Longhorns Football

Rand Al'Thor,

well said. I fully disagreed with many of theaustinescorts' statements but was too lazy to reply as you did.

Athletic programs at the majority of colleges lose money. At those few schools where athletics are in the black, it is football revenue that puts them there.

Most of the D-1 (FBS) schools that have highly-rated football programs are also excellent educational institutions -- UT is such an example. Wasn't it just a few years ago that there was a great deal of controversy over UT beating out Cal-Berkeley for a BCS berth? And Stanford, which is the highest ranked non-Ivy League college in the U.S. according to U.S. News & World Reports annual rankings, consistently wins the trophy for best over-all college sports programs. Others in the top 25 in the rankings -- Duke, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cal, USC and UCLA. Yes, there are several colleges that do not emphasize football, but they are present in most other sports.

Unfortunately theaustinescorts likes to lay down blanket statements which would be true if he chose to limit them somewhat. I would agree that many, if not the majority, of students at the football factories, should not be there. However, there are several brilliant students at those colleges too. Ever hear the Ocho brothers talk? My son should not have been at Rice. However, he was a fantastic runner and got a partial scholarship and received an outstanding education. College sports programs give a lot of young men and women a chance that they would not otherwise get and it is up to them to realize that and take advantage of it.

The sports program at UT also brings a great deal of money into the city of Austin. Also brings a great deal of pride to the students (okay, maybe not this year). Studies have shown that when UT has a good year in football, applications increase about 10%.

Pretty much everything that's been said in rebuttal is pure wishful thinking.

It would be wonderful if college football at places like UT was the expression of the age-old ideal of training a healthy mind with a fit body...but it's not. It's quite the opposite.

When Tommy Lee Jones played at Harvard football was his passion. It didn't take away one bit from his scholarly studies. But that's because Harvard players are different from those at places like UT, and that's because the philosophy of sports at Harvard is the classic ideal - as opposed to places like UT where it's purely a business....a charade sold to the public to make money.

My friend Tony D******, who played for UT and Green Bay, went through an entire four year program in Fine Arts and painting without even being required to know who Jackson Pollack was. Of course you will find graduates from Harvard and Berkley who don't know who J. Robert Oppenheimer was....if Oppenheimer had nothing to do with their major of study. But if someone from Harvard graduates with a degree in Fine Art and painting you can damn well guarantee that he will know who Jackson Pollack was. Tony is better off for having played football than not, but he was one of the very few who progress on to a pro career, and even that was of ambiguous benefit given he has two broken vertebrae in his lower spine to show for it, no money saved, and a greedy "sports manager" who has been trying to sue him for years over financial disputes.

Athletics in college is supposed to "lose" money. Like all other offerings it has costs which must be born, and it's not supposed to be a cash cow. However the football [and sometimes basketball] teams are able to rake in millions in advertising, donor contributions, and paying otherwise mediocre students. This revenue is used to pay for the costs of other, non-commercial athletics as well as other expenses of running a University. That sounds harmless enough until you examine the compromises that are made in permitting the players to skate through without really doing any scholarly work, etc. This makes a mockery out of the purpose of the school in it's academic as well as athletic missions.

As for Stanford being an excellent school, or better than Berkley [despite what "Useless News and World Distort" may claim] it's well known among academics that Berkley is BY FAR the best University in California...definitely NOT Stanford. Stanford's admissions requirements are FAR LOWER than Berkley's. Stanford is an elitist private school with high tuitions, a student body of trust-fund brats with Republican parents, and nothing more than a mediocre academic reputation. It is the home of the "Hoover School" [a far right-wing public policy think tank] and idiots like Condleeza Rice on the faculty and administration.

In contrast Berkley is the hardest school to get into anywhere west of the Mississippi. It's on a whole different level. It is the Harvard of the west coast, and Cal-Tech is the MIT of the west coast. IMHO Berkley is probably the best University anywhere in the world, and actually better than Harvard. Berkley does however compromise itself regarding it's basketball team.

When schools like Cal-Tech, MIT, U of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, NYU, Columbia, etc. start to field football teams [and their students start showing up to games with their bodies painted in their school colors] then I will agree with you.

But that of course will never happen.

I'm not saying that UT is a bad school. It's still the best in the state, but it's overall academic stature appears to have declined as the public's zeal for its football team has mushroomed. And what bothers me is that most of these morons wearing my school's mascot on the ass of their shorts never even went there LOL.

austinescorts,

please understand that your statements are, for the most part, 100% OPINIONS. I would take your statements more to heart if you could even understand that it U. Cal BERKELEY, not Berkley. If you choose not to believe U.S. News & World Reports as a source for gaining information on the over 3,000 institutions for higher education, that is your choice. I found it to be an excellent source of information when it was time for my kids to choose a college.

FYI, in 2009 Stanford accepted 8% of the applicants and Cal-Berkeley accepted 22%. If you have any statistics that would point to Cal-Berkeley being a superior school to Stanford, please present them. I don't consider it an apples-oranges comparison but rather 2 shiny apples -- both are excellent colleges.

Who says college athletics are not supposed to be a cash-cow. EVERY college would love to have their programs operate in the black. Very few programs are able to do that, and it leaves more money for the college to spend on academics. Sports at MIT, Cal Tech, and the Ivies are just money down the drain. And BTW, Columbia does field a football team.

And ANY student can slide by in college. IMHO, the days of GIVING college athletes easy grades is long gone. If you have anything SOLID that would state otherwise, please let us know. Not opinion, but fact.

I do agree that football at schools like UT is definitely too high profile. But is it as bad as you believe -- not in my opinion.

After doing some quick research I believe the player in question had a commercial arts degree which I believe is for advertising purposes.

Being a Treehugger from So. Cal ---BUT living in Texas for some time I want to the UCLA game.. oh shit I did have blue on... and UCLA sucked could only run off tackle.. how did they win?

Heading to the game tomorrow. Actually some drama here. Win or no bowl. It will be a shitty bowl if we go. But still if we lose and no bowl game, heads will roll more than they will now.

I was at the game last week vs. Florida Atlantic and have tickets to tomorrow night's game vs. A&M. Considering I usually root AGAINST UT, I can't believe I'm going to sit in weather where the wind chill will be in the 30s. Would prefer to sit at home and watch in my man-cave while sipping a drink. But sometimes you gotta do what the wife wants.

Should be an interesting game. I agree with you Derek -- heads are going to roll, especially if the UT offensive game plan sucks, as usual, and A&M whips the Horns.

My friend Tony D******, who played for UT and Green Bay, went through an entire four year program in Fine Arts and painting without even being required to know who Jackson Pollack was. ... But if someone from Harvard graduates with a degree in Fine Art and painting you can damn well guarantee that he will know who Jackson Pollack was. Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

Well, I'm not surprised that he didn't know who Jackson Pollack was. But I bet he knew who Jackson Pollock was. He was an abstract expressionist painter.

Monk

p.s. Hook 'em.

I bleed orange BUT... I think the worst thing that can happen tomorrow is that we whip the Aggies... why? Well, this is a rivalry game, records are thrown out the window. A convincing win will make us think that we are a really good team when we are not. Change NEEDS to happen. Mack is a great coach but he needs to trade in some of the complacent coaches on his staff. Like anything else, its time to move on in certain areas...

sixx

Off to freeze my ass off. So stupid I won't wear a coat because it covers my burnt orange up.

I bleed orange BUT... I think the worst thing that can happen tomorrow is that we whip the Aggies... why? Well, this is a rivalry game, records are thrown out the window. A convincing win will make us think that we are a really good team when we are not. Change NEEDS to happen. Mack is a great coach but he needs to trade in some of the complacent coaches on his staff. Like anything else, its time to move on in certain areas...

sixx Originally Posted by sixxbach

I totally agree with you Sixx. Change needs to happen and the team needs to stop being delusional. Love my orange, but I would rather see a Texas team in the bowl games than a non.

Am I the only one that thinks Chiles got fucked? In his Freshman and Soph. year he came in the 4th Q as we were stomping everybody. He looked good! More of a runner than a thrower but still I liked him. Then last year when they signed Gilbert they moved him to WR. Had some stupid package (forgot the name) they called it when he was in the game. The thought was he would be a flanker and be a threat to carry or throw the ball. They gave up on that as it fooled no one because of lack of playing time. When he came in he turned into a decoy at best. He would of been a much better QB than Gilbert this year. I know they broke down everywhere, but Gilbert looks terrible. He looks scared to run. Last night was another typical example that many times receivers were covered and there was ample room to run and pick up 3-10 yards thus making something out of nothing. Just like McCoy and Young did. Chiles would of been even better than McCoy at this. Even pump faking while running Gilbert don't do. I'm usually not an angry fan, but once again I left pissed off in the 3rd Q. (my toes were cold) and went home and screamed at my radio in my truck then my TV. Chiles should of told Brown to fuck off and transfer to another school. He's twice the QB Gilbert is. I'm sure getting the Simms-Applewhite vibe here. And Gilberts worse than Simms! See....I'm pissed.

I really think Chiles is one of the biggest busts in UT history. Some people thought he was the second coming of VY. I think that if you have the talent, you will play. The O line is horrible. Texas needs to recruit some cornfed boys from Iowa and the rest of the big 10. You must have time to throw. Look at all the time Tannenhill had to throw the ball. Texas does not have the speed at RB to make something out of nothing.

I kind of think that the top 5 recruits should reconsider Texas. If Gilbert plays horrible again, his ass is gone. Great opportunity for a true freshman phenom to possibly be a starter. Malcolm Brown (RB) may very well be the starter before the OU game. I would be salivating to play at UT next year if I was high school recruit....

sixx

Gig Em....................

Chiles is a bust at WR, not QB. To get Gilbert to sign it's obvious they made promises. And with case McCoy I didn't see enough of him to get a sence if he's half what his big bro was. Not sure what we have there. And these RB's aren't developing. They were Fab 55 coming out of high school.