Show me the money--Players turning pro

[Osorojo]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

ah, five kids who won the national championship at BU last year have played in the nhl this year....

or were you talking about some other professional hockey league?!?!

Of all the hockey players who left a Division I school this year to turn pro what percentage left without a degree? What percentage left before successfully completing even two years of study?
It's safe to dismiss the argument "Some of them went back and finished their degree." as a cop-out. The argument that college is not the only path to success in life is validated by observation, as is the argument that not everyone is suited for college. However, it's foolish to take youngsters who have neither the desire nor the ability to complete a college education and admit them to develop their hockey skills and fill seats in the rink. That's what junior hockey is for. Furthermore, the money, effort, and classroom space expended on non-academic wannabe pro hockey players would be much better spent to educate intellectually talented and academically oriented youngsters from all economic classes. This is the mission of colleges, after all.
Yeah, I know, some fortunate souls are both scholars and athletes. It hardly seems fair that one individual should have so much talent but that's how it goes, and why college athletes deserve our respect and admiration. It is NOT elitist to demand college athletes be both athletes AND scholars. In fact, this is the only legitimate reason for the existence of college athletics.

 

[Back check]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

It was reported in D3 thread that Eric Selleck of Oswego State signed with Florida Panthers organization.

 

[ts8801]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Of all the hockey players who left a Division I school this year to turn pro what percentage left without a degree? What percentage left before successfully completing even two years of study?
It's safe to dismiss the argument "Some of them went back and finished their degree." as a cop-out. The argument that college is not the only path to success in life is validated by observation, as is the argument that not everyone is suited for college. However, it's foolish to take youngsters who have neither the desire nor the ability to complete a college education and admit them to develop their hockey skills and fill seats in the rink. That's what junior hockey is for. Furthermore, the money, effort, and classroom space expended on non-academic wannabe pro hockey players would be much better spent to educate intellectually talented and academically oriented youngsters from all economic classes. This is the mission of colleges, after all.
Yeah, I know, some fortunate souls are both scholars and athletes. It hardly seems fair that one individual should have so much talent but that's how it goes, and why college athletes deserve our respect and admiration. It is NOT elitist to demand college athletes be both athletes AND scholars. In fact, this is the only legitimate reason for the existence of college athletics.

So what's it like in La La Land?

and EDIT: So no college is better than some but not completing college? There are a lot of people who go to college and don't finish, whats your take on them? should they never have been allowed in? Just because they don't finish their degree doesn't mean they didn't have the ablility or desire to complete their college education. A better opportunity arose for them. Would you say to Bill Gates? he left after one year I believe, he has done well for himself. What about Dick Schulze, he didn't even attend college and started one of the most successful companies in the Country.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

..... Furthermore, the money, effort, and classroom space expended on non-academic wannabe pro hockey players would be much better spent to educate intellectually talented and academically oriented youngsters from all economic classes. This is the mission of colleges, after all...

every school accepts students who don't attend there.

there is a place to learn for any youngster from any class.

i know many college graduates who, even though they have a degree, are ****ing stupid.

--so what's your point?

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

every school accepts students who don't attend there.

there is a place to learn for any youngster from any class.

i know many college graduates who, even though they have a degree, are ****ing stupid.

--so what's your point?

I'll go slowly:

Junior hockey programs do not recruit unwilling, untalented hockey players, pay their expenses, and provide them with courses in higher education with the hope an educational program will help recruits graduate into skilled professional hockey players.

Why in blazes should colleges recruit unwilling, untalented students, pay their expenses, and provide them with hockey programs in the hopes a hockey program will help them become scholars and graduates?

Please note: Junior hockey programs waste their own money when they make foolish decisions; nearly every college receives substantial public funding, so guess whose money they waste when they make foolish decisions?

Just how ARE things in la-la land?

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Please note: Junior hockey programs waste their own money when they make foolish decisions; nearly every college receives substantial public funding, so guess whose money they waste when they make foolish decisions?

Nearly every college? How many are private colleges. Wonder how much public funding Harvard receives?

Heck you can't even make that argument about some Public schools.


What color is the sky in your world.

 

[Onion Man]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Please note: Junior hockey programs waste their own money when they make foolish decisions; nearly every college receives substantial public funding, so guess whose money they waste when they make foolish decisions?

Maybe this idiotic response is a primary reason why you could not get into a private university and ended up at a public school.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Maybe this idiotic response is a primary reason why you could not get into a private university and ended up at a public school.

Did you attend Brown? If so, were you a legacy admittance?

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I'll go slowly:

too fast.... slower, please.

 

[KnowItAll]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Of all the hockey players who left a Division I school this year to turn pro what percentage left without a degree? What percentage left before successfully completing even two years of study?
It's safe to dismiss the argument "Some of them went back and finished their degree." as a cop-out. The argument that college is not the only path to success in life is validated by observation, as is the argument that not everyone is suited for college. However, it's foolish to take youngsters who have neither the desire nor the ability to complete a college education and admit them to develop their hockey skills and fill seats in the rink. That's what junior hockey is for. Furthermore, the money, effort, and classroom space expended on non-academic wannabe pro hockey players would be much better spent to educate intellectually talented and academically oriented youngsters from all economic classes. This is the mission of colleges, after all.
Yeah, I know, some fortunate souls are both scholars and athletes. It hardly seems fair that one individual should have so much talent but that's how it goes, and why college athletes deserve our respect and admiration. It is NOT elitist to demand college athletes be both athletes AND scholars. In fact, this is the only legitimate reason for the existence of college athletics.

you seem pretty intelligent.

that has no place on this forum.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Nearly every college? How many are private colleges. Wonder how much public funding Harvard receives?

Heck you can't even make that argument about some Public schools.


What color is the sky in your world.

Even the most heavily endowed private universities are not above taking money from the government (public money), and more than a little government financial support is offered to and accepted by private schools. Both industry and government give financial support to endowed schools in hopes of attracting intelligent and well-educated graduates into their ranks. Until I got to the ad hominem responses I was surprised so many posters on this site seem to be ignorant of this fact.

There is a tiny chance that developing more and better athletes and entertainers will make our nation stronger and more financially competetive. This remote possibility is not sufficient cause for institutions of higher education to misrepresent payments to athletes as "scholarships" [scholar?], or to subordinate academics to athletics in the recruiting of "students".

Many colleges and universities do a wonderful job of prioritizing academics and athletics. Schools in the Ivy League are generally good examples of this. Many schools do a lousy job of keeping athletics in perspective. They know who they are, and so do we; the college rules stretchers and benders, purveyors of gut courses, phony majors, high-paying, no-show jobs, and other miserable scams. Fans of such programs deny such abuses exist or attempt to trivialize the importance of these abuses. No surprises here; many fans of college teams tend to respond like primitive tribesmen, not rational citizens.

As to sky color in my world? Usually black at night, red at sunset, pink at dawn, gray when it rains, white when it snows, occasionally blue, and too many in-between shades to list. I'll bet when you posed this question you were thinking the sky in your world is BLUE, and that's that. Be honest, that was what you were thinking, wasn't it? You might profitably expand your view of reality concerning college athletic programs as well as sky colors.

 

[ts8801]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I'll go slowly:

Junior hockey programs do not recruit unwilling, untalented hockey players, pay their expenses, and provide them with courses in higher education with the hope an educational program will help recruits graduate into skilled professional hockey players.

Why in blazes should colleges recruit unwilling, untalented students, pay their expenses, and provide them with hockey programs in the hopes a hockey program will help them become scholars and graduates?

Please note: Junior hockey programs waste their own money when they make foolish decisions; nearly every college receives substantial public funding, so guess whose money they waste when they make foolish decisions?

Just how ARE things in la-la land?

Even the most heavily endowed private universities are not above taking money from the government (public money), and more than a little government financial support is offered to and accepted by private schools. Both industry and government give financial support to endowed schools in hopes of attracting intelligent and well-educated graduates into their ranks. Until I got to the ad hominem responses I was surprised so many posters on this site seem to be ignorant of this fact.

There is a tiny chance that developing more and better athletes and entertainers will make our nation stronger and more financially competetive. This remote possibility is not sufficient cause for institutions of higher education to misrepresent payments to athletes as "scholarships" [scholar?], or to subordinate academics to athletics in the recruiting of "students".

Many colleges and universities do a wonderful job of prioritizing academics and athletics. Schools in the Ivy League are generally good examples of this. Many schools do a lousy job of keeping athletics in perspective. They know who they are, and so do we; the college rules stretchers and benders, purveyors of gut courses, phony majors, high-paying, no-show jobs, and other miserable scams. Fans of such programs deny such abuses exist or attempt to trivialize the importance of these abuses. No surprises here; many fans of college teams tend to respond like primitive tribesmen, not rational citizens.

As to sky color in my world? Usually black at night, red at sunset, pink at dawn, gray when it rains, white when it snows, occasionally blue, and too many in-between shades to list. I'll bet when you posed this question you were thinking the sky in your world is BLUE, and that's that. Be honest, that was what you were thinking, wasn't it? You might profitably expand your view of reality concerning college athletic programs as well as sky colors.

How many D1 programs don't turn a profit? I would assume most of those programs take in make a profit which is then used to fund other sports programs. Also here's a fun fact for you, a school can not use the government funding for athletics unless it was specifically stipulated in the bill like ones used to build or upgrade stadiums.

 

[leswp1]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I'll go slowly:

Junior hockey programs do not recruit unwilling, untalented hockey players, pay their expenses, and provide them with courses in higher education with the hope an educational program will help recruits graduate into skilled professional hockey players.

Why in blazes should colleges recruit unwilling, untalented students, pay their expenses, and provide them with hockey programs in the hopes a hockey program will help them become scholars and graduates?

Please note: Junior hockey programs waste their own money when they make foolish decisions; nearly every college receives substantial public funding, so guess whose money they waste when they make foolish decisions?

Just how ARE things in la-la land?

What a cynical view. Can't speak for any of the other programs but the guys on the team I root for are not eligible unless their academics are in good standing~ coach rule.(not an Ivy school). We lose recruits because they can't get in. The grad rate is pretty decent. Probably better than the avg population of the school.

Also I saw Ben Smith signed- no linky- it was in the paper.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

What a cynical view. Can't speak for any of the other programs but the guys on the team I root for are not eligible unless their academics are in good standing~ coach rule.(not an Ivy school). We lose recruits because they can't get in. The grad rate is pretty decent. Probably better than the avg population of the school.

Also I saw Ben Smith signed- no linky- it was in the paper.

How so cynical? The primary mission of junior hockey programs is to develop professional hockey players. Junior hockey does not recruit indifferent, untalented hockey players nor offer recruits college courses. Those are facts, and facts are neither cynical nor benevolent.

Applying precisely the same logic to colleges and universities: The primary mission of colleges and universities is to develop educated graduates. (fact)
No valid arguement has appeared to suggest colleges and universities should compromise their academic goal by permitting athletic potential and performance to supercede academic potential and performance. This conclusion seems much more realistic than cynical. We don't always like the truth, but it's suicidal to deny it.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Even the most heavily endowed private universities are not above taking money from the government (public money), and more than a little government financial support is offered to and accepted by private schools.

I don't suppose you have any evidence for this statement?

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

I don't suppose you have any evidence for this statement?

Are you kidding? How about: the fact that schools have to abide by Title IX in sports is an indicator that they receive government funding. Title IX (in its entirety) reads, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

All D-1 hockey schools have to abide by Title IX; therefore, all D-1 hockey schools receive Federal funding. QED.

If you had a truly private university that did not accept federal government funding, you could field 10 football teams and nothing else.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

Are you kidding? How about: the fact that schools have to abide by Title IX in sports is an indicator that they receive government funding. Title IX (in its entirety) reads, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

All D-1 hockey schools have to abide by Title IX; therefore, all D-1 hockey schools receive Federal funding. QED.

If you had a truly private university that did not accept federal government funding, you could field 10 football teams and nothing else.

That's absurd. What that says is if a school accepts a student who took out a federal back student loan then they have to abide by that rule. A loan is not receiving public funds, nor is a grant. The money is given to the student not the school, and is in the case of a loan paid back with a net of ZERO public monies going to any school public or private.

Again, is their evidence that a private school receives funding from the public, and I will specify for clarity, directly?

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

That's absurd. What that says is if a school accepts a student who took out a federal back student loan then they have to abide by that rule. A loan is not receiving public funds, nor is a grant. The money is given to the student not the school, and is in the case of a loan paid back with a net of ZERO public monies going to any school public or private.

Again, is their evidence that a private school receives funding from the public, and I will specify for clarity, directly?

As far as I know, Title IX does not apply just because individual students have federal loans - its applicability means that the school itself DOES directly receive federal funding.

Edit: here's where NSF's research funding goes. Loads of private schools on those lists...

 

[BUT09]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

That's absurd. What that says is if a school accepts a student who took out a federal back student loan then they have to abide by that rule. A loan is not receiving public funds, nor is a grant. The money is given to the student not the school, and is in the case of a loan paid back with a net of ZERO public monies going to any school public or private.

Again, is their evidence that a private school receives funding from the public, and I will specify for clarity, directly?

When I got my Financial Aid package, it included a Stafford Loan, which is a federal loan - but it was given to the school to award, and given directly to the school. I never saw the money. I think that counts as the school receiving funding, even if it is just specifically for loans.

 

[jcarter7669]

Re: Show me the money--Players turning pro

As far as I know, Title IX does not apply just because individual students have federal loans - its applicability means that the school itself DOES directly receive federal funding.

Edit: here's where NSF's research funding goes. Loads of private schools on those lists...

NSF funding goes to investigator's that submit grants. Not to Universities.

Keep trying.