Hawkspeak RE: Participation

[aik]

If the student athlete isn't getting it done in the classroom, of course he isn't going to play. There are policies beyond the head coach's control that will regulate that. But not knowing the playbook and being late to meetings? That's a tough one to swallow as I imagine if a talented player wants to see the field he will work to remedy that. Something's not quite right with Hawk's rehearsed rant. But what the hell would I know about it, as I have neither children nor coaching experience.

 

[Duff Man]

As for academics and the whole NFL (Crabtree) analogy: Sorry, but the NCAA does hold schools accountable for academics. For either good or bad, CU is tougher, academically, than most ranked programs. So keeping a kid on track at CU is more difficult than, say, at Miami. We aren't like Florida State where kids can take on line exams with the answers provided ahead of time, :lol:. At least I hope not.

Yeah, CU is a big time academic school. So freaking tough. You do not really believe that, do you?

CU is a decent school. Nothing more, nothing less. We may not coddle the players as much as some schools do, but do not pretend as if the players are going through the rigors of the Ivy League or anything.

 

[DBT]

Yeah, CU is a big time academic school. So freaking tough. You do not really believe that, do you?

CU is a decent school. Nothing more, nothing less. We may not coddle the players as much as some schools do, but do not pretend as if the players are going through the rigors of the Ivy League or anything.

If it's so ****ty, why do you go there?

As far as athletics go, CU's priorities towards academics are some of the most stringent in the Big XII. For instance, Texas' grad rate is around 50%. Texas is a very good school. However, for athletics, they turn the other cheek. CU's administration does not.

 

[TheRoyale90]

If it's so ****ty, why do you go there?

As far as athletics go, CU's priorities towards academics are some of the most stringent in the Big XII. For instance, Texas' grad rate is around 50%. Texas is a very good school. However, for athletics, they turn the other cheek. CU's administration does not.

Texas and the other powers know that the student/athlete paradigm is a fairy tale. D1 football and basketball is a business and Texas knows what it takes to get paid. Win. I guess we can take comfort in how morally superior we are to them when they're beating us down again and again.

 

[Duff Man]

If it's so ****ty, why do you go there?

As far as athletics go, CU's priorities towards academics are some of the most stringent in the Big XII. For instance, Texas' grad rate is around 50%. Texas is a very good school. However, for athletics, they turn the other cheek. CU's administration does not.

It's not ****ty and it's not as great as you make it out to be. It is a pretty good school, but you act like CU is lucky if we get football players to pass a class.

 

[buffalo30]

If the student athlete isn't getting it done in the classroom, of course he isn't going to play. There are policies beyond the head coach's control that will regulate that. But not knowing the playbook and being late to meetings? That's a tough one to swallow as I imagine if a talented player wants to see the field he will work to remedy that. Something's not quite right with Hawk's rehearsed rant. But what the hell would I know about it, as I have neither children nor coaching experience.

You are right. Something isn't right with his rehearsed rant, because he didn't need to say it at all. It's more fluff and BS for anyone fool enough to believe anything he says. All of that stuff, going to class, getting passing grades, being on time, being a decent citizen are all expected anyway. Talking about those things and having to say you are "doing things right" is more excuses and smoke screens for losing.

 

[SBG]

Texas is a great school, but they also have the advantage of being able to cherry pick just about all of the top FB talent in the area. They don't need to make exemptions, although I'm sure they do.

You can say the same about Cal and UCLA, but their programs must compete with USC and ND to get the top talent. ND doesn't get non-quals and USC can pick whomever they wish given that they don't have to report anything about how students get in.

 

[DBT]

It's not ****ty and it's not as great as you make it out to be. It is a pretty good school, but you act like CU is lucky if we get football players to pass a class.

You aren't getting my point. CU holds student athletes to a higher standard than most other Big XII schools. It isn't about whether or not CU is better or worse. It is that CU expects its athletes to perform in the classroom. It is that CU has higher standards for enrolling student athletes than most other schools. Just as GB said, Hawkins has lost more kids to academics than he ever expected he would.

 

[Chilly]

You are right. Something isn't right with his rehearsed rant, because he didn't need to say it at all. It's more fluff and BS for anyone fool enough to believe anything he says. All of that stuff, going to class, getting passing grades, being on time, being a decent citizen are all expected anyway. Talking about those things and having to say you are "doing things right" is more excuses and smoke screens for losing.

By how many programs? Just look at the SEC The "Class of the NCAA" for football and tell me just how many of those programs are expecting this from their kids?

 

[Liver]

By how many programs? Just look at the SEC The "Class of the NCAA" for football and tell me just how many of those programs are expecting this from their kids?

oh fer chrissakes, you act like we want CU to suddenly become 'bama or pre-death penalty smu...

let's just throw a quick list of PEER institutions together, shall we? each is a state school:

michigan
cal
texas
ucla
virginia

what do all those schools have in common, other than they'd all kick our Buffs' arses up and down the field on any given saturday?

answer: all are widely regarded as academically superior to CU.

you can win and win big and still not go totally ****ing rogue like bama and the sec. ****, i should probably even add florida to that list above...

 

[Chilly]

oh fer chrissakes, you act like we want CU to suddenly become 'bama or pre-death penalty smu...

let's just throw a quick list of PEER institutions together, shall we? each is a state school:

michigan
cal
texas
ucla
virginia

what do all those schools have in common, other than they'd all kick our Buffs' arses up and down the field on any given saturday?

answer: all are widely regarded as academically superior to CU.

you can win and win big and still not go totally ****ing rogue like bama and the sec. ****, i should probably even add florida to that list above...

So answer me this, and no I don't know the answer, but I think I do for some of these schools.

How many of these schools you listed have relaxed admissions standards for the student athletes compare to CU?

The may be widely regarded as academically superior for the average non-athlete student. But I am not so sure I agree with that statement when it comes to admission requirements for student athletes.

And yes I agree both can be done at CU and Hawkins is failing miserable at achieving both goals.

 

[Junction]

oh fer chrissakes, you act like we want CU to suddenly become 'bama or pre-death penalty smu...

let's just throw a quick list of PEER institutions together, shall we? each is a state school:

michigan
cal
texas
ucla
virginia

what do all those schools have in common, other than they'd all kick our Buffs' arses up and down the field on any given saturday?

answer: all are widely regarded as academically superior to CU.

you can win and win big and still not go totally ****ing rogue like bama and the sec. ****, i should probably even add florida to that list above...

:yeahthat:

This idea that somehow saying you expect a coach at CU to actually win some ****ing games somehow means that you want to turn CU football over to the illegitimate child of Jerry Tarkanian and Barry Switzer who was raised by Jackie Sherrill and educated under the guidance of Dennis Erickson is just ridiculous.

Clearly it is unacceptable to have an unethical, cheating, morally bankrupt program at CU, even if it means winning. But it is also unacceptable to have an uncompetitive program that does things right off the field. The expectation at an institution like CU should be to field a team that conducts itself under the standards expected of the student body at large and at the same time putting a winning product on the field.

And no, that might not be easy. Which is why it pays a million dollars a year. They rarely hand out paychecks like that to people doing something easy and low risk. If you're looking for easy and low risk, a position as a Wal-Mart greeter might be of interest. But it's not going to pay like being a Big XII head football coach... :lol:

 

[LABuffalo]

Hawk owes the scholarship players who commit to play for Colorado over other schools. They are supposed to be coached up so if possible they can move on to the next level in the NFL. When these kids commit it is a two way street. And Hawk's first responsibility if to those players. The walkons are being offered a second chance for a scholie that they couldn't earn in the normal process. There are an abnormal number of walkons on the team right now. And it's no wonder since it has become a haven for them to earn a second shot at a scholie. They are highly motivated knowing that if they are good citizens not only are they going to play but earn a ship as well.

 

[leftybuff]

I remain in awe of Hawk's ability to say monumentally stupid things...

Yes, there is a baseline of performance off the field to play...it's called staying eligible. After that, you put your best players on the field.

Thanks Coach Cubmaster for effing that up too.

 

[AlferdJasper]

You mean, if you were coach, you would play the bigger, stronger, faster guys?


what a concept.

 

[DBT]

oh fer chrissakes, you act like we want CU to suddenly become 'bama or pre-death penalty smu...

let's just throw a quick list of PEER institutions together, shall we? each is a state school:

michigan
cal
texas
ucla
virginia

what do all those schools have in common, other than they'd all kick our Buffs' arses up and down the field on any given saturday?

answer: all are widely regarded as academically superior to CU.

you can win and win big and still not go totally ****ing rogue like bama and the sec. ****, i should probably even add florida to that list above...

I do not know the answer to your question regarding the schools you listed. What I do know is that the great academic institution, the University of Texas, has a grad rate less than 50% while CU hovers around 78% to 80%.

Here is the deal that I'm talking about, and I've written this before. The University of Colorado has a scoring system based on GPA and test scores which they use to qualify kids. The standards are pretty rigorous and a lot of kids, in general, do not qualify. By oldest had a 2.9 gpa and 27 on his ACT, not great, for sure, and was turned down by CU. (He made it in after a couple of years at Metro).

However, CU will also allow a small percentage of kids in as exceptions based on things like extra curricular activities and such. This exception is how CU used to get academically challenged athletes in. The school, as a whole, will allow something like 10% of students in.

Here is where the rule changed under GB. Whereas the football team used to be able to include a number of athletes under the overall school percentage, the rule changed to say that they could only allow the percentage of scholarships to match the overall percentage.

So, say we have 20 scholarships and the school has 2,000 enrolees. That meant that 200 kids could be allowed in under the exception thing. If the football team had 8 kids that could only get in under the exception, those 8 came out of the 200. The new rule is that the football team can only allow 10% of their annual scholarship guys to be exceptions. So, out of 20 ships, only 2 can now be allowed in under the exception thing.

I'm not sure what the rules are for the other programs you mention, but I suspect they are much more lenient the ours.

 

[leftybuff]

I do not know the answer to your question regarding the schools you listed. What I do know is that the great academic institution, the University of Texas, has a grad rate less than 50% while CU hovers around 78% to 80%.

Here is the deal that I'm talking about, and I've written this before. The University of Colorado has a scoring system based on GPA and test scores which they use to qualify kids. The standards are pretty rigorous and a lot of kids, in general, do not qualify. By oldest had a 2.9 gpa and 27 on his ACT, not great, for sure, and was turned down by CU. (He made it in after a couple of years at Metro).

However, CU will also allow a small percentage of kids in as exceptions based on things like extra curricular activities and such. This exception is how CU used to get academically challenged athletes in. The school, as a whole, will allow something like 10% of students in.

Here is where the rule changed under GB. Whereas the football team used to be able to include a number of athletes under the overall school percentage, the rule changed to say that they could only allow the percentage of scholarships to match the overall percentage.

So, say we have 20 scholarships and the school has 2,000 enrolees. That meant that 200 kids could be allowed in under the exception thing. If the football team had 8 kids that could only get in under the exception, those 8 came out of the 200. The new rule is that the football team can only allow 10% of their annual scholarship guys to be exceptions. So, out of 20 ships, only 2 can now be allowed in under the exception thing.

I'm not sure what the rules are for the other programs you mention, but I suspect they are much more lenient the ours.

If what you say is true, and I don't know one way or the other, someone at CU is saying admitting 5-6 more kids who have athletic skills but a few black marks on their academic record is somehow going to dim the University's academic beacon?:wow:

 

[DBT]

If what you say is true, and I don't know one way or the other, someone at CU is saying admitting 5-6 more kids who have athletic skills but a few black marks on their academic record is somehow going to dim the University's academic beacon?:wow:

Yep. Those were some major changes under the Hoffman regime. Honestly, I cannot say for sure whether or not they've been relaxed. But I've never heard that they had been. Also, I'm not sure if the percentage is applied to the overall AD or each program within the AD. In other words, if the AD gives out 80 ships a year, meaning 8 kids can be academic exceptions, could all 8 apply to football? Also, remember, if this rule is still in place, it really hurts basketball as well as all other athletic varsity sport programs.

 

[BlackNGold]

If what you say is true, and I don't know one way or the other, someone at CU is saying admitting 5-6 more kids who have athletic skills but a few black marks on their academic record is somehow going to dim the University's academic beacon?:wow:

I do not see DBT's post usually because he is the only allbuffer on my ignore list. But is did see your quote of his post and can tell you that once again he has a lot of misinformation. CCHE sets the admissions standards for the public colleges and universities in the State of Colorado and there is a matrix that give you an index score. There is a window for students not meeting the index score - for CU that window is 14% for the years 2007 to 2010. The pool for calculating the window has always been the full pool of enrollees. There has never been a separate allocation for athletes. Transfers are calculated differently. There is no new rule from CCHE that specifies anything to do with the limiting the football team to the same percentage as the rest of the university - and it is not happening at this time.

Since CU had ~ 5750 freshmen enrolled in 2008 the school could admit 805 that did not meet the requirements. So allowing 12 football players in would not be a big impact.

Here is the link if you are interested.

CCHE Requirements.

 

[Duff Man]

The standards to get into CU for the average student are not rigorous. I love CU as a school, but some people tied to the school have a very inflated view of good the school actually really is in the grand scheme of things.

 

[DBT]

I do not see DBT's post usually because he is the only allbuffer on my ignore list.

Ouch. :lol:

 

[DBT]

I do not see DBT's post usually because he is the only allbuffer on my ignore list. But is did see your quote of his post and can tell you that once again he has a lot of misinformation. CCHE sets the admissions standards for the public colleges and universities in the State of Colorado and there is a matrix that give you an index score. There is a window for students not meeting the index score - for CU that window is 14% for the years 2007 to 2010. The pool for calculating the window has always been the full pool of enrollees. There has never been a separate allocation for athletes. Transfers are calculated differently. There is no new rule from CCHE that specifies anything to do with the limiting the football team to the same percentage as the rest of the university - and it is not happening at this time.

Since CU had ~ 5750 freshmen enrolled in 2008 the school could admit 805 that did not meet the requirements. So allowing 12 football players in would not be a big impact.

Here is the link if you are interested.

CCHE Requirements.

My information came from what was reported in the news at the time. If it has changed or if I got it wrong, so be it. But I sure as hell didn't make it up. How could I?

 

[DBT]

Please read BlackNGold's link and tell me where I'm wrong. I can tell you. The window is 20%, not 10%. Go to paragraph 5.05.01 regarding the "window." But I also believe that the school can amend as they see fit. Paragraph 5.06: "Institution MAY make admission decisions based on other criteria..."

Anyway, I do not believe BlackNGold has linked anything that contridicts me. But I will admit, I'm going strictly by memory, which is probably not a great defense, :lol:. If I'm wrong, I have no problem with being proven wrong. But BlackNGold obviously has some sort of problem with me.

 

[AlferdJasper]

ISince CU had ~ 5750 freshmen enrolled in 2008 the school could admit 805 that did not meet the requirements. So allowing 12 football players in would not be a big impact.

Haven't any idea whether this statement is true or not, but for the argument. Encouraging 12 football players to enroll who cannot meet traditional standards is setting the team up for GPA failure. One imagines that somehow kids who didn't dazzle anyone in high school are going to get enough mentoring, tutoring and advising to excel in classroom, but past behavior does indicate future success.

Yes, bring along a few kids who can do the work but didn't have grades and test scores, but to bring as many as 12? Dangerous. If they don't make it, you wasted their time, and the teams and prevented another player from being in that spot for the four years available.

 

[TheRoyale90]

Haven't any idea whether this statement is true or not, but for the argument. Encouraging 12 football players to enroll who cannot meet traditional standards is setting the team up for GPA failure. One imagines that somehow kids who didn't dazzle anyone in high school are going to get enough mentoring, tutoring and advising to excel in classroom, but past behavior does indicate future success.

Yes, bring along a few kids who can do the work but didn't have grades and test scores, but to bring as many as 12? Dangerous. If they don't make it, you wasted their time, and the teams and prevented another player from being in that spot for the four years available.

Yes. That about sums hawk up. 15-29. Oh.. you were defending the status quo. Carry on.

 

[The Guest]

I think Dan Hawkins would be a good fit for one of the service academies. They have the very type of hard working, disciplined over achievers he's looking for. Those young men have to be, when they graduate they won't go on to the league, they'll be leading our young men into combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. DH has totally unrealistic expectations of the players at typical D1 universities. I absolutely believe that bigger, stronger, faster trumps hard working, film studying gym rats. Not saying that's how it ought to be, just saying that's how it is.

:lol::lol:Ummmm, you're clearly working with a different caliber of Academy Grad than I am.

 

[The Guest]

Yeah, CU is a big time academic school. So freaking tough. You do not really believe that, do you?

CU is a decent school. Nothing more, nothing less. We may not coddle the players as much as some schools do, but do not pretend as if the players are going through the rigors of the Ivy League or anything.

If it's so ****ty, why do you go there?

Really? You have to ask?:smile:

 

[The Guest]

I do not see DBT's post usually because he is the only allbuffer on my ignore list.

Sorry for the triple post, but this thread is full of win.

You don't see DBT's posts? Does that mean you don't see the threads he starts? Brother, you're missing out on about 60% of Allbuffs content!

EDIT: Just to be clear that we're talking volume, not necessarily content, here.

 

[FlatironsBuff]

My information came from what was reported in the news at the time. If it has changed or if I got it wrong, so be it. But I sure as hell didn't make it up. How could I?

You could because it is a well known fact that 93% of 'facts' people quote are in fact made up on the spot.

 

[Buffnik]

You could because it is a well known fact that 93% of 'facts' people quote are in fact made up on the spot.

61% of Amish women disagree with you.