples, which I'm open to hearing). Many colleges struggle to make money from athletics, but my impression is that Iowa is better than most at doing that.

As for student-athletes, Iowa is constrained by the same basic eligibility rules as anyone else. The difference, I think, is that we will not bend the rules to the extent as other universities (read The Blind Side to see how Ole Miss did so to get Michael Oher eligible). Iowa also does not over-sign like SEC schools, nor dump players off scholly. I can't say for certain that the Big Ten has any more stringent 'hard' rules than the SEC, but I do believe the Big Ten tries a little harder to actually get their players some semblance of an education. Still, the academic life of a scholarship athlete is much different than that of a 'normal' student, for good or ill.
 
Golfer said:
I'm not sure I indicted an entire education system?

Cited one example. Not a broad sweeping generalization such as this one for example:

"This posting logic is why people on the Right are considered brain dead"

Can't remember who posted this one, can you?

When can I be a HN Legend?
Click to expand...

You are making ridiculous statements...why would you not expect ridiculous responses?

I hope you never mke HN Legend status!
 
"(unless Golfer can elaborate with specific examples, which I'm open to hearing)."

I can't, because they would never publicly admit things like these, so it would be me just saying it.

But I get these things, just as I got the KoK leaving, from folks that always seem to have solid information. FWIW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top