FB: Empire 8

[AUPepBand]

And one more thing, is everyone else pulling for a Wesley/Linfield final?

Yes.  

dlip is happy for Linfield's success and would really like to see a Wesley/Linfield final. Honestly, and dlip says this with no disrespect to Dub Dub and MUC but dlip would rather see a ****in Fog Horn Leg Horn/Pepe Le Pew final than another MUC/Dub Dub. Just for the sake of seeing some different teams on the Stagg Bowl national stage. dlip means ****, it differs for all but dlip can only look at the same color ****in paint on the walls for so long....unless of course that paint is Garnet.

Linfield is Purple too.  It's impossible to get away from that color... The main Teams of this decade have been Purple... (Including Mary Hardin Baylor)

Need Pep remind E8ers that the E8 co-champs and NCAA AQ was also Purple? 

[Doid23]

a ****in Fog Horn Leg Horn/Pepe Le Pew final

I gotta go with LegHorn in that one. Although, that skunk can be pretty sneaky, and never quits...I'm changing my pick, I think Fog Horn's not taking the skunk seriously, I'm going for the upset and taking Pepe outright.

[AUPepBand]

There are likely some posters unfamiliar with Fog Horn Leg Horn and Pepe Le Pew. Thanks to today's technology, posters need not be ignorant of our cultural heritage. Here's a couple of examples of Fog Horn Leg Horn and Pepe Le Pew....

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/218917/825866

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGY-8F7XxyQ&feature=fvw

[Yanks 99]

I hate this time of year...when the only thing to look forward to is next August...

[Jonny Utah]

I hate this time of year...when the only thing to look forward to is next August...

Yanks you should love this time of year.  How many weeks in a row now does Hartwick go without losing?

[Yanks 99]

I hate this time of year...when the only thing to look forward to is next August...

Yanks you should love this time of year.  How many weeks in a row now does Hartwick go without losing?

Hey O...now that sounds like an August/September barb!!!

[maxpower]

There are likely some posters unfamiliar with Fog Horn Leg Horn and Pepe Le Pew. Thanks to today's technology, posters need not be ignorant of our cultural heritage. Here's a couple of examples of Fog Horn Leg Horn and Pepe Le Pew....

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/218917/825866

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGY-8F7XxyQ&feature=fvw

Pep (or should I say pepe), you don't give us youngins enough credit. Of course we know those two!

Although we are probably more likely to reflect that if he were around today, Pepe le pew would most likely be a registered sex offender with multiple restraining orders out on him.

[sjfcards]

There was a good article in the Ithaca Paper yesterday from AP writer Alan Scher Zagier, about the underperformance academically of student athletes at the DIII level. Apparently student athletes at DIII schools in all sports score roughly 9 percentage points lower in school than the average of the rest of the student body. A group called the College sports project is looking into the statistic, and has the NCAA's interest. They have performed a study on 80 of the toughest academic schools in Division III, and are looking at their student averages (The UAA declined to participate in the study, so no U of R etc in the study. Too bad since that one league probably has most of the top 10 academic schools by itself.)

The article was basically saying that this assumption that DIII has their priorities straight with sports and academics may not be so accurate after all. I found myself not sure what to make of the article. I was a student athlete at Fisher and did not see any difference in the time and energy I put into school compared to other students, but I was wondering how others on the boards viewed it? 

[dlippiel]

There was a good article in the Ithaca Paper yesterday from AP writer Alan Scher Zagier, about the underperformance academically of student athletes at the DIII level. Apparently student athletes at DIII schools in all sports score roughly 9 percentage points lower in school than the average of the rest of the student body. A group called the College sports project is looking into the statistic, and has the NCAA's interest. They have performed a study on 80 of the toughest academic schools in Division III, and are looking at their student averages (The UAA declined to participate in the study, so no U of R etc in the study. Too bad since that one league probably has most of the top 10 academic schools by itself.)

The article was basically saying that this assumption that DIII has their priorities straight with sports and academics may not be so accurate after all. I found myself not sure what to make of the article. I was a student athlete at Fisher and did not see any difference in the time and energy I put into school compared to other students, but I was wondering how others on the boards viewed it? 

Here is the answer to that; the ****ing student athletes are STUDENT ****ING ATHLETES, hence they have many many responsi****ingbilities that many non athlete students do not have. Not saying the non athlete does not have a lot on their plate but balancing high level academics and high level athletics is incredibly difficult and challenging. Something has got to give somewhere as long as the give isn't to long. When dlip went to UVM with the hopes of playing hockey and when things did not work out he found out that even with his studies, partying, and volunteer work he still had a ton of ****ing time to work on his academics. D3 athletes (for the most part) have their priorities straight especially in comparison to many of their D1 counterparts.

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

There was a good article in the Ithaca Paper yesterday from AP writer Alan Scher Zagier, about the underperformance academically of student athletes at the DIII level. Apparently student athletes at DIII schools in all sports score roughly 9 percentage points lower in school than the average of the rest of the student body. A group called the College sports project is looking into the statistic, and has the NCAA's interest. They have performed a study on 80 of the toughest academic schools in Division III, and are looking at their student averages (The UAA declined to participate in the study, so no U of R etc in the study. Too bad since that one league probably has most of the top 10 academic schools by itself.)

The article was basically saying that this assumption that DIII has their priorities straight with sports and academics may not be so accurate after all. I found myself not sure what to make of the article. I was a student athlete at Fisher and did not see any difference in the time and energy I put into school compared to other students, but I was wondering how others on the boards viewed it? 

Here is the answer to that; the ****ing student athletes are STUDENT ****ING ATHLETES, hence they have many many responsi****ingbilities that many non athlete students do not have. Not saying the non athlete does not have a lot on their plate but balancing high level academics and high level athletics is incredibly difficult and challenging. Something has got to give somewhere as long as the give isn't to long. When dlip went to UVM with the hopes of playing hockey and when things did not work out he found out that even with his studies, partying, and volunteer work he still had a ton of ****ing time to work on his academics. D3 athletes (for the most part) have their priorities straight especially in comparison to many of their D1 counterparts.

Couldn't agree more.  Doesn't matter what level (DI, DII, DIII, etc.) you are playing.  There is going to be a difference with all the extra responsibilites that atheletes have.  9% points is not too much.  I am sure it is alot bigger difference at the higher levels.

[theoriginalupstate]

There was a good article in the Ithaca Paper yesterday from AP writer Alan Scher Zagier, about the underperformance academically of student athletes at the DIII level. Apparently student athletes at DIII schools in all sports score roughly 9 percentage points lower in school than the average of the rest of the student body. A group called the College sports project is looking into the statistic, and has the NCAA's interest. They have performed a study on 80 of the toughest academic schools in Division III, and are looking at their student averages (The UAA declined to participate in the study, so no U of R etc in the study. Too bad since that one league probably has most of the top 10 academic schools by itself.)

The article was basically saying that this assumption that DIII has their priorities straight with sports and academics may not be so accurate after all. I found myself not sure what to make of the article. I was a student athlete at Fisher and did not see any difference in the time and energy I put into school compared to other students, but I was wondering how others on the boards viewed it? 

Here is the answer to that; the ****ing student athletes are STUDENT ****ING ATHLETES, hence they have many many responsi****ingbilities that many non athlete students do not have. Not saying the non athlete does not have a lot on their plate but balancing high level academics and high level athletics is incredibly difficult and challenging. Something has got to give somewhere as long as the give isn't to long. When dlip went to UVM with the hopes of playing hockey and when things did not work out he found out that even with his studies, partying, and volunteer work he still had a ton of ****ing time to work on his academics. D3 athletes (for the most part) have their priorities straight especially in comparison to many of their D1 counterparts.

Couldn't agree more.  Doesn't matter what level (DI, DII, DIII, etc.) you are playing.  There is going to be a difference with all the extra responsibilites that atheletes have.  9% points is not too much.  I am sure it is alot bigger difference at the higher levels.

Plus you'll find some non-scholarship athletes at these levels that have jobs during the season.  I know most of them are part time but you add that to athletics plus classes and that's a ton of things on an athlete's plate. 

I worked at FedEx during the season, took 17 credits my Senior year during the season.  It sucked but I got through it with a 3.3 that semester...

[SJFF82]

There was a good article in the Ithaca Paper yesterday from AP writer Alan Scher Zagier, about the underperformance academically of student athletes at the DIII level. Apparently student athletes at DIII schools in all sports score roughly 9 percentage points lower in school than the average of the rest of the student body. A group called the College sports project is looking into the statistic, and has the NCAA's interest. They have performed a study on 80 of the toughest academic schools in Division III, and are looking at their student averages (The UAA declined to participate in the study, so no U of R etc in the study. Too bad since that one league probably has most of the top 10 academic schools by itself.)

The article was basically saying that this assumption that DIII has their priorities straight with sports and academics may not be so accurate after all. I found myself not sure what to make of the article. I was a student athlete at Fisher and did not see any difference in the time and energy I put into school compared to other students, but I was wondering how others on the boards viewed it? 

Here is the answer to that; the ****ing student athletes are STUDENT ****ING ATHLETES, hence they have many many responsi****ingbilities that many non athlete students do not have. Not saying the non athlete does not have a lot on their plate but balancing high level academics and high level athletics is incredibly difficult and challenging. Something has got to give somewhere as long as the give isn't to long. When dlip went to UVM with the hopes of playing hockey and when things did not work out he found out that even with his studies, partying, and volunteer work he still had a ton of ****ing time to work on his academics. D3 athletes (for the most part) have their priorities straight especially in comparison to many of their D1 counterparts.

Couldn't agree more.  Doesn't matter what level (DI, DII, DIII, etc.) you are playing.  There is going to be a difference with all the extra responsibilites that atheletes have.  9% points is not too much.  I am sure it is alot bigger difference at the higher levels.

exactly....it is all relative.  If D3 is at 9pts lower and D1 athletes are 12 pts lower...then who has their priorities in order?

[maxpower]

I think anyone that says athletics don't divert attention from studies is lying to themselves. Of course, it would also be silly to say that athletes are the only ones that get distracted from their studies. But I think you'd be hard-pressed to find another school activity that had as many mandatory missed days of class.

As far as DIII vs. DI, there is little comparison between the way the sports are carried out. But I hate all this "DIII athletes play for the love of the game" cop-out stuff. It bugs me for two reasons:

1) DIII athletes get plenty of perks from their respective schools, including academically, or so I've heard. (again, this obviously doesn't approach DI, but still).
2) It kind of implies that DI athletes are in it for the money. I'd be willing to bet that an overwhelming majority of DI athletes not only LOVE playing their sport, but that they would play it no matter what college they went to, regardless of division.


I guess in summary it's not really a shocker that athletes perform worse academically. BUT athletic programs also have minimum GPA requirements, so you could also say that athletes have at least more motivation to stay above 2.0.

[SJFF82]

I think anyone that says athletics don't divert attention from studies is lying to themselves. Of course, it would also be silly to say that athletes are the only ones that get distracted from their studies. But I think you'd be hard-pressed to find another school activity that had as many mandatory missed days of class.

As far as DIII vs. DI, there is little comparison between the way the sports are carried out. But I hate all this "DIII athletes play for the love of the game" cop-out stuff. It bugs me for two reasons:

1) DIII athletes get plenty of perks from their respective schools, including academically, or so I've heard. (again, this obviously doesn't approach DI, but still).
2) It kind of implies that DI athletes are in it for the money. I'd be willing to bet that an overwhelming majority of DI athletes not only LOVE playing their sport, but that they would play it no matter what college they went to, regardless of division.


I guess in summary it's not really a shocker that athletes perform worse academically. BUT athletic programs also have minimum GPA requirements, so you could also say that athletes have at least more motivation to stay above 2.0.

This is a good point.  I would add though, that at least from my perspective, the idea about d3 and the love of the game, is more about the 'system' of d3 as a whole versus the 'system' of d1 as a whole.  I dont think anyone would disagree with your point about all college athletes playing for the love of the game.  The problem is the expansive commercial industry that surrounds D1.

[Jonny Utah]

I think the bottom line here is that you really have to do a scientific study if you want the real truth here.  Does this include female athletes?  Im willing to bet females do much better than the average female student at a lot of schools.

As far as getting academic perks for athletes, I just don't see it at d3.  The biggest perk d1 athletes get is that they are forced to attend hours of study halls with tudors a week.  The big programs usually pay for these tutors as well (or they pay for themselves and more I should say).

As far as sports hurting academics at the d3 level?  I don't buy that either.  How many hours of classtime do you have on your average day?  2-3?  That leaves 5-6 hours before practice a day of study time.

I didn't read the article but I don't think d1 athletes are in it for the money.  They are in it so thousands of people can watch them at the highest level and they do get college paid for.  And like any athlete (including pros), if you didnt pay them (or paid them what your average american gets paid for regular jobs), Id say 95% of them would still be playing those sports