• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Yahoo, Tattoos, and tOSU (1-year bowl ban, 82 scholly limit for 3 years)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
MaxBuck;1939769; said:
More sports means more scholarships, means more students are afforded the possibility of an excellent Ohio State education. Again, an excellent outcome.
Click to expand...
You don't get an excellent education merely by attending Ohio State. You get an excellent education by attending Ohio State and also being an excellent student. If Ohio State is a University that also happens to have a football team, I'm not sure it's beneficial to admit a lot of "student"/athletes. If Ohio State is a football program that happens to also have a University attached, then carry on.
 
Upvote 0
zincfinger;1939818; said:
... I'm not sure it's beneficial to admit a lot of "student"/athletes.
Click to expand...
As the parent of a former D1A athlete, I could not disagree more. The presence of collegiate athletes on a campus is a very good thing both for the athletes themselves and the student body at large. If this were not the case, Oberlin, Harvard and Williams Colleges (as an example) would not have varsity sports - they do, and they're very proud of the fact.

This doesn't mean it's a good idea to have a bunch of mercenaries who care nothing for the scholastic part of the equation (though some of these are inevitable), but in my experience that's a pretty small fraction of the total.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye;1939486; said:
Coach's cheat for one reason: to win
Click to expand...

I've read your arguments over the last few months and I've let many things slide. However, this little clip of tunnel vision is just too much for me.

You really have ZERO clue about player-coach relationships if you honestly believe that statement. ZERO. I am not going to get up on a soapbox here nor am I going to spill dozens of personal "feel good" stories. However, I will tell you that little snippet of yours is a broadstroked swipe that reeks of frustration and overwhelmed with ignorance.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;1939824; said:
As the parent of a former D1A athlete, I could not disagree more. The presence of collegiate athletes on a campus is a very good thing both for the athletes themselves and the student body at large. If this were not the case, Oberlin, Harvard and Williams Colleges (as an example) would not have varsity sports - they do, and they're very proud of the fact.

This doesn't mean it's a good idea to have a bunch of mercenaries who care nothing for the scholastic part of the equation (though some of these are inevitable), but in my experience that's a pretty small fraction of the total.
Click to expand...

This isn't a comment on OSU, but on top tier sports schools in general. The numbers vary from program to program, but football and basketball tend to have a fair number of mercenaries. The other sports tend to have mostly student athletes. I believe the main reason for this is the revenue potential of football and basketball. Schools like Oberlin, Harvard and Williams are not competitive in either football or basketball and probably never will be.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;1939824; said:
As the parent of a former D1A athlete, I could not disagree more. The presence of collegiate athletes on a campus is a very good thing both for the athletes themselves and the student body at large. If this were not the case, Oberlin, Harvard and Williams Colleges (as an example) would not have varsity sports - they do, and they're very proud of the fact.

This doesn't mean it's a good idea to have a bunch of mercenaries who care nothing for the scholastic part of the equation (though some of these are inevitable), but in my experience that's a pretty small fraction of the total.
Click to expand...
Please note that I put "student" in quotation marks. I'm completely in favor of having student/athletes on campus when you're talking about real students who are also athletes. It's when you're talking about athletes for whom the "student" part of the equation is nothing more than a euphemism, that I become a little leary about the arrangement.
 
Upvote 0
zincfinger;1939842; said:
Please note that I put "student" in quotation marks. I'm completely in favor of having student/athletes on campus when you're talking about real students who are also athletes. It's when you're talking about athletes for whom the "student" part of the equation is nothing more than a euphemism, that I become a little leary about the arrangement.
Click to expand...

That's such a small percentage it's hardly worth talking about. Of the thousands of kids who have participated in athletics at tOSU in the past few years, you can probably count the number who fit that description on one hand.
 
Upvote 0
Pheasant;1939851; said:
That's such a small percentage it's hardly worth talking about. Of the thousands of kids who have participated in athletics at tOSU in the past few years, you can probably count the number who fit that description on one hand.
Click to expand...
As I said above, it's a small percentage of the student body, and I'm not talking specifically about any former or current OSU student/athletes (although, I think to say that there are fewer than five "student"/athletes who have attended OSU in the past several years is pretty generous). Rather, I'm questioning the idea that embracing that euphemism for a small percentage is a good thing.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top