Topic: MU winning records

[z13629]

Alright emperor or whatever your alter ego is...I contend that MUs run of winning seasons that herd fans revel in was due to their past practices which the NCAA deemed to be a violation of rules (that means cheating).  The NCAA stated that MU received a "substantial competitive advantantage".  These practices were stopped in 2001 when MU was placed on probation.

The result is clear - as the probation time line has advanced the wins have declined.  So two questions for you herd types:

1. Was your run in the 90s a result of your cheating ways? And if not,

2. How do you explain the declining wins tracking nicely with probation?

[Peter Griffin]

well my take on it, is that probation will most likely hurt any school, take miami (fl) for example, their program temporarly declined while they were on probation, same with auburn, they were horrible and look at them now.  but i wouldn't say that the pennington years forward were as a result of the ncaa violations, because those for the most part from what i recall were under the donnan years.  but to claim that any school who does have a slump is a result of the fact that they cheated in some way and that when they have to pay the price for it they will not have as good of a team is rediculus.

[z13629]

Thanks for answering, it's good to see one of you will.

The period of time referenced by the NCAA started in 96 to 00, but I agree probation will hurt a school, so point taken.

But that doesn't answer my first question which essentially is 'was the 90's run a result of the cheating?'.

I'm really waiting for the emperor to chime in here, he seems to have a long winded, blow hard explanation for every thing else.  What about it emporer, are you going to reply or are you chicken?

[carolinaherdfan]

You may just refer to us as fellow West Virginians. Let it be understood we have no argument, or discourse with you. You have deemed it worthy to attack us, for talking to one another about our University, and our football team. We talk about these, because we care about "these". But, we would never be rude enough to come on your board, and try to disrupt you, and your friends conversations.

GO THUNDERINGHERD!

 :cool:

[z13629]

As I expected, dodging the question.  Thanks for living up to my expectations.

[carolinaherdfan]

Thank you for posting again z, I, am certain you are a great fan, and supporter. You are a West Virginian, and we are proud of you. Do something, and make us proud.

GO THUNDERINGHERD!

 :cool:

[z13629]

Answer the question or admit you can't.  It's that simple.

[carolinaherdfan]

I'll just go this far. When I began college at MU, I was a failure on the football team; at your dismay that is why I am still alive today. I, had two really great friends that played at WVU. OX Stevens, and Tree Adams, and we all knew what was going on, and we ran around together in M'town, H'town, we did a lot of crazy things. Ox's thighs as a freshman were larger than most human hips. He, and Tree started for WVU as freshman. I know what there deal was. I know what my deal was. I, know for a fact that WVU, or anyone else does not want to get into the details. I have bit glass, and spit it, and done all sorts of stupid stuff young guys, and football players do. I was one of the group. I do not choose to go down that road, for a lot of good reasons. This is about WVA. Not WV & MU. It's WVA. You don't have a clue, as to what has all come down over the years. Don't come here high handed. The only people who do that are people who wish they were. People who are, or were know MU, and WVU are in the same bye and bye.

[z13629]

Aside from further semi-coherent rambling, you aren't going to answer the question.  Correct?

[carolinaherdfan]

My answer is, I have never known a more cowardice, nor cheating group of people in my life than those I have known at Morgantown, WV and WVU. I, guess that has been going on for well over 100 years. If I were to concede any other position without starting at the top of corruption in the State of WVA, I would be lying. This stand I can substantiate, and if necessary I will.

GO THUNDERINGHERD!

  :smile:

[z13629]

Hey emporer,

"This post is about MU's record. Now see if you can stay on tract."

"Hey DumbE, this post is about MU's record. Now, see if you can understand what that means. Focus, and try, once again, to stay on tract, or take your ritilan."

[DJdaHERDfan]

:grin:

[z13629]

Good one.  Your wit is unparalleled.

[Blade]

I don't usually visit the smack boards (I just send people there :wink:) but since you asked nicely.

The program was started in 1993 to help Prop 48 athletes obtain employment.

From 1993 to 2001, 63 props used the program; 5 under Donnan and 58 under Pruett.  The reason for the dispairity was basically because the program was elevated as we moved from DIAA to DIA and needed 20 additional DIA players.

Of the 63 props, less than 1/3 actually contributed.  That was less than 10 percent of all Marshall players recruited in that 9-year span.

During the 1990's, only Donnan's and Chaump's recruits participated.  That means that 5 props athletes were recruited out of 150 players, or 3% of Marshall's roster.  Hardly any significant on field advantage.

During that time, only two props made it to the NFL (Troy Brown & Doug Chapman).  Pennington, Starkey, Williams, Lyons, Moss and Wade were not props and did not participate in the program.

Though the reason for the win fall off has been explained, you will be elated to know that the last 3 Marshall recruiting classes (two them while we were on probation) has (on paper) been light years ahead of anything we had in 90's.

Marshall success is not going away, regardless of how strong WVU  fans pray that it will.

Hope that alleviated you concerns for our program.

[z13629]

Thanks for a well reasoned reply versus a pompous, long winded, diatribe about the civil war.  

You are incorrect on the number of props and the time frame.  It was 'at least' 65 props from 96 to 00, that's over 15 a year.  These kids may have been marginal students but they weren't marginal athletes.  They added depth and raised the talent level of the whole program.  When they dried up, you have seen the steady reduction of wins.  

The NCAA also noted that MU used this practice to over award grants in aid and exceed the normal schollie allotment and again in their view, the NCAA stated that "the competitive advantage clearly was substantial".

Are you saying the Bob Pruett never used a prop athlete during his tenure?

We shall see if MU success is not going away.  The win trend line says otherwise.

[carolinaherdfan]

I don't usually visit the smack boards (I just send people there :wink:) but since you asked nicely.

The program was started in 1993 to help Prop 48 athletes obtain employment.

From 1993 to 2001, 63 props used the program; 5 under Donnan and 58 under Pruett.  The reason for the dispairity was basically because the program was elevated as we moved from DIAA to DIA and needed 20 additional DIA players.

Of the 63 props, less than 1/3 actually contributed.  That was less than 10 percent of all Marshall players recruited in that 9-year span.

During the 1990's, only Donnan's and Chaump's recruits participated.  That means that 5 props athletes were recruited out of 150 players, or 3% of Marshall's roster.  Hardly any significant on field advantage.

During that time, only two props made it to the NFL (Troy Brown & Doug Chapman).  Pennington, Starkey, Williams, Lyons, Moss and Wade were not props and did not participate in the program.

Though the reason for the win fall off has been explained, you will be elated to know that the last 3 Marshall recruiting classes (two them while we were on probation) has (on paper) been light years ahead of anything we had in 90's.

Marshall success is not going away, regardless of how strong WVU  fans pray that it will.

Hope that alleviated you concerns for our program.

I, am still awaiting a post that has facts, that this post is incorrect. Opinion's don't fly.

GO THUNDERINGHERD!

 :P

[z13629]

Well emporer since you are still ducking the question and riding Blade's coattails, here is the information I'm quoting, straight from the NCAA website:

Nonqualifiers. From 1996 to 2000 the university admitted at least 65 nonqualifiers in the sport of football, most of whom were recruited, and also recruited nonqualifiers in men's basketball. As nonqualifers, these student-athletes were barred by NCAA legislation from receiving institutionally administered financial aid which includes employment arranged by the university with representatives of the university's athletics interests. The committee believed that these circumstances warranted close attention and monitoring of these nonqualifiers as well as special attention to legislation affecting them. Instead, the university facilitated their employment in direct violation of clear NCAA bylaws delineating both that employment arrangements by an institution count as institutionally administered financial aid and that nonqualifiers are barred from receiving such aid in their first year of enrollment.

There are some opinions in my post, just like there are opinions in blades.  However, his is well-reasoned and not making outlandish claims like others on this board.  But just in case you're still confused about my source of information, here's the website:

http://www.ncaa.org/releases/infractions/2001/2001122101in.htm

[carolinaherdfan]

I don't usually visit the smack boards (I just send people there :wink:) but since you asked nicely.

The program was started in 1993 to help Prop 48 athletes obtain employment.

From 1993 to 2001, 63 props used the program; 5 under Donnan and 58 under Pruett.  The reason for the dispairity was basically because the program was elevated as we moved from DIAA to DIA and needed 20 additional DIA players.

Of the 63 props, less than 1/3 actually contributed.  That was less than 10 percent of all Marshall players recruited in that 9-year span.

During the 1990's, only Donnan's and Chaump's recruits participated.  That means that 5 props athletes were recruited out of 150 players, or 3% of Marshall's roster.  Hardly any significant on field advantage.

During that time, only two props made it to the NFL (Troy Brown & Doug Chapman).  Pennington, Starkey, Williams, Lyons, Moss and Wade were not props and did not participate in the program.

Though the reason for the win fall off has been explained, you will be elated to know that the last 3 Marshall recruiting classes (two them while we were on probation) has (on paper) been light years ahead of anything we had in 90's.

Marshall success is not going away, regardless of how strong WVU  fans pray that it will.

Hope that alleviated you concerns for our program.

I, am still awaiting a post that has facts, that this post is incorrect. Opinion's don't fly.

GO THUNDERINGHERD!

 :P

No Z, to use your words, I am going to stay on the coatails of Blade. If I were to move from it I would be posting in dishonesty. Your question has been addressed, and you were not satisfied with the answer. So you pull up a web site that is honest, but inciteful. See my next post, and notice how I am not doing that against WVU.

GO THUNDERINGHERD!

[hookem herd]

Z,
Being placed on probation hurts any program in America, but one of the major factors in the decline in wins was the fact that our competion was better. The talent level in the MAC vastly improved during this time, if you don't believe me ask Maryland, Pitt, Kansas St. among others. Some injuries to key players didn't help matters either. But with that said I am proud of how far we have come as a University. The truth of the matter is every school in America has skeletons in thier closets'. I am a High School football coach and I know what is offered to these kids by College Coaches.