Assault with a deadly lineman - Meyers' idea of institutional control...

#101
#101
Orange_Crush said:
BigPaPaVolL

"so we can have an even more superficial discussion about morality vis a vis college football?

It's just a lot more fun to avoid long walls of text like the one you just penned. Let's stick to the superficial quips and leave morality debates to philosophy professors and seminary students."

It isn't so much morality as it is an extension of thoughts on integrity found in the article that actually started this thread.

Tell me what's superficial about that. To quote, I don't think that word (superficial) means what you think it means.

And feel free to avoid my long walls, including this one. It just seems somewhat self-defeating to both ignore them and make disparaging comments about them such as the "naive", and the "go to a bible study" one (neither by you, of course).

Either ignore the thoughts or deal with them. But don't belittle them while ignoring them. That's just ignorant.

I'll drop the subject and leave the thread to the "Ends justify the means" camp, and the "Defend Meyer at the expense of Fulmer" mindsets...

Peace...
Click to expand...
I'll assure you that I'm aware of the meaning of superficial and don't know how any blowhard on earth can expect any discussion of a college football coach's disciplinary decisions can be anything but superficial. This site is loaded with self-righteous windbags regularly wanting to paint all other coaches / programs as a bit shady while turning the blind eye toward our own. Any discussions that we, or anyone else might have on the topic, while full of potentially interesting opinions, are simply scratching the surface, unless one of us involved has to actually pull the trigger on our thoughts.

My approach isn't remotely to paint Fulmer in a bad light relative to other coaches. It's simply to say that our holier than thou approach to coach decisions of this nature is hypocritical at best and blind at worst. The nature of dealing with the modern college athlete is rife with personal issues and bad decisions. All coaches have theirs coming and no program is exempt, including UF and UT.
 
#102
#102
Orange_Crush said:
You actually alluded to this point in that parents may stop sending their student athletes there.
Click to expand...
Which is about as likely to happen as Ralph Freidgen winning the Mr. Olympia competition. The vast majority of parents of top notch recruits get it. It's a bottom line business. Most people are sophisticated enough to take comments like "top 1% of 1%" for what they are: politically correct fluff. Anyone who thinks that's actually how college athletics works is either terminally naive or completely blind. If it were all about character and discipline, Army wouldn't spend so many Saturdays in the fall being used as a pinata by open doors programs like Rutgers.
 
#105
#105
Regardless of his "apparent character and values," I'm sick of Tim Tebow.

I think I'll take a break now, and head over to the recruiting forum...it tends to offer far more diminutive posting styles.
 
#106
#106
hatvol96 said:
It was actually a compliment to the Black Knights of the Hudson. I was using them as the ultimate example of disciplined college students.
Click to expand...
the Rutgers' pinata concept turned it a bit backhanded, but I understood the point.

By the by, I'm well aware that Navy hasn't been the softy that Army has been this decade.
 
#107
#107
BigPapaVol said:
I'll assure you that I'm aware of the meaning of superficial and don't know how any blowhard on earth can expect any discussion of a college football coach's disciplinary decisions can be anything but superficial. This site is loaded with self-righteous windbags regularly wanting to paint all other coaches / programs as a bit shady while turning the blind eye toward our own. Any discussions that we, or anyone else might have on the topic, while full of potentially interesting opinions, are simply scratching the surface, unless one of us involved has to actually pull the trigger on our thoughts.

My approach isn't remotely to paint Fulmer in a bad light relative to other coaches. It's simply to say that our holier than thou approach to coach decisions of this nature is hypocritical at best and blind at worst. The nature of dealing with the modern college athlete is rife with personal issues and bad decisions. All coaches have theirs coming and no program is exempt, including UF and UT.
Click to expand...

Your original quote was:

"so we can have an even more superficial discussion about morality vis a vis college football?"

The potential discussion you were referring to was about morality. I simply stated that if you consider morality a superficial subject, then we must not agree on the definition of superficial. Let's at least keep our subjects straight.

I don;t know if I'm the blowhard or self-righteous windbag in question, but I've not made this about UT/UF. I'm discussing a man who has proven himself a liar. I had similar discussions about Clinton. But since this is a football message board, I guess that article would be misplaced.
 
#109
#109
Orange_Crush said:
Your original quote was:

"so we can have an even more superficial discussion about morality vis a vis college football?"

The potential discussion you were referring to was about morality. I simply stated that if you consider morality a superficial subject, then we must not agree on the definition of superficial. Let's at least keep our subjects straight.

I don;t know if I'm the blowhard or self-righteous windbag in question, but I've not made this about UT/UF. I'm discussing a man who has proven himself a liar. I had similar discussions about Clinton. But since this is a football message board, I guess that article would be misplaced.
Click to expand...
Morality can certainly be superficial, but in blind discussions on boards of this nature, it almost certainly is.

I'm not calling you the blowhard or self righteous windbag, but most who shove the morality down our throats tend to be and every single discussion on here tends to be very superficial, hence, my comment. Just so you know I'm straight on the subject.

If you want to single out a particular coach as a liar to make you feel better about ours, good luck.
 
#110
#110
hatvol96 said:
Which is about as likely to happen as Ralph Freidgen winning the Mr. Olympia competition. The vast majority of parents of top notch recruits get it. It's a bottom line business. Most people are sophisticated enough to take comments like "top 1% of 1%" for what they are: politically correct fluff. Anyone who thinks that's actually how college athletics works is either terminally naive or completely blind. If it were all about character and discipline, Army wouldn't spend so many Saturdays in the fall being used as a pinata by open doors programs like Rutgers.
Click to expand...

(A) Maybe I'm beginning to understand why you have no qualms about Meyer speaking out of both sides of his mouth. You just said:

"If parents are concerned about the teammates their sons will have in Gainesville, they'll quit sending them to play there."

Now you say:

"Which is about as likely to happen as Ralph Freidgen winning the Mr. Olympia competition. "

???

(B) You also just said:

"The only quote from Meyer is simply the term "top one percent of one percent." The author then decides to add what he thinks defines that concept."

Now you say:

"Most people are sophisticated enough to take comments like "top 1% of 1%" for what they are: politically correct fluff. Anyone who thinks that's actually how college athletics works is either terminally naive or completely blind."

Now, I'm fairly sophisticated. I promise. Unlike some, I'm sophisticated enough to follow a concept such as "ought" and move past the concrete of "is". Because something "is" doesn't mean it "ought" to be. Just because something is accepted doesn't mean it is right.

Are you following me now?

"If it were all about character and discipline, Army wouldn't spend so many Saturdays in the fall being used as a pinata by open doors programs like Rutgers."

Who said it should be "all" about character and discipline? There are ballgames to play. But there are also the concepts of "ought" and "is", "right" and "wrong". And when the people we hire now to teach those concepts to the people who will be hiring then...

What I'm saying is that Meyer has a responsibility to instill some things in these young men. He's instilling the wrong things. So, we'll have a future of men with nothing to instill to those they will mentor.

Get it?
 
#111
#111
BigPapaVol said:
Morality can certainly be superficial, but in blind discussions on boards of this nature, it almost certainly is.

I'm not calling you the blowhard or self righteous windbag, but most who shove the morality down our throats tend to be and every single discussion on here tends to be very superficial, hence, my comment. Just so you know I'm straight on the subject.

If you want to single out a particular coach as a liar to make you feel better about ours, good luck.
Click to expand...

I'm giving it up as chavisut recommends, except to refer you to my post that you are answering.
 
#112
#112
Orange_Crush said:
(A) Maybe I'm beginning to understand why you have no qualms about Meyer speaking out of both sides of his mouth. You just said:

"If parents are concerned about the teammates their sons will have in Gainesville, they'll quit sending them to play there."

Now you say:

"Which is about as likely to happen as Ralph Freidgen winning the Mr. Olympia competition. "

???

(B) You also just said:

"The only quote from Meyer is simply the term "top one percent of one percent." The author then decides to add what he thinks defines that concept."

Now you say:

"Most people are sophisticated enough to take comments like "top 1% of 1%" for what they are: politically correct fluff. Anyone who thinks that's actually how college athletics works is either terminally naive or completely blind."

Now, I'm fairly sophisticated. I promise. Unlike some, I'm sophisticated enough to follow a concept such as "ought" and move past the concrete of "is". Because something "is" doesn't mean it "ought" to be. Just because something is accepted doesn't mean it is right.

Are you following me now?

"If it were all about character and discipline, Army wouldn't spend so many Saturdays in the fall being used as a pinata by open doors programs like Rutgers."

Who said it should be "all" about character and discipline? There are ballgames to play. But there are also the concepts of "ought" and "is", "right" and "wrong". And when the people we hire now to teach those concepts to the people who will be hiring then...

What I'm saying is that Meyer has a responsibility to instill some things in these young men. He's instilling the wrong things. So, we'll have a future of men with nothing to instill to those they will mentor.

Get it?
Click to expand...
I get it. A very longwinded way to say just about nothing, except that right and wrong "ought" apply.

I can appreciate that they should apply, but his point was simply that we, as human judges, are fickle in that we tend to have less "oughts" when coaches are winning, as they are ultimately paid to do. Seems to me you don't quite understand the hierarchy of those responsibilities that you want to heap upon Meyer.
 
#114
#114
BigPapaVol said:
I get it. A very longwinded way to say just about nothing, except that right and wrong "ought" apply.

I can appreciate that they should apply, but his point was simply that we, as human judges, are fickle in that we tend to have less "oughts" when coaches are winning, as they are ultimately paid to do. Seems to me you don't quite understand the hierarchy of those responsibilities that you want to heap upon Meyer.
Click to expand...

I get it. I've followed both of your points from the beginning.

It's good that we can both appreciate the "oughts".

I think it less a fact that I don't quite understand the the hierarchy, and more that I have a proper perspective of importance, i.e. moral character and role models above football winning percentages. (I have a feeling that if you read the NCAA and UF literature, they ate least pay lip service to such.) I mean, maybe I'm just grasping for straws, but I think instilling character and integrity into our future leaders would trump football stats.

Again... I'll leave it alone. I'd like to end the conversation with the points we agree on. I never intended this to evolve into such an intense and disruptive discussion. Peace to both of you. I enjoy your input.
 
#115
#115
Orange_Crush said:
(A) Maybe I'm beginning to understand why you have no qualms about Meyer speaking out of both sides of his mouth. You just said:

"If parents are concerned about the teammates their sons will have in Gainesville, they'll quit sending them to play there."

Now you say:

"Which is about as likely to happen as Ralph Freidgen winning the Mr. Olympia competition. "

???
Click to expand...
For someone of the level of sophistication you claim, that should be crystal clear. I simply stated that the marketplace will correct itself if any significant portion of the parents of recruitable athletes feel as you do. Then, I'm letting you know there's a better chance of a hockey rink in Hell. Parents of elite athletes tend to be realists. They don't waste their time worrying about what "ought to be." They take the system "as is" and make it work for them. That's what realists do.
 
#116
#116
Orange_Crush said:
What I'm saying is that Meyer has a responsibility to instill some things in these young men. He's instilling the wrong things. So, we'll have a future of men with nothing to instill to those they will mentor.

Get it?
Click to expand...
Then,given the overall behavior of football players during his tenure Phillip Fulmer has been an incredibly deleterious influence on the young men he's come in contact with. Since you seem to think coaches have such a huge role in molding the young men in their charge for the future, will you join me for calling for the immediate firing of Phillip Fulmer for the conduct of Leonard Little and Dwayne Goodrich. I'd say three dead bodies trump anything one of Meyer's current or former players are responsible for.
 
#117
#117
Orange_Crush said:
I mean, maybe I'm just grasping for straws, but I think instilling character and integrity into our future leaders would trump football stats.
.
Click to expand...

It's not a football coach's responsibility to instill character and integrity in his players...a parent or guardian should have worked on that in the 18 years prior to these young men stepping on campus.
 
#118
#118
Jaytrain5 said:
It's not a football coach's responsibility to instill character and integrity in his players...a parent or guardian should have worked on that in the 18 years prior to these young men stepping on campus.
Click to expand...
Amen. I'm reminded of a conversation with a recruit's mother John Thompson relayed during a speech I attended.

Mother-"Coach Thompson will you make my boy go to class?"
Coach Thompson-"Why would I? You sure the Hell never have."

Also, when asked how many of his players had graduated during his tenure, Wimp Sanderson accurately replied, "Every single one that wanted to. I haven't stopped anybody yet."
 
#119
#119
hatvol96 said:
Then,given the overall behavior of football players during his tenure Phillip Fulmer has been an incredibly deleterious influence on the young men he's come in contact with. Since you seem to think coaches have such a huge role in molding the young men in their charge for the future, will you join me for calling for the immediate firing of Phillip Fulmer for the conduct of Leonard Little and Dwayne Goodrich. I'd say three dead bodies trump anything one of Meyer's current or former players are responsible for.
Click to expand...

Actually, I say that they should instill values and not reward them for making poor choices. I haven't said that they can remote-control them.

The fact that I haven't made this a team vs team issue should indicate that I do not view this as a team vs team issue. The fact that lawgator has taken issue with Meyers' actions should indicate it isn't a team vs team issue.

You, in seeking any opportunity possible to spew against the coach of the team you claim to be a fan of, are the one making it a team vs team issue.

Now, again, after explaining yet again where I'm coming from, I'd really like to just leave this discussion. Seriously, I had no intent of this turning into such a divisive and emotionally-laced issue.

I'd much rather find areas for us to agree on. So... Go Vols.

Right?
 
#120
#120
Orange_Crush said:
Seriously, I had no intent of this turning into such a divisive and emotionally-laced issue.

I'd much rather find areas for us to agree on. So... Go Vols.

Right?
Click to expand...
You're overestimating our response to the issue. There is little emotion in this debate relative to many of the others you'll see here. Disagreement in a strong fashion with hardened opinions is not emotion.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#121
#121
what is this future leaders gibberish?? They're football players and the coach's function is to maximize their results on the field. The leadership end of it is simply an unintended side effect.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#122
#122
I guess we can just disagree concerning your first 2 sentences.

Raising every young person as if they are a future leader should be an intention. The unintended side-effects of leaders (which coaches are) refusing to lead by example are what's scary.
 
#123
#123
Orange_Crush said:
I guess we can just disagree concerning your first 2 sentences.

Raising every young person as if they are a future leader should be an intention. The unintended side-effects of leaders (which coaches are) refusing to lead by example are what's scary.
Click to expand...
again, you're losing sight of the coaches' hierarchy of functions. I'm sure Ron Zook turned out some leaders and he led by example, but the UF crowd correctly 86'd him for somone who could meet the #1 item on that list.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top