04-16-2019, 05:25 PM
Was posted on the Boot.
(04-16-2019, 11:26 AM)Phogge Wrote: The supposed secret is out on TOS. Got to say that my athlete friends and I did a bit of it in HS IF TRUE. Mostly in cars in the back seat. And mostly at SH guys and old ladies Downtown.
Quote:Hey Phogge that facebook post probably isn't the reason.
(04-15-2019, 08:25 PM)JJJ Wrote: Slightly OT but I just read the article that goes with this video in print over the weekend re: strength coaches.
http://www.si.com/college-football/video...aaron-feld
Quote:Oregon pays Feld $200,000 per year, but that number is likely to go up before long. Iowa pays its strength coach $725,000 per year—the most in the nation—and Clemson pays its $600,000, up 20% from last season's $500,000.
The catch for this new breed of very well compensated assistant? In addition to the 405 pounds on his back, Feld carries the weight of Oregon's program. He and his peers are judged on W's and L's, not just bench-press LBs. In other words: If things go wrong for the Ducks, it's his thick neck.
Quote:In today's college football, a strength assistant is the most important hire that a head coach makes. He matters more than either coordinator because he spends more time with players than any other staff member. The NCAA strictly limits how much contact head and position coaches can have with players, but there are fewer restrictions on strength coaches, who run workouts almost year-round. Many of these workouts are officially voluntary, but coaches tend to say “voluntary” with air quotes the size of the Goodyear Blimp.http://www.si.com/college-football/2019/...aaron-feld
From the start of August practices through the season's last game, strength coaches have the same access to players as do other staff members. But it's in the offseason where their value escalates: While other coaches are limited to two hours per week with players, they're allowed eight.
(04-17-2019, 06:12 PM)Phogge Wrote: If that’s the reason is it so important to have possibly ruined the guy’s life? My god what have we become?
(04-17-2019, 08:37 PM)2006alum Wrote: I'm just going to say it again: no good comes from speculating about this. The more we chase potentially red herring leads, the more false rumors spread that benefit no one. It's not good for him, not for good Stanford, not good for whomever came forward, not good for our football team or our athletics department. Truly, we have no legal right to know.
Just assume the university investigated thoroughly and exercised good judgment in its decision, and come to terms with the fact that some things aren't going to, and shouldn't be, made public.
(04-17-2019, 07:43 PM)BobK Wrote: So you don’t think in the nine weeks of suspension Stanford and Turley didn’t reach an agreement and sign NDAs ?
That would be a first
(04-18-2019, 03:30 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: But again, whether Stanford sheds more light on what happened or not, speculation will occur, as evidenced by this thread, that may unfairly damage someone’s reputation. And the less that is said, the more speculation there will be.
All parties would be better off if Stanford released a statement indicating an investigation revealed Turley did something inconsistent with Stanford’s code of conduct and if it involved the football program or not, because frankly, that is all anyone really cares about. I’m confident there would be littlle discussion had a assistant men’s cross country coach been dismissed in similar fashion as Turley.
Quote:From the standpoint of an employer-employee relationship, Turley is not different than the assistant men's cross country coach. Or any other employee. It's none of our business. So please stop.