Athlete puts foot in mouth

[cbish]

*sigh!* Here we are again. NFL Hall of Famer Paul Hornung gives a radio interview in which he makes remarks that are going to be considered disparaging.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=1772368

Why does this type of thing suprise us? Performers (athletes & actors) have made a profession out of something they have been doing since childhood. Since they are "playing a childs game" for a career, I contend that just because they physically mature, they are intellectually and sociologically stunted. They're not educated, typically. I doubt they have had to ponder societal/political issues. Then, when asked about some issue, we get a "shocking/insensitive" answer.

Last year at this time a Colorado Rockies pitcher was being raked over for anti-gay comments he made.

I don't understand why we would go to a celebrity for an opinion.

On the other hand, have we become so PC that we are hypersensitive to any remark that mentions minorities. If you take the word "Black" out and just leave athlete, you change the meaning somewhat.

 

[Tmy]

Considering the history ofthe country are you surprised when minorites are sensative about this stuff.

Heres a guy who obviously has some streotypical views of blacks. I doubt hes a racist or anything, but it still shows that bigotry and ignorance live on.

Notre Dames standards have been the same for years, and they still manage winning teams most of the time. The causes of their "woes" lie more wh scholarships restrictions, parody, players leaving early. THis guy thinks its cause blacks are too dumb to get into ND.

Its stupid. The ND coach is a black guy who was successful at STANFORD!!! (howz that for tough standards). There biggest rival is Michigan, another school wh tough standards but still a good f-ball program.

 

[Tony]

Sounds like a supporter of affirmative action.

 

[Tmy]

Imagine if he said they need to lower acedemic standards so they can get more southerners on the team. Would you be cool with that.

 

[Tony]

Imagine if he said they need to lower acedemic standards so they can get more southerners on the team. Would you be cool with that.

I wouldn't be cool with a school lowering standards to get ANYONE on the team.

 

[Tmy]

Its not an affirmative action story.

 

[cbish]

I'm not for lowering academic standards for athletes either. However, if you're going to suggest this as a possible means of attracting a larger population, I would have just said "athlete" and not specify any race, gender, flavor or any other adjective.

My point is, why do we constantly use this appeal to authority and then object when they give us their candid answer?

 

[Number Six]

Every school lower standards for athletes. It's just a matter of who lowers them the most.

And then after they lower the standards, they pay for the schooling of these people who, if they weren't athletes, wouldn't be permitted to attend the school even if they paid!

Then again, standards wouldn't have to be lowered for some atheletes if they had spent more time on schoolwork and less time learning to excel at their sport. But if they did that, then even if they qualified academically for the school they might not be able to go because they'd no longer get a free ride because they spent time on schoolwork instead of improving at their sport.

Am I the only one that finds this all completely ridiculous? How about just dropping athletic scholarships altogether and admit students without regard to their athletic talents?

 

[evil sutko]

There's too much money floating around for anything to get done... all the people with the authority are too busy cashing checks and negotiating TV deals.

 

[cbish]

number six wrote:

How about just dropping athletic scholarships altogether and admit students without regard to their athletic talents?

And, allow those who are good enough turn pro and move on. Quit whining about LaBron James and Kobe Bryant. Hockey & baseball have it right (or at least better). Allow high school kids, JC kids draft eligibility. Right now, university students have to wait until their junior year or 21 yrs. old to be draft eligible. Why? I've seen university baseball players (Oakland's Barry Zito) actually leave a university for a JC to be eligible. In hockey, I believe the NCAA allows drafted players to remain in school and actually play while under contract with their NHL club.

Yes it is all about money. I wonder what Allen Iversen's GPA was at Georgetown? I wonder if he could spell Georgetown. What a farce.

On those same lines, I just received a memo today (I'm a high school teacher) listing the NCAA guidlines for high school students for academic eligibility when they go to college. This is for the class of 2008. Basically, it's your standard college prep curriculum already in place; 4 years English, 2 years science including lab class etc. But,

Who is the NCAA to dictate university entrance requirements?

 

[c0rbin]

*sigh!* Here we are again. NFL Hall of Famer Paul Hornung gives a radio interview in which he makes remarks that are going to be considered disparaging.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=1772368

Why does this type of thing suprise us? Performers (athletes & actors) have made a profession out of something they have been doing since childhood. Since they are "playing a childs game" for a career, I contend that just because they physically mature, they are intellectually and sociologically stunted. They're not educated, typically. I doubt they have had to ponder societal/political issues. Then, when asked about some issue, we get a "shocking/insensitive" answer.

Last year at this time a Colorado Rockies pitcher was being raked over for anti-gay comments he made.

I don't understand why we would go to a celebrity for an opinion.

On the other hand, have we become so PC that we are hypersensitive to any remark that mentions minorities. If you take the word "Black" out and just leave athlete, you change the meaning somewhat.

Bah.

Professional athletes are people too. They run the gamut of intelligences just like Stock Brokers do.

To assume that pro athletes are dumb or "stunted" is like assuming nerds are never going to get laid.

Bah, I say.

 

[WildCat]

Sounds like a supporter of affirmative action.

Tony's been criticized for this remark, but isn't affirmative action the lowering of standards for minority students in order to increase their enrollment? How is this any different than what Hornung proposed?

 

[cbish]

cOrbin wrote:

They run the gamut of intelligences just like Stock Brokers do.

Do you know any professional athletes? I do. Several. Both current and retired. Let me give you a standard scenario.

Typical day (in- season)

Wake up at noon. Play video games until 3:00. Go to work. Return home at 11:00 pm. Play video games until 2:00 am. Go to bed. Repeat. On the road, substitute hotel for home

Typical day (off-season)

Wake up at noon. Go to gym and work out until 4:00. Play video games until 6:00. Eat dinner. Play video games until 2:00 am. Sleep. Repeat.

Now, this person is

a) 16 year old high school student.
b) 19 year old college student
c) 35 year old stock broker
d) 35 year old MLB player.

I'm being a little facitious here, but the point is how often are we outraged by some ridiculous comment made by a celebrity? We ask serious questions of people who, in reality, have a very narrow world view and then we're "shocked" when we get some sophmoric answer.

I remeber a SF Chronicle article a few years ago addressing why more players didn't want to play for the Giants because San Francisco was so culturally rich. The answer. Because they don't care about stuff like that. "Just give them an octoplex at the strip mall and that's all they need". I remember the quote.

 

[c0rbin]

Do you know any professional athletes? I do. Several. Both current and retired. Let me give you a standard scenario.

You have never met an intelligent or thoughtful professional athlete?

 

[crimresearch]

If we are sticking to the point of the original post, which was football players attending universities (and I suppose we could expand that to the other money sports in college, baseball and basketball), I will admit that it seems as though 'intelligent and thoughtful' would be the exception that makes the rule. Napoleon McCallum comes to mind as one such exception.


If you want to include fencers, Olympic shooters, golfers, Grand Prix drivers, etc. under professional athletes, you may very well increase the representation of intelligent and thoughtful members, but those sports aren't the ones that cause universities to lower admission standards , now are they?

And doesn't the lowering of standards, and de-emphasizing of academics stand to increase the numbers of those who do fit the streotypical 'dumb jock' norm?

Paul

 

[cbish]

nah, I have. Of the athletes I know and have met, they're all wonderful people. As I said, I'm being facitious. However, I do think there's a little bit of truth to what I've said. Perhaps I haven't articulated it well.

My point to the thread is along the lines of the appeal to authority that we constantly use with celebrities (I'm extending it to entertainers too, not just athletes). I have found as a group, because of their experiences and lifestyle that they have a tendancy to be "narrow" intellectually. Not that they are any less intellegent than anyone else, it's just that they really haven't had to ponder life because they don't really live in real life. Now, that's not limited to this population. It's everywhere. Most people don't ponder things like the people of this forum do. But because they are well known, often times they are asked to comment in areas out of their breadth. Just because someone can run with a ball doesn't make him qualified to comment on college admission. Or, take a 30 year old pitcher, who has at best a high school education, who has had the same intellectual stimulation since he was 14 years old and asking him what he thinks of homosexuality?: we're going to get an adolescent, locker room type answerand we really shouldn't be suprised by that. We seem to think that because someone excels in an area that we value, that we can assign them similar skills in more serious walks of life.

I remember Diezel starting a thread where he was peaved about some comment Oprah Winfrey made. I brought up the same points there.

 

[c0rbin]

I may have reacted rawly myself.

Both of my parents are life-time athletes (my mom is in the National Lacross Hall of Fame in Maryland and my dad, although retired, has coached top ten collegiate soccer and has set up scholarship programs for his athletes).

Both of my parents have been erstwhile professional educators and coaches for the past 40 years. My dad has a PhD in Instructional Systems Design and my mom has a masters in Adaptive PhysEd.

My wife's grandfather and father played baseball (her granddad for the Senators in the 50s)--both are successful local business men.

Perhaps football is a repository of lower intellectual standards, perhaps college football is a gristmill of young talent. I apologize if I overreacted.

 

[Phil]

Tony's been criticized for this remark, but isn't affirmative action the lowering of standards for minority students in order to increase their enrollment? How is this any different than what Hornung proposed?

Good question.

Something else to consider: Hornung's remarks may seem insensitive, but is there any truth to them? Do black students/athletes perform at a lower level on the tests and courses on which the admitting academic criteria is based? Do the numbers suggest that lowering requirements would in fact allow more black athletes to be admitted? Anybody have a source to check? I unfortunately don't.

If so, here is a situation where a man said some things that you and I probably wouln't say, but that has still been forced to apologize simply for telling the truth.

 

[Tmy]

Tony's been criticized for this remark, but isn't affirmative action the lowering of standards for minority students in order to increase their enrollment? How is this any different than what Hornung proposed?

No thats a quota, A numbers game if you will. AA allows people into despite the typical standards for a number of reasons. Thats it, it doesnt modify the classes or tests for those students.

A comparable program would allow guys on the team who didnt make the standard 40 yrd dash time.

 

[Tmy]

Good question.

Something else to consider: Hornung's remarks may seem insensitive, but is there any truth to them? Do black students/athletes perform at a lower level on the tests and courses on which the admitting academic criteria is based? Do the numbers suggest that lowering requirements would in fact allow more black athletes to be admitted? Anybody have a source to check? I unfortunately don't.

If so, here is a situation where a man said some things that you and I probably wouln't say, but that has still been forced to apologize simply for telling the truth.

What truth is he telling???

He makes assumptions. We had a lousy team cause our admissions are too high (assumption #1)

We'd have a better team if we had lower standards (Ok I can see this. After all lower standards mean a greater pool of players to choose from).

Blacks are better players (another assumption. IS he saying they have a genetic advantage?? Thats the implication)

Lower standards mean more blacks avaiable ( well thats true. It also means more whites and evryone are available).

The reason this guy is on the hot seat is that he throws race in. If he just said lowerstandards = more players to pick from, hed be fine.

When he throws in race it touches on 2 stereotypes. Blacks are the better athlete, blacks arent as smart. Surprise, people are offended!