The CardBoard
The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed (/thread-3323.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed - Leftcoast - 05-24-2012

I doubt Garvin's negative rating was the next round in the editor vs reporter slugfest - other culprits come to mind.  I've noticed Cal-Bashing posts seem to get a quick -3 votes and if some of our friendly heathens are Pawlousy fans then that number might have climbed even higher.    Et tu, Lurck?

(By the way, Yvonne, GG is now showing an unwarranted 5% next to the "warning level" category in his profile.  Can an editor show a reporter some pity there?)

Re: The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed - oman - 05-24-2012

(05-23-2012, 03:26 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Was reaction really negative? There was certainly some negative reaction, but I wouldn't characterize everyone or even the majority's reaction as negative. The predominant reaction I saw was in the same vein as the 59er alternatives I posted earlier, i.e. an opportunity to make jokes about other schools.

Yeah, the reaction form another school's board that I frequent was that it was kind of silly.

But to me it is just more opportunity to talk about Stanford football.  We aren't always a big deal.

Re: The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed - 76lsjumb - 05-24-2012

No way garvin's post deserves a -4 rating. 

Everybody knows that sort of rating is exclusively reserved for positive comments about Jon Wilner...  ;)

Re: The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed - 76lsjumb - 05-24-2012

(05-24-2012, 11:18 AM)garvin link Wrote:Thanks to whoever gave me a thumbs up and uncovered that post. If you're ever in Miami, I'll buy you a drink or a pipe of crack or whatever the cool kids do these days.

garvin -- From what I saw on the news yesterday, it looks like what you really need in Miami right now is a rowboat.  Hope you're staying somewhat dry...

Re: The Andrew Luck Directorship of Offense Endowed - fishman - 05-24-2012

I find it pretty surprising that some people feel that naming an endowed position after Andrew Luck is somehow premature, undeserved or inappropriate.

First of all, naming rights at virtually all nonprofit institutions are essentially a fundraising commodity for sale to anyone willing to pay the price.  The purchaser/donor can choose the person - your Aunt Milllie, Uncle Herman, himself, herself - for whom the building, position, chair, etc. is to be named (with consent) as long as it isn't some notorious character.  So a generous donor chooses to honor Andrew Luck - what's the big deal?  This is just ordinary fundraising, and Stanford as an institution is exceptionally good at it. 

What's more, I would submit that Andrew Luck is a completely appropriate, if not exemplary, person to honor by endowing a coaching position.

He's:

•one of the greatest Stanford football players of all time
•an outstanding student at a very challenging school - 3.5 GPA!
•a young man of demonstrably solid values
•an articulate, accessible and approachable spokesman and individual
•a great representative of Stanford in the sports world and beyond
•a highly respected teammate among his peers
•a modest, self effacing guy despite all the above attributes.

There are plenty of buildings, including at the athletic complex, that are named after individuals who were not exactly paragons of virtue.  Even if Andrew were not such an exceptional person and athlete, it's a very nice gesture by the donor and a well-deserved honor for Andrew and calling it premature, inappropriate, etc. just misunderstands the whole process of naming and endowments.