Well, since the last part of your post is irrelevant let's focus on the important part: that we could decrease the standards and graduate at the same levels. Yes. That's what I believe. What you conveniently left out of my argument is the idea that we can and should do what great schools are supposed to do: do a great job of teaching. We can up our game for athletics BOTH on the field and in the classroom. If we're half the academic institution we claim to be, we should put our money and efforts where our egos are and teach the crap out of these kids and graduate lesser qualified kids at the same levels. THAT would be teaching. Anybody can teach the brainiac kids.
6-6 is a yawner, sorry all !!!
- Thread starter Catbeast
- Start date
Well, since the last part of your post is irrelevant let's focus on the important part: that we could decrease the standards and graduate at the same levels. Yes. That's what I believe. What you conveniently left out of my argument is the idea that we can and should do what great schools are supposed to do: do a great job of teaching. We can up our game for athletics BOTH on the field and in the classroom. If we're half the academic institution we claim to be, we should put our money and efforts where our egos are and teach the crap out of these kids and graduate lesser qualified kids at the same levels. THAT would be teaching. Anybody can teach the brainiac kids.
I agree. Please just teleport Rev back to 1979 where he's happy getting creamed by guys wearing J-Pads.
I think NU and Fitz's goal is to shape young men while competing for championships.
And yes, Fitz is compensated in part because he does a great job maintaining high academic and social standards amongst his players. Like it or not, that side is ALWAYS going to matter more at NU than just about any other P5 school.
That's entirely reasonable, but that's at odds with the poster I was responding to originally, who specifically said that competing for championships was not part of the goal.
Sure, and I know that's not going to change. But winning is the priority, and Fitz would rightfully be fired if he went 2-10 every year, even with a 100% graduation rate and no players in trouble. Winning is everything at a lot of schools. It's certainly not everything at NU, but it's still important. If it wasn't, we wouldn't belong in FBS, never mind the Big Ten.
The question is what would happen in the opposite situation: if we were in the B1G title conversation every year but our standards visibly slipped. Assuming no firing for cause (NCAA violations, rampant criminality like at Baylor, etc.), would that coach still be fired for failing to maintain NU's standards?
I'm not advocating for that situation but I think it's an interesting question.
I guess it would depend on what "visibly" really means. A 5 or 10 point decrease in APR (or similar decrease in other metrics) seems like it would be worth it if it meant competing for title more regularly. A 50 or 100 point decrease would likely be grounds for a firing, championships notwithstanding.
For a program to reach the next level it must first start to be consistent. Meaning, bowl-games, year-in and year-out. That builds the program! Nothing else will, it is not a light switch this will be step-by-step to the top of the division.
The start of the season was disappointing. However, if you reference 2014 and how that season ended a repeat would be a major setback. This win against UI enables additional practice time which means the program can start building for next year starting today.
As frustrating as it seems sometimes NU does not have the depth needed. But, having a consistent bowl team year-in and year-out should improve the current position. In addition, the new facilities open soon... I think this was huge not to loose the season. The team fought hard - and keeps the program moving forward.
If the team does in fact have a 7 or 8 win season next year. The program will have raised the floor and moved closer to the top.
The start of the season was disappointing. However, if you reference 2014 and how that season ended a repeat would be a major setback. This win against UI enables additional practice time which means the program can start building for next year starting today.
As frustrating as it seems sometimes NU does not have the depth needed. But, having a consistent bowl team year-in and year-out should improve the current position. In addition, the new facilities open soon... I think this was huge not to loose the season. The team fought hard - and keeps the program moving forward.
If the team does in fact have a 7 or 8 win season next year. The program will have raised the floor and moved closer to the top.
They don't despise us. They just claim they do publicly to present themselves to others here as the truest NU fans.
In truth, they thank God we're here - because echo chambers get boring when everybody agrees with each other about how great NU is doing when they all know in their hearts that that's not true. That's why I can ignore them and not read a word they say and not care a whit, whereas they simply cannot stop themselves from reading and responding to every word I say.
They'll protest, of course. But they just prove the truth when they do....
I'll take 3 B1G championships in 6 years and 3 losing records to go with it. I'll take 3 B1G championships in 10 years and 7 losing records to go with it.
Then we should join the Ivies. Be competitive in conference and eliminate any dream of D1 relevance. Heck, makes it easier to get to the dance.
I am not glad you're here; you post the same nonsense over and over again, under different handles. The boards dramatically improved when DocCatsFan left, and they will improve when you're gone as well...
Is that above .500? (I know the answer but want to make this easy for Ed.)
This was in response to the post that these teams have been handing us our lunch. It is not true. It shows that whether the measurement is this decade or the last two it has been a near even matchup with all of these teams.
Maybe this helps put this in context
Me loves multi quote almost as the new archives!Provided one example of a "true student-athlete" by name, then included a lot of others. How is that deflection exactly?
Seems dumb to me.
And now Barnett is getting credit for Walker's 2000 season as well?
Because your response was in response to this from Styre:
"Northwestern is in the process of spending over two hundred million dollars to build a football practice facility. Explain how that is necessary to "prepare young men for life."
So what does "hey" have to do with his question?
Answer: nothing.
Hence, deflection - because you totally ignored to topic. That's how.
Ok, fine, even if I was respond to the portion of the post that posited that there is no such thing as a true student-athlete anymore and you just chose to ignore that part in order to be an asshole.
Spending that kind of money will attract better athletes who will win more football games and, by your own logic, raise NU's standing by attracting more applicants so that NU can drive better admission ratios and keep rising up the rankings. Better?
Maybe this helps put this in context
So from the original post, those teams are not blowing us out every year. Thanks for putting it in perspective.
I saw a post where someone mentioned we should lower our academic standards like that would magically make us a better team.
Is the University spending any money on the athletic facility or is it just coming from a few rich alums?
Let's drag dimbulbs through NU like a car through a car wash, pressuring them all the way!
How about doing a better job recruiting bright kids? That way, bright NU students aren't spending $70K a year to sit next to and have to "learn from" giant "Woolly dimbulbs" in class. Or is that too radical of a solution?
Other coaches are also graded on APR and championships; it's just a different place on the continuum at Alabama or Texas.
Frankly, I don't think that "teaching non-brainiac kids" is part of the mission at Northwestern. Teaching average to above-average students is the job, I'm sure you would agree, of our large public universities. klemman has spoken very cogently about the opportunity that OSU is able to provide to fringe qualifiers precisely because that is part of OSU's mission - to provide a great education to students who finish in the top X percentiles of their class at Ohio public high schools.
Teaching and inspiring and widening the perspective of brainiacs is NU's undergrad mission.
Ok, sure, you got me, us, them...awh, forget it. Someone will actually believe you.
He recruited the players. We saw what Walker did with his own recruits.
Somehow, I'm not that surprised that there are some who would prefer a series of 6 win seasons and lower tier bowl appearances in favour of a few B1G Championship rings. It is essentially the defining characteristic of the Walker years, and I know many on this board seem to feel those were good years for the NU program. To each their own. Personally, if we're going to suck, I'd prefer we not suck at it and really suck, and not pretend we are any thing more than mediocre.
I see this question was already answered above. So you're turning up the sarcasm meter because I broke this off at 2000 instead of 2006? Wow. And by the way, anything since 2000 by any standard qualifies as relatively recent history. I am NOT an octogenarian and can remember games from the late '50s and early '60s, which I guess judging by your post might be astounding to you. With posts such as this you begin to cross the line from legitimate argument into the troll category.
The 2000 'championship' (two losses, didn't play Ohio State, but still a trophy) was 99% due to an ahead of its time offensive scheme. If GB were in charge, I probably would have seen Sam Simmons lining up in the backfield and running dives in 2000, like I did for the final home game of 1998 (looks like it was too early in the internet to find an archived box).
Randy Walker and Kevin Wilson's willingness to innovate won that championship. The talent was okay. Anderson hung around for a few years in the NFL. I don't think any of those O-linemen had a career - Austin King was the closest. (Essex, Strief, etc. we're Walker recruits.)
Ok Pa, disagree with you = troll. Then color me troll. And I was not even born in the 50's and 60's. So if you can remember games from then, you have an amazing childhood memory...or you are an octogenarian.
Anywho, yes, it has been covered and the team hasn't really excelled this decade.
Considering that many klanners like to blame the fanbase, and the largest nearby source of fanbase is that group attending, I suspect the last few years means more than the epic battles of the 50s. But what do I know, Im just a troll w NU parchment and a letterjacket. And you?
So you won't be adding me out? Bummer. Would you like to know yours? I'd be lying to say I pay close enough attention.
Its also the least compatible with those of you that like to call me a non fan, a troll, whatever. Well, too bad. It's true.
I'm just trying how to square that kind of record would work for people like you who think we should be competing for championships annually. Would we be lauding the coaches 2 out of 7 seasons and calling for them to be fired after the other 5?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Just saying there are a lot of really good non-alum contributors here that probably feel a twinge when they see someone attacking another's status as a fan based on their status as an alum.
And I kinda twinge when called a troll or non fan. So I offer a deal, the Board collectively agree to lay off the label troll or non fan for posters that they disagree, and I will stop running out my status and maybe we can convince woody to stop spouting his attendance streak. No? Then why do I care what those non alums that insult me think?
You are not a troll because you disagree with me. You are a troll if you post nonsensical crap just for argument's sake. An octogenarian would be at least 80 years old and born in 1936 or earlier. It is entirely possible to be 10 or more years younger, which I am, and remember events from the late '50s and early '60s very well. I take it your "NU parchment" wasn't in math — that or you don't know the meaning of octogenarian. My original post was quoting records from 2000 on, which by definition is the last few years and not "the epic battles of the '50s." And me? I have a master's degree from Northwestern. Big deal. So do thousands of other people. So post on, and I'm sure your inevitable last word will follow.
Similar threads
