RE: RE:Josh Chichester

[Dan Marshall]

yeah I'd say that too if I were in a public setting a few days after the
head coach was fired.  Again, it was a private meeting.
 
of course it will affect it, it has to, or they aren;t on target for their
goals, they kept saying we need to improve, what area then are we improving?


  _____  

From: Keith Wedinger [mailto:address@hidden 
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:25 AM
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester


Time for a counter point.  I remember listening to a Coach Dantonio call-in
show during last season where he was asked about the UC|21 impacts on
recruiting.  He stated that UC|21 will not impact his recruiting.


On 2/1/06, Dan Marshall <address@hidden> wrote: 

I talked about this way early, before Huggins was fired, Dantonio made a big
deal out of this at a coaches meeting.  I heard the story was he stood up in
the middle of the meeting, Z at the podium, and said, "Will there be
accsptions for student athletes". expecting a long answer and explanation he
waited for about 2 seconds, and she said "No" and moved on.  Apparently
Dantonio just sat back down looking a confused and put off.
 
I don't think thy can only hold certain students to the standards

  _____  

From: jon breiner [mailto:address@hidden 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 4:26 PM
To: address@hidden 

Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester



I don't think so.  I was under the impression that athletes will be (mostly)
held to the same standards as all students.  If Joe Schmo from Cincy Public
gets a 15 on the ACT, but has a HS degree, UC let's them in.  I do not see
how they can say to the same person, no you cannot play football (or
whatever).  I did not see where the new standards were tied in with athletic
scholarships.
 
I might be wrong, but I would have a HUGE issue if they hold athletes (or
any segment) to a different standard.
 
Jon
 
 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bob Fancher <mailto:address@hidden>  
To: address@hidden 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester

yes, but aren't we talking about minimums to dole out athletic rides?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: jon breiner <mailto:address@hidden>  
To: address@hidden 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester

And remember that only applies to out of state students.  Any resident of
Ohio with a HS diploma or GED MUST be accepted by a state university
regardless of a test score.  It does not mean that CECH or CoE or A&S etc.
must accept them, but remember they do have the much ballyhooed CAT
available!
 
Jon
 
 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Zahid Siddiqi <mailto:address@hidden>  
To: address@hidden 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester

I thought I read 21 ACT.  

address@hidden wrote: 

Actually, I thought Z was trying to raise it from 17 to 19 or higher.  I
thought it had been 17 on the ACT for a long time (with exceptions of
course)...
----- Original Message -----
From: address@hidden 
Date: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:49 am 
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester 
> IQ or score? 
> Glenn 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Bob Fancher 
> To: address@hidden 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 9:04 AM 
> Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester 
>
>
> I believe she demands minimum of 17. 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: GEORGE YOUNG 
> To: address@hidden 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 8:38 AM 
> Subject: RE: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester 
>
>
> I hear he only got 13 on his ACT, so I don't think he would be 
> admitted because of NZ. 
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------- 
> From: "Al Uhrig" <address@hidden> 
> Reply-To: address@hidden 
> To: <address@hidden> 
> Subject: [UC Basketball] RE:Josh Chichester 
> Date: Mon, 30! Jan 2006 





-- 
Keith Wedinger
Bearcatnews.com
Sciotofootball.com