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
There certainly has been an effort to appeal more to the by KeoughCharles05
"high brow" types.
You can see this with the de-emphasis of football, the focus on the Director's Cup, terms like "aspirational peers," the flowers in the stadium, and even things like the long period where you couldn't find the leprechaun on any items in the bookstore (it was all the school seal or the block ND).
Monk went out of his way to kill the program. Jenkins has provided more support to the program, but has not given it the full-throated defense it needed after Monk's assault. Had Jenkins followed Hesburgh, I think we would have been fine. Now we have a BoT loaded with aspirational peer types, which makes taking bold steps to create the conditions for football success more difficult.