Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

[jcarter7669]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Lynah Fan: I attended classes with several members of Cornell's first national championship hockey team.

Was that while you were employed there mowing lawns? I have a hard time believe you went to Cornell judging by your posts. Either Cornell had no academic requirements, you simple sat in course, or you went..took a few classes and then failed out.

You type horribly, exhibit almost no skill in grammar, have no idea of how to research anything, and are unable to put together two pieces of information together to come up with a coherent thought. Next you are going to tell us you were accepted into Mensa and got 1600 on your SAT's.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Was that while you were employed there mowing lawns? I have a hard time believe you went to Cornell judging by your posts. Either Cornell had no academic requirements, you simple sat in course, or you went..took a few classes and then failed out.

You type horribly, exhibit almost no skill in grammar, have no idea of how to research anything, and are unable to put together two pieces of information together to come up with a coherent thought. Next you are going to tell us you were accepted into Mensa and got 1600 on your SAT's.

I don't know the details of how it works (I'm sure LynahFan or Osorojo could enlighten you much better or correct me if I'm wrong), but my understanding from a co-worker who went to Cornell is that there are actually kind of "two Cornells" in a way. There is the Ivy League super duper hard Cornell and a state-supported (to what degree, I don't know) college that shares the Cornell name and does not use the SUNY moniker or even outwardly differentiate itself much. I don't have the slightest idea if the athletes are only allowed to be in the Ivy Cornell, or if they can be in either one and still wear the Red. I'm going out on a limb and guessing your buddy there was more likely in the latter than the former. But who knows, I could be wrong and he could be secretly more intelligent than he's letting on. I'm positive that even if he was in the "real" Cornell, he was not on the debate team

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Was that while you were employed there mowing lawns? I have a hard time believe you went to Cornell judging by your posts. Either Cornell had no academic requirements, you simple sat in course, or you went..took a few classes and then failed out.

You type horribly, exhibit almost no skill in grammar, have no idea of how to research anything, and are unable to put together two pieces of information together to come up with a coherent thought. Next you are going to tell us you were accepted into Mensa and got 1600 on your SAT's.

J.C.
This forum and this thread is about college hockey and how it will change. [For the terminally dense it's "Whether it will change?"] Neither this site nor this thread is about me, my honors and awards, past employment, or the lack thereof. Try to remember this.

College hockey is changing. It is gaining fans in new geographic areas. It is finding more access to cable TV coverage. It is setting single-game attendance records. It is suffering increasing numbers of "early departures."
Ticket prices are soaring. Minimum admission requirements for hockey recruits are minimalized (you can't get lower than "400" on an SAT.) Profits are soaring from team copyrighted clothing and accessories. Still you reactionaries chant, "There are no substantial change in college hockey. There's no reason to suspect college hockey will follow the path of other college sports which faced identical pressures in the past. There is no reason to discourage the abuses other college sports suffer."

J.C.: If you remain fascinated by my college career or my credentials and life story in general please indicate your interest and I will put you in touch with my ex. You two can Twitter. You have much in common.

Tiger (Princeton?) fan: It is possible for a private university to include and direct state colleges within its organization and still maintain high standards and a quest for academic excellence. Elitists such as you mock public education yet eagerly accept and commonly seek public funding. It is also possible for a college or university, state or private, to maintain both a hockey program, high standards, and a quest for academic excellence. Many institutions of higher education do not manage to maintain these goals,* but many schools have done so. Check and see. I suggest you start with Cornell, but then I'm biased.

* Their excuse is "Half the schools must be below average." The obvious response is "Why not strive to be the best?"

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

J.C.
This forum and this thread is about college hockey and how it will change. [For the terminally dense it's "Whether it will change?"] Neither this site nor this thread is about me, my honors and awards, past employment, or the lack thereof. Try to remember this.

College hockey is changing. It is gaining fans in new geographic areas. It is finding more access to cable TV coverage. It is setting single-game attendance records. It is suffering increasing numbers of "early departures."
Ticket prices are soaring. Minimum admission requirements for hockey recruits are minimalized (you can't get lower than "400" on an SAT.) Profits are soaring from team copyrighted clothing and accessories. Still you reactionaries chant, "There are no substantial change in college hockey. There's no reason to suspect college hockey will follow the path of other college sports which faced identical pressures in the past. There is no reason to discourage the abuses other college sports suffer."

J.C.: If you remain fascinated by my college career or my credentials and life story in general please indicate your interest and I will put you in touch with my ex. You two can Twitter. You have much in common.
"

Pegleg,
when you say
"It is suffering increasing numbers of "early departures."
what exactly do you mean. We have established that the GSR is going up meaning few hockey players are leaving early. So does that mean your decrepit mind is unable to process that fact? That you are an "English as a second language learner" and no comprende? Or, do you just mean that you are going to ignore all facts and make sh_i_t up as you go? Just curious?

Send me her e-mail, I would love to talk to with her. I am of the suspicion I know why she left, just want to confirm.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Tiger (Princeton?) fan: It is possible for a private university to include and direct state colleges within its organization and still maintain high standards and a quest for academic excellence. Elitists such as you mock public education yet eagerly accept and commonly seek public funding.

FYI... Read much?
My screen-name is Tigerfan86-87 and my location is Rochester, New York. Put 2 and 2 together and come up with Princeton? Certainly possible, but it does say right below my screen name something to the effect of: R!!!...I!!!...T!!! Get it, now?

And I certainly wasn't making any elitist or mocking statements about state-funded colleges, just pointing out that there is a part of Cornell University that isn't actually Ivy League, that's all. Of course all universities and colleges are striving for academic excellence the best they can. I certainly wouldn't want my kids to attend a school that touts striving for mediocrity. That being said, some schools achieve a higher level of excellence than others for many different reasons, most of which are money-related. I am not an Ivy League person nor do I look down my nose at state schools (my father teaches at one), but it's somewhat obvious that Ivy League > State School, no matter who you ask.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

FYI... Read much?
My screen-name is Tigerfan86-87 and my location is Rochester, New York. Put 2 and 2 together and come up with Princeton? Certainly possible, but it does say right below my screen name something to the effect of: R!!!...I!!!...T!!! Get it, now?

And I certainly wasn't making any elitist or mocking statements about state-funded colleges, just pointing out that there is a part of Cornell University that isn't actually Ivy League, that's all. Of course all universities and colleges are striving for academic excellence the best they can. I certainly wouldn't want my kids to attend a school that touts striving for mediocrity. That being said, some schools achieve a higher level of excellence than others for many different reasons, most of which are money-related. I am not an Ivy League person nor do I look down my nose at state schools (my father teaches at one), but it's somewhat obvious that Ivy League > State School, no matter who you ask.

Rats. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were kidding around, given the rather public feud between Keith Olbermann (Cornell Ag School) and Ann Coulter (Cornell Arts School) regarding Cornell colleges, the state of NY, and the Ivy League. Guess not - better check your facts.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

College hockey is changing. It is gaining fans in new geographic areas. It is finding more access to cable TV coverage. It is setting single-game attendance records. It is suffering increasing numbers of "early departures." Ticket prices are soaring. Profits are soaring from team copyrighted clothing and accessories.

If all this is true, then why aren't dozens of schools sprouting new men's D-1 hockey teams? I'll tell you why: because they're not even profitable enough to pay for the additional women's team that would be required by Title IX. Gee, I guess they're not that profitable after all, despite all those dozens of dollars flooding in from plastic megaphone sales...

It is also possible for a college or university, state or private, to maintain both a hockey program, high standards, and a quest for academic excellence.

Which is what we've been saying ALL ALONG - so glad you finally agree with us. Can you stop posting now?

 

[HoosierBBall_GopherHockey]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

If all this is true, then why aren't dozens of schools sprouting new men's D-1 hockey teams? I'll tell you why: because they're not even profitable enough to pay for the additional women's team that would be required by Title IX. Gee, I guess they're not that profitable after all, despite all those dozens of dollars flooding in from plastic megaphone sales...


Which is what we've been saying ALL ALONG - so glad you finally agree with us. Can you stop posting now?

I think he may be seeing it is possible, but we have not reached that point yet.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Pegleg,
when you say
"It is suffering increasing numbers of "early departures."
what exactly do you mean. We have established that the GSR is going up meaning few hockey players are leaving early. So does that mean your decrepit mind is unable to process that fact? That you are an "English as a second language learner" and no comprende? Or, do you just mean that you are going to ignore all facts and make sh_i_t up as you go? Just curious?

Send me her e-mail, I would love to talk to with her. I am of the suspicion I know why she left, just want to confirm.

J.C.: The way you persist in writing about me rather than college hockey makes me wonder if you are striving to take her place.

BTW: The GSR rate includes former students who have not graduated and may never graduate. The NCAA slyly named the "Graduation Success Rate"
and then defined it to include former students who have never graduated from any college or university. It's a pretty dumb trick, but it seems to have completely fooled some people . . .

"There are two types of statistics: lies and ****ed lies." The GSR belongs in the latter category.

 

[Dirty]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

You make Chris "Corky" Burke look like Albert Einstein.

 

[CLS]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

...
Which is what we've been saying ALL ALONG - so glad you finally agree with us. Can you stop posting now?

Well played!

And not only did he come to that realization but he also said

. . . I'm biased.

 

[Patman]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

J.C.: The way you persist in writing about me rather than college hockey makes me wonder if you are striving to take her place.

BTW: The GSR rate includes former students who have not graduated and may never graduate. The NCAA slyly named the "Graduation Success Rate"
and then defined it to include former students who have never graduated from any college or university. It's a pretty dumb trick, but it seems to have completely fooled some people . . .

"There are two types of statistics: lies and ****ed lies." The GSR belongs in the latter category.

no you don't.... cite those definitions EXACTLY.

People lie... statistics don't.

 

[komey1]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

BTW: The GSR rate includes former students who have not graduated and may never graduate. The NCAA slyly named the "Graduation Success Rate"
and then defined it to include former students who have never graduated from any college or university.

Got a link that explains that?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

This thread is being taken with a grain of entertainment salt, especially given the poster-in-question's original argument on the other thread that was hi-jacked.

Does it need change academically? I don't think so. Yes, some players are below average, but, *gasp* that's how an average is created! It's not that half are below average, as the average would then be a median. Also, with players leaving, people leave contracts early both inside and outside college sports. So what? College hockey is still a stepping stone, not a professional league.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Rats. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were kidding around, given the rather public feud between Keith Olbermann (Cornell Ag School) and Ann Coulter (Cornell Arts School) regarding Cornell colleges, the state of NY, and the Ivy League. Guess not - better check your facts.

I believe I stated earlier that I do not know all the facts and was hoping actual Cornell folks could elaborate. What I do know (and had no idea prior) is from the following exchange I had with a co-worker who went to Cornell (some sort of science major, microbiology maybe). When I made a comment about how they must be pretty smart if they graduated from Cornell, they replied that they didn't go to "that Cornell", or something to that effect. Of course I asked what that meant and I got a rather vague explanation about the situation that boiled down to that there was an Ivy League Cornell and another, apparently not-as-prestigious college in the same place under the same name. Again, I didn't claim to "have the facts".

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

J.C.: The way you persist in writing about me rather than college hockey makes me wonder if you are striving to take her place.

BTW: The GSR rate includes former students who have not graduated and may never graduate. The NCAA slyly named the "Graduation Success Rate"
and then defined it to include former students who have never graduated from any college or university.

I call B.S. Show me that definition. All I find is GSR is the number of students that graduate within 7 years. The GSR takes into accounts transfers and does not "penalize" a school by counting it as "not graduating" but instead moves it to the school to which they transfered. The GSR counts graduates period. Unless you have a citation I am inclined to not believe you given your history of beinging.........well, wrong.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

I call B.S. Show me that definition. All I find is GSR is the number of students that graduate within 7 years. The GSR counts graduates period. Unless you have a citation I am inclined to not believe you given your history of beinging.........well, wrong.

If you never troubled yourself to seek out the NCAA's definition of "Graduation Success Rate," you naturally but incorrectly would assume "Graduation" in this context actually means someone graduates. Until you research the actual NCAA definition of "GSR," you should not use that statistic as the foundation of your argument.

Here's the citation and quote you required. This definition also appears in a PDF on the NCAA "GSR webpage" but my Acrobat Reader 9.3 is acting up.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaa...hletes/education+and+research/academic+reform
[click on "academic reform" then click on "Division I academic success rate"]
Right hand column, second paragraph:

"The GSR also allows institutions to subtract student-athletes who leave their institutions prior to graduation as long as they would have been academically eligible to compete had they remained." [ie. They don't drop out, they vanish.]

Eliminating student athletes who drop out in good standing belies the title "GRADUATION success rate" and distorts the "success rate."

 

[komey1]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Here's the citation and quote you required. This definition also appears in a PDF on the NCAA "GSR webpage" but my Acrobat Reader 9.3 is acting up.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaa...hletes/education+and+research/academic+reform
[click on "academic reform" then click on "Division I academic success rate"]
Right hand column, second paragraph:

"The GSR also allows institutions to subtract student-athletes who leave their institutions prior to graduation as long as they would have been academically eligible to compete had they remained." [ie. They don't drop out, they vanish.]

Eliminating student athletes who drop out in good standing belies the title "GRADUATION success rate" and distorts the "success rate."

So basically a school is not punished if a student goes pro (vanish?) but is in good academic standing and would have. Just how exactly does that help your arguement? They cannot subtract out "bad" students that go pro.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

So basically a school is not punished if a student goes pro (vanish?) but is in good academic standing and would have. Just how exactly does that help your arguement? They cannot subtract out "bad" students that go pro.

Because according to his logic, unless every single hockey player stays 4 years, gets straight As, graduates summa cum laude, and becomes a Rhodes Scholar, then the school has not achieved academic excellence and the hockey program should be disbanded and replaced by a major junior team. If the players don't achieve all that, then their time in college was totally wasted and they shouldn't have bothered.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

If you never troubled yourself to seek out the NCAA's definition of "Graduation Success Rate," you naturally but incorrectly would assume "Graduation" in this context actually means someone graduates. Until you research the actual NCAA definition of "GSR," you should not use that statistic as the foundation of your argument.

Here's the citation and quote you required. This definition also appears in a PDF on the NCAA "GSR webpage" but my Acrobat Reader 9.3 is acting up.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaa...hletes/education+and+research/academic+reform
[click on "academic reform" then click on "Division I academic success rate"]
Right hand column, second paragraph:

"The GSR also allows institutions to subtract student-athletes who leave their institutions prior to graduation as long as they would have been academically eligible to compete had they remained." [ie. They don't drop out, they vanish.]

Eliminating student athletes who drop out in good standing belies the title "GRADUATION success rate" and distorts the "success rate."

I stand corrected. You are correct, the GSR is actually exactly what you are looking for......the % of students that fail out. So when the same number of students fail out of a non-scholarship hockey program as a scholarship program.....how does that fit into your argument again? Wait, what exactly is your argument again..hockey is bad and only retards can be student athletes?