Jenksismyhero

All fair points but you guys seem to be ignoring the good. I'd love for Beckman to win 6 games and then lose 6. That would be better than where they are right now.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Sep 22, 2014 -> 12:13 PM) No. Zook for sure had to go. He was a terrible coach, his recruiting took a huge drop off, and the program collapsed at the end. As mentioned, they hung on to him too long. He also had a ton of guys leave the program, which left the team with zero depth. Regardless of what Beckman has done, he left the program in bad shape for the next head coach (yes he had some talent senior year but after that, no depth, and we saw the results last year). This isn't a "since the guy who took over is possibly worse, I guess it says old guy should have never been fired." Zook didn't have the program going in the right direction. Even if Beckman doesn't either, it just means find the guy who can. If Beckman is gone after this year, whoever takes over will have an easier time building than when Beckman came in. I just don't know who would come here. Routinely early on, sure, but not consistently. I don't think Cubit is offered the HC job but who knows. Not really true. His teams won 2 bowl games in back to back years, which I don't think Illinois has ever done before. I think people need to be a little more realistic about Zook. He was far from good but he wasn't terrible, he did a lot of nice things, but ultimately his ceiling was too low for the Big Ten. He needed to be removed, earlier than he was, but he was better than a lot of other Illinois coaches, including Beckman. And why not Cubit? He did pretty good at Western Michigan and the offense turnaround was amazing last year. It's not as good this year, but he's got a lot of young transfer talent in key positions, on top of some injuries. He's not a home run hire, but people are dreaming if you think a great coach is coming to Illinois in down years (if ever).

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Sep 22, 2014 -> 09:31 AM) Elijah Thomas named Illinois his leader. I feel like Groce is so close to hitting a home run in this class but the scary part is that the possibility of striking out on all the top prospects we are in on still exists (although it sounds like they feel real good about Jalen Coleman). They've felt good about everyone. I won't hold my breath until someone actually signs on the dotted line. ET still has a visit to OSU right? I'm scared for that. ET also seems like a guy who loves the attention and will say whatever to get a response from various people on social media. edit: NM, i'm thinking of JE with the visit to OSU this weekend. I guess it's SMU next for ET. Still, if you're feeling like you have a leader, why not just commit?

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Sep 21, 2014 -> 11:11 PM) We are on that plan. The 3 lines for $145. It's $100 for the 10 GB data plan, and then $15 per line. However, both of my parents have opted in to that AT&T Next plan, which makes you pay the FULL price of a phone over 2 years. So my dad is paying an additional $12.50 a month for his Galaxy S3, and my mom is paying an additional $27 a month for her iphone. So while I only pay $50 a month right now, they pay $62.50 and $77 a month respectively. However, once I decide to get a new phone, apparently that $15 a month will go up to $40 a month with a new 2-year agreement UNLESS I decide to opt in to the AT&T Next plan, which means I too will end up paying a monthly price for a phone. Assuming I get a nice phone like an LG G3 or something, it will probably be $25-$30 a month, essentially what the rate increase would be from $15-$40 if I stayed on the 2-year agreement plan. Yeah all of those family plan deals aren't what they appear to be because you have to join the phone purchase plans, which end up costing way more in the long run. Buying a phone/plan these days is almost as bad as buying a car at a dealership - you know they're trying to screw you and confuse you every chance they get.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 22, 2014 -> 11:39 AM) Yes, Ron Zook ruined the mighty Illinois football program that was going through a glorious stretch of multiple Big Ten titles and bowl games year after year. True, but the talent was there to actually do that and become a decent program in the Big Ten. Instead he ruined it much like Turner did.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Sep 22, 2014 -> 11:33 AM) Wrong, a competent AD fires Zook in 2009 and Zook's recruiting had tailed off to the point that his 2010 and 2011 classes were absolutely horrible (there was only a handful of above average Big 10 players in those two classes combined) so I doubt he was going to be sustaining even 6-6 type seasons. The problem wasn't firing Zook but hiring Tim Beckman. And if Zook had been properly fired in 2009 and the new coach inherits a roster with a ton of talent (those 6-6 teams underachieved badly in typical Ron Zook fashion) they would have been able to get off to a great start and build a lot of momentum. Regardless of the quality of the class, Zook found NFL caliber players routinely. They just didn't have the coaching to really win at the college level. I agree with you though that he needed to be fired much earlier to save the program 5-6 years of rebuilding. Guenther did the same thing with Weber, so let's all be glad he's gone. I see this team winning 5, maybe 6 games at most. Beckman gets fired and Cubit is offered the HC job and he takes it. Another 2 years of 4-6 win seasons and we're back to having the same conversation about whether Cubit is good enough for year 3 and 4.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:55 PM) So why do love animal cruelty? I haven't seen you talk about it. For the 3rd time, feel free to be outraged. If you're the media, cover the story, don't take it to the next step of trying to create some narrative that doesn't exist about that issue.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:52 PM) That doesn’t sound like and out of control kid. That sound like a kid throwing a fit. It happens. At least you are making an effort to do something about it. I know a few parents that make no effort at all. Those are the ones with the out of control kids. Oh we know. It's a stage. He's 2. It's gonna happen. But trust me, as a new parent, it's incredibly infuriating when you hear non-parents and parents of "well behaved kids" make comments about your parenting as if they would be any better.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:48 PM) And the official efforts at the highest levels of a team and at the highest level of the NFL to sweep it under the rug/cover it up? I think that's been covered/talked about, no?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:48 PM) To the kid getting the s*** beat out of him by a stick, it is a big f***ing deal. Some people actually feel the need to stand up and say that we don't have to allow that as a society. Hey great, I agree. But why didn't we do all this a week ago before we knew of a particular instance of abuse by an NFL player?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:39 PM) Do we know this for sure? It's a legitimate question to ask when there's a string of these high-profile events of domestic and child abuse represent a deeper problem within the NFL's culture and more broadly in the country's culture. USA Today put together NFL player arrest data since 2000. It's presented in an interactive graphical form here: http://highrankwebsites.com/nfl-crimes-interactive/ 3-4 recent events = a string of events out of a league that employees thousands and thousands of people? This is what i'm talking about. We're creating narratives that don't exist based on a few events involving a couple of popular, well-known players. http://www.ibtimes.com/nfl-domestic-violen...re-rest-1690695

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:34 PM) I think you mistake anybody commenting on anything on a message board as making it "the biggest deal in the world". Please learn to read.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:28 PM) I think it's safe to say that 3 weeks ago, I would have been just as appalled to learn about a child being beaten with a stick to the point of bruising and bleeding as I am today. It's not weird for people to express their opinions on a topic when the topic comes up in current events. It sometimes takes a major event that happens to get the public's attention for whatever reason to expose deeper problems that have been there for a while but weren't made so obvious before. See this is my point. This type of abuse isn't new. It's not different. It's not an epidemic. It's not a league-wide issue. Yet that's the responses and editorials we're getting from these single, relatively rare events.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:30 PM) I guess jenks's point is that in his perfect world, we would not be upset about women being hospitalized by their fiancees and 4 year olds getting whipped in the testicles with a tree branch. Ahh what a world, free of the oppressive stench of PCism, where you can beat your wife without fear of people being condescending. Be outraged, but don't act like it's the biggest deal in the world. This criticism of mine applies more to the tone and narrative used by the media than individuals reacting to the story.

So 3 days ago everyone was outraged over child abuse right? And 6 months ago everyone was outraged over domestic violence right? And a year ago everyone was outraged about the name Redskins right? The media absolutely should cover these stories, and in some ways it's good that they become more high profile so that the country can be reminded that these terrible people/events exist. But it IS a little over the top when the media covers the story, and then takes the next step of asking stupid questions like does the nfl have domestic abuse problem? are all nfl players violent? etc.

QUOTE (He_Gawn @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:19 PM) Because of handlers... There's a reason IU, Purdue, OSU, MSU, etc.... have put hardly any time into the kid. UNLV will have what those guys are looking for. The red flags for those programs went up 2 years ago when he became even too expensive for Cathedral HS. Didn't ND just get a guard commit to fill that scholarship?

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 08:20 AM) Yes, Chuck, let's blame the media on this one for being concerned about someone that beat the f*** out of a 4 year old (and doesn't appear to be the first time). This isn't a speeding ticket. I brought that up before, but yes, I agree, right there shows me he was abusing him and getting some sort of emotional satisfaction out of it and was well intot he category of abuse, not just "disciplining." You have to admit this is just something else for people to talk about and be pseudo fake outraged over. Can we get back to domestic abuse? Oh and the Redskins name? Or have we exhausted our outrage on those already?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 06:37 PM) Sparingly or extremely infrequently is going to be something incredibly hard to control for. If you go through those references, one person presents a small study with a not-statistically significant sample size that finds a slightly positive response, but then the same person who conducted the study is quoted as saying that she can count the number of studies who find a positive effect on 1 hand whereas there are hundreds of studies on the other side. That's the issue with probabilities. It's entirely possible that under certain circumstances there is a slightly positive response, but determining those circumstances is going to be very difficult and it may not be possible to know that beforehand. There's probably a finite chance of a positive result from a very occasional thing for extreme behavior and there's probably a finite chance that the same thing turns the kid into a sociopath. The people I have seen at the grocery store where it's just an instinct for them and you debate whether you ask the person not to do that in front of you, that's the kind of kid who is going to be more prone to violence. Under the absolute correct circumstances? We don't understand the brain or its development well enough to answer that or, more importantly, to predict beforehand. I was just going to say, there's a huge difference between beating kids repeatedly (and/or with a weapon) and doing it infrequently to the point where it's a realistic threat (like 3-4 times in a childhood). One is not acceptable, the other I don't really have a problem with and no study is going to prove it will create some monster later in life. Abuse begets abuse, I can buy that. But not a few occasions. And btw, those same studies will say that yelling at kids isn't effective and is more harmful than good, yet 99% of parents do it anyway. Slightly related, f*** anyone that says bulls*** like "if your kids are out of control you're a bad parent." That's 100% bulls*** with little kids. Maybe a 16 year old you can say there's a failure in parenting, but not a kid under say like 6-7. Kids are wired from the day they're born to have certain traits. One of those is being incredibly strong willed and independent. I have a 2 year old son who is going through the terrible twos. He tests us every chance he gets. He purposefully does things to get a rise out of us. He's the complete opposite of my wife and I (as adults anyway). We just spent 3 days at Disney and for the most part he was great, but he had a couple meltdowns where he tried to run away and wouldn't listen or he just broke down and threw a tantrum. I guarantee you there were people thinking "oh what an out of control kid, clearly the parents fault." No, f*** that. We've done everything nearly by the book (which is bulls*** in and of itself given that every child is different and every parenting of a child should be different) and we're stuck with a strong willed 2 year old. My point is, if you're judging a parent, don't. You can't use your experience as any kind of basis for what that parent is doing right or wrong. You won the kid lottery. You have a kid that listens and doesn't run off, etc. Great for you. Just leave it at that. Just so it's said - I think Peterson is an asshole and should never be near kids or in the NFL. Hitting a kid with sticks, especially to the point you leave bruises and blood, is abuse and shouldn't be tolerated. But yelling and the occasional spank? I don't have a problem with it. Me and my siblings, my wife, a lot of my friends all had the same experience - a few spanks and a bunch of threats and we're all very civilized, non-violent people. Lastly, catching up on the thread was an entertaining read. Iamshack, I agree with your general point, despite others not really getting what you were saying.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 16, 2014 -> 11:11 AM) Only on the US Taxpayer. Time to start taxing unions and trade associations too.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 16, 2014 -> 07:39 PM) Have you researched this? I have not, but what I have researched is this same issue in dogs. There is widespread belief that we over-vaccinate our dogs and this causes far more harm than is appropriate given the relatively remote risks we are vaccinating against. As I said, I haven't researched it yet, but I'd guess the theory is along the same lines. I think at this point all of the "we're over vaccinated" myths have been debunked. And it absolutely is a rich white person issue because any kid not vaccinated can't go to daycares, public school, etc. That's a lot of alternative stuff to pay for. Costly choice.

Jesus. Decimated by injuries. Both teams

Got the lead. All it took was 4 turnovers and 175 yards in penalties!!

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Sep 12, 2014 -> 04:57 PM) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switch_(corporal_punishment) Thank you. I literally had no clue what that meant. Light switch didn't make much sense!

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Sep 12, 2014 -> 04:27 PM) I don't understand the whole "X school will get me to the NBA" thing, it doesn't make any sense. You could play for eastwest southern alabama state a&m. If you have NBA talent, they'll find you, and they'll draft you. If you want to talk about it helping their development a little bit? Maybe a LITTLE bit. But one year of a player "developing" at a school isn't going to change much when people are calling the player a possible lottery pick before he even plays a game in college. Do you know why Kentucky and Kansas "put" guys into the NBA? It's because NBA-level talent go to that school. It all comes down to winning and lifestyle while winning. At Kentucky you live in a bazillion dollar dorm specifically for basketball players where the players are provided anything and everything you can think of. 99.9% of other schools don't have that.

http://mashable.com/2014/09/12/nfl-ravens-...om-Tw-main-link