This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
Football was not as important at Army or Yale. by Flann
Army and Yale were great American Universities whose alumni were leaders of the nation before college football existed.
I am sure that during the time Army, Yale, and other former powers were in their football glory, that their excellence in football added to the atmosphere on campus and was passionately discussed by alumni.
But football did not play the constant and integral role at those schools as it has at Notre Dame. I have a difficult time comprehending a Notre Dame without football.
Perhaps, it's a lack of imagination on my part, perhaps Notre Dame can go the way of Chicago,leave competitive football behind and continue to excel in other ways.