Glendower

Hello? the subject line says that it's "TRUE"... I don't know whom to believe.. hmmmm huhh... hmmmm.... Though I do object to your wanton use of the phase "conspiracy theories" when what you actually mean is "lies." It debases the whole notion of conspiracies when *actual* conspiracies are discussed.

Sad but true. Its everywhere Pac-10, ACC, Big-10, Big East, etc. and getting worse. Just as our society's standards slide, so we must expect it from the individuals in that society. It's almost impossible to weed out the bad apples (if that is the case here), throughout football land because there are so many bad apples today. Paris Hilton is a good example of the rot in our society. Its so sad when you want to be associated with a class organization. it really is, as you said rampant everywhere. best policy is for ALL coaches, everywhere to throw the bums out. best way to deal with it and get it stopped is bust their careers. unfortunately, it is all about winning in college ball and the hell with doing what is right. i applaud callahan for doing what is right! If you meant it

"Now it's time to get behind this staff and players like Husker fans always have." Remember how much everyone loved TO right off the bat? Those were the good ol' days of... um.... oh yeah.

Hmmm... it's hard to know whether this is insult or flattery

Do they let teh public in to take shots? I have this fancy new lens that i would love to try out shooting at practice. I guess this is something that I should know since i walk past (or near) the stadium every day

As long as we don't need healthy running backs for our gameplans, we will rawk the house! (but here's hoping for healthy running backs, anyway)

Swift is totally a clutch receiver. When a first down is more important than huge yards, that's when swift gets a good look. He was pretty invisible to some of husker-watching friends, but I started calling his name before certain clutch plays and they all started to recognize his strength. I hope that the coaching staff continues to use him when sure-handedness is more important than flash.

Good Effing Lord. If people hate this conversation so much, then why do they jump in to make a comment?? When you were kids, did you also tell people that you were ignoring them and then go on at length to explain why?

Hahahaha But I'm going to go back to that they should have said something. Look, there are a lot of different ways to tell the "truth;" I don't really care what the truth is, I, personally, am disappointed in the inept way they handled this situation in the public. If you make something *look* like a coverup, people will assume that it *is* a coverup. See? They could have made a half truth, near lie, anything.. ad there you go. I don't think we need a tell-all or anything... And anyway, would people please stop using 'conspiracy' as a pejorative? It is a real word that actually means something. This *is* a conspiracy. It takes a coordinated effort to keep something like this private. That doesn't mean that it's crazy, but it's also true that the existence of a conspiracy is inconsequencial in this instance. That's all. you have to remember one thing. they (the university) cannot legally say anything reguarding what happened to Marlon because of the HIPPA laws. AR has given great examples of this legaleese earlier in this thread. (thanks AR) if the university said the hell with the HIPPA laws and released a statement on what happed, damage control as some would call it) only bad would come out of it. 1.) Marlon and his family would be able to sue the University 2.) future recruits would say "Why the hell would I want to go there and have them post my personal business all over the papers and on the internet" then we would really need to do some damage control. i understand understand why everyone wants to know what happened. it is called morbid curiosity, kind of like driving by a bad car wreck. you want to look away but you just can't. sure i would like to know what caused Marlon to end up in the hospital, but I am fine with his asking for us to respect HIS privacy. if MARLON wants everyone to know what happened MARLON will tell us what happened. as for Doak, who really cares? i didnt even know his name until the article came out that he was fired. p.s. i really do not think he had anything to do with BC getting the job at NU. Okay... hmm... I think we need to get some de-tangler in this thread because there are a few different arguments and it seems like some of the thread's multiple threads are getting crossed, knotted, and conflated. The first one: "I think XXXX happened to lucky!" -> That one has been settled. Think whatever you want, you don't know, nobody who does is talking. Done. The Second one: "We, as fans, deserve to know what happend!" vs "No you don't! Jeeze! Shut up!" The latter argument has won that one. You don't deserve to know and have no right to know. The end, that's it. There is no legal obligation and the laws actually protect people like lucky from people like you. The third is: "They should have said something to curb the two above arguments before they began" vs "You have no right to know." Hasn't really been settled because it's more of a theoretical argument. The response doesn't really address the issue about whether it is better to stop wild speculation from running arond like an idiot on crank. You can't cite anything, but I think this is still an interesting arguement because I, personally, want ot know what people think. Are there any professional PR people here? I've seen PR people get fired for releasing a press release justa little bit too late (and letting the opposing side spin the outcome of a suit their way first which then screwed "my" side... PR people were canned). This seems like the latter case, only the opposition are the people who say crap like "I have it on good authority that he tried to KILL HIMSELF!!" or some other unfounded thing. But we all played telephone in kindergarten, I'm sure... one thing gets picked up here, another there, until the first person gets something back that isn't what he said. Or everything comes full circle and the idiot who starts this stuff hears his own words echoed back to him and it's confirmed, suddenly he has the power of "I heard other people say that htey heard this too!: When he's acutlly just standing in an endless echochamber. I know we have no right, I know that he can stay private (and good for him!) all he wants. But if this were you and it was up to you to protect the image of the team, would you have wanted to have been able to say something officially? And you do know that PR people don't have to tell the "truth" right? I'm not saying that they should have revealed details... all that they woudl have to do is say a "drug interaction"... that might be one of those catch-alls that would cover a wide range of actual causes... Substance here is irrelavant. This is about how to stop innane speculation, conjecture, and one of those other words that means Made up Schiße.

New fancy Storebought Word? Thanks for making me look it up Pejorative From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A word or phrase is pejorative if it implies contempt or disapproval. The adjective pejorative is synonymous with derogatory and dyslogistic (noun: dyslogism) (antonyms: meliorative, eulogistic, noun eulogism). Dyslogisms such as "pea-brain" and "bottom-feeder" are words and phrases essentially pejorative by their nature. Although pejorative means much the same thing as disparaging, the latter term may be applied to a look or gesture as well; in the evocative language of gesture, it may not be easy to distinguish a disparaging gesture from a dismissive or merely skeptical one, however. Pejorative expressions that are not inherently dyslogisms may also be used in a non-pejorative way, however, and determining the intent of the speaker is problematic — as with any implied meaning. Conversely, a common rhetorical ploy is to apply "pejorative" to a factual descriptor — as "toxic" might be applied to poison — and then decry it as "pejorative" to suit the agenda of those defending the substance as harmless. Not every breath of criticism is pejorative. Err... thanks for posting the definition of words THere are a couple of ways that people can talk about 'conspiracies'... one is to say, simply, that there is a conspiracy like the House Selected Committee on Assassinations did. It only means that more than one person conspired to commit a crime. The other, pejorative sense is when people just say "Oh that's a conspiracy theory" or some other dismissive phrase and incoperate the word "conspiracy" to stand in for "crazy." It's supposed to end the discussion when, quite often, the person using the word doesn't appear to actually know what it means. I just think it's unfortuante when this happens to our language and then that same language is used to paint serious investigators and schizophrenics alike. Anyway... is this off topic? I think this might officially be 'off topic' now

Bah, the warren commission! They'd be just as involved in the conspiracy as the person who *really* pulled the trigger! My guess is that castro sent some of his pills up here... that's why he seems so miserable right now. It was more important to him to give the program a black eye than it is to feel good. That sneaky jerk.

Hahahaha But I'm going to go back to that they should have said something. Look, there are a lot of different ways to tell the "truth;" I don't really care what the truth is, I, personally, am disappointed in the inept way they handled this situation in the public. If you make something *look* like a coverup, people will assume that it *is* a coverup. See? They could have made a half truth, near lie, anything.. ad there you go. I don't think we need a tell-all or anything... And anyway, would people please stop using 'conspiracy' as a pejorative? It is a real word that actually means something. This *is* a conspiracy. It takes a coordinated effort to keep something like this private. That doesn't mean that it's crazy, but it's also true that the existence of a conspiracy is inconsequencial in this instance. That's all.

THe resto of them merely scored more points.

:-( WTF??

I don't think it's really about that anymore It's become a discussion about whether it's a good idea to let the public know or not... at least, that's how I'm reading it. I think we all know that no one knows, that was settled in the first couple of posts I think it's fun for that reason, anyway.

I don't think that anyone said that they have a right-- to speak for myself, I don't think that I have one. But just think how much easier it would be to end the discussion and lock the thread if you had the department's talking points. Don't you think that there is something to be said for that? For having an accessable official explanation?

To be fair, owens is blasted because he is a jackass, and becase his publicist made absolutely stupid comments (and was subsequently let go, wasn't she?). "He has twenty five million reasons to stay alive" or something like that...

So think his sh#t is apart? Even saying that his sh#t needs to get put back together shows that they ought to have been more active in the PR department to imply that his sh#t is just fine. Waiting for all of his sh#ts to return to one cohesive sh#t means that something was more deeply wrong than we were led to believe. This is why public figures should be in the public... not because I need to know or becuase it will affect anything in my life, but because it could give the program a black eye to do these things that look like a coverup.

"On the next 'Beyond the Glory'" lol. i admit i might of gone a little overboard... but i'm getting sick of people saying "we don't know anything, so just shut up with the bad vibes" but at the same time saying "everything is going well". it's contradictory They should fire someone in the PR department, too. This is horrible damage control at best and leads to this sort of speculation. They should have made a formal announcement immediately to keep the sort of speculation that we're seeing from growing legs. Putting the pieces together, yeah, it looks like he was incorrectly medicated and the responsible person was canned-- who doesn't try to find another job in the field he's been trained to work? Someone who did something severely wrong for one. However, maybe it DIDN'T happen that way. Maybe lucky just had too many pills and did it to himself while at the same time he should have known better than to hand a kid so many potentially "fun" pills. See? Who knows? This is what PR is for. In a world of mass media and rapid mass communication between lay people, you have to get the first word out there. They didn't defuse the story and now we can all just keep on guessin' for ever. If they do decide to eventually tell the tale, people who believed that lucky ODed on purpose (or whatever) will see the denial as a confirmation and it will continue until people have forgotten who lucky is. I don't know what happened, I am curious, but at this point all explanations are about equally plausible. Bad PR! Bad BAD! Go to your room.

..and I think it's "you're" Thanx fur da spelll czech glen that's why i'm not becoming a law-yer Hahha I do what I can. U jist leaf that law-talkin' ta the edumacateds.

..and I think it's "you're"

Hahahaha I read the title of this thread and thought, "Who cares if some players are going to go watch the combine?" I need some sleep

It's widely said that San Diego is the most 'tallented' team in the NFL... I don't know if there could be a much better opportunity

Hmm... scholarship at stanford. There isn't much I wouldn't do for that. I love the University and am going to have a number of degrees from this institution, but if someone offered me a scholarship to stanford... hmm... well, actually, that might be kind of a tough call because my adviser is one of the top men in his field... but still Stanford... And I think that before we start talking about how much he did or didn't love the team blah blah blah, we have to ask how many players are here because they love the team vs. several self-promoting interests. Loving the team and the state and the school are fantastic, no question, but it's pretty naive to assume that people see that big red N and swoon. People see a national stage to showcase their skills and great facilities that will best develop their skills that will in turn be showcased. I think a lot of the dead-enders (no offense intended by this, just being really blunt) are probably more school and team oriented than the really great players. I strongly doubt that Swift will be going pro... this is The It for him. I love watching him play and he is probably one of my favorites on the team. He probably won't play in a super bowl, he'll never kiss a lombardi trophy, so he plays ever day to get whatever he can out of this team. That is true for *most* players, of course, and it is not to say that the showcase players don't have this drive and love, but I can't blame them if they don't. I don't hope to publish to make the school look better, though it can, nor to make my adviser look better, though it can-- I want my CV to look good. I guess it's similar to Ayn Rand's philosophy (however uneasy it makes me to say that )-- striving to be my best and the 'good' trickles up, down, and all around. So what if the guy came here selfishly? He helped NU win a goddamned national championship! What more do you want? You want something "good" in his heart while he does it? Hell, he could be out there thinking about killing kittens for all I care, but if he runs through on an option and picks up a block, what does it matter? Similarly, I don't want people to act like jerks off the field either-- to a destructive level, I mean. LP was great on the field, but his actions off the field are going ot be carried by the program and TO for years to come. So, I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not going to question a guy's motive if he gets things done and isn't a jackass. You might not like him personally, but just accusing him of being self-involved or self-centered is such a moot point. How many people work where they work because they just love it so much and not because of the paycheck? Would you do it for free? How much less would you take to do your job? And, no, you can't say "I'd do it for free if..." because the 'if' is usually added to diminish sacrifices that you'd have to make outside of work. You want to live, you want to be happy, you don't want your S.O. to leave you... But you can't erase that stuff-- you have self-interested motives in *everything* you do, some people can just frame it better than others. Oh... hmm... end rant.

Okay, this is just for fun, but i see that we have all of these saviors coming in next year, so I'm wondering if anyone has any (fun) speculation about who *won't* live up to the hype. I'm going to think about it while I'm in class doodling today and see if I can think of anything entertaining to say. Have fun, don't hate (it's valentine's day FFS!)... hell... talk about who will live up to all of the hype in the world... that's fine, too... It's just that all of the super duper player hype is cracking me up.