vic law's former teammate has announced he is transferring from Kentucky. Was NU ever involved with him?
Charles matthews
- Thread starter Windy City Cat Fan
- Start date
I would not assume that SU has the same academic standards for athletes as NU.............
Oh please. Don't you realize that our coaches receive plenty of special allowances and exceptions nowadays? There are few guys that we can't take and those guys won't wind up at Stanford either. (Maybe Duke though. Ha ha.) We're not to the point of "dropping our pants" when it comes to academic standards but it's closer than it's been for 50 years.
One of the NU Asst Deans told me that every revenue athlete is an academic exception. Not strictly true, but the point is clear.
I replied that not very many of the non athletes who do qualify academically have manual labor jobs that require them to do physical work 20 plus hours a week and another 15 hours non physical work while carrying a full course load.
Not true Y-Cat. Only a "few" revenue sport athletes we can't get admitted? That's just not true. While the vast majority of these athletes do not have the academic qualifications to be admitted in the general pool of NU applicants, we still maintains the 2nd highest overall admission standards for revenue athletes among all Power 5 conference members. That allows us to recruit approximately 20 percent of the best prospects in the Country. At least that's what I have been told by Fitz, and Phillips and Bates. I am sure they know. Have no reason to believe they are embellishing the facts.
GOUNUIi
With the cost of college nowadays, there are plenty of non-athletes who work one or more side jobs to be able to afford college, and many take a year or more off school to ante up the money for tuition. Most students take more than four years to graduate. One of my grandsons, who has been taking courses at night for years while holding a full-time job, is a good example. The life of a college athlete is not easy, but then again it shouldn't be easy to get a full-ride scholarship to a top school.
Not true.
"Most" graduate NU in 4 years. Overall graduation rate for incoming Freshmen at NU is 93%. 86% of the incoming freshmen class of 2006 graduated in 4 years, and 85% of the 2007 class. So all but 6-7% of incoming Freshmen graduate in 4 years, about the same as those that don't graduate at all.
A great site for college stats is:
https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?s=all&q=northwestern&id=147767#retgrad
Why, I personally haven't seen him play but I tend to trust john calipari's eye for talent.
That might be true at NU, but:
"Woodard’s not alone in extending his university studies beyond a typical senior year. While undergraduate education is typically billed as a four-year experience, many students, particularly at public universities, actually take five, six or even more years to attain a degree. According to the Department of Education, fewer than 40% of students who enter college each year graduate within four years, while almost 60% of students graduate in six years. At public schools, less than a third of students graduate on time."
From Time magazine a couple of years back. There are newer articles on the subject.
Then Coach Fitz should have no problem releasing the information publicly. Oh wait, last time NU was asked by a colleague of mine, NU refused on the grounds of student privacy. Then my colleague said that NU could remove all identifers. NU refused on the grounds of not being obligated to divulge because it's a private institution.
Besides that, many people with inside info at NU have shared that Fitzgerald has been successful in getting a few kids into NU who would not have gotten in 10 years ago. Don't shoot the messengers.
Not that it really matters. Back before the 1970s, we had much looser standards than now for football and basketball. No surprise we had some great teams in both sports.
So what you're saying is you don't have a clue about current NU admissions standards for athletes.
NU should do whatever it takes to sign Matthews. Finalists for him coming out of High School were Kentucky, Mich St. & Kansas. Enough said ?
I'd have Law at his house tonight !
I'd have Law at his house tonight !
What evidence do you have to suggest such a thing? Hate is a strong word.
Speaking of hate, your personal attacks toward me could be construed as hate for me, but I take them as petty ignorance.
If only that were true. I have too much direct experience with NU athletes, but what I don't have are mean test scores and GPA data. Ask Coach Fitz if he has more leeway with recruiting than when he started as coach and you will get a non-answer at best. Try it.
The 58-59 team finished 2nd in the conference. The 67-68 team was 4th. They could have been in the NCAA Tournament if there had been 64 seeds back then.
There were only 23-24 teams in the Tournament back then.
Wasn't an attack; asked you a question. Many of your posts are critical of our coaching staff, so was wondering why you hate them, that's all...
I have. We started discussing admissions the second time we met when he inquired of me, as a former player, what my highest degree was and what I do. That seemed to open doors for me to the program that perhaps aren't available to you. I also have received reports on the mean test scores and GPA data. It's impressive. You are completely full of ......
Last edited by a moderator:
A team that finishes fourth in a conference is a good team. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a great team. And you're talking two teams over many years of NU bssketball.
The standards were tougher than the rest of the conference back then as well. Maybe not as much as today but still more stringent. We never had the depth that other teams had. Another problem back then was that schools like OSU would stockpile players as the limits on scholarships were a lot higher (I think 115) . Big problems back then were the lack of money and Strotz
Those are great teams. Look up some of the guys on those teams before you bash them. They would have been NCAA Tournament teams in the modern era. How do you deny that?
Oh, right. In the Charlie Moore thread, xyzbobxyz said that I drink the purple kool-aid and agree with everything that NU does. Now I am critical and hate NU.
I think that you and xyzbobxyz should get married. Have you picked a date?
Since he is the only person I have on ignore here, he is probably not a good poster to cite when you are making a point such as this.
Just to be clear, I'm the groom and Mike will be wearing white.
Actually that makes my point. You want to ignore posts that don't agree with your preconceived notions about the posters. I'm just asking you to consider what you're saying, that you say I "hate" NU coaches while another poster says I'm drinking the purple kool aid. It can't be both.
That poster's opinion is meaningless to me, so thus there is no "both"when you say "It can't be both".
A fourth-place team in a 10-team conference is NOT a great team. It is a good team. You must be from the "everybody gets a trophy" era. You really think everyone who makes the NCAA tourney is a great team these days? Seven teams from the B1G made it this year. They were all great?
All that shows is a woeful understanding of history and a lack of appreciation for those NU teams. Joe Ruklick was just "good?" Same for Dale Kelley and Don Adams? Uh-huh.
Considering your posts are becoming only personal attacks or putting down other posters, in what way are your posts meaningful?
Are you talking about teams or individual players now? Make up your mind. I saw Dale Kelley and Don Adams play the year I was at NU. They were good players on a mediocre team. Unfortunately, they didn't have much of a supporting cast and were a sub-.500 team and were barely over .500 the previous two years. You and I obviously will have to disagree over what constitutes a "great" team.
Gamber also played with them a few years, with Sarno. I think they had 4-5 players average double figures. In 68-69 they were ranked in the top 20 several times in a Big Ten with five teams that were ranked at various junctures.
I guess that just doesn't count for anything to you.
The 58-59 team was ranked as high as 6th in the country in a Big Ten with (again) five teams that were ranked at different times.
These were among the only great teams at NU, ever. A "good" team at NU is quite a bit lower than these teams. "Good" would be like Eschmeyer's final year, the NIT team. Below that are mediocre and bad.
I wonder, if you could pick a team of your choice of any of the best 9 or 10 players in NU history, would that be a "great" team? I'd define "great" as definitely a final 4 NCAA team, if not the champion.
In my time following NU, the best team would be:
G: McKinney, Juice, BMac, Jitim
F: Shurna, Crawford, Stack, Goode
C: Esch, Olah
I think this is a border-line Final 4 team.