Unless things have changed recently I would say he does not have a + arm or speed at this time. You are right though he could probably focus on baseball and do great. I would rather he focus on basketball if he is getting a scholarship.
thanks for the insight. I am concerned that you have 4 testiclesPresumably it'd be four, and you are ****ing stupid.
You have no clue about what you are posting.. There was a time when wrestling coaches tried to claim that their sport suffered because of money going to women's programs under Title IX. The data on financial support for athletes has been published over & over again, and conclusively shown that neither wrestling or baseball OR ANY other men's programs ANYWHERE were adversely affected by Title IX.
In the decade following the adoption of Title IX there was not ONE Division 1 member where the spending on men's programs decreased while the budgeting for women's athletics increased.
When I was a graduate student tutoring in the Iowa Athletic Dept in the glory years 1955-57 the only baseball players who got any significant financial aid were guys who were on football or basketball schollies. The kind of financial assistance that baseball, wrestlers, swimmers, etc got was phoney "counselors" jobs in the dorms or other "employment" by the university. The AD & U officials looked the other way at Coach Evy's under-the-table money, though everyone around the Fieldhouse knew about it (along with other scandals involving AD Paul Brechler).
The facts: almost all Division 1 schools pass on large sums of student fees to athletics----and the majority of students paying the fees are women. and until only recently this included Iowa (which has consistently operated its athletic programs with a profit & hasn't needed the fees---or the revenue from charging students for game tickets---always free until Fry and winning came in 1980); a constantly increasing number of athletes at Iowa---now about half----get financial aid from endowed scholarships (endowed by the millions donated by wealthy COUPLES---you know, the pairs that Republicans insist must be half women---who keep U of Iowa athletics in the top 10% of revenue in the entire Division 1. You might want to reflect a moment on the fact that Lucille Carver (of Carver-Hawkeye Arena) alone has and continues through the Carver Foundation to provide enough funding to underwrite the Hawekeye baseball program every year.
Title IX is not the reason why "minor" sports (in the bizarre manner that the NCAA finds the world's most popular sports like soccer/real football, baseball, track & field, tennis, hockey to be "minor" ones) can only be partially supported by scholarships. That is the decision of the NCAA (based on subservience to the major TV networks, ESPN, Comcast, Fox)----and any school not named Notre Dame, UNC, Ohio State. Michigan. UConn, Syracuse, Southern Cal, or Kentucky will get penalized for millions of dollars lost in consequence of overspending the limits placed on minor sports by the NCAA before Title IX was even proposed in the US Congress.
The only impact of Title IX is that almost two decades ago the NCAA decreed a 15% reduction in the numbers of FULL schollies in all men's programs (this was necessary to make it possible for expenditures on women's sports to make progress toward parity: NCAA Division 1 member schools were unwilling to allow schools to give less than a FULL schollie to ALL 100 football or 15 basketball players, but agreed to a 15% reduction in scholarship money to all men's programs. So blame belongs on football & basketball (i.e., the source of the hundreds of millions of dollars the NCAA gets---and partially divides---among member schools).
And if Title X still bugs you, I've got news for you: Hillary is about to become your worst nightmare.
I was a d1 baseball coach when I was younger. Screw your BS.
I saw first hand what happens to men's programs like baseball. I watched as we fund raised several hundred thousand dollars for a new lighting system and turf and watched participation and roster limitations (not even talkingtalking about scholarships ) cut.
I then watch as softball had more scholarships than baseball and still had to hold open tryouts to fill those spots. Whereas we had close to 100 boys try out just to get an Opportunity to practice through fall and winter hoping to make the practice roster for the season. Many tried out 4 straight years. All that went away. Boys paying their own way were denied opportunitiea because if title ix.
I watched as softball demanded to have (for no effort on their own) all of the things we had built on our own. Not just the basics, the luxury items. The things we worked for in addition to the budget.
Using football roster #s in the formula is a joke.
I have a daughter that played basketball in college. So I am certainly glad she had opportunities but she understands that we cannot legislate equality in all situations. It's ridiculous.
So don't try to lecture me on your agenda BS.
The fair thing would be to have men's and women's athletic departments. Each responsible for their own funding. Women's sports aren't appealing to most people so why should they get the same treatment?Unfortunately equality DOES have to be done through legislation because people and systems wont do the right thing unless they are required to do so through legislation. Just look back at how poorly womens sports were treated before the legislation.
My experience is through disability, not gender, but the fact that legislation required to get people to do the right thing sucks big time. How would would feel if your daughter had not had the opportunity to play college basketball because college didn't want to spend the money??
Wrong. You can't and shouldn't try to legislate equality.Unfortunately equality DOES have to be done through legislation because people and systems wont do the right thing unless they are required to do so through legislation. Just look back at how poorly womens sports were treated before the legislation.
My experience is through disability, not gender, but the fact that legislation required to get people to do the right thing sucks big time. How would would feel if your daughter had not had the opportunity to play college basketball because college didn't want to spend the money??
Probably about the same as I would if my Son wanted to be a College Baseball player at say................ Iowa State.Unfortunately equality DOES have to be done through legislation because people and systems wont do the right thing unless they are required to do so through legislation. Just look back at how poorly womens sports were treated before the legislation.
My experience is through disability, not gender, but the fact that legislation required to get people to do the right thing sucks big time. How would would feel if your daughter had not had the opportunity to play college basketball because college didn't want to spend the money??
The fair thing would be to have men's and women's athletic departments. Each responsible for their own funding. Women's sports aren't appealing to most people so why should they get the same treatment?
I remember when the university decided they had to add a women's sport and chose rowing. There were signs posted all over town imploring women to try out for the team (and thus, a scholarship), no experience necessary.
Connor just said he is playing baseball at Iowa. The OPs question was legit
You have no clue about what you are posting.. There was a time when wrestling coaches tried to claim that their sport suffered because of money going to women's programs under Title IX. The data on financial support for athletes has been published over & over again, and conclusively shown that neither wrestling or baseball OR ANY other men's programs ANYWHERE were adversely affected by Title IX.
In the decade following the adoption of Title IX there was not ONE Division 1 member where the spending on men's programs decreased while the budgeting for women's athletics increased.
When I was a graduate student tutoring in the Iowa Athletic Dept in the glory years 1955-57 the only baseball players who got any significant financial aid were guys who were on football or basketball schollies. The kind of financial assistance that baseball, wrestlers, swimmers, etc got was phoney "counselors" jobs in the dorms or other "employment" by the university. The AD & U officials looked the other way at Coach Evy's under-the-table money, though everyone around the Fieldhouse knew about it (along with other scandals involving AD Paul Brechler).
The facts: almost all Division 1 schools pass on large sums of student fees to athletics----and the majority of students paying the fees are women. and until only recently this included Iowa (which has consistently operated its athletic programs with a profit & hasn't needed the fees---or the revenue from charging students for game tickets---always free until Fry and winning came in 1980); a constantly increasing number of athletes at Iowa---now about half----get financial aid from endowed scholarships (endowed by the millions donated by wealthy COUPLES---you know, the pairs that Republicans insist must be half women---who keep U of Iowa athletics in the top 10% of revenue in the entire Division 1. You might want to reflect a moment on the fact that Lucille Carver (of Carver-Hawkeye Arena) alone has and continues through the Carver Foundation to provide enough funding to underwrite the Hawekeye baseball program every year.
Title IX is not the reason why "minor" sports (in the bizarre manner that the NCAA finds the world's most popular sports like soccer/real football, baseball, track & field, tennis, hockey to be "minor" ones) can only be partially supported by scholarships. That is the decision of the NCAA (based on subservience to the major TV networks, ESPN, Comcast, Fox)----and any school not named Notre Dame, UNC, Ohio State. Michigan. UConn, Syracuse, Southern Cal, or Kentucky will get penalized for millions of dollars lost in consequence of overspending the limits placed on minor sports by the NCAA before Title IX was even proposed in the US Congress.
The only impact of Title IX is that almost two decades ago the NCAA decreed a 15% reduction in the numbers of FULL schollies in all men's programs (this was necessary to make it possible for expenditures on women's sports to make progress toward parity: NCAA Division 1 member schools were unwilling to allow schools to give less than a FULL schollie to ALL 100 football or 15 basketball players, but agreed to a 15% reduction in scholarship money to all men's programs. So blame belongs on football & basketball (i.e., the source of the hundreds of millions of dollars the NCAA gets---and partially divides---among member schools).
And if Title X still bugs you, I've got news for you: Hillary is about to become your worst nightmare.
Probably a good move for all involved. After what I saw of him in the state tournament, he definitely did not look like a B10 caliber pg. Being in a Saul-Tubby Smith like situation wouldn't be good for him or Fran.
Why don't you take a few plays off?
He did start as a freshman at West, with their size of school and amount of athletes that does say something..You really think Connor is anything close to a B10 caliber starting guard? As a walk-on, 7th/8th/9th type of guy, I like that role a lot for him, a lot less pressure on him.
You really think Connor is anything close to a B10 caliber starting guard? As a walk-on, 7th/8th/9th type of guy, I like that role a lot for him, a lot less pressure on him.
Yes, I do. He's more than proved himself on the AAU circuit.
You realize HS ball is not a good indicator at all of college performance right? AAU is much better because you actually play other good competition and is a more free flowing game.I've never watched him play there, but from what I've seen in the state tournament the last few years, if he's our starter, I think we're in trouble.
West High's coach runs a slowdown style that is terrible to watch. Connor is a Top 100 recruit because he is playing great against much better competition during the AAU season.I've never watched him play there, but from what I've seen in the state tournament the last few years, if he's our starter, I think we're in trouble.
Did you even read Tom's post above?Well, I stand corrected on CM playing baseball. I thought there'd be no way. I still will be surprised if he actually follows through with this and I will be extremely surprised if he ever plays an inning of baseball at Iowa.
Good for him to do what he wants either way.
He and his dad also squashed the idea that they wouldn't use his scholarship to bring him a top-flight player
It was also mentioned that Connor might try for an academic scholarship as an option.
Was Saul that bad? Refresh my memory. Save me from Googling his name to see whether he started on a final four team or not.Probably a good move for all involved. After what I saw of him in the state tournament, he definitely did not look like a B10 caliber pg. Being in a Saul-Tubby Smith like situation wouldn't be good for him or Fran.
Was Saul that bad? Refresh my memory. Save me from Googling his name to see whether he started on a final four team or not.
Yes. Specifically what do you believe I am incorrect about?Did you even read Tom's post above?
Yes. Specifically what do you believe I am incorrect about?
Spoke with Connor today. His plan is to play both baseball and basketball at Iowa. He's also open to walking on for basketball. Family has not talked about it at any depth at this point, but if needed he would be happy to do it. At some point, he expects he would be on scholarship...
He and his dad also squashed the idea that they wouldn't use his scholarship to bring him a top-flight player
LOLYou really think Connor is anything close to a B10 caliber starting guard? As a walk-on, 7th/8th/9th type of guy, I like that role a lot for him, a lot less pressure on him.
Damn that double negative!You should reread it more slowly. He used a double negative bruh.
What's not being an NBA player got to do with it?Doesn't seem like a good idea to try and play both. At least if he wants to excel at one of them it doesn't sound like a good idea. If I were him I would focus on baseball. He isn't an NBA player.
What's not being an NBA player got to do with it?
If he wants to be a professional in a sport. If he doesn't then what he is doing is fine. But he stated himself he sacrifices development in both sports by playing both. And he is not a Bo Jackson type freak athlete.