Replies: 27
| visibility 1
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11175
Joined: 11/30/95
|
Letter from President Barker
Feb 13, 2007, 6:20 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1631]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 2404
Joined: 1/6/00
|
That explains NOTHING*****
Feb 13, 2007, 6:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
What the #### do you want him to say***
Feb 13, 2007, 6:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [5125]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 13024
Joined: 11/6/03
|
FREE JO JO!***
Feb 13, 2007, 6:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [427]
TigerPulse: 47%
Posts: 1883
Joined: 7/2/04
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6768]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 12494
Joined: 2/13/05
|
Makes sense, but why not address the issue of the timing of
Feb 13, 2007, 6:24 PM
|
|
the AARC's decisions? The 11th hour is baaaaad!
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Read the statement from TDP. He explains that it was their
Feb 13, 2007, 6:28 PM
|
|
fault due to a mistake that won't be repeated.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1764]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2227
Joined: 11/30/98
|
he said that in one instance...
Feb 13, 2007, 6:29 PM
|
|
which could be construed as a way to Barker with Jo Jo Cox...
so, I guess it was the AARC's fault for telling us we couldn't sign Dwight Jones until the night before signing day....
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I don't see the words "Jo Jo" or "Jones" anywhere in
Feb 13, 2007, 6:30 PM
|
|
either statement so you (as usual) are just making #### up to support your theories. What else is new?
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1764]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2227
Joined: 11/30/98
|
i see the reason why you have "loco" in your handle*
Feb 13, 2007, 6:32 PM
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I fail to see the reason you have "Tyger" in your's. You
Feb 13, 2007, 6:33 PM
|
|
should change it to "I only care about football Boy"
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1764]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2227
Joined: 11/30/98
|
nope... care about other sports as well...
Feb 13, 2007, 6:36 PM
|
|
and care about Clemson University and do not want to see it become something it's not... if I had wanted to go to an elitist school, i'd have gone to a UVA or someplace similar... no reason not to be the best we can be academically... as long as we are fulfilling our mission of serving the people of a poor, rural state first.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44048]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32965
Joined: 2/22/03
|
The applicant pool at Clemson has gotten better, but despite
Feb 13, 2007, 6:48 PM
|
|
that we have still kept the 66/33 ratio of in-state to out-of-state students. To me, that means we are "educating the state of South Carolina" just as much as we were before the rise in the talent of each entering class. So what's the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14224
Joined: 10/5/01
|
Re: The applicant pool at Clemson has gotten better, but despite
Feb 13, 2007, 6:49 PM
|
|
would Thomas Green Clemson want it to be 66 or 100?
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Thats not really a fair comparison. In the late 1800s, it
Feb 13, 2007, 6:53 PM
|
|
was hard to imagine someone coming all the way from Charleston to Clemson to go to college let alone California, Maine or Texas. Its a vastly different world and given the fact that TGC was a traveler who lived in many different states, I would imagine he would be pretty happy with 2/3 in state and 1/3 out of state.
|
|
|
|
|
null [159]
TigerPulse: null%
Posts: 299
Joined: 1/21/07
|
Re: President Barker just PWNED all of you!***
Feb 13, 2007, 6:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [301]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 396
Joined: 2/7/03
|
Re: Letter from President Barker
Feb 13, 2007, 6:56 PM
|
|
We need to give Jim Barker the benefit of a doubt and at least acknowledge that this situation could have been an honest mistake. I believe he got the message: Clemson fans will not support anyone who puts up unnecessary barriers to a winning program. I also believe most Clemson fans would also say that we appreciate Jim Barker's goal of making Clemson at top 20 national university.
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [427]
TigerPulse: 47%
Posts: 1883
Joined: 7/2/04
|
Re: Letter from President Barker
Feb 13, 2007, 7:23 PM
|
|
Give him the benefit of the doubt!Are you crazy?Barker is pure academics and help planned this attack on the athletic program.He along with the AArc are anti athletic and of one viewpoint.They did not mean for all of the information to get in public view.Now it is cover up time.The anger and backlash against them have caught them off guard.It is not time to let up on them.Keep speaking out and emailing these ivory tower idiots.Dont trust them.All of Barkers letter is pure bs.Fire Barker instead!
|
|
|
|
|
null [18]
TigerPulse: null%
Posts: 28
Joined: 10/8/02
|
Yeah! And I heard he's a communist Nazi!!! BURN HIM!!!***
Feb 14, 2007, 9:23 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connoisseur [356]
TigerPulse: 49%
Posts: 601
Joined: 10/1/01
|
Bark, I fail to see how we are competing at a "championship"
Feb 13, 2007, 6:57 PM
|
|
level. Have we won any national championships in basketball or football? Have we even sniffed a championship in either? We haven't even been able to win our division yet (please, kool-aid drinkers, don't tell me we were one point away. we were also one point away from having a worse season. at the end of the season, you are what you are). Facts are that if we bring in players like Dwight Jones instead of letting them go to great academic instituations like UNC, we stand a much better chance of winning championships.
Admit that you screwed up and tell us that you will fix it before next year.
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [427]
TigerPulse: 47%
Posts: 1883
Joined: 7/2/04
|
Re: Bark, I fail to see how we are competing at a "championship"
Feb 13, 2007, 7:25 PM
|
|
He is thinking about our future championships in the Ivy League.Barker is a disgrace to this university.
|
|
|
|
|
null [10]
TigerPulse: null%
Posts: 5
Joined: 12/15/04
|
Re: Letter from President Barker
Feb 13, 2007, 7:43 PM
|
|
The timing Mr. President... the timing. Why didn't you address the timing?????
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [368]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 262
Joined: 2/6/06
|
Re: Letter from President Barker
Feb 13, 2007, 11:07 PM
|
|
That's my question about all of this!!! Where was this statement 5-10 days prior to signing day?
There should have been a statement long before now! This smells of an attempt to divert and siege more than a clean up operation.
I love Clemson as I studied there for a year before finishing here at Auburn. Clemson is a great institution with high expectations of a Top 20 ranking. All that's great! However a ranking in some magazine should not be what Clemson is all about in terms of academics. It should be about what the founders of Clemson wanted it to be. An institution of higher learning in areas of agriculture, engineering, and the arts. If Barker wants to make Clemson better, then provide the university with a major in music, a graduate school in Vet. Medicine, and use the agricultural base to do what we are now doing at Auburn.....alternative fuel research that may one day be on the farms of america.
I would like to see my University (Auburn) in the Top 20, but I am happy with the Top 40 and the 25,000 students who come here and become extremely successful people. I am also happy that the athletic programs (which help provide the spirit of an institution) can operate without the interpretation of another body outside the NCAA. Just my .2 cents worth. Go Tigers!
War Eagle!
|
|
|
|
|
Rookie [15]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30
Joined: 8/25/03
|
Take the crosshairs off the Prez.
Feb 14, 2007, 8:40 AM
|
|
To accuse President Barker of being "anti-athletics" and "pro-academics" is an utterly ridiculous statement. It amazes me how some people on these forums can have such a one track mind. CLEMSON IS AN INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING FIRST AND FOREMOST. President Barker's responsibility (among many others) is to promote a positive image for the University to attract bright young students to want to study here. It is NOT to ensure that we have athletes here that can rush for 180 yards on Saturdays. A strong athletic program, while a large draw and an important piece of the puzzle, is not the ultimate goal of Clemson University. We should not persecute him for wanting to maintain a standard. He loves Clemson, and he loves Clemson athletics.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3436]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 7938
Joined: 6/24/01
|
While i agree, would you pay hundreds or even thousands
Feb 14, 2007, 9:05 AM
|
|
of dollars to watch a student take a math test?
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11950]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10521
Joined: 9/19/01
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [89]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 119
Joined: 5/30/03
|
Evidence for Board Success?
Feb 14, 2007, 9:13 AM
|
|
I do not see evidence that the board process is working. The high graduation rates the past 2 years offered as evidence by Pres. Barker are reflective of student athletes that were recruited prior to the establishment of the board. This proves that the coaches and Vickery Hall are the reason for Clemson's graduation success.
Why are we not adopting a process from a University that is experiencing success both academically and athletically?
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1729]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 3425
Joined: 2/7/07
|
Barker: You're missing the big picture.
Feb 14, 2007, 7:52 PM
|
|
"We know that we cannot be successful unless we are able to recruit, retain and graduate talented student-athletes."
So please explain why your rejects are accepted by other academically equivalent or superior universities. (I think it's because their presidents see the big picture, and you don't.)
"But we also insist on winning with integrity, and we have proven that we can do both."
Your definition of "winning" must be different than everyone else's. Clemson alumni want championship football and basketball teams. We'd rather have the top ranked football & basketball teams with mediocre graduation rates, than mediocre teams with top graduation rates. Schools like UNC & UF have "proven" that they can do both. You've only proven that Clemson can be mediocre in both academics and prestige sports. (In case you you're not aware, mediocre football teams and top tier soccer teams don't bring national prestige, money, and massive alumni support.)
Admitting a few academically marginal football & basketball players is not going to have any statistically significant impact on the academics of a university with 15,000 students. However, producing championship caliber football & basketball teams WILL significantly improve Clemson's academics by raising national awareness of Clemson, bringing financial support, and attracting higher caliber students.
That's the big picture.
Do you think that Notre Dame could attract so much academic talent, alumni support, prestige, and money (to cold, boring, flat Indiana) if they had perennially mediocre football teams? How long do you think their president would last if he handicapped the football team into mediocrity as you have done? Don't you think Notre Dame lets some academically underqualified athletes slide in for the greater good?
See the big picture?
|
|
|
|
Replies: 27
| visibility 1
|
|
|