• 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!

Zach Smith (Official Thread)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
ORD_Buckeye said:
... I think a strong argument can be made that big time sports, particularly the foosball, far from being some crucial necessity to the university, are actually hurting the university.
Click to expand...

Typical comment of someone who fails to recognize that the mission of our great university is to support and nurture the growth of the entire individual, including academic, intellectual, artistic, physical and social aspects.

Ohio State graduates are likely much more well-rounded as a result of their collegiate experience, by and large, than graduates of Caltech (as an example). I think the OSU model is a terrific one, and attempts by pseudoelitists to change the model to "de-emphasize" the athletics are misguided.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck said:
Typical comment of someone who fails to recognize that the mission of our great university is to support and nurture the growth of the entire individual, including academic, intellectual, artistic, physical and social aspects.

Ohio State graduates are likely much more well-rounded as a result of their collegiate experience, by and large, than graduates of Caltech (as an example). I think the OSU model is a terrific one, and attempts by pseudoelitists to change the model to "de-emphasize" the athletics are misguided.
Click to expand...

not going to lie, I have been on this board so long I thought you said pedo-something-ist

:lol:

other than that, great post I agree.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck said:
Typical comment of someone who fails to recognize that the mission of our great university is to support and nurture the growth of the entire individual, including academic, intellectual, artistic, physical and social aspects.

Ohio State graduates are likely much more well-rounded as a result of their collegiate experience, by and large, than graduates of Caltech (as an example). I think the OSU model is a terrific one, and attempts by pseudoelitists to change the model to "de-emphasize" the athletics are misguided.
Click to expand...
I think the is true. I also think it’s true that at some smaller schools where athletic budgets are swelling and there is no means to pay for it that it might be detrimental to the school. But that’s not The Ohio State. We are exceptionally good at being a “football factory” and as such, it greatly helps the university.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck said:
Typical comment of someone who fails to recognize that the mission of our great university is to support and nurture the growth of the entire individual, including academic, intellectual, artistic, physical and social aspects.

Ohio State graduates are likely much more well-rounded as a result of their collegiate experience, by and large, than graduates of Caltech (as an example). I think the OSU model is a terrific one, and attempts by pseudoelitists to change the model to "de-emphasize" the athletics are misguided.
Click to expand...

Well said, and yes, I am very well rounded. :beer:
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck said:
Typical comment of someone who fails to recognize that the mission of our great university is to support and nurture the growth of the entire individual, including academic, intellectual, artistic, physical and social aspects.

Ohio State graduates are likely much more well-rounded as a result of their collegiate experience, by and large, than graduates of Caltech (as an example). I think the OSU model is a terrific one, and attempts by pseudoelitists to change the model to "de-emphasize" the athletics are misguided.
Click to expand...

You're confusing offering intramurals (and even a complete nerd school like CalTech or Chicago offers plenty of athletic opportunities to their students) with running big time D1 sports. Do you really think that operating a big time football program (full of "scholar-athletes" who couldn't even sniff admission without their athletic skills and who generally segregate themselves off both academically and socially from the larger student body) has any effect on how well rounded students are upon graduation. Nobody is graduating from Kenyon or Middlebury or Carleton as a well rounded individual? Do you think that an employer is going to say, sorry Cal-Tech guy, but that Alabama graduate is just so much more well rounded than you! " Do the majority of undergraduates at Ohio State who don't buy tickets graduate somehow less employable and lesser people than those who do? I knew kids at Ohio State who were diehard Buckeye fans and to this day still are but never made it past their second year. I knew people who could care less about it but have somehow managed to have become very successful (such as the general counsel for a Big 4 accounting firm). Some might leave as lifelong Buckeye fans, but that's about the extent of the football program's lasting impact on their lives. Good God, I've heard a lot of rationales for our collegiate sports-industrial complexes, but this may be the worst and most vapid.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
Do you think that an employer is going to say, sorry Cal-Tech guy, but that Alabama graduate is just so much more well rounded than you! "
Click to expand...
Depends on whether the employer is a Bama graduate himself. And whether he likes football. Would also depend on any other social connections like fraternity affiliation, etc. Just curious if you can hear the echo inside your bubble Ord? Like it or not, the world works on all kinds of connections you may never agree with and can never change.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
You're confusing offering intramurals (and even a complete nerd school like CalTech or Chicago offers plenty of athletic opportunities to their students) with running big time D1 sports. Do you really think that operating a big time football program (full of "scholar-athletes" who couldn't even sniff admission without their athletic skills and who generally segregate themselves off both academically and socially from the larger student body) has any effect on how well rounded students are upon graduation. Nobody is graduating from Kenyon or Middlebury or Carleton as a well rounded individual? Do you think that an employer is going to say, sorry Cal-Tech guy, but that Alabama graduate is just so much more well rounded than you! " Do the majority of undergraduates at Ohio State who don't buy tickets graduate somehow less employable and lesser people than those who do? I knew kids at Ohio State who were diehard Buckeye fans and to this day still are but never made it past their second year. I knew people who could care less about it but have somehow managed to have become very successful (such as the general counsel for a Big 4 accounting firm). Some might leave as lifelong Buckeye fans, but that's about the extent of the football program's lasting impact on their lives. Good God, I've heard a lot of rationales for our collegiate sports-industrial complexes, but this may be the worst and most vapid.
Click to expand...

So accounting for all the olympic sports that football pays for and some of the football players themselves, I hope are willing to concede that there are indeed many instances of the well rounded student athlete model being accomplished?

I personally think well rounded is always a better model than extreme to one end of the spectrum or the other.

If you are with those two assumptions then it's just flawed logic to arrive at athletics = no value
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
So accounting for all the olympic sports that football pays for and some of the football players themselves, I hope are willing to concede that there are indeed many instances of the well rounded student athlete model being accomplished?

I personally think well rounded is always a better model than extreme to one end of the spectrum or the other.

If you are with those two assumptions then it's just flawed logic to arrive at athletics = no value
Click to expand...

I absolutely believe that there can be well rounded student-athletes. Some sports (fencing is one) outperform the student body at large. And many football players fit the mode. Ryan Shazier comes to mind recently.

My issue is with the absurdity of the original post that says big time foosball is somehow necessary to producing well rounded graduates of the university. Do you really think that the Buckeyes are some catalyst for Ohio State producing more well rounded graduates than peer schools without successful football tradition (Minnesota, Texas) or no D1 football at all (UC-Davis, UC-Santa Barbara). Do our graduates do better than theirs because we're a football blueblood? Is their eduacation somehow less fulfilling? Are they less "well rounded" individuals? There's been some thoughtful posts here defending the presence of big time football. Max Buck's, however, was not among them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
Call me what you will, but we'll see who gets offered the coveted position of Abigail Wexner's stable boy.
Click to expand...

"Stable boy"

nod.gif
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
You're confusing offering intramurals (and even a complete nerd school like CalTech or Chicago offers plenty of athletic opportunities to their students) with running big time D1 sports. Do you really think that operating a big time football program (full of "scholar-athletes" who couldn't even sniff admission without their athletic skills and who generally segregate themselves off both academically and socially from the larger student body) has any effect on how well rounded students are upon graduation.
Click to expand...
Actually, yes, I think exactly that.

My daughter attended a very elite university that also had a robust D1 athletics program which admitted athletes who couldn't otherwise have matriculated there. She and the other students at the school got the chance to interact with those student-athletes who gave them a different perspective on a cohort of society they otherwise wouldn't have. The notion that the student-athletes "segregated themselves" from the student body at large is ridiculous. Do they preferentially socialize with other athletes? Sure, but they also attend classes and, as people like Austin Mack demonstrate, involve themselves in broader student activities on campus.

You appear to pine for Ohio State to become a sort of annex for the University of Chicago. Ain't going to happen. And though I have immense respect for Chicago, so do I for Ohio State. Forgive me for saying you don't appear to. If you did, you wouldn't take so many opportunities to depreciate the value of its athletics program in general, and the football program specifically, to the mission of the university overall.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck said:
Typical comment of someone who fails to recognize that the mission of our great university is to support and nurture the growth of the entire individual, including academic, intellectual, artistic, physical and social aspects.

Ohio State graduates are likely much more well-rounded as a result of their collegiate experience, by and large, than graduates of Caltech (as an example). I think the OSU model is a terrific one, and attempts by pseudoelitists to change the model to "de-emphasize" the athletics are misguided.
Click to expand...

ORD_Buckeye said:
You're confusing offering intramurals (and even a complete nerd school like CalTech or Chicago offers plenty of athletic opportunities to their students) with running big time D1 sports. Do you really think that operating a big time football program (full of "scholar-athletes" who couldn't even sniff admission without their athletic skills and who generally segregate themselves off both academically and socially from the larger student body) has any effect on how well rounded students are upon graduation. Nobody is graduating from Kenyon or Middlebury or Carleton as a well rounded individual? Do you think that an employer is going to say, sorry Cal-Tech guy, but that Alabama graduate is just so much more well rounded than you! " Do the majority of undergraduates at Ohio State who don't buy tickets graduate somehow less employable and lesser people than those who do? I knew kids at Ohio State who were diehard Buckeye fans and to this day still are but never made it past their second year. I knew people who could care less about it but have somehow managed to have become very successful (such as the general counsel for a Big 4 accounting firm). Some might leave as lifelong Buckeye fans, but that's about the extent of the football program's lasting impact on their lives. Good God, I've heard a lot of rationales for our collegiate sports-industrial complexes, but this may be the worst and most vapid.
Click to expand...

There are 1,038 student athletes at Ohio State out of more than 66,444 enrolled students. That is less than 1.6%. Personally, I don't feel all that rounded by the archery course I took to fulfill the basic education requirement. If 10% of students take part in intramural sports more than 1 year, I will be gobsmacked.

It's football season! Please stop this nonsensical bickering or we will lock this thread too.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top