UC and Huggins: Apparently it's a race issue now...

[Handy Smurf]

I just read this column by the the boy who called wolf, also known as Jason Whitlock, a sportswriter famous for making everything under the sun into an issue of race. Are there race issues in college sports? Absolutely. What about in college in general? Sure. So does that mean we call racism every time there is an issue that in any way shape or form has to do with black students/student athletes at our nation's universities? Jason sure thinks so...
Read on to find out how insulting one uninformed moron can be

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=whitlock/050825
By Jason Whitlock
Special to Page 2


Nancy Zimpher, president of the University of Cincinnati, will be hailed in some circles and assailed in others for the bold stance she took with her basketball program.

She basically fired Bob Huggins for recruiting too many poor, academically and socially underprepared black kids. She called off the whole, tired charade.

I offer her praise. I respect her honesty.

She's uninterested in playing statistical games about who did and who didn't graduate. She's unimpressed with Huggins' charitable activities in and around Cincinnati. She apparently doesn't believe Huggins has a legitimate interest in helping the underclass.

With the Bearcats safely tucked in the money-generating Big East, Zimpher wants to fix the nasty perception that Cincinnati is a halfway house for lawless, difficult-to-educate black basketball players. Getting rid of Huggins is the first step in that process.

Yes, the saga continues. Another institution used poor blacks for its benefit, disrespected them in writing and then kicked them to the curb. Some will blast Zimpher and UC for its callousness. I won't. Again, I offer her praise. I respect her honesty. What must be questioned is the sanity of the black community that continues to allow its youth to be used by institutions that don't respect them.
I spent the better part of two hours perusing the letters that flew between Huggins' attorney and UC's legal counsel this summer. Zimpher's message was concise and clear.

"Mr. Huggins continues to recruit individuals that exhibit a disregard for the law and respectful behavior," one of the university's letters read. "I fully understand that off-the-court trouble and the poor choices made by student-athletes are not restricted to UC's basketball team. Indeed, such discipline and control issues are a national problem. Yet problems appear to be more prevalent in Mr. Huggins' basketball program."

The letter went on to state that in a 16-year span, 21 of Huggins' players had run afoul of the law in a significant way, including three players/recruits who were scheduled to play at UC this season.

"In short," the letter continued, "although Mr. Huggins may claim some specific successes, the University is seeking an environment and climate where the development of the whole student is sought and the successful education of all our students is realized. And while some may argue that academically challenged individuals who experience difficulty conforming their behavior to appropriate norms deserve a chance at success that a winning college basketball team can provide, UC believes that it can better advance its mission by building a winning program around scholar athletes who earn degrees that will allow them to succeed not only in athletics but more importantly in life generally."

Now we can play games and pretend like we don't know what Zimpher and Cincinnati are saying. But we know what she's saying. We know the type of players Huggins used to resurrect the UC basketball program and garner personal fortune and fame. He raided junior colleges for poor black players, snagged an occasional transfer and patched them around other players from the other side of the tracks.

Those players served their purpose for Huggins. They elevated UC to a level where it would be worthy of joining a major conference, and now Zimpher and UC are ready to wash their hands of Huggins and his image-eroding junior-college players.
Yes, the saga continues. Another institution used poor blacks for its benefit, disrespected them in writing and then kicked them to the curb.

Some will blast Zimpher and UC for its callousness. I won't.

Again, I offer her praise. I respect her honesty.

What must be questioned is the sanity of the black community that continues to allow its youth to be used by institutions that don't respect them.

The University of Cincinnati basically just said that, for 16 years, Bob Huggins had little interest in educating the black athletes he recruited. That's not a secret nor is it much of a surprise. It's probably even unfair to blame Huggins.

The blame falls on the players, their families and the black culture that gleefully participates in and condones this exploitation because a handful of black kids sign NBA contracts.

Cincinnati, just like every other mainstream academic institution, has virtually no interest in properly educating the black underclass. It's not the mission of a mainstream institution. UC, Duke, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio State, USC, Notre Dame and all the rest are set up to educate upper- and middle-class kids.

"Academically challenged individuals who experience difficulty conforming their behavior to appropriate norms" are not wanted at Cincinnati or at Boston College, Nebraska, Texas Tech …

And you know what? It's not in the best interest of those academically challenged individuals to go to Cincinnati. When you go someplace where you're not wanted, you get treated like you're not wanted. You get used. You get used by the well-intentioned basketball coach, the well-intentioned school president, the well-intentioned student body and the well-intentioned professors.

Black athletes participating in Division I sports graduate at an alarmingly low rate because the people running the institutions don't view the athletes as capable of being truly educated, and the institutions are ill-equipped to educate the black underclass.

Again, I want to thank Nancy Zimpher for her honesty and integrity. Maybe one day poor black athletes and their parents will study their history and realize that countless black leaders and professional athletes were educated and groomed at historically black colleges. There's absolutely nothing second-rate about the education, and black students are seven times more likely to graduate at a historically black college than at a mainstream institution.

Jason Whitlock is a regular columnist for The Kansas City Star. His newspaper is celebrating his 10 years as a columnist with the publishing of Jason's first book, "Love Him, Hate Him: 10 Years of Sports, Passion and Kansas City." It's a collection of Jason's most memorable, thought-provoking and funny columns over the past decade. You can purchase the book at TheKansasCityStore.com. Jason can be reached by e-mail at ballstate68@aol.com.

[Handy Smurf]

A few thoughts.

1.) how did UC "use black kids, disrespect them in writing, and kick them to the curb"? Last I checked, they all got free 4 year educations, which included free meals, housing, clothing, shoes, equiptment, and other perks. Those that chose not to graduate in that time were helped along the way when they went back to earn their degrees after their initial 4 years. Many players are offered jobs by companies that are UC basketball boosters. I worked at JTM with Terrance Davis. John Jacobs turned a job JTM gave him over the summer in college into a career there once he got his degree. As pampered as all scholarship athletes are at any college/university, its a crime for anyone to say they were "used"...wether the school got rich off NCAA related contracts or not.
2.) Huggins got too many bad apples, period. It had nothing to do with skin color or wether or not they went to junior college. Some of the best players and classiest guys to play under Huggins were juco transfers: Terry Nelson, Anthony Buford, Pete Mickeal...
3) Academically challenged individuals who experience difficulty conforming their behavior to appropriate norms" are not wanted at Cincinnati or at Boston College, Nebraska, Texas Tech …
This quote just blows my mind. Academically and behaviorally challenged people of all races have trouble succeeding at any school and they are never the dean of admissions first choice. Is Whitlock saying these are characteristics that apply more often than not to the black underclass? Also, if you're academically and behaviorally challenged, isnt it in your best interests to conform to appropriate norms? Why is that difficult?
4) When did any recruit UC ever brought in for basketball feel unwanted? When they didnt get enough playing time? Football and basketball players are revered on college campuses. George Leach is one of the goffiest looking guys I've ever been around, but I'll be damned if I didnt seen a half dozen smokin hot girls all over him at the ZBT/Jurassic 5 concert freshman year.
5) nothing wrong with traditionally all black schools, but Id imagine their graduation rates for black athletes tend to be higher because none of them are division 1 schools. All division 2, 3, and NAIA schools have much higher graduation rates than their division 1 counterparts and it doesnt matter if the students are white, black, purple, or chevy nova

[Wondertastic]

that's what happens when people write articles on subjects on which they have little facts or history

[greenleeD]

People who start shouting about racism in every situation in order to get their names and faces (Jesse Jackson, Damon Lynch III) in the press drive me absolutely nuts.

I have no firsthand knowledge of the situation, but I've never been a Huggins fan. However, to say that race played an issue in his dismissal (or whatever they're calling it) seems a stretch. I'm sure that plenty of poor black kids who happen to be good at basketball are recruited by any number of schools hoping to put together the best team possible. That's what colleges do. They also are in the business of providing higher education, so it doesn't seem to be too much of a stretch to ask players to attend classes, study, graduate, and not get themselves in trouble with the law.

[chuxxter]

No F***ing Comment.

[Shlep]

Like Handy, I fail to see how the young black men in question were "used." They got a golden opportunity to parlay their skill at hoops into a 4-year degree; if they squandered it partying, goofing off, and/or deciding they were there to major in b-ball while pinning their futures on an unlikely trip to the big leagues, that's their own damned fault. I for one wish like hell I was good enough at something to have been "used" by a major university in such a way (free room, free education, travel, the adulation of peers on campus, the prestige of being an athlete at a notable college).

I do, however, agree with the sentiment that reversing the trend of a supposed institute of higher learning filling slots for students with functional illiterates and semi-crimminals simply because they can reliably put a rubber orb through a metal ring.

[george]

John Thompson also recruited a lot of poor, academically and socially underprepared black kids who had zero chance of getting into his school. The vast majority of them graduated because Thompson was willing to focus on their academics and off-court life as much as he was willing to focus on their shooting percentages and zone defense skills.

[FOBAgain]

I do, however, agree with the sentiment that reversing the trend of a supposed institute of higher learning filling slots for students with functional illiterates and semi-crimminals simply because they can reliably put a rubber orb through a metal ring.


Hey, hey, hey, I take offense at that....



... very few of my Bearcats have been able to reliably put the rubber orb through the metal ring! :p

[the happy prole]

I think Jason Whitlock is a race-baiting shitbag. Always have.

However, I agree with george. The coaches who bring these kids in have an obligation to see that they complete their studies, or at the very least that they have a legit shot to make the pros. Otherwise you haven't done anything but use them.

You read about some of the things that happened at OSU, and I think those kids were just money-making pawns for the university.

[jcarwash31]

they can reliably put a rubber orb through a metal ring.
You know "basketball" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "metal ring rubber orb" does.

[Handy Smurf]

I think Jason Whitlock is a race-baiting shitbag. Always have.

However, I agree with george. The coaches who bring these kids in have an obligation to see that they complete their studies, or at the very least that they have a legit shot to make the pros. Otherwise you haven't done anything but use them.

You read about some of the things that happened at OSU, and I think those kids were just money-making pawns for the university.
I dont think anyone here would disagree with this. Its just a matter of having the meagerest of academic standards for your players. Xavier excercises this all the time. They've had players forced out of school, not by failing out, but by not meeting the standards that the team and school have jointly set for players to achieve

[the happy prole]

Why? I mean if Jason Whitlock were a government official or University president or something I could see your point. As it is, emailing him my dissenting view would accomplish less than talking about it in this board.

For the record, I don't think it has anything to do with race either. All that the universities care about is whether you can play ball. White, black, rapist, stupid, they don't care.

[Shlep]

You know "basketball" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "metal ring rubber orb" does.

I dunno; "metal ring rubber orb game" sounds like something the Coneheads would call basketball.

[paranoidandroid]

it's a no win situation.

huggins will be smeared if he didn't take chances on guys from the wrong side of the tracks OR

he is smeared FOR taking chances on guys from the wrong side of the track.

i believe jason whitlock is a former college football player...so you know he has some shit to grind on the good old NCAA.

maybe when the NCAA finishes their PC crusade on mascots, they can get to the business of coaches across the land using young urban black men as cash registers to the tune of billions of dollars.

BUT if you think for GD second that these...uh....student athletes....don't get fucking sweet deals (cough) CASH & CARS.(cough)..as they meander through 4 years of college...then you should really be laughing your ass off.

we should all be so lucky to be used like that.

[back2vinyl]

Frost, I think big business (and face it, that's what certain college sports have become) takes advantage of whomever they can. It just so happens that black Americans make up the bulk of the best athletes in basketball and football today, so they get screwed more often. I'm not talking about the ones who make it to the pros. They are obviously doing fine. I'm talking about the ones who are good enough to play at the college level, but not at the professional level who use up all their college eligibility without obtaining a degree.

And another thing. Why the university can't at least give these kids on scholarship a couple of bucks a week to have some walking around money and enough to go home for the holidays is beyond me.

I don't know if any of this makes any difference or is even true as I'm a white non-athlete who paid his own way through school and only knows what I read in the papers anyway.

[shivui]

so you're saying they intentionally went after black athletes to use and then turn away?

i don't understand how the opportunity to get better at school isn't there. some of my classes offer free tutors.

[back2vinyl]

so you're saying they intentionally went after black athletes to use and then turn away?

i don't understand how the opportunity to get better at school isn't there. some of my classes offer free tutors.

I think colleges just go after the best athletes they can get regardless of race without really worrying about what happens a few years down the road. Some schools probably do put in an effort to bring them up to speed academically. Some just have papers and tests taken care of for them so they can keep playing ball without learning a thing.

[markalot]

Huggins went after the best basketball players he could find, ignoring their past. Some of these athletes happened to be criminals. The old white woman gets the job and sees how the basektball program has gotten 'dirty' and wants to clean it up. She uses phrases like 'it doesn't fit with the image of UC'.

I see racism. I could be wrong.

[SteveinNYC]

Would you be crying racism if the criminal players were white?

If someone wants to clean up a dirty program, then we should applaud the effort. Think of all the hard-working kids of all races who were denied UC scholarships so that room could be made for dilinquents with BBall skills. That is the real crime here.

The issue is not skin color, the issue is character, both of the coaches and players.

[markalot]

Would you be crying racism if the criminal players were white?

If someone wants to clean up a dirty program, then we should applaud the effort. Think of all the hard-working kids of all races who were denied UC scholarships so that room could be made for dilinquents with BBall skills. That is the real crime here.

The issue is not skin color, the issue is character, both of the coaches and players.

When has this happened when all the players were white?

I see two wrongs here. I think it's wrong to say this is based on racism and I think it's wrong to say racism had no involvement. The entire college basketball universe is filled with inner city kids who would otherwise never be accepted to a college that they play for.

[Handy Smurf]

yeah, but the vast majority of them, by the time they are 25, don't have a future.

I don't even agree with the guy, but to say race plays no part, well that's just flat out denial. But I suppose I shouldn't find that suprising coming from some people around here.

shall I bust out the stats or can you take my word for it that yes, the vast majority of these players get the short end of the stick?

damn this is intriguing. It's like society feeds you a line and some people just eat it up hook line and sinker, and no amount of information can convince otherwise, not just that certain things aren't as they seem, but even the possibility that they aren't as they seem. I don't know if I ever expected it to be like this. But honestly I think it's an internet thing, because when confronted face to face, somehow the people who hold these same arguments realize the truth. I guess it's a lot easier to dismiss things when you can flip the screen or scroll past or skim. When you've got someone right in front of you, questioning your reasoning and their job is to study society, you look kind of silly ignoring context and acting like race isn't a factor in america. But I guess it's entertaining : :confused:

I just read this column by the the boy who called wolf, also known as Jason Whitlock, a sportswriter famous for making everything under the sun into an issue of race. Are there race issues in college sports? Absolutely. What about in college in general? Sure. So does that mean we call racism every time there is an issue that in any way shape or form has to do with black students/student athletes at our nation's universities? Jason sure thinks so...

Read closer, Frost ;)



also, no major college scholarship athlete is getting "the short end of the stick," when you consider the oppurtunities they are presented with
(these athletes also happen to be any number of other races besides black, btw)
lets see...
-free 4 year education worth upwards of $100,000 or more
-four years of free housing
-four years of free meals
-special facilities to assemble, workout, and study
-free and unlimited tutoring provided to them
-university employees in charge of registering them for classes, buying their books, and generally organizing even the smallest details of their campus life
-free shoes and clothing
-free equiptment
-all manner of kickbacks (not really a valid one to list here, because it is against the rules and not standard, but you know if happens)
- preferential treatment by some teachers, university employees, fellow students, and members of the local business community
-prestige out the ass

Sounds like a pretty sweet deal no matter how you spin it, Frost

[the happy prole]

Look at the entire picture though. The people who have a sweet deal are the people who are getting wealthy off the deal, and the vast majority of athletes are not getting wealthy or even rich or even close.

Actually no, apparently the white athletes are getting wealthy. Either that or Jason Whitlock doesn't give a shit unless you're black.

[jcarwash31]

I haven't been following huggins situtaion that clearly - I thought I'd heard he got some D.U.I.'s or something.

The man needs to quit for his own health anyway, sheesh.

And I'm sorry but there were a significant amount of people he brought in that ended up being thugs.

The team the last couple of years isn't really a team. They play like a bunch of muscle-necked weightlifters. They really do.
See, this is why he got fired. I thought you knew better than to debate something without knowing all the facts. Huggins got a DUI, he has recruited a bunch of players through the years because of their ability to play that are criminals, he has a responsibility to try to discipline these players and make them better citizens as well as players, he has failed at this, and since he can't even control himself, how can control these players. Plus, the new president doesn't want the university to have an image of being a bunch of criminal thugs. Thus, it makes alot of sense why he got fired.

yeah, but the vast majority of them, by the time they are 25, don't have a future.
They could have a future it they gave a shit. We know some of these athletes are only in college because they are great athletes. Their talent gives them the opportunity to possibly go pro or, barring that, get an education and get a job. If they cared at all about their future they would go to class and get their degree.

College sports has provided a way for many poor athletes to escape poverty and crime. These are people who would have otherwise never had the chance to go to school, but because of thier unique talents can. They now have the choice to try or not give a shit.

[FOBAgain]

But that complaint just doesn't wash with me as any scholarship athlete has earned at minimum a four year education. Perks and under the table deals go with the territory, but I'm trying to stay above board here. My understanding of the purpose of education was, in either order: 1) Enrich your life 2) Prepare you for employment.

People like Whitlock who demand equal compensation miss the point. You got used because you can dribble a basketball? Welcome to the real world kid. Plenty of white kids being used by folks to enhance company bottom line. You pissed away a free education and now think you're entitled to reparations? Tuff shit, kid - you had a prime chance to improve your lot in life, but you'd rather strut around punching police horses.

We don't live in a socialist world where everyone gets equal shares. People get used. People of ALL SKIN COLORS get used so that a select few can get rich. That's not racism. And when Jason Whitlock runs around crying wolf, it provides cover for legitimate racist issues that still need to be addressed.


You took the words right out of my mouth.

[the happy prole]

I think it depends on the school, but more and more I'm thinking that the "opportunity at an education" is a myth.

Anyone remember Majestic Mapp? He was looking pretty promising his first year in the ACC. Then he blew out his knee and went through five different surgeries (and there's pretty good evidence the UVA surgeon botched the first operation, which caused a lot of the problem). He came back from all those operations and had a year of eligibility left-- and Pete Gillen yanked his scholarship.

The story has a happy ending in that apparently Majestic Mapp is apparently an exceptional kid. He graduated with a degree in Economics, but it couldn't have been very easy to study while trying to rehab your knee and travelling with the team, etc. And yanking his scholarship was still kinda low, even if he graduated.

And this happened at UVA which takes it's academics pretty seriously. Plus, Pete Gillen is supposed to be a really, really nice guy-- which is how he hung on to his job so long despite the fact he's undeniably a *terrible* basketball coach. I have no doubt he was under considerable pressure to pull that scholarship even earlier.

So I look at that, and I think about OSU, Miami, Nebraska, and FSU and I have to say I don't think those kids are getting a chance at all. You look at what happened at OSU where the kids were pushed into these joke classes where they don't learn a thing.

[Handy Smurf]

Look at the entire picture though. The people who have a sweet deal are the people who are getting wealthy off the deal, and the vast majority of athletes are not getting wealthy or even rich or even close.

Tell me specifically what information I can reasonably produce that will invalidate your claim. Give me specifics. Thanks.
I understand what you mean. The NCAA gets huge contracts for broadcast rights to football and basketball. In general, the money for these are going to universities, which are non profit, and are being funneled back into programs to benefit current and future students. In some cases, this influx of money may go towards lining someone's pockets with an occasional raise, but this isn't like a corporation where CEOs and shareholders are raking it in hand over fist.
If you're advocating that student athletes be paid, well, thats a slightly different topic. I've heard compelling arguments both ways on that, but its a very sticky issue. In the end, I don't think it can work. Either way, they are fortunate to be presented with an oppurtunity that very few people get, the chance to get a college degree at absolutely zero cost to themselves, plus all the help along the way they could possibly need to complete it.

[Handy Smurf]

I think it depends on the school, but more and more I'm thinking that the "opportunity at an education" is a myth.

Anyone remember Majestic Mapp? He was looking pretty promising his first year in the ACC. Then he blew out his knee and went through five different surgeries (and there's pretty good evidence the UVA surgeon botched the first operation, which caused a lot of the problem). He came back from all those operations and had a year of eligibility left-- and Pete Gillen yanked his scholarship.

The story has a happy ending in that apparently Majestic Mapp is apparently an exceptional kid. He graduated with a degree in Economics, but it couldn't have been very easy to study while trying to rehab your knee and travelling with the team, etc. And yanking his scholarship was still kinda low, even if he graduated.

And this happened at UVA which takes it's academics pretty seriously. Plus, Pete Gillen is supposed to be a really, really nice guy-- which is how he hung on to his job so long despite the fact he's undeniably a *terrible* basketball coach. I have no doubt he was under considerable pressure to pull that scholarship even earlier.

So I look at that, and I think about OSU, Miami, Nebraska, and FSU and I have to say I don't think those kids are getting a chance at all. You look at what happened at OSU where the kids were pushed into these joke classes where they don't learn a thing.
I agree with this to an extent and its the one area where Jason Whitlock may have a valid point. There's a difference between giving kids the oppurtunity to have a free four year education and actually making it part of your mission to really help the kids along the way, not just using them for athletic cannon fodder.
A few thoughts:
-My freshman orientation over the summer at IU. Met a lot of people, was in one small group that had 3 football players. I happened to be privy to a conversation where they were discussing their schedules. It was a joke. One guy was taking some kind of dance class, bowling, and 1 or 2 other ridiculous courses I cant remember.
-Some schools *cough XU cough* have academic standards that far exceed those the NCAA has in place. It isn't a matter of failing out of school, there. If you're grades dont meet the standards set jointly by the team and university, you wont last. This happened to Aaron Turner a few years ago.
-Having team officials arrange for you to have fixed grades (UC officials taking summer classes for Charles Williams, Jim Harrick Jr. giving all his players A's in a basketball theory class that was taught at a 3rd grade level and that most of the players seldom to never attended.) This is a practice that in the end benefits nobody accept the basketball program which gets to have all of its players eligible to play (until they get caught)
-A friend of mine who I used to work with was in a situation similar to Mapp(above) He was a poor kid from Withrow HS, got grants, partial scholarships, and aide money to play safety at Division 1AA Indiana St. He wrecked his knee his freshman year and they pulled all his financial aide and he couldnt afford to stay in school.

That aside, I still believe that once you enter college, you should be mature enough to realize that getting that degree will probably be an important part of your future, depending on what type of goals you have. While it may be a coaches responsibility to push you towards success and not give any free handouts, that prodding shouldnt be necessary.
In the case of someone like my friend Krist, I find it disgusting the way they give up on a kid who doesnt have any athletic value to them anymore

[Handy Smurf]

Look at the entire picture though. The people who have a sweet deal are the people who are getting wealthy off the deal, and the vast majority of athletes are not getting wealthy or even rich or even close.

Tell me specifically what information I can reasonably produce that will invalidate your claim. Give me specifics. Thanks.

BTW, the ability to participate in high level intercollegiate athletics for four years has made lots of young men extremely rich over the years. In fact, its made them far wealthier than their classmates who went on to become lawyers, brain scientists, and rocket surgeons in most cases :p

[Handy Smurf]

Associate Press
Updated: Aug. 26, 2005, 1:34 PM ET

Matt Leinert will have plenty of time to focus on football in his final season. Leinart is enrolled in one class: Ballroom dancing will fulfill the final elective for his sociology degree, The Los Angeles Times reported.
:rolleyes:
thanks for that, though :cool:
I guess its a little less roll-eyes-y if he has already completed everything else necessary for a legitimate degree in his first 3 years

[FOBAgain]

I have sympathy for a guy that gets a free ride, gets hurt and loses his scholarship. That's not right. Exceptions should be made for these cases and they should somehow get to continue their education.

I don't have sympathy for guys squandering their educations by taking shit classes, allowing others to take courses for you or allowing the school to provide you with fixed grades or other such nonsense. If you go on a full ride because of athletics and it's borderline whether or not you have enough talent to go pro and make tons of money, you should be smart enough to cover your ass and put the education and resources given to you to good use.



Note: I'm not lumping Leinart in there. If he's one course from a sociology degree, then he's earned the right to take a ballroom dance class :p

[the happy prole]

Yeah, but show me the race angle.

OSU did the same thing with those Yugoslavian basketball players as they did with Clarett. They also did it to the football team, including Sammy Maldonado.

[Shlep]

"The belief that sport is a mobility escalator is built on a succession of myths. These myths are: (1) Sport provides a free college education. (2) Sport leads to a college degree. (3) A professional sports career is possible. (4) Sport is a way out of poverty especially for racial minorities. (5) Because of Title IX, women now have many opportunities for upward mobility through sport. (6) A professional sports career provides security for life"

Myth: Sport provides a Free Education

One assumption of the "social mobility through sports participation" position is that involvement in high school sport leads to college scholarships, which is especially helpful to poor youth who could not afford college otherwise. The problem with this assumption is that so few high school athletes receive full ride scholarships."

Add to that the myth that college athletics is a great money-maker. It's not; big-time college sports teams are huge money-losers for universities. They're a luxury expense that serves to do little other than increase the presitge of the university that fields the team(s).

As for the other myths you show here:

(1) Sport provides a free college education.: In some cases it does. My best friends' little brother got a full ride to West Liberty State U in West Virginia quarterbacking for the football team. Of course, he was also a standout academically, so he didn't piss away the opportunity he had and has since gottem his DVM and has a private veterinary practice in Texas.

Even if athletic scholarships (funny how the "scholar" part in that phrase seems to get lost) don't pay the whole nut, they're still a leg up, an opportunity. Much like work/study with your own cheering section.

(2) Sport leads to a college degree: of course not. Doing your schoolwork leads to a college degree. I think that's the point that's been iterated here repeatedly: if these guys get into college based on their athletic talent and do not avail themselves of the opportunity, they've no one to blame for failing but themselves. If they're not academically prepared, that's another thing...though as a post-high school instructor myself, I can tell you lack preparedness for college is not an insurmountable hurdle-- I deal with it daily. It's a problem nationally in many universities, and it's not limited to athletes.

(3) A professional sports career is possible. I myself already said that if these guys think that they're certain to parlay their college sports career into a pro one, their delusional. They're beating Vegas odds getting into college on their athletic talent as it is. Again, that's their own fault if they're not being realistic or leaving themselves options (i.e. "I best get a degree just in case I don't wind up being the next $100 million man in the NBA")

(4) Sport is a way out of poverty especially for racial minorities. I dunno about you, but the only people I've ever heard make this largely ludicrous claim are racial minorities, particularly when governing bodies in college athletics start making noise about raising academic requirements for sports scholarships, or making eligibility to play incumbent upon maintaining a GPA that isn't pathetic. "What about the the young black men who needs sports to get out of the ghetto?!" comes the hue and cry.

(5) Because of Title IX, women now have many opportunities for upward mobility through sport Who is it that has been calling sports a major venue of advancement for women?

(6) A professional sports career provides security for life Nothing provides security for life, that includes sports. If a few years on the playing field set you up for life, I doubt there'd be so many ex-athlete entrepeneurs attaching their names to real estate companies and car dealerships.

[FOBAgain]

So who perpetuates these myths, then and whose responsibility is to make kids understand the role of sports or the likelihood that they won't be "the answer" for them? I'm just curious, because growing up, I knew I didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting an athletic scholarship. That didn't keep me from playing sports or from working hard in the classroom. I guess I'm just missing the point.

[Handy Smurf]

One assumption of the "social mobility through sports participation" position is that involvement in high school sport leads to college scholarships, which is especially helpful to poor youth who could not afford college otherwise. The problem with this assumption is that so few high school athletes receive full ride scholarships.[/color]"

Jesus Frost, nobody once argued that getting a college athletic scholarship is easy nor did anybody debate the statistical likelihood of a HS athlete getting one. The discussion had to do with athletes who had actually received scholarships and were competing on the collegiate level. Jason whitlock's contention is that they are being used and disrespected by a system that they have no business being a part of and that doesnt really want them anyway. Most of us are disagreeing with the points he raised in his article. Nobody is debating the likelihood of anyone getting any type of free ride to college.
The belief that sport is a mobility escalator is built on a succession of myths. These myths are: (1) Sport provides a free college education.
They do provide a free or discounted college education to thousands upon thousands of students every single year. So this is false. (2) Sport leads to a college degree.
To those who earn college scholarships based on their athletic skill, yes they potentially do. Keep in mind, our discussion is about collegiate athletes, not the millions of potential collegiate athletes populating our nation's high schools. You can't be "used" by universities for your athletic skill if you arent a student athlete at a university. (3) A professional sports career is possible.
Seeing as how there are several professional sports league currently operating in the United states and even more abroad, I would say this is false. (4) Sport is a way out of poverty especially for racial minorities.
It can be if it a) gets you a pro career b) gets you a college scholarship and a free education
(5) Because of Title IX, women now have many opportunities for upward mobility through sport.
There arent womens pro sports leagues that compare in any way to the type of salary men can potentially make playing pro sports, but many females get to attend college for free and earn a degree every year because of their athletic talents. Wrong again.
(6) A professional sports career provides security for life"
If you arent a dolt and know how to manage money than this is absolutely true. If you play out one 5 year/8 million dollar contract, you should be able to retire on that if need be. If you can't, you are a weak, moronic, self indulgent, slug of a human being

I think these points are beside the point, Frost. While they would be interesting to bring up in a discussion about sport's place in society and the values we place on it, hopes and dreams, etc...thats not the discussion we're having. I know you like to site sources, but it doesnt make a difference when the information isnt applicable.

[Shlep]

Good. Now why don't you actually go get some literature on it and see where your assertions are wrong. Have fun : )

Better yet, why don't you get over yourself, Frost.

My undergrad degree is in Health, Fitness & Rec Resources Management. I've had formal courses on sport history and sport sociology and the role of sport if society. I've been formally educated on the topic we're discussing in this thread (the role/impact of athletics in college, the relationship between minorities and sport in US history such as baseball for the interned Japanese and the role of blacks in sport since slavery).

I realize you seem to be operating under the impression that you're the only person here who's ever had an education or read a friggin' book, so I apologize if this Earth-shaking revelation has induced a sudden, injurious fainting spell. If you're still feeling okay, maybe you could deflate your wildly super-sized sense of self-importance just a wee bit and actually join the discussion instead of condescending everyone in it.

[FOBAgain]

and actually join the discussion instead of condescending everyone in it.


No shit.

10, 9, 8, 7...

[purple_octopus]

Better yet, why don't you get over yourself, Frost.

My undergrad degree is in Health, Fitness & Rec Resources Management. I've had formal courses on sport history and sport sociology and the role of sport if society. I've been formally educated on the topic we're discussing in this thread.

I realize you seem to be operating under the impression that you're the only person here who's ever had an education or read a friggin' book, so I apologize if this Earth-shaking revelation has induced a sudden, injurious fainting spell. If you're still feeling okay, maybe you could deflate your wildly super-sized sense of self-importance just a wee bit and actually join the discussion instead of condescending everyone in it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Frost has no choice but to shut the fuck up now. You have a *degree* in it. He learned about racism in college, which makes him the end-all, be-all racial authority. I suppose he has no choice but to bow down to your wisdom.

God, I love it when people's lame-ass arguments get used against them.

[Handy Smurf]

Good. Now why don't you actually go get some literature on it and see where your assertions are wrong. Have fun : )
BTW, if you truly believe that those 6 things are true because you read it somewhere, then I just lost a lot of respect for you Frost.
As I stated earlier, I can see how those can be applied as generalities when talking about the joe/jane everyman population of the entire United States, but once again, we are talking about young (men specifically) who have already parlayed their athletic skills into college scholarships
To know the amounts of athletes who earn college scholarships and who start professional sports careers and take any of those as straight out, 100% of the time facts is irresponsible nonsense.
People who earn a living playing sports are practically a statistical anomaly, but they exist.
People who earn athletic scholarships are a small percentage of the population, but they still total a very large number. The percentage of lower to middle class black athletes that earn scholarships is significantly higher than any other demographic, too

[gwar469]

The percentage of lower to middle class black athletes that earn scholarships is significantly higher than any other demographic, too

See, Handy, this statement you just made sums up what has been confusing me about how this whole thing can be racist. Is it racist because so many low-to-middle class black kids are being targeted solely for the profit gain of universities? Would people still be screaming racism if this group were receiving fewer scholarships? It's a no-win situation it seems to me: you either give these kids the scholarships and the opportunity, and people claim the universities are targeting them and taking advantage of them; or, you don't give these kids scholarships and people say they're being overlooked because of the color of their skin.

No matter what anyone does, someone somewhere will find a way to add some racial context to it, whether it's warranted or not. It's sad, really.

[Handy Smurf]

Add to that the myth that college athletics is a great money-maker. It's not; big-time college sports teams are huge money-losers for universities. They're a luxury expense that serves to do little other than increase the presitge of the university that fields the team(s).

Im not here to doubt the validity of this, but would like to hear more about it from anyone who knows more. I realize athletic departments spend ridiculous amounts of money on scholarships, travel expenses, coaches salaries, etc. But I know schools are making huge amounts of money on television and licensing contracts thru the NCAA. Id think its hard to say wether having football would help or hurt a given schools profit/loss. I realize it requires putting about 75-80 (maybe even more) athletes on full scholarship, but between game and advertising related revenues, all the way up to the aforementioned tv and licensing shares, plus bowl payouts, some schools are making quite a few million every year. I guess at best a handful of schools could be making money off of football. A big time bowl appearance is imperative to accomplish this.
Either way, its been a few years since I've seen anything on the finances behind college athletic departments, but I do remember most schools were coming up losers

[the happy prole]

Gather up the race percentages from all the sports and then do an examination based on that?

This is a problem that disproportionately affects blacks, because blacks are a higher percentage of basketball. Had Whitlock been phrased that way, I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

But Whitlock is saying or at least STRONGLY implying that Cincy treated its black players differently than white players. The piece is entitled "Black and White" as if there is a disparity between the way black athletes and white athletes are treated. Read the quotes:

"The University of Cincinnati basically just said that, for 16 years, Bob Huggins had little interest in educating the black athletes he recruited."

Did Bob Huggins have no interest in educating athletes, or was it specifically BLACK athletes?

He even goes so far as to suggest that black athletes ought to attend HBC's because they aren't going to get fair treatment and "white" colleges:

"Maybe one day poor black athletes and their parents will study their history and realize that countless black leaders and professional athletes were educated and groomed at historically black colleges. There's absolutely nothing second-rate about the education."

So non-HBC (aka. "white" colleges) don't care about blacks, but HBC's do? That's not just inflammatory, it's also wrong.

If you had a free ride to ANY of these schools, which would you pick?

UVA's FOUR year grad rate for black football players is 60%.
Virginia Tech's FOUR year grad rate for black football players is 62%.

Norfolk State's SIX year graduation rate among ALL students is 28%.
Hampton University's SIX graduation rate among ALL students is 54%.
Virginia State's SIX year graduation rate among ALL students is 38.7%.

If you care about your education, I think you pick the big ACC school. And if you're Marcus Vick, you *still* pick the big ACC school.

[purple_octopus]

Still failed to live up to that challenge so long ago, eh?

What challenge?

If none of you guys have shut the fuck up and listened, why on earth would it make sense for me to do so now, until you do likewise.

I'm not saying you should. I'm just delighted that someone's used your own bullshit against you. I find it highly fucking amusing.

We can make a deal right here and right now, but I know you're too much of a purple murple to go through with it :P

What kind of deal? Is there money involved?

(inside joke, sorry)

So inside that I don't even get it.

But I'll give you points for that one - I suppose turnabout is fair play.

Damn straight. It was the funniest thing I've read all day! :p

[purple_octopus]

Am I really that big and bad? Damn, I guess I'm this huge monster who rules the countryside with an iron fist, crushing and killing whomever I come in contact with.


rraaarrrr!!!

I said rarrr dammit!
No, you're neither big nor bad. Nothing you say offends me because I've seen through your bullshit for awhile. (Not to say I don't like you, because oddly enough I really do. I just place you on ignore once in awhile so I don't have to scroll through your meaningless diatribes.)

[FOBAgain]

I guess I hurt your feelings too. Man, if I was like this with all the things you guys had said, I'd be somewhere crying 24/7.

Am I really that big and bad? Damn, I guess I'm this huge monster who rules the countryside with an iron fist, crushing and killing whomever I come in contact with.


rraaarrrr!!!

I said rarrr dammit!


It takes a lot more than some pompous ass to hurt my feelings. I merely emphasized what Shelp said, that you haven't added anything useful to the conversation besides an extremely arrogant, condescending attitude. Thanks for trying, though. Feel free to come back when you have something useful to contribute.

[Megs79]

5) nothing wrong with traditionally all black schools, but Id imagine their graduation rates for black athletes tend to be higher because none of them are division 1 schools. All division 2, 3, and NAIA schools have much higher graduation rates than their division 1 counterparts and it doesnt matter if the students are white, black, purple, or chevy nova

Actually, there are quite a few D1 HBCU's. Umm... Southern, Grambling, etc. are all in the SWAC. That whole conference is HBCs.

[Handy Smurf]

But that's what goes on on this board all the time. all the time. virtually the entire time, in fact. People say things and other people believe them....uh...until it comes to certain subjects and then the slightest mention of anything that contradicts the status quo and a dissertation is necessary for backup, and still that's not enough.

and no, I'm not JBC
I realize that
and I didnt mean to sound harsh...
Im just saying

a) if you wanted to take the discussion to a different arena, I wouldnt mind going there, apply those 6 things to a broader spectrum and don't include them as absolutes and I don't have a problem with them
b) the insinuation that those 6 things were absolute is what I was referring to with my comment you quoted above. We all know that some people get athletic scholarships and some play professional sports, its just a minority of the total population. A very good portion of said minority is made up of ethnic minorities, many of them middle-lower class. To say that "sports provides a free education" is a myth is totally incorrect. To say relying on sports to provide you with a free education isn't sensible is wholly accurate.
c) if you arent agreeing with Whitlock, then I see no point of contention in this thread. The points you raised seem to be on a slightly different topic and I've followed along and it seems to me that others here might have misconstrued your original intent.
d) if theres anything Whitlock said or anything related on the matter you'd care to discuss, I'd enjoy talking to you about it. Post here or pm me if you're interested

[Shlep]

You're right, the snobbery hath returned. The gall that i ask people who specifically say they don't know much about race, to learn about it before making silly statements. what an ass I am. I think you've just gotten used to hearing things a certain way. If you're not used to being told you're wrong, without cuddling you and stroking your hair, then perhaps me and you can agree to never talk again. This just cracks me up. For people that talk shit about those who whine, you sure do enough of that playing the victim card. I'm the big bad mean guy whose words make people fall over and die.

thunder cracks when i enter the room, good lord!
Yall are punked. I disagree with you, and unless I sugar coat it, you curl up in the corner. I'll get over myself when you get over me. I'm not all that hot, believe me. Any smugness is in your (collective) imaginations.

Weren't you in the armed forces? are you really this hurt by things I say? or is this faux pain?

Lovely, Frost. And might I add, jam-packed with irony. The sum of your contribution to this thread, excepting perhaps the snippet from a book you posted has been simply "Hoooo, boy! Are you guys clueless!! Clueless, clueless, clueless!! I'm not going to attempt to quantify this in any way, just take ol' Frosts' word for it that you all don't know your own ass from this thread, since I've been to college and what-not and have studied subjects tangent to what's being discussed here!"

Then, when I explain why I feel I am at least somewhat as qualified to opine on the subject as you by virtue of the fact that like you, I've been formally educated on the topic, now I'm just all full of myself. Furthermore, I'm being silly, and close-minded to boot since Frost, Grand Dispenser of Truth On All Topics Even Tangentially Racial, hath spake and I dare to defy his infallible wisdom. Surely, as you seem to think, this is a direct result of never having been told I'm wrong or having had my beliefs questioned aggressively and not, say, the fact that I simply disagree with you.

And what's this "victim card" shit, Captain Ego? Where exactly have I played the victim here or anywhere else? Please do point this out.

Yes Frost, you have gall. Loads of it. You are 10 pounds of gall in A 5-pound bag to think that I or most anyone else here simply cannot bear the blinding light of the awesome truth you periodically deign to shine upon without it being "sugar-coated." Naw dude, that isn't the slightest bit arrogant, any more than your habitually advancing upon any discussion involving race with the pre-determined notion that everyone you're talking to is a blithering ignoramus.

[purple_octopus]

Oh come on purposterous, I'm not all like that. I post lots of funny, interesting, clever, hilarous and random things.

Yes, you absolutely do. Which is why I only place you on ignore "every once in a while".

That you focus in on the times I'm getting belig...beligger... pissed and posting "meaningless" diatribes, is on you. :P

See, you don't get it. I *don't* focus on it. Because I don't see it. :p

I probably shouldn't have even responded, because "race really doesn't matter in america" talk will happen on this board until the end of time.

That's why I don't read this shit. I haven't even read this thread, just Shlep's hilarious comments. Because he's so damn funny and all, I read all his posts (or most of them, anyway).

[Handy Smurf]

the little girl in florida - not racism
FTR, I think most people werent prepared to "jump to the conclusion" that the cops were racist. Everyone said it was horrible, punishable police work. I think most just didnt see any evidence to indicate they were racist cops and not just bad cops

american idol voting - not racism
and on and on and on

wasnt around for this conversation, but probably wouldve agreed with you
To this day, I'm amazed that that fat guy beat that effeminate guy
:p

[the happy prole]

I think I expect too much from people. I'm like an nba coach, yelling at preschoolers for double dribbling. It's inappropriate. People have lives to lead and haven't the time to sit and research every topic. they do the best they can with the knowledge they have.

Bingo. shit, I've been trying to tell you and Due this for months.

Also, the SWAC schools are Division IAA so they're not quite the same as the OSU's and Nebraska's.

Also, the graduation rates for Division II and Division III schools aren't any higher than for Division I schools. The entire Ivy League is Division IAA.

Also, I post stats all day and everyone ignores them so don't ask me to do research if you don't actually care.

Also, I think many people agree with you that Huggins was an ass who had to go. That's why we have such problems with Whitlock playing up any sort of race angle to this.

[Sofa King]

I hope they bring in a different system. I always felt Huggins treated his players like sub-humans (along with bobby knight, whose players looked like slaves) anyway.

I never thought I'd say this but that's what the media would love you to believe. "That the Bearcats were nothing but ruthless thugs." Bullshit. You know there are two refs out there who will call anything that is a foul. If the Bearcats play like you described them then they would never ever have won a single game unless the other team was completely disfuntional at shooting foul shots. They just played D with more power, doesn't make them all violent thugs on the court.

It seemed to be the other way around. The Bearcats last year led the NCAA in DRAWING fouls..not giving them.

If Huggins treated his players like sub-humans then how come a very large number of them are coming out of the woodwork fully supporting him? Saying how important and how much of an impact he had on their lives.

Just a small handful of quotes from Huggin's "Slaves and sub-humans:"
Many of those former players reunited at the pub to show support for their old coach.

"He was one of the best coaches I had," said Corie Blount, former UC player and an 11-year veteran of the NBA. "He was the one who saw potential in me."

Tarrice Gibson was the second recruit signed by Huggins at UC.

"He's a great man - who only wanted to lead others to be great men," said Gibson, who played for Huggins from 1989 to 1993.

"I love the university, and I love my coach," said former UC player Melvin Levett. "He's been there for me, and I'm here for him."

The former players mingled around the bar and signed autographs, but there was a feeling of sadness in the air.

"It's like your dad's basketball funeral," said former Bearcat Keith Starks. "It's just tough - it really is."

Alex Meacham, a North Avondale native, walked onto the UC team without a scholarship and later wrote a book about his experiences. Without Huggins, Meacham said, he likely wouldn't be an author or vice president of Shining Star Sports, which trains and coaches 360 aspiring basketball players.

"I owe a lot to him," Meacham said.

[Handy Smurf]

Actually, there are quite a few D1 HBCU's. Umm... Southern, Grambling, etc. are all in the SWAC. That whole conference is HBCs.
Sorry, those are Division 1AA schools

[purple_octopus]

:P

well at least i'm "off punishment" for the moment. I haven't even argued like this in a good month. it's kind of nice, actually (to not argue with people - coloring is much more fun)

It's because you're not cutting & pasting today. It's not the content that puts you on ignore -- it's the length of the post. If I have to hit "scroll down" more than twice, you're on ignore buddy.

aren't you guys married or something?
Close enough. Isn't he dreamy? :o

[Handy Smurf]

yeah, i'm not necessarily agreeing with whitlock. but then again, I really need to learn about his other writings to put into context what he actually wrote. apparently from what you guys are telling me, he's a minor demon? what other crazy columns has he written that got you guys pissed off ?
I havent read too much of his stuff in the past to be honest. No more then 15-20 columns. To be perfectly honest, I dont remember specific details of any of them too well. If nothing else, he has a pretty strong national reputation as a columnist who constantly deals with race but is also known for using the "race card." Ralph Wiley (God rest his soul) on the other hand was known for writing about race in sports, but for doing so in an intelligent, well informed manner, not just alleging racism willy nilly all over the sports world. Where Ralph would take a concise jab at racism in sports, Whitlock takes a story like this one, and goes looking for a racial angle...often making one up on his own.

As far as denial of anything racist by boarders, someone said on here a long time ago (mightve even been you) its pointless to sit around here smacking our heads and debating wether or not the klansmen who lynched 3 black men are racist. A lot of racism is very obvious. We could start a thread about it and everyone would agree (probably) it'd be a short thread. Some racism is more subtle and is definitely worth discussing, as it makes for an interesting debate. Lastly, some people (IMO) allege racism in situations that might not be racist at all. It also makes for good discussion, you're just going to see where the line is drawn at people who are immediately willing to accept that a situation involves racism and those who are big time sceptics and want to see definitive proof that its racism before they go pointing fingers...

If you want to talk about something else related to the NCAAs, I'd be all for it. Maybe about the ridiculously low amount of black coaches in college football? I was surprised you didnt join into the NCAA mascot ban thread

[Handy Smurf]

Also, when are you in town? Get yourself a Bengals ticket and we can go down to a game together. I've got my season tix :D I'll be wearing my Ricardo McDonald jersey*








*disclaimer: Handy Smurf does not actually own a Ricardo McDonald jersey, he only wishes he did ...and slightly less than he wishes he had a Lewis Billups or Barney Bussey jersey

[the happy prole]

what other crazy columns has he written that got you guys pissed off ?

I'm sure YOU can look it up.

There was one on how Steve Nash won the MVP because he's white. There was one on how Jonnie Cochran is a black hero just like Martin Luther King. Women reporters should be barred from Men's locker rooms.

There was the time he sat in the pressbox and taunted Patriots fans with a handwritten sign calling Bledsoe either "gay" or "a fag" depending on the source.

[Handy Smurf]

I was actually at the patriots game. in the rafters dude. it was so high up birds were flying by

...below me.

I might be in town next week - i'll pm you if I get to come.
I had to give my ticket to that game up...

I'm actually not sure if I'll be around next weekend or not. It depends if I'm leaving for Chicago on Friday night or saturday morning...

If I know for certain that I'm leaving on Friday, you can have my ticket to see Indy. If I'm in town Friday, I'll make you a hip hop heavy mix and buy you a beer after the game

[frizgolf]

cool. does anybody else (who really hasn't read much on this situation) think that she did it for huggins own good, healthwise, and the "thug" thing was just a way to do it on paper?

Funny, I was wondering about this. Could someone have seen Huggs all drunked up again somewhere a couple times, and seen the writing on the wall? Or maybe he still eats too many cheeseburgers and Zimpher doesn't want him dying on her watch?

[markalot]

Well that's not my fault! Doesn't this (http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/4257/see1xh.jpg) happen to everybody ? :confused:



hahahaha choke gag

cough


whew

Thanks for a really good laugh.

[paranoidandroid]

I shouldn't say this is a stupid comment, so I will retract my earlier point. But, how exactly does a basketball coach get in trouble for not bringing in guys with "checkered pasts" - you didn't say black, and neither did I.


okay screaming meanie let's rewind some 15-20 years ago and take a look at the UC hoops team.

they were a bunch of no-named, average talented, collection of guys that played each season with no fanfare, major alumni support, virtually no corporate support and in a basketball conference called the metro, then the great midwest....virtually toiling in anonymity since the glory years of the 60's and 70's....THEN

someone wanted a new coach with a new attitude and new approach. They go out and get a guy coaching at the basketball powerhouse of akron.

why was huggins chosen?

well a big part of the process was his proclevity to draw players from junior colleges and urban inner city locales. kids who needed, and, wanted second-chances in life. sometimes even third chances. so, in came herb jones and company, along with the new logo, the new darker color, and new image, BUT most importantly what came from these players that huggins recruited was WINS baby. a shit load of them. and along with the wins came $$$ by the barrel full. shoemaker was built, the UCats club was either formed, or became much bigger than it previously was, the NCAA tournament was back, better conferences were down the road....and on and on...UC was put on the map. BUT i'm stating the obvious.

so now let's fast forward some 16 years and nearly 400 wins later and these same players NOW are the problem for huggins and the university. nevermind the fact that these same type players got this university into one of the great conferences of the NCAA's. or were you thinking UC got into the BIG EAST because of their stellar football team? women's soccer? no never mind the FACT that it was huggins and the basketball team that secured the invite for UC. 16 years ago it was a pipe dream at best, now it's a reality. and whether you like it or not, art long contributed to this.

so really when i say it's a no win situation, it means that huggins was encouraged to recruit kids from the wrong side of the tracks to get wins. remember the tony yates era? didn't think so.

BUT NOW

huggins has lost his job because of those same kids that put UC back on the national pedestal.

that's all well and good, but when sub-500 seasons start to become the norm again, it will only be a matter of time before the NEW president looks for that NEW huggins.

you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

get it now? welcome to big-time athletics.


So it's taboo to "use" young urban black men, but it's ok to use native americans.

no it's not okay to use any of them. i just disagree on the severity of the using. but no use of getting into that again, when all you need is a checkbook and a price....


OK. I revert to my earlier assessment. In this realm, these are the most ignorant things I've ever read.

well thank-god for that. i didn't want to disappoint you. i'm honored to be in your realm of ignorance!


but my real question is:

why does UC feel the need to be academic powerhouse in basketball? i mean we already have xavier just down the road!

[paranoidandroid]

yeah, but the vast majority of them, by the time they are 25, don't have a future.

frost, who's fault is that? i mean the responsibility has to be shared doesn't it? if you went through 5 years of college, and STILL have no future? you got bigger problems. BUT i see your point, at some point, someone, somewhere has to recognize that the kid isn't cutting it academically and should receive help.

I don't even agree with the guy, but to say race plays no part, well that's just flat out denial. But I suppose I shouldn't find that suprising coming from some people around here.

see my damned if you do, damned if don't ramble.

shall I bust out the stats or can you take my word for it that yes, the vast majority of these players get the short end of the stick?

nah, who told you? :rolleyes: was it because they could dunk a ball, or was it because they were black?

But honestly I think it's an internet thing, because when confronted face to face, somehow the people who hold these same arguments realize the truth.

maybe the people doing the t(pre)eaching realize a thing or two as well?

[Handy Smurf]

well a big part of the process was his proclevity to draw players from junior colleges and urban inner city locales. kids who needed, and, wanted second-chances in life. sometimes even third chances. so, in came herb jones and company,
...
so now let's fast forward some 16 years and nearly 400 wins later and these same players NOW are the problem for huggins and the university. nevermind the fact that these same type players got this university into one of the great conferences of the NCAA's.
This is an ignorant statement. They werent the same players at all. Huggins was in his fifth year('93) before he began bringing in players who got in real trouble, specifically (in '93) dontonio wingfield...who was not a Juco.
I think Zimpher didnt like the fact that Huggins was bringing in players like Vince Banks (not a Juco) who obviously never had any intention to be a student and who realistically needed to start out at a junior college and work on his grades before going to a school like UC, or Roy Bright (also not a Juco) who was carrying a gun on campus.
Either Huggins is the worst judge of character ever, or he just kept bringing in kids who he knew had serious character issues and had no interest in being students, only playing basketball

[paranoidandroid]

This is an ignorant statement. They werent the same players at all. Huggins was in his fifth year('93) before he began bringing in players who got in real trouble, specifically (in '93) dontonio wingfield...who was not a Juco.
I think Zimpher didnt like the fact that Huggins was bringing in players like Vince Banks (not a Juco) who obviously never had any intention to be a student and who realistically needed to start out at a junior college and work on his grades before going to a school like UC, or Roy Bright (also not a Juco) who was carrying a gun on campus.
Either Huggins is the worst judge of character ever, or he just kept bringing in kids who he knew had serious character issues and had no interest in being students, only playing basketball

listen. they were the same types of players. huggins was successful all those years because he recruited guys, who mostly, could play basketball..period. not go to class, not be outstanding citizens...and all the while winning and going to tournaments, something the yates and badger era's could not do. he was winning, so the school looked the other way. he gave second chances, the school looked away. he gave third chances, the school looked away. WELL now the school and the new prez are looking at the image that was created, and permitted by previous administrators, and saying his track record is not living up "to the philosophy and vision of the university relative to student recruits as scholar athletes and positive role models."

if you think huggins was fired just for the roy bright and tyree evans incidents, then you are the ignorant one. this stuff has been going on for the better part of a decade. not to mention roy bright was immediately dismissed from the team after the gun incident.

huggins was fired because of what the school's image became, with the players he recruited. but it's a fact that those same TYPE players are largely responsible for putting uc hoops back on national paperstands.

and i just didn't say he recruited jucos, he recruited all types of players, but he started winning with jucos, which then brought in the blue chippers.

[Megs79]

Sorry, those are Division 1AA schools

That distinction only makes a difference for football, and it's a game attendance distinction. http://www.ncaa.org/about/div_criteria.html

[Handy Smurf]

listen. they were the same types of players. huggins was successful all those years because he recruited guys, who mostly, could play basketball..period. not go to class, not be outstanding citizens...and all the while winning and going to tournaments, something the yates and badger era's could not do. he was winning, so the school looked the other way. he gave second chances, the school looked away. he gave third chances, the school looked away. WELL now the school and the new prez are looking at the image that was created, and permitted by previous administrators, and saying his track record is not living up "to the philosophy and vision of the university relative to student recruits as scholar athletes and positive role models."

if you think huggins was fired just for the roy bright and tyree evans incidents, then you are the ignorant one. this stuff has been going on for the better part of a decade. not to mention roy bright was immediately dismissed from the team after the gun incident.

huggins was fired because of what the school's image became, with the players he recruited. but it's a fact that those same TYPE players are largely responsible for putting uc hoops back on national paperstands.

and i just didn't say he recruited jucos, he recruited all types of players, but he started winning with jucos, which then brought in the blue chippers.
My only point is that Huggins has been bringing in jucos his entire career. That, in and of itself is not a problem. Most of his original players(first few years), juco or not, have gone on to graduate even if it took them 7,8,9 years to do so.

I didnt say that Huggins was fired for any specific incident. I said Zimpfer didnt like that he was still bringing players like that in. Theres a big difference between bringing guys in who "need a second chance" or who dont get the best grades and take more than 4 years to graduate and bringing in guys who commit crimes as members of the university and who clearly had neither the ability or the intention to ever be a student at the collegiate level.

My guess would be that Zimpfer told Huggins that the university didnt want him bringing in any more players with histories of being in trouble with the law and that she wanted him focusing on players who wouldnt have problems meeting minimum academic requirements and he gave her the old "fuck you"
She mentioned that they had issues like that that they were dealing with but didnt get into specifics. I never heard Huggins comment on it. Id imagine that there was something to what she was saying and that they wanted to put guidelines in place and Huggs didnt want to work with them

[Handy Smurf]

That distinction only makes a difference for football, and it's a game attendance distinction. http://www.ncaa.org/about/div_criteria.html
they play for a seperate championship and I dont believe they receive any revenue from the NCAA Div 1 tv contracts

its all beside the point now anyway, happy prole debunked the myth that graduation rates are different(Im assuming he had some stats on that...thp tends to do his homework there) and whitlock was proven to be wrong and an ass once again