Survey : Which would make you prouder ?

[Blue Hen]

...This is only for graduates of a D1 football playing university.

A) Your Alma Mater's football program features student-athletes that are cerebrally and academically comparable to the general student body. These players can speak coherently, read and write on the college level , do their own work, are enrolled in legitimate majors, and graduate. These players are also good campus and community citizens, rarely getting in trouble. The team , typically, wins 6-8 football games per season, is usually competitive, sometimes 'ranked' (low), awarded a minor PSEG trip in most seasons, and produces occasional NFL players.

..........or.....

B) Your Alma Mater's football team, typically, wins 10-13 games per season, is highly 'ranked' , competes for mythical national championships, appears in big money PSEGs most seasons, plays on national TV most of the time and produces lots of NFL players....many of whom opt for the draft as underclassmen. Most of your players are hidden in phony 'no fail' majors and courses of study and rely on an army of tutors and academic support people to get through any legitimate college work that may be required. The teams' stars , typically, are reading at the 6th grade level ...or below and can barely verbalize a coherrent thought. Even with the constant monitoring of the 'life skills' support staff , provided by the athletic dept., many of your players consistently engage in thuggish behavior.......on and off campus.


Which of these hypothetical profiles of your university's football program would make you prouder ?

[EvilVodka]

so pick one extreme or the other?

I suppose A would make me prouder, but I like to see football teams I cheer for win...as a football fan, B is definately more exciting

[AJBuckeye]

That is like asking do you want to be a fan of Stanford or a fan of USC. Every football fan in America would rather be a fan of USC regardless of academics.

[Blue Hen]

This isn't a survey for "every football fan in America". As stated in the post, it's for graduates of D1 FB playing universities, that participate in this forum.

[AJBuckeye]

I graduated from tOSU. Watching the Buckeyes win 13 games with less than stellar academic profiles is more appealing than watching a 7 - 7 team with 12 academic all americans.

[Blue Hen]

Fair enough..........just curious about folk's values

[Stumpy Stew]

To be honest, I want A. While winning is great, first and foremost, it is still a univerisity, and it's job is to educate. And I don't mind some of the players getting a college education because of football that they normally wouldn't be able to get. But I don't want thugs or criminals.

And my alma mater, Applachian St., is doing that. The majority, if not most, are doing the school work and are good students with no major arrests or embaressments. And they are playing winning football and back to back national champions.

Rember, DIV I football school grads. You didn't specify BS or FCS. hehe

[FLORIDA HERD FAN]

This choice is too easy: A

[AJBuckeye]

Fair enough..........just curious about folk's values
Not really sure what this has to do with values....
I graduated with a EE degree from tOSU. The program has a very good reputation and has certainly helped me in my profession. If my football program has football players with liberal arts\physical education I don't see that have much impact on my education or how it is perceived.

To answer the question again I would take a guy like Troy Smith (Communications Major) and Ted Ginn (Human Development and Sciences Major) any day of the week over a 4.0 Premed mediocre QB and a Rhode Scholar WR who runs a 4.7 40. Ted Ginn and Troy Smith are not academic all americans but they did meet their academic requirements and were absolutely phenomenal with regards to representing the university. If you feel differently then I don't think you are being true to yourself.

When you talk about values I have issues with players and programs who cheat the system. I also have a problem with the Marcus Vick type of player who have monumental character flaws. These types of players reflect poorly on your football program as well as your university.

[Blue Hen]

only relates to very 'general' values regarding how we would prefer our university's fb to operate...given these two limited, simple, models to choose from.

Glad to see that A) winning moderately with 'class' is the preferred model, so far....over
B) winning big with no class

[HellYeahHokie]

The poll is flawed.

It's like asking whether I prefer the political philosophy of Ayn Rand or Karl Marx.

Most people would likely pick something in between, because there are examples of successful football teams that fall in between. I certainly don't want "B", but I also don't want "A" either. If I wanted to cheer for a team that won 6-7 games a year and went to a crappy bowl, I'd be a UVa fan...but they have thug players too.

[Blue Hen]

...but if you had to choose, HYH, which would make you most proud of your alma mater?.... moderate success with class and integrity or big success with fraud/sleaze ?

[aufan59]

B

A football program that sustains all athletics with heaps of money, which allows for all other sports to sustain top of the line facilities. This allows for my school to have a better chance to be very competitive in other sports. Not to mention the huge exposure for the school of a consistent program.

The only downside is that people will see your Football team as a bunch of 18-22 year old males acting like ..18-22 year old males.

Whats the worse they can behave? I don't see OSU fans that ashamed and they've produced players like Maurice Clarrett. Hell, they have players that choke the opposition and it hasn't really left an embarrassing scar on their school. They actually seem pretty proud of their team.

Illinois leads the Fulmer Cup(http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/?p=1787 for more info) with 24 points, yet I'm sure loyal CFB fans didn't even know or care about their player's legal trouble.

So should I be ashamed of .5% of the student population who brings millions of dollars and tons of national expose to my school because they do things that nobody cares about?

I'd rather be proud of a strong athletic program which consists of many other sports with one 'bad spot' if you can even call it that.

[HellYeahHokie]

Sorry Hen. The question is stupid.

It's more like asking "Would like like a piece of unbuttered toast, prepared by Mother Theresa, or would you rather a perfectly cooked filet mignon, that was prepared by Charlie Manson after he killed the chef"

What's the point. Nobody is going to choose B, but nobody is really going to be happy with A.

If you are just looking for an answer, then I'd pick A. But the question is moot.

[buckeyejim]

Is there a "bad guy" who might be playing football at Vanderbilt right now and just about every year? Probably. Is there a very bright student athlete playing football at "Football Factory U" in 2007? Yes. There is no such thing as a college football team completely made up of thugs or saints.

[Blue Hen]

So you choose ' b ' ?...fine.

[Blue Hen]

Common knowledge.....these are very small polar opposite models. My reasonable question (imo) is simply this : If your universitiy's FB program had to fit one or the other of these profiles...which would, personally, make you prouder of your alma mater ?

[Blue Hen]

It's hypothetical.....not "stupid". If your University's football program was either model A or Model B, which would make you prouder ? You chose A. I would choose A.

[HellYeahHokie]

Well, stupid is too strong a word. But I get these type of questions in political surveys. And I tell these pollsters that I find their questions an insult to my intelligence, because it's obvious from the way they are written, they are designed to get a specific answer.

For example:

Do you think teachers get paid enough, or do you support raising taxes to increase funding for public schools?

I tell pollsters I think that question is stupid and I won't answer it. (Pollsters just love me)

But you're not a pollster. You are someone I know. So I shouldn't have called it stupid.

So here's my hypothetical answer: I'd be prouder of something in between.

[buckeyejim]

Unfortunately I'm not eligible to vote since I did not attend a major university that fields a football team. Oh well!?!

[ZOOMBAG]

I simply cannot be as happy for a football factory as I can a legitimate academic school. I'm a big Nebraska fan since the late 70's and an Air Force Academy grad. I enjoy seeing Nebraska win, but they have done so with some pretty marginal characters over the years. I am much prouder of Air Force's three final top 10 finishes since my graduation that Nebraska's three national championships because AFA was a legit top 10 team with legitimiate student atheletes.

[ZOOMBAG]

I am much more proud of the 1998 Air Force Academy's 12-1 top 10 team than 1997 Nebraska's 13-0 national championship.....

[ZOOMBAG]

As a general fan, however, I would have to think, that most of us are much prouder of those Big 10 champion Northwestern teams than the countless runs of football factory champions from Ohio St and Michigan. Same with Stanford's PAC 10 title several years back. And most of the nation's college fans think something special of Service Academy teams that finish in the final top 25.

If you don't, then it indeed does say something about your values.

[Yoda]

"A" would make me most proud.

"B" would make me most happy. Well, not exactly, but you know what I mean.

Yoda out...

[HoyaSooner]

Sorry Hen. The question is stupid.

It's more like asking "Would like like a piece of unbuttered toast, prepared by Mother Theresa, or would you rather a perfectly cooked filet mignon, that was prepared by Charlie Manson after he killed the chef"

What's the point. Nobody is going to choose B, but nobody is really going to be happy with A.

If you are just looking for an answer, then I'd pick A. But the question is moot.

Actually, I'd choose "B" on that one. Steak is good.

[HoyaSooner]

I went to OU for undergrad, Georgetown for law school. Both are D1 schools, though you'd never know it were you to see Georgetown play. Now, all the G'Town football players were legitimate students (you know, with the exception of guys who only got in because they were legacies, with their parents having gone there and contributed tens of thousands of dollars to ensure that junior could go to a prestigious school -- there are a lot of f***tards at Georgetown, or any other such private university, believe me). Georgetown also had a grand total of about one thousand people go to Homecoming. It's really just not very exciting at all to watch them get their asses beat by the local junior high. To quote Patches O'Hoolihan, "it's like watching a bunch of retards try to hump a doorknob." Of course, I could say the same thing about OU during the Blake years.

Of course, I could turn this question around as well. Adrian Peterson would never have been admitted to Georgetown. His scores weren't high enough, and his parents weren't rich enough. Not that people with lower test scores than AD weren't admitted to G'Town, but their families had enough money to smooth things over. Instead, he went to a lowly "football factory", by all accounts was not a particularly scholarly sort while he was there, and then became a multi-millionaire. As I was watching him on NFL draft day, seeing him get drafted by the Vikings, and get more money than I'll ever see in my life, I just couldn't bring myself to see how OU had wronged him. If every school was Georgetown, however, then AD would be working at a Home Depot somewhere instead of getting millions to play in the NFL.

Listen, some guys aren't going to be rocket scientists, just like I don't get to run a 4.4 40. That's just the way life is. I don't feel like my education has been "de-valued" just because some football players who normally couldn't be admitted got to go there because they run fast.

["14-O" U.]

Well, stupid is too strong a word. But I get these type of questions in political surveys. And I tell these pollsters that I find their questions an insult to my intelligence, because it's obvious from the way they are written, they are designed to get a specific answer.

For example:

Do you think teachers get paid enough, or do you support raising taxes to increase funding for public schools?

I tell pollsters I think that question is stupid and I won't answer it. (Pollsters just love me)

But you're not a pollster. You are someone I know. So I shouldn't have called it stupid.

So here's my hypothetical answer: I'd be prouder of something in between.

Great answer. I must really be bored to even skim this thread again. When I saw the original post a while ago I figured the poll was so stupid (sorry, "stupid" is appopriate for this "poll") it wasn't worth further comment. It's good to see someone else gets it.

[TommyTrojan]

...This is only for graduates of a D1 football playing university.

A) Your Alma Mater's football program features student-athletes that are cerebrally and academically comparable to the general student body. These players can speak coherently, read and write on the college level , do their own work, are enrolled in legitimate majors, and graduate. These players are also good campus and community citizens, rarely getting in trouble. The team , typically, wins 6-8 football games per season, is usually competitive, sometimes 'ranked' (low), awarded a minor PSEG trip in most seasons, and produces occasional NFL players.

..........or.....

B) Your Alma Mater's football team, typically, wins 10-13 games per season, is highly 'ranked' , competes for mythical national championships, appears in big money PSEGs most seasons, plays on national TV most of the time and produces lots of NFL players....many of whom opt for the draft as underclassmen. Most of your players are hidden in phony 'no fail' majors and courses of study and rely on an army of tutors and academic support people to get through any legitimate college work that may be required. The teams' stars , typically, are reading at the 6th grade level ...or below and can barely verbalize a coherrent thought. Even with the constant monitoring of the 'life skills' support staff , provided by the athletic dept., many of your players consistently engage in thuggish behavior.......on and off campus.


Which of these hypothetical profiles of your university's football program would make you prouder ?

I am much more proud of (A). As a Northwestern grad, and at school when NU went to the Rose Bowl (and ironically lose to USC), it was one of the biggest thrills ever!