Administrators need to start rethinking D1 athletics. The amount of money D1 sports consume is ridiculous and indefensible. And now this corruption.
Just the price tag to fly teams around to compete is absurdly expensive and bad for the environment.
I've been on the "No sports in college" thing since I was a college athlete. We used to talk about it when we ran. My gf at the time was on an academic scholarship and received less money than I did as a runner. Think about that. She was smart and a SCHOOL determined it would reward someone that could run kinda fast over someone that was smart and academically accomplished. A SCHOOL!
I think all sports should be club sports "affiliated" with the school, but in no way should the athletes on the teams be students, or required to be students.
The schools then get to market the teams just like they do now, only the pretense is gone. IF the school wants to give the athletes that are on their team a discount, fine, that's up to them.
Lefties don't care about the environment. They fly around everyday, some even on private jets. Yet, they preach that you and I should not and that we should not use gasoline and we should only use wind power. They own multiple homes that are being heated and cooled year round while homeless people are on the street. This story is just one example of the real lefty lifestyle and moral values.
Boys score better than girls. Of course mothers are going to help their girls in today's environment where they watch the view everyday where they are told that their daughter should outperform the sexist males.
Varsity Blues wrote:
Since it's almost all females, isn't the story nobody wants to talk about related to the fact that under Title IX. women's NCAA sports are a joke with many (most?) teams having multiple women who have no business being on a collegiate team (and often with a scholarship)? It was a lot easier sliding a non-athlete on a roster whose last several women had no business being on the team in the first place. Men's sports are much more competitive and generally don't have teams with multiple guys at the end of the bench who aren't NCAA caliber. At the end of the day, these non-athletes posing as fake athletes often took spots from "real" athletes who had no business being on an NCAA roster in the first place. It's not like any star recruits weren't recruited and accepted because of this.
Typical LetsRun post; poster one (Fogrunr) makes an erroneous statement, "The students were all girls, just one boy." Poster two (Varsity Blues) than uses false fact to attack his (and many others) favorite bete noir, Title IX . There were 13 boys and 19 girls involved. 9 boys and 14 girls were admitted due to athletic fraud and in some cases testing fraud as well . 3 boys were admitted as potential football players .
Boys are smarter wrote:
Boys score better than girls. Of course mothers are going to help their girls in today's environment where they watch the view everyday where they are told that their daughter should outperform the sexist males.
7 out of 13 boys and 11 out of 19 girls participated in testing fraud.
social media influencer WTF is a social media influencer
we are in the hand basket on the way to...
producing insipid ideas is a career path? wrote:
social media influencer WTF is a social media influencer
we are in the hand basket on the way to...
Well, it gives them the ability to pretend to do something. With robots/UBI coming in, it's a way to cope.
Would you rather have young ppl hanging in hacker groups and writing druggly poetry, maybe even manifestos?
Plus +1 wrote:
Don't know why in the first place these parents would be sending especially their daughters into a literal Rape Culture that exists on these campuses. Isn't that some sort of child abuse?
It's almost like that was just some sort of party line to influence political culture.
She said she was there for game day. Didn't care about school.
Libs cheat and steal wrote:
The dictionary definition says that liberals reject traditional values.
Which dictionary?
So by definition, everyone who cheats is a liberal.
I wish you could see the logical fallacy here, but let's try just one example: "The dictionary says that bachelors are not married. So by definition, everyone who is not married is a bachelor."
Everyone involved in this scandal is a liberal regardless of what they claim to be. It’s [like] someone telling you that they didn’t cheat on you but you discover they did. They are by definition a cheater regardless of what they claim to be.
Assumes that which needs to be proven--namely, that anyone who cheats is perforce a liberal. Again, please let us know which dictionary defines the word that way.
I don’t like when people try to redefine words. They have meaning.
Yes, they do. Your efforts to redefine the noun "liberal" have been noted.
Oh, the irony.
Oh, and FYI I've been a voter for 40+ years and have never checked the Democratic box (much less the Liberal or Socialist or Communist box) for any office.
PS--It actually occurs to me that you're simply trolling. Credit where it's due: 9/10! Well played.
My goodness, is that a SJW Climate Change imbecile?
Not to worry ...
God looks after fools, little children, drunkards and The United States of America!
No.
[quote]Warren Buffett wrote:
This type of stuff is nothing new in a way.
I'm so ashamed. I paid for a Kaplan SAT review course for my idiot grandson.
He got into the local state U, spent five years partying, going on spring break, attending Phish concerts all over the country and smoking weed. Still no degree, but is working part-time at the hippie food co-op. Still asks me for money.
a : one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways
lacking moral restraint :
Merriam-Webster. These are definitions as a noun and adjective. Yes, all cheaters are liberals but not all liberals are cheaters. Everyone involed in this scandal is by definition a liberal because lacked moral restraint and they rejected traditional values. It’s like saying they are cheaters and having you argue with that definition.
The local state U would probably be Nebraska.
Libs are dumb wrote:
a : one who is open-minded or not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional, or established forms or ways
lacking moral restraint :
Merriam-Webster. These are definitions as a noun and adjective. Yes, all cheaters are liberals but not all liberals are cheaters. Everyone involed in this scandal is by definition a liberal because lacked moral restraint and they rejected traditional values. It’s like saying they are cheaters and having you argue with that definition.
Well, first: It looks like that's only the definition of an adjective, not a noun. And it looks like you've skipped other parts of the definition, including the higher-listed (i.e. "preferred") definitions. But let all that go.
By your "reasoning" someone who shoots up a house of worship is a liberal because he lacks moral restraint (shooting innocent people) and rejects traditional values (one traditional value is not to shoot innocent people). See how that works?
Yes that person is a liberal. They may not like the label but it is accurate.