TGHusker

Political correctness running amok -- regardless, the timing worked out for RB when Turner fired the WR coach.

I was thinking of something similar - the 1995 team was full of Achiles - esp on D and Tommie on O. Those guys had the 'take no prisoner' mindset. Tom had to control that aggressiveness in a way that allowed them to maintain discipline and focus. You end up wt a team that allowed NO QB sacks all year (unheard of), low penalties, and disciplined (the Hector factor) enough to not be threatened in any game.

In other words you'd rather be NU and not OU. Seems like every time OU won a nat'l championship there was scandal or NCAA penalties

That is a man with an exceedingly sharp crystal ball. So, reading the tea leaves, it would seem that Brown went to YSU intending to stay there. But, something happened with Gill's WR coach, Gill had to make a move, and called his buddy Ron Brown. I'm betting this has less to do with Ron Brown's ministry and a lot more to do with Turner Gill's short list of coaches he wants to work with. I agree with this assessment by Knapp. RB would have continued his ministry regardless of location - it can happen anywhere. But there are few opportunities to coach with and under a very good friend. This switch makes perfect sense to me. Coach under Bo or under a friend - Turner. Not a hard choice. The last video exchange between Bo and RB that I saw was of Bo spitting all over RB has he walked by yelling on the side lines. On the ministry side, Liberty, Gill and RB is a good match. On the football side, the school will be on the rise with coaches like these.

SUH's money put to good use!

A good (doesn't have to be Heisman great - a good game manager and passer will do who isn't a turnover machine) QB, a great O-line, and consistency on D and we are there. We've had skilled players at WR, RB and spots on the D. If our OLine can get back to 'pancake' form then we'll be able to competed season in and season out with anyone. I look for Riley to get a better QB in with his next class - someone we can build around. We know we have a coaching upgrade in the o-line - I'm looking forward to see how it plays out on the field. We have some excellent WRs - DPE will be and is a game changer, we'll be good at RB (maybe by committee to begin with), and the D-line will be excellent wt Collins and VV set free to be aggressive. We are just a few pieces away from where we need to be. I think it starts wt the O-line and a good QB.

Potential recruits caught http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/fbi-arrests-six-isis/2015/04/20/id/639518/

Add to that the story of the Christians dumped at sea by militants - as they were escaping Libya on their way to Italy.

This should get interesting pretty soon

How she can do that story with a straight face is beyond me.

I would agree with this but with one change - I'd Move Taylor to #1. Wtout Zac we could have had 4 losing seasons under BC - Taylor was a coach on the field. He made up for some of the play calling with his truly gutsy play (he and Ganz really stood out in that way). Both he and Ganz took some horrible hits (multiple sac games) but always got up. They weren't afraid to take a hit in order to get the 1st down either. I do think the top 3 have significant separation from the others (wt Armstrong - still to be determined). Ganz should have started his JR year and I think the team knew it and that is a big reason why BC lost the team and eventually his job. BC throwing his lot in wt Keller (who could have been better if he had more years of development here) sealed his fate - that and his terrible D. His D the year before was decent. I think part of losing the D was BC's decision at QB. Ganz proved it the next year wt Bo's 1st team. Ganz made that team a winner with his leadership and gutsy play. TM is a standout purely with his individual skills. Not a leader like Taylor or Ganz but he lead in his own way. He had some pretty amazing plays and individual drive that I think 'willed' the team to win in the season they won and had to win the last 6 games to win the division.

You got that right. This is getting way off track but I wonder why there haven't been joint operations to clean up that mess. If we can invade Iraq which has little affect on us, why not go into Mexico to rid it of the scum that greatly affects our country (not talking immigration but the drug traffickers). Of course wt Mexico cooperation and with their military - it would be a cooperative effort not an invasion. The answer probably is self evident: Mexican Mafia = Corruption at the highest level of Mexican govt. Thus the drug mafia business continues.

Good call on the source, BRB. The only thing I could find on this that did not come from Judicial Watch: http://www.kvia.com/news/us-federal-law-agencies-say-report-of-isis-in-anapra-mexico-is-unsubstantiated/32367718 good catch

+1 to both of you. That's a good saying. I'll take your +1 & I'll double that with 2 :thumbs

Getting back to your original post, I'd have to say 'no' to this. Running a university is a balancing act that has to be struck somewhere between maintaining complete order in all things and letting the inmates run the asylum. American universities do a pretty fair job of maintaining an atmosphere conducive to free thinking while still providing an education to student who want one. This may be true to a very limited extent, but for good reason. Recall last month the OU students and their bawdy racist song? They were probably within their Constitutional First Amendment rights to sing that song. But no university could allow behavior like that to exist. It would quickly spiral out of hand, leading to prejudice and alienating a significant segment of students. See above. The reining in of free expression on U.S. campuses is de minimis, and for the most part, necessary. /JMHO I think the bigger issue is simply with that generation of kids in general. I have read a number of articles where a student body here and there try to get "Trigger Warning" labels on books, or attempts to ban anything someone might find "upsetting" even to the point of trying to censor comedians. None of these have been instituted by the universities, but by the students. Who belong to a ridiculously sheltered and oversensitive generation as it is. It would not be the first time you hear even football coaches talk about kids never get told "No" by anyone. Its a mentality that needs to get fixed, or these kids will get destroyed when they enter the real world. Interesting - I've not considered that angle before.

good one

Good post. The issue with limited manufacturing jobs is one a big one. And you are correct about student debt. We were fortunate in that one of our sons was a National Merit Scholar and basically got his education paid for and our other son wasn't far behind and got large scholarships (both ended up being named as the at top finance student the year they graduated - smarter than their proud dad!). I don't know what we and they would have done if they went to the same school without that aid (excellent private univ, ranked high). School debt will drive a change in the way we do college and post high school education. We are supporting a huge brick and mortar institution in spite of modern tech and new teaching methods. Disclaimer - I teach as an adjunct (business) and do enjoy the classroom experience much more than the on line experience.

Don't forget 1950s antique car collectors... That is right!! Good point - time to find some parts in Cuba for those old cars in my Dad's farm trees!!

Link They very well could be just south of the US border. However, pardon me if I take this article with a huge grain of salt when it comes from Judicial Watch. A paper bound and determined to convince everyone of corruption and conspiracies. Write an article about something really scary and then claim it's just impossible to verify because it's in such a dangerous area that the Mexican and American forces can't even go in and check it out. I saw that article yesterday and decided to use the Knapp School of Moderation and not post it because of the source. But since you did ..... Me thinks if it is legit - a few flights wt drones would take care of them and maybe the dangerous cartels. Since there has been no action, and since I think our CIA /military/FBI/President would know about it before this article was published - I decided it was not legit and did not ramp up my fear meter. On a related matter, there was another article I read in which the military estimated another year to get ISIS out of Iraq.

How is this NOT a "whackadoodle" version of Christianity? If this were a common tenet amongst Christians, wouldn't we see dozens, hundreds of such stories? We don't, it's rare, and labeling all Christians as like this is not remotely correct. Thank-you Knapp for speaking up. And also thank-you for addressing my post. And yes, Moderation is a good thing in posting a article.

My only comment, I wonder if Knapp will judge this thread as divisive and label VV as a propagandist for the "anti-god" crowd - (The crowd that is angry at the Christian God that "doesn't exist"). The OP itself is not worthy of a response.

Powerful, sobering - thanks for sharing

I'm ok with this. Actually more than ok. I think it will be a good thing. Normalizing relationship wt Cuba is long overdue. We have communist China as our # 1 trading partner, which has its own civil rights and anti-American issues, yet we hold Cuba at arms length. The environment in Central and South America has changed dramatically since 1982 when Cuba was placed on the list. If the voice of democracy and liberty has any power at all, it should be expressed to our neighbor 90 miles away. Perhaps normalized relationships will paved the way for greater freedom within their system. I'd rather Cuba be linked to us financially/economically then to their old Russian (Soviet) masters. One side benefit: Both political parties have been 'beholding' to the Cuban/American vote in Florida. Thus policy towards Cuba has been swayed by the same. This will remove this 'pandering' issue from the table to a certain degree. I know Rubio will make a big issue out of it (as well as most of the other Repubs running for President) but I think overall it is time to get beyond the politics of 1962-63 http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-takes-cuba-off/2015/04/14/id/638442/

Yes, lets have a guy that doesn't have a college degree be the leader of our country. I dont' disagree with basically what you said but I find it funny at the same time. I have had many conversations on forums like this with liberal people who believe jobs that require a college degree are elitist and do nothing but hurt poor people and are designed to keep the poor in their place. I've been a Scott Walker fan but of late I wonder if he will be able to weather the heat of the constant campaign pressure and exposure. Bush, Christie, Cruz, Paul all have had more media experience and exposure. We'll see if Walker is ready for prime time and avoids the Rick Perry moment.

Because we wouldn't' want to help or fellow man now would we? I'm for anybody but a status quo GOP candidate who panders to the extremists. However I'm not dumb enough to think that will ever happen. Too many damn redneck idiots out there, and too many ignorant bible thumpers that want to force their "values" on me. Z - I agree wt the 1st part I highlighted in red. No more establishment candidates - Jeb Bush for example and also not one from the extreme like Ted Cruz. I'm ready for a new face/name. Regarding 'values' - in the market place of ideas, many values are 'forced' on us to consider. Some we agree wt and some we don't. Some we end up living with when they become the 'law of the land' - whether we like it or not. I'll give Jeb the benefit of the doubt right now because I don't know much about him. He would be better than Cruz and that's not even open for debate. Cruz is the Bane of current American politics, and everything this country doesn't need. Jeb could be better than Rubio too. I had hope for Rubio when he took to the stage but for all his intelligence he's still become just another GOP candidate, no more original thoughts, he just toes the party line. Regarding values I know you understand what I'm saying. We protect people's right to worship and separate that from the government, we don't beat the bible down on them and force them to live how our interpretation of "our" religion sees fit. Have to agree with you about Rubio - it seems his 'flower has faded' over time and the rhetoric is becoming pretty routine. Maybe he was having a hard time finding his unique 'voice'. Cruz and Paul came along and started sucking all of the air out of the room. I understand what you are saying about values also. No issues.