-
Posts
14459 -
Joined
-
Days Won
22
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by Huckleberry
-
-
4 minutes ago, Armybrat said:
I thought Stanford did not allow lower admission standards for their athletes. At least back in the day that was the case. Maybe they loosened up somewhere along the line?
That's always been bullshit.
Glad to help.
-
3
-
2
-
-
On 3/11/2019 at 7:40 PM, Gil Bang said:
McGregor's a piece of shit and he's gonna get deported. And the US will be a better place the minute it happens.
Is it a bad sign when your attorney obviously tries to avoid saying you're innocent in his official statement on the incident?
http://www.espn.com/mma/ufc/story/_/id/26247519/surprised-mcgregor-grabbed-phone
McGregor's defense attorney, Sam Rabin, issued the following statement on Monday.
"Last evening, Conor McGregor was involved in a minor altercation involving a cell phone that resulted in a call to law enforcement," Rabin said. "Mr. McGregor appreciates the response of law enforcement and pledges his full cooperation."
-
Does the FA ban people for life? That guy deserves a lifetime ban from any FA soccer match. Okay, maybe just the EPL and EFL. I guess National League and below matches would be okay.
-
"per me"
I finally found an attribution even dumber than everyone around here who gives credit to TFloss for other people's work.-
1
-
-
You are attempting to argue that insurance companies should not be allowed to charge a higher premium on life insurance for professional daredevils.I would imagine that "behavioral decisions" are conditioned to some extent by environmental factors, and thus are not totally unencumbered by factors out of the individual's control. Thus, there is really on a difference in degree in the amount of control an individual has over those behavioral factors and something like his or her genetics. Given that we are discussing a difference in degree and not category, there is really no sound basis in asserting that insurance companies should be able to discriminate on the basis of one and not the other.
It's an absurd argument to make.
As for the specific example at hand, the unvaccinated generally aren't responsible for their health insurance premiums until they're old enough to have learned better and gotten themselves vaccinated. -
2 hours ago, texifornia said:
I thought it was pretty clear that it's a lower bar than for non-athletes, but still higher than your garden variety college admissions process. Similar to how the Ivies need their recruits to collectively hit an average academic target score (created by blending test scores and GPA).
The scandal lets the dumb rich kids freeload on the smarter athletes and get rolled into that athletic average.
You may know it, but many don't. Otherwise their administration wouldn't feel the need to lie about it and then get called out by their own alumni.
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/02/22/the-price-of-athletics-at-stanford/
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of this trade-off is admissions standards for athletes. Many of my friends at Stanford with whom I have discussed athletic admissions are under the impression that academic standards for admission are essentially the same for athletes and non-athletes, even in high revenue sports like football. This impression is pushed by the athletics department. When Duke University economist Charles Clotfelter gave a presentation at Stanford claiming that universities were making academic concessions, including relaxed admissions standards, in order to have successful athletic programs, Stanford’s senior associate athletic director responded: “I beg to differ on that. We haven’t lowered our academic standards.” Football coach David Shaw has repeated this mantra: Responding to critics claiming that Stanford had relaxed its academic standards to achieve football success, he claimed, “We have the same academic standards.”
But this is not actually true. Although we do not have comprehensive statistics comparing athletic admits to regular admits, some data does exist. Looking at a group of 10 elite colleges and using SAT scores (on the 1600 point scale) as a proxy for academic ability, Princeton researchers found that being a recruited athlete gave an admissions boost equivalent to scoring 200 points higher on the SAT. We can also look at high school scouting reports for football players. Looking at the Stanford recruitment class of 2009 (this year was quite typical in terms of test scores), the median football player who reported scores got an 1800 out of 2400 on the SAT and 26 on the ACT. Based on university statistics, this puts the football median comfortably in the bottom quartile and likely somewhere in the bottom 10 percent in terms of test scores. Stanford football players are quite smart, but the data suggests they place near the bottom of Stanford’s admits.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Fozzz said:
I assume you have no problem then with insurance companies using genetic information to adjust premiums.
I assume you're drunk if you think characteristics you're born with are the same as behavioral decisions.
-
7 minutes ago, Fozzz said:
That sounds totalitarian.
Seems like you have fast-forwarded your consciousness to where government runs health care and simultaneously removed your knowledge of actuarial science.
-
Certainly would make sense to me to have vaccine information in premium calculation.
-
I get that it used to be done, but seems strange at this point. At least it's limited to the points places in order to earn the point. Otherwise you'd see all the cars in 11th and lower positions coming in for new tires on the third to last lap to make one big run at it on fresh tires and low fuel loads. Not that they'd have a real high probability of hitting the fastest lap but there'd be no reason not to try. And if a front running car had some sort of wing damage early in the race and found themselves in something like 12th place with 3 laps to go they absolutely would do that.
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, satyanash said:
Suddenly I'm glad Texas has struggled to recruit IMG kids... not that it did any good for men's tennis
So we've been led to believe for years that Stanford doesn't lower admissions requirements for recruits, even in football.
Today we find out that is complete and total bullshit. It's apparently worth hundreds of thousands of dollars for their fucking SAILING coach to say you're a recruited athlete in order to help with the admissions process.
The entire brand and aura they've created around getting admitted as a football recruit is one hundred percent bullshit.
-
1
-
-
I really hope you're just a bit, because otherwise I'd have to think that your history of incredibly stupid posts is a reflection on your intelligence.
-
4
-
-
-
Center is the only one listed from the Western District of Texas, so I assume that means he's the only UT guy involved. At least as of now.
-
Any chance we can tie Shaka to the admissions scandal? Who's a walk-on at the end of our bench?
-
1
-
-
But that's also simply school policy. The so-called recruits would still have to hit NCAA minimums for eligibility. The fact that the school might admit a lesser student if they're an athlete has nothing to do with the NCAA (see the Stanford bogeyman on the recruiting forum).
-
Haven't read anything on that "proposal" but it would also seem at first glance to favor people who are already in a better financial situation. Poorer people tend to have children younger and therefore won't have as much social security savings as richer people who have kids later.
-
This seems like a purely FBI and legal issue. To be honest, it sounds like the athletic programs were hurt, if anything, by the scheme. The entire concept was that unworthy athletes were being admitted as members of teams they weren't good enough to be on. Now obviously they probably just "quit" the team once they were enrolled, but I honestly don't see why the NCAA would punish anyone. It's completely up to each athletics program what students they allow on their teams.
-
13 hours ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:
Um, you do know that quite a bit of that was related to being a 1 deep team at many positions?
This is completely wrong.
When Texas was leading by 14+ points in the fourth quarter last season they were outscored 80-3. When the game was closer or Texas was losing in the 4th quarter Texas was outscored 68-55. Depth explains a very small amount of the situation. Inability to put teams away was a much bigger factor.
The only points Texas scored when up by 14+ in the fourth quarter last season were from a field goal against Kansas to stretch the lead to 24-7.
-
1
-
-
Well a Mormon guy has to make each of his candles feel special and give them each individual attention.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Well I can name one pregame show I won't be watching.
-
Is that really going to have anything to do with the basketball situation? Hard to sneak a basketball recruit into a major school who doesn't actually play basketball. I would imagine it's more like the Loughlin deal with the crew team. Basically squads that nobody pays attention to anyway.
-
Texas A&M in SEC with Big 12 recruits: 28-11 overall, 13-11 conference
Texas A&M in SEC with SEC recruits: 32-20 overall, 17-15 conferenceMissouri in SEC with Big 12 recruits: 28-12 overall, 16-8 conference
Missouri in SEC with SEC recruits: 24-25 overall, 11-21 conference-
2
-
-
Ha, that guy deleted his Twitter, I assume hoping he could do so before people found even worse stuff on it.
When you make me root for Russell Westbrook and anything having to do with Oklahoma without reservation you have to be a real piece of shit.
-
3
-

Fire Shaka Smart
in Basketball
Posted
The Tech guys are cute, be nice to them. Reality will take care of things on its own.