Nevermind, it works both ways. (teeheehee...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...01780.html

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_...story.html

(03-11-2016 10:35 AM)Dukes84 Wrote:  I saw last night that Florida Gulf is pegged as a 16 seed, so good for them.

I think both sides are probably evenly divided by this Brady issue and are entrenched in their views. The JMU sports blog has a poll that's evenly divided on the issue. The author believes that Brady should be retained, but not without the support of the JMU Admin. He says that JMU reluctantly extended Brady the last go round, which I agree with.

One of the key arguments for the Brady detractors is this issue of shooting for the moon on the next coach. If we go back in time to the last coaching search and to the present day with some of the names we've seen floated in the interim, it's never a slam dunk, of course.

Mike Jarvis -- had limited success at one of the Florida schools and made an NIT....have not heard or seen of him of late.
Matt Doherty -- coached at Florida Atlantic and then SMU and is now out of coaching, I believe.
Larry Eustachy -- coached for 8 seasons at Southern Miss, where he made one NCAA tournament, before taking the CO State job. I believe he is a good coach, albeit with baggage.
Larry Hunter -- guy from Western Carolina and NC State, as I recall, who's had limited success at the former school as head coach
Mike Rhoades - has a lousy record at Rice in his first two seasons
Danny Hurley -- has been at Rhode Island for four years and has yet to make an NCAA tournament and has a sub .500 record. I believe he's a good coach.
Bobby Hurley -- initially went to RI with his brother and then went to Buffalo, where he left after two seasons to go Arizona State. He made one NCAA tourney at Buffalo, as I recall.
Murray Bartow -- did not knock it out of the park at East Tennessee State

The life of a mid major is very tough, especially at the CAA level. It's not much different from the A-10, but that conference is likely to get 4 bids this year while the CAA gets the auto bid. CAA needs to find a way to get multiple bids and has to get better still at scheduling for RPI purposes. Meanwhile, there are a limited number of programs nationwide that routinely compete for NCAA bids at the mid major level. Gonzaga, St. Mary's, VCU, Dayton, Wichita State, Northern Iowa and more recently Stephen F. Austin come to mind.

good post here but regarding the bolded part, wasn't it the JMU admin that put themselves in that position? IIRC, prior to the NCAA berth they let him coach out the final year of his contract. If they were unhappy with him, they should have bought him out. They decided not to do that (probably thought it was too expensive) and Brady led his team to an NCAA birth. He then won a first round game (or he didn't) and thus positioned himself for a new contract which the administration felt forced to give him as the optics of firing him after the NCAA "run" would have been bad. Point is, they did it to themselves.

(03-11-2016 09:49 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 09:36 AM)HyperDuke Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 09:03 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  No it is not a ridiculous post and I apologize if it strikes a nerve with those of you in education, but it is definitely a fact that the public school system teaches to the middle, encourages mediocrity, and does not push to achieve excellence from their students. Waaaaaayyyy more time, effort, and money is spent on low-achievers in an effort to achieve mediocrity than is spent to encourage excellence. I don't an no parent I know expect a teacher to be their kid's parent or take responsibility for them.....I am more than happy to do that for my children. Kids don't come up with statement like a 'C' is good enough or a 'C' is a good grade or a 'C' is ok, that's average on their own. Those statements get repeated from what kids here from their fine educators.

Does this apply to 100% of teachers, no of course not, not generality applies universally, that is b/c it is a general statement....but you can GTFO out of here with your BS politically correct answer if you for a second believe public school system don't teach to the middle, with ever reducing expectations. Get the blinders off and wake up.

You can always tell the educators in the crowd b/c they always tow the party line.

I think being forced to focus more time getting low-achieving students up to a minimum standard ABSOLUTELY takes away from a K-12 teacher's time that can be focused on pushing the high-achievers. But that's a way different statement than saying teachers are aiming for mediocrity with their students. You clearly understand that not all teachers do this, but I would argue that I don't know ANY teachers that do this.

The teacher's efforts to get low-achieving kids at a higher level might result in a mediocre result for that student, but the issue you have isn't the teacher's effort or goals...it's the system & accountability structure in place requiring them to focus that disproportionate time on those lower-level students.

Does that make sense? I think we have some of the same concerns & I don't think we're on two different sides of this issue. I just get a little confused when you start assailing teachers as the issue when it would seem like an institutional issue some of the time (education administrators) or a lack of parent accountability the rest of the time. I'm certainly not pretending like all teachers are great, but I'm being dead-honest about not knowing one teacher aiming for mediocrity with their students.

I sponsor a major activity at the HS where I work. It's treated just like a VHSL sport with daily after-school practice & weekly competition. True story, I had a parent upset that I don't prohibit participation by students based on GPA. The real issue was that this parent wanted to not have to be the "bad guy" & tell their kid they weren't allowed to participate anymore. Instead of being a parent, they came to school & wasted my time lecturing ME on why there needed to be a minimum GPA standard. Unbelievable. That's YOUR job, parents!

I'm really trying to move past rhetoric & engage in thoughtful conversation on this...but I can't resist asking why I'm being accused of "towing the party line".

It is definitely an institutional issue with school system and administrators and teachers do tend to get caught in the middle to a degree. That being said, when I refer to 'towing the party line', I would say you are in the minority of your colleagues with regard to seeing this as an institutional issue in our public schools. I could be incorrect, but that is my experience over the last 10 years dealing with my public school system in VA.

I will agree it is also a parent problem. I don't think and never will think it is a teacher's responsibility to act as a surrogate parent to my or any other child.

The time, money, and effort put forth to reach some arbitrary minimum standard or teaching specifically to standardized test is hurting all the kids. Critical thinking and problem solving skills are being taught in our public school less and less each year. I fully believe folks are hired to solve problem and fix issues.....not to recite the periodical table from memory as an example. That being said when huge amounts of resources are spent on low achievers vs mid/high achievers to push for excellence......that does have to possible un-intended consequence therefore of teaching much more so toward the middle (average) whether that is intentional or not. Something has to give and in my opinion what gives is the upper end of pushing for excellence.

I would say 'you' are much more the exception rather than the 'rule' given my experiences with VA school systems. I recognize where the shortcomings are and push my children to excel and not settle for good enough. I think that is the part that is really missing.....too many educators and school systems settle for 'good enough' when these kids can and should be pushed beyond 'good enough'. If they settle for 'good enough' from k-12, that is what they will strive for and settle for, for the remainder of their lives. After 13 years of settling for 'good enough' it is a learned behavior at that point that will be very, very difficult too change.

Well said Hyper. Much more reasonable than the route I would have gone so I'm sure everyone appreciates that.

ShadyP - Ultimately you changed your statement and are now falling into that middle group that I believe most educators, parents, citizens will all agree on. If you have a class of 30 kids and all 30 have to do XYZ then ultimately you will have kids that are not challenged to their full potential. It is a time/resource problem and this is where the parents have to step up, and there are plenty that do not and blame the school for their kid not being challenged. Schools take on initiatives and try to offer a tailored education for each student but ultimately that is impossible and why people pay for private schools with lower student to teacher ratios. To sy schools don't want to challenge the over achievers is throwing out all they do with honors programs starting in elementary school, IB programs, college partnership programs, etc. Ultimately even in these specialized programs for the brightest minds, you will still have the smartest students in each class that are not challenged. This isn't the teachers fault and MANY times the teachers work extra hard to ensure they are challenging everyone. Nobody is being taught to be "average". FWIW I am not a teacher.

I feel the well may already be poised for Brady. If MB does not have the support of JB then I do not see how our men's program can improve. There needs to be trust and synergy for a Div 1 team to compete in a conference as competive as the CAA. We all recognize this past team lacked athleticism but that's because most of these players come from Brady's lame duck recruiting class when he did not have the support of his AD.

For all those who think the JMU job is a good job you are underestimating the effects of not offering COAs will have on our program. Coaches who are looking to take the next step in their careers and build their resumes do not want to go into a very competitive mid major conference and be handicapped when recruiting against conference and state peers. I keep reading how posters want a young entergetic coach to give this program a shot in the arm, well I do not feel those type of coaches will be interested in JMU unless they feel they have all the opportunities to succeed from the administration.

The coaching fraternity is tight and word gets around respected coaching circles if a school fully supports or does not support its basketball program. If we are not going to appeal to young exiting coaches we have to settle for retreads who are desperate for another chance. If that is the case I would prefer to retain Brady.

(03-11-2016 02:00 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 09:49 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 09:36 AM)HyperDuke Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 09:03 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  No it is not a ridiculous post and I apologize if it strikes a nerve with those of you in education, but it is definitely a fact that the public school system teaches to the middle, encourages mediocrity, and does not push to achieve excellence from their students. Waaaaaayyyy more time, effort, and money is spent on low-achievers in an effort to achieve mediocrity than is spent to encourage excellence. I don't an no parent I know expect a teacher to be their kid's parent or take responsibility for them.....I am more than happy to do that for my children. Kids don't come up with statement like a 'C' is good enough or a 'C' is a good grade or a 'C' is ok, that's average on their own. Those statements get repeated from what kids here from their fine educators.

Does this apply to 100% of teachers, no of course not, not generality applies universally, that is b/c it is a general statement....but you can GTFO out of here with your BS politically correct answer if you for a second believe public school system don't teach to the middle, with ever reducing expectations. Get the blinders off and wake up.

You can always tell the educators in the crowd b/c they always tow the party line.

I think being forced to focus more time getting low-achieving students up to a minimum standard ABSOLUTELY takes away from a K-12 teacher's time that can be focused on pushing the high-achievers. But that's a way different statement than saying teachers are aiming for mediocrity with their students. You clearly understand that not all teachers do this, but I would argue that I don't know ANY teachers that do this.

The teacher's efforts to get low-achieving kids at a higher level might result in a mediocre result for that student, but the issue you have isn't the teacher's effort or goals...it's the system & accountability structure in place requiring them to focus that disproportionate time on those lower-level students.

Does that make sense? I think we have some of the same concerns & I don't think we're on two different sides of this issue. I just get a little confused when you start assailing teachers as the issue when it would seem like an institutional issue some of the time (education administrators) or a lack of parent accountability the rest of the time. I'm certainly not pretending like all teachers are great, but I'm being dead-honest about not knowing one teacher aiming for mediocrity with their students.

I sponsor a major activity at the HS where I work. It's treated just like a VHSL sport with daily after-school practice & weekly competition. True story, I had a parent upset that I don't prohibit participation by students based on GPA. The real issue was that this parent wanted to not have to be the "bad guy" & tell their kid they weren't allowed to participate anymore. Instead of being a parent, they came to school & wasted my time lecturing ME on why there needed to be a minimum GPA standard. Unbelievable. That's YOUR job, parents!

I'm really trying to move past rhetoric & engage in thoughtful conversation on this...but I can't resist asking why I'm being accused of "towing the party line".

It is definitely an institutional issue with school system and administrators and teachers do tend to get caught in the middle to a degree. That being said, when I refer to 'towing the party line', I would say you are in the minority of your colleagues with regard to seeing this as an institutional issue in our public schools. I could be incorrect, but that is my experience over the last 10 years dealing with my public school system in VA.

I will agree it is also a parent problem. I don't think and never will think it is a teacher's responsibility to act as a surrogate parent to my or any other child.

The time, money, and effort put forth to reach some arbitrary minimum standard or teaching specifically to standardized test is hurting all the kids. Critical thinking and problem solving skills are being taught in our public school less and less each year. I fully believe folks are hired to solve problem and fix issues.....not to recite the periodical table from memory as an example. That being said when huge amounts of resources are spent on low achievers vs mid/high achievers to push for excellence......that does have to possible un-intended consequence therefore of teaching much more so toward the middle (average) whether that is intentional or not. Something has to give and in my opinion what gives is the upper end of pushing for excellence.

I would say 'you' are much more the exception rather than the 'rule' given my experiences with VA school systems. I recognize where the shortcomings are and push my children to excel and not settle for good enough. I think that is the part that is really missing.....too many educators and school systems settle for 'good enough' when these kids can and should be pushed beyond 'good enough'. If they settle for 'good enough' from k-12, that is what they will strive for and settle for, for the remainder of their lives. After 13 years of settling for 'good enough' it is a learned behavior at that point that will be very, very difficult too change.

Well said Hyper. Much more reasonable than the route I would have gone so I'm sure everyone appreciates that.

ShadyP - Ultimately you changed your statement and are now falling into that middle group that I believe most educators, parents, citizens will all agree on. If you have a class of 30 kids and all 30 have to do XYZ then ultimately you will have kids that are not challenged to their full potential. It is a time/resource problem and this is where the parents have to step up, and there are plenty that do not and blame the school for their kid not being challenged. Schools take on initiatives and try to offer a tailored education for each student but ultimately that is impossible and why people pay for private schools with lower student to teacher ratios. To sy schools don't want to challenge the over achievers is throwing out all they do with honors programs starting in elementary school, IB programs, college partnership programs, etc. Ultimately even in these specialized programs for the brightest minds, you will still have the smartest students in each class that are not challenged. This isn't the teachers fault and MANY times the teachers work extra hard to ensure they are challenging everyone. Nobody is being taught to be "average". FWIW I am not a teacher.

Agree to disagree. If you actually believe that kids are not being taught to be 'average' based on SOLs you need to take the blinders off. Whether you want to say it is an institutional issue or teacher issue is up for debate. I tend to think it lies much more as an institutional issue.....but make no mistake teaching is like any other profession and is a slice of the population in general. There is basically the same % of teachers that are poor/lazy teachers as there are accountants that are bad/lazy accountants or doctors that are bad/lazy doctors. I respect what teachers do and value the majority of teachers that are good teachers but they are not above any other profession. They go to work just like the janitor in that school does for one primary reason and that is to earn a living, there are many secondary reasons sure....but the primary reason for going to work each day is a paycheck.

It's not agreeing to disagree with your smug comments. If kids are just being taught to SOLs then why have all those programs I mentioned? Clearly they are above and beyond "just SOLs" right? Anytime you have minimum standards there will be great effort on ensuring those standards are met but those standards don't mean that kids are being taught to be average. They are bein taught there is a minimum threshold you have to meet. No teacher is telling kids to stop learning once they know the SOL minimum because they are at "average".

Your profession example is laughable. Comparing a work ethic of a GED individual with a paycheck collecting job to a profession that now requires a masters degree in some places and under paid in all places is insane. And nobody implied teachers were holier than thou so I'm not sure how you got on that tangent

I never said the insitute or the teachers were perfect. I said your statement that teachers are teaching kids to be average and for kids to get a c is stupid and so far from the truth. That is even something that can be debated.

(03-11-2016 03:18 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  It's not agreeing to disagree with your smug comments. If kids are just being taught to SOLs then why have all those programs I mentioned? Clearly they are above and beyond "just SOLs" right?

Your profession example is laughable. Comparing a work ethic of a GED individual with a paycheck collecting job to a profession that now requires a masters degree in some places and under paid in all places is insane. And nobody implied teachers were holier than thou so I'm not sure how you got on that tangent

I never said the insitute or the teachers were perfect. I said your statement that teachers are teaching kids to be average and for kids to get a c is stupid and so far from the truth. That is even something that can be debated.

Ah, I see now....so you are saying that someone that does not have masters degree for their profession cannot have the same work ethic/pride as a teacher/doctor/accountant.....WOW that is quite a statement. Work ethic and pride in one's job as absolutely ZERO to do with the profession. I have known janitors and warehouse workers that have shown far more work ethic and pride in their job than white collar professionals. If that is how you feel than might as well stop, cannot have a discussion with a snob.

You miss the point entirely......even with the programs you mention if the institutional approach even with those programs is 'mediocre/average' is good enough ---- that is the problem.

Then you tell me where this would come from (I can assure you it is not myself nor my wife). My 2nd grade daughter comes home with a test from a math concept earlier this year (benchmark test) and it is a 70 (that is lowest C you can get and pass benchmark --- no clue why you have/need 10 point grading scales in elementary school). So I ask her let's go over this so we can address what is giving you an issue so you can do much better next time you have a test on this stuff.......and her response is......why, it's a 70, and my teacher told me that was 'ok' b/c it passes the benchmark. This is not the first time I have heard this type of response from children over the years and this is not something the figure out by themselves as a 7/8 year old. To me that is unacceptable for a teacher and programming children at a young age that 70/C is good enough. The kid getting a 70 has supposedly mastered the topic and does not need any more help/instruction on that topic.....but little Susie who got a 60 which does not meet the benchmark, well we better boot-camp her and get her up to that 70 pronto. So are folks really OK with this and see this as acceptable as an institution --- because this is happening right now and is quite prevalent in public education.

You talk in circles and never complete a point before moving onto the next. First you blamed teachers on your kid thinking a c was okay and average and now you want to say talk about it being an instotuial issue. I have no desire to discuss any of the other junk. Your initial atatement was insanely incorrect. Sure maybe a teacher tells a low performer that a c is great and maybe they tell a high pe former that a c is okay every once in a while. However you made it seem that teachers only want kids to be average and that is simply incorrect.

As for the "work ethic", maybe that isn't the right choice of words bc I agree there are plenty of janitors that take pride in their work. There are teachers that do not. My point was that neither went into the profession for the money but one required a lot more work to obtain. As such, I don't believe you can say that both have jobs for the same reason.

(03-11-2016 03:42 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  You talk in circles and never complete a point before moving onto the next. First you blamed teachers on your kid thinking a c was okay and average and now you want to say talk about it being an instotuial issue. I have no desire to discuss any of the other junk. Your initial atatement was insanely incorrect. Sure maybe a teacher tells a low performer that a c is great and maybe they tell a high pe former that a c is okay every once in a while. However you made it seem that teachers only want kids to be average and that is simply incorrect.

As for the "work ethic", maybe that isn't the right choice of words bc I agree there are plenty of janitors that take pride in their work. There are teachers that do not. My point was that neither went into the profession for the money but one required a lot more work to obtain. As such, I don't believe you can say that both have jobs for the same reason.

Whatever, dude....all I ever did was expand on my point and further explain. If you call addressing your specific examples and issue talking in circles - I apologize, figured you would want your specific topics addressed, oh well I guess not. I think I clarified that it is a shared institutional (school systems/admin) and teacher issue. You should really work on your readying comprehension skills. After you were exposed as an intellectual snob you did not like it and resorted to personal attacks -- based on your own words you are talking in circles if you attempt to clarify your statements and that is not allowed. Even as you try to back track on that work ethic comment you still cannot get it right ---- 99.99% of employees take a job for one primary reason, to make a living and provide for their family. Everything else is secondary. I for one, know I sure as hell ain't going to work every morning without a paycheck and unless you are independently wealthy you are lying. What the heck does how long you went to school have to do with the reason for a taking a job, give me a break.

If you disagree that is fine and I will agree to disagree and it is fine to have a different opinion.....but that is not good enough for an intellectual snob.

So is this thread no longer get about its subject title... Matt Brady?

(03-11-2016 10:19 PM)Rock House Duke Wrote:  So is this thread no longer get about its subject title... Matt Brady?

Ha - true sorta....this whole tangent came from my claim that Matt Brady is a very mediocre/average coach and JMU and JMU alumni should not be settling for a mediocre coach because it is the easy alternative.

How's that for one big circle