|
Post by brophy on Mar 9, 2010 10:29:23 GMT -6
This effect would appear to be the natural order of how the educational system operates, correct? In the public arena, aren't teachers essentially the same as civil servants?
If a city/state operation is not meeting budget/KPIs, then it isn't the planners/administrators getting axed, its the ditcher-diggers and truckers getting laid off.
As long as it operates as a for-profit enterprise (testing metrics are the carrot $$ incentive), the motive will be skewed from the stated purpose.
How are educators treated elsewhere in the world? How are education systems around the world tiered? Are they centered around making a buck (driving the student into debt) or are they centered around higher learning / improved society?
It seems we keep going around and round with finger-pointing because of vested interests. While our proposed solutions may garner personal appeasement, they never truly address what is actually flawed in the system.
We want control/power, but no accountability.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 5, 2010 12:36:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 25, 2010 11:48:39 GMT -6
Whether it is constantly asking questions, or yelling instructions (watch reverse, draw, screen, and slant!)..........it seems counter-productive, especially on game day.
I mean, aren't coaches really just trying to pacify their own adrenaline and anxiety by talking all the time (not really saying anything)? good point about player communication....and I believe tog has made several great stumps over the years on here about verbiage concission / effective use of buzzwords to get your message across. "Zero" is a perfect example - one word, and you know exactly what the coach is referring to and what needs to change. Also, further exploring this is, during practice and during games. In practices, don't we want to control everything to the point where we ARE wearing the kids down? To the point that they are mentally fatigued so they truly have to focus on what exactly is going on? On Game Night, what really is there left to say? What did you do during the week? All that really needs to be said is reminders of cues you already rehearsed. Coaches not screaming at their players on game night will likely only upset the people in the stands ("those guys aren't doing anything! They're supposed to be yelling at those kids...they don't care") So I'm watching an NFL network documentary on the 99' Rams. I seem to remember Vermeil holding a Master's in Psychology (am I too lazy for Wiki? yes), so do you think he did this on purpose or he was just neurotic?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 25, 2010 11:07:19 GMT -6
we say they didn't work on it, but I seem to remember the big hubbub in 2008 about Tebow "going to the Lab" and watching ESPN pieces on the 'science of correcting Tebow' in the off-season.....and that in the 2009 Spring Game, Florida did a lot of empty formations, highlighting Tebow's "new throwing form"...
seriously....nobody else remembers this?
And then I remember watching the 2009 Season, and wondering where all that went to?
So, I'm not sure that anyone can really say "why didn't they do something?". Its clear they did. Why didn't it change? ....who's to say?
Does it NEED to change? ....grounds for even more debate
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 25, 2010 10:58:02 GMT -6
It would seem these two statements conflict; White seemed to get along well with his teammates according to most accounts. Green Bay did pretty well when he was there I think. So did the Carolina Panthers with Mike Minter as team captain, pretty bold guy as well. Tony Dungy seemed to do ok with it too. Christian bashing is alive and well and is the only belief system that is fair game to pile on these days it seems. But it is 100% expected, not complaining about it at all, just pointing it out. Examples given to support that outspoken people thrive in a franchise....but then it is asserted that outspoken people are blackballed. I'm confused. This whole Christianity thing (including the FOF commercial) would all fall under the rather simplistic (and unsensational rationalism) reasoning below (nothing more, nothing less) Those same people would have a problem with an outspoken atheist...........or an openly gay man..............or dye in the wool Rush Limbaugh Republican who spouts off like Rush..........or a passionately anti-war proponent.........or someone who outspokenly believes the Holocaust didn't really happen........or a scientologist..........or a civil rights activistTebow's failure/success will have zero to do with his beliefs on circumcision, and all to do with his consistent athletic performance. The throwing mechanics have everything to do with that consistency. It'd be nice if we could avoid the bible-victimhood as it has nothing to do with coaching, football, or Tebow's performance FYI - smartfootball has a good synopsis of blutarsky.wordpress.com musings on the timeline of events regarding Tebow's throwing.....worth checking out
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 24, 2010 7:21:20 GMT -6
Combine starts tomorrow so the "need-to-fil-dead-air-with-something" may die down.
Of course, every period where there is non-play will be filled with Jimmy Sportswriter speculating about something he spent a minute 'researching' (brain storming for a headline deadline)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 21, 2010 21:59:41 GMT -6
According to the article, the program would turn the credit hour system on its head (good). When the student passes proficiency in subject matter they essentially CLEP into satisfying HS diploma criteria.
This style of system would also seem to force current classroom curriculum to adapt to meeting this testing standard (almost like teaching for the ACT).
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 21, 2010 16:55:43 GMT -6
If he graduates early, he hasn't used up eligibility.
So I would imagine, he would be 'out' of HS, but taking JC courses (technically) 'through' the HS.
If so, I would have to imagine that this would make those kids even MORE attractive to NCAA schools. The only thing would be...getting an 19 year old junior...that'd be tough for most larger schools, unless the kid plans on going for his Masters.
If it is simply get rid of the kid and out of the HS system (pay for JC courses at JC prices), then yeah, I could see how everyone loses but the schoold district.
In the end, what's important is kids getting an education and moving towards higher learning...this is a step in the right direction
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 20, 2010 22:09:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 18, 2010 11:00:49 GMT -6
It is interesting ( I agree with Huey's perspective ) to see highlights treated differently (how each coach interprets them).
Admittedly, I'm not used to the "slo-mo epic NFL Films" thing. So as a viewer, I'm kind of thrown for a loop when I see a fast-paced, violent sport turned into a maudlin encounter (just different is all). It works.
I suppose the music selection (as Huey points out) is important to pair with the video you are presenting. If you're throwing non-stop action at a viewer, I suppose selections from 'Turandot' may not really work.
It also depends on the intended audience and how you intend to reach them.
Personally, the only ones I like are the ones that come out and punch you in the face and make little children cry. Something so over the top with action that the viewer HAS to take notice (get your attention!!).
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 18, 2010 10:26:57 GMT -6
Interesting concept of using soundtracks.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 9, 2010 9:08:26 GMT -6
do you not have Desktop Manager (w/ internet connectivity)?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 22:37:03 GMT -6
I've meet some freaks of nature that never got recruited despite living on football island and being fantastic football players. I get what you're saying, but colleges aren't looking for the best player - they are looking for the best 4 year investment. Again, refer to that 5-point litmus. I've had guys who were the BEST athletes I've ever seen fail on 3 of those and not get a whiff of even DII consideration This isn't 'American Idol'. No one 'deserves' a scholly.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 21:30:11 GMT -6
Who needs an iPhone.....lol?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 21:04:56 GMT -6
Great post, coachks......
Does(n't) this lead to a skewed statistical reference, then?
Then the next question would be how this translates to pro (NFL) talent (per capita)....which will read remarkably similiar as to the one the OP presented. Why?
* it REALLY should be noted, however, that Texas is its own nation, and including it with the rest of the 49 states will significantly skew the data
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 20:15:12 GMT -6
Dp
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 20:13:57 GMT -6
Teams stick for the most part to their region. So if you are from outside of anyones region and don't have the money to go to camps and increase your visibility you are screwed. hey, I appreciate your contributions. I'm certainly not breaking balls here or even challenging you here - but here is a question... How does that relate to the regional "per capita" dominance argument that the article is suggesting? Does LA / TX just have a greater DI saturation (more DI schools in a region = more DI athletes regionally)? Or, if your assertion is correct, how else are you accounting for the regional numbers (why some areas have more than others)?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 18:28:30 GMT -6
Could be, you may be right (I'm not here to disqualify your belief).
Are you suggesting that there is an equal number of bonafide DI kids across the Nation, but the regional, per capita dominance as the article articulates, is based on staffs not willing to travel?
To temper this discussion, I'd offer this as a general rule, the metric always seems to come down to; 1 ACT scores (GPA is all relative - can this kid hack college academics?)
2 Ht/Wt measurables (is this kid a dominant physical specimen?)
3 Explosiveness / speed (is he over and above the top flight athleticism in the country?)
4 Athletic ceiling (has this kid already peaked? Will he grow more?)
5 Can I trust this kid? (Or will he spoil the opportunity by being a knuckle head?)
I've seen lots of players who probably could compete at DI level but fail any one of those metrics (pretty much disqualifying him from scholarship consideration)_
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 17:50:22 GMT -6
Kids lifting isn't what makes a DI caliber athlete, though.
Look at DI rosters, visit their practices. Those athletes aren't 'normal' teenagers (and may help to take your HS kids to see them up-close to give them a dose of reality). DI athletes have the bodies of most grown men (there is no question if a kid is a college football player or not).
I understand there are kids who you would go to war with and are the epitome of a HS football player. That isn't the (necessarily) definition of a DI scholarship athlete.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 12:22:46 GMT -6
have you tried it from the BB app store or go through Desktop Manager? FWIW, messenger would never show up on my Bold (I had to access it by clicking the app hotkey and cycle through active programs on my device).
I tried it out this weekend and the active chat, updating/adding contacts, and file sharing was pretty useful.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 10:36:52 GMT -6
yes, culture plays a BIG part of it (and may beget another question ...."what degree should be the standard?"......i.e. if the South sets the standard, then why do Northern schools lack the commitment to it / if the North sets the standard, why does the South go so overboard?" Being a 6'3 - 6", 215 - 280 lbs player that is explosive, THAT is genetics. That is something no coaching or prodding will 'develop'. I think the 'genetics' argument is somewhat lazy, always deflating, but it is what it is - and genetic freaks are what (90%) DI athletes ARE. As ridiculous as the Lane Kiffin 9th grader situation is, the majority of DI prospects ARE DI caliber in those years (many will wash out, but there aren't many DI prospects that wake up when they are 17 and all of a sudden have lifted their way to being a 300lbs power cleaning behemoth). I've coached DI kids.........and I can unequivocally attest that there is NOTHING we did, as coaches, to 'make' any of them DI talents. This is an interesting article presented and continues a quandry we've had many times on this site over the past 5 years (US football cultures/athletes) former discussion on this here
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 10:27:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 8:33:25 GMT -6
Here's something to try out 1. Open your Blackberry Messenger (5.0) 2. From the Menu, select "Scan a Group Barcode" 3. Camera applet launches, point the camera at the barcode You will be added to this Huey networking IM application.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2010 20:47:13 GMT -6
Gee, so much for a Colts blow out.
Excusing a vindictive schadenfreude of New Orleans / Katrina suffering is just as ridiculous
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2010 17:19:38 GMT -6
You think it is the 5 days that creates the DI athletes?
LA / TX /gulf south is over flowing with athletic (genetic) talent....which is what DI talent actually is
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2010 16:08:53 GMT -6
So what happens if the coach's notes suck?
Also, what if the clinic is GIVING/PROVIDING the alcohol?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 5, 2010 19:24:38 GMT -6
So stats are completely meaningless?
If you have the "#1 defense in the league" it would be inconsequential because teams didn't go against the same offenses?
I'm not arguing, just trying to understand your position. I don't believe anyone has asserted that because "X has ----- stat superiority, they will beat Y", so the case for statistical comparison is one raised for framing a spectator's reference.
We're talking about blowouts and disparity, but when actually comparing the teams...they're actually quite equal.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 5, 2010 17:20:00 GMT -6
....Huge disppointment sends Nahlins into looting and burning.... jesus, you're ridiculous as well as offensive yet both opponents combined winning percentage comes out to 45-48% Both played AFC East opponents And yet they only had six common opponents, or less than 40% of their schedules. the point was that they both are about as similar (of a team/result) as you can get. To play the exact same schedules would mean they'd be coming from the same division and same conference (meaning, you're missing the point)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 5, 2010 12:18:22 GMT -6
Take stats for what they're worth because the two teams did not play identical schedules. yet both opponents combined winning percentage comes out to 45-48% Both played AFC East opponents
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 5, 2010 11:10:17 GMT -6
The Saints barely beat the Fumblingbumbling Vikings last week. Yeah, because the Vikings weren't a good team and the NY Jets were a dominant force in the AFC all season.......... Saints 34 - Colts 24
I really hope New Orleans gets back to their quick game and [fast] screens against the Colts, which was surprisingly absent against the Vikings. Though they scored (with Bush) on the Snag, they usually work the beejesus out of Stick and Spacing early in games. When they do - Brees really carves up underneath defenders (effortlessly).
I have to say, I have about lost all faith in the NFL as a sport entity with rule enforcements this season. I am having difficulty understanding / recognizing the subjectiveness of DPI / RTP penalties or even their relevance/legitimacy. Sure, you can make these calls, but I'm disheartened at how realisitic the threshold for calling them is (touching a QB's helmet / making contact with QB while he is throwing / a DB going for the ball near a receiver / etc) BOLD prediction? You couldn't ask for a more evenly matched game QB ComparisonPre Super Bowl Thoughts
|
|