Is Rupp pro?

Before you question morals you have to ask yourself, "Do you hold NCAA cross country to a different standard than NCAA football, baseball and basketball?" There are pro caliber athletes competing at the NCAA level in these sports that receive "pro" coaching, training, nutrition, blah, blah, blah.Was it fair for Georgia to beat up on Hawaii? Why should NCAA cross country be the only sport to qualify for righteous indignation?

What standard are you talking about?

How many basketball, baseball, and football players who turn pro out of HS get to rescind their pro status (with the help of Nike's legal dept) and return to NCAA action?

Very dumb post.

Also, how many other NCAA athletes get to first go pro, have a coach they dislike fired, enter the NCAA school of their choice with their private coach, and peak for competitions that their teammates will not qualify for?

My standard is your double standard.What is dumb is to presume that NCAA football, basketball and baseball players are amateurs. In order to reach the next level they “hire” professional coaches, travel to “pro” level training facilities, receive gear and sometimes houses (Reggie Bush USC), etc., etc. No one is screaming to for them to rescind their “pro status” (whatever that means in today’s college athletics).What is dumb is to presume that Rupp is a pro who is competing against babes-in-the-woods amateurs and has an unfair advantage. The NCAA has determined that Rupp is eligible to play. Period. His attorneys, Nike, parents, hell throw in Pre while you’re at it, did not ok his status or eligibility to resume his career at Oregon. They made their case and the NCAA agreed. If you’ve got a beef, you’ve got one with the NCAA not with Rupp. What is dumb is the tendency for runners to hold collegiate runners to a different standard than athletes from other collegiate revenue producing sports. It’s still the NCAA; just because runners aren’t used to getting all the perks as the athletes they walk the halls with doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t.When all the sports within the NCAA are treated the same then you have a point otherwise you just sound like a petty, jealous and ignorant Rupp basher or a burned out Duck.The goal is to get fast, and outside of PE's, everyone should use everything at their disposal to get fast, whether that is in the collegiate or out.

burnt out ducky wrote:

What standard are you talking about?

How many basketball, baseball, and football players who turn pro out of HS get to rescind their pro status (with the help of Nike's legal dept) and return to NCAA action?

Very dumb post.

It's an accepted standard, whether you like and accept it or not.

Now you're sounding like an idiot. Unless you have some evidence of collegiate athletes from other sports actually turning pro, not just hiring private coaches, not just getting gear, not just the sundry other infractions you mention, actually declaring professional status and belonging to a pro team. Unless you have some evidence that other college athletes got away with what Rupp did, then there is no standard.

Ah yes, the "jealousy" card. At least now we know where you're coming from... another doting Galen Rupp fanboy.

BTW, this last post was dumber than the first.

asgdagwerwue wrote:

Also, how many other NCAA athletes get to first go pro, have a coach they dislike fired, enter the NCAA school of their choice with their private coach, and peak for competitions that their teammates will not qualify for?

I'm guessing none. Does that make me jealous?

I'm gonna play another card.

How's his thyroid these days? It worrys me.

I know you are but what am I? You've got an endearing argumentative style that I'm sure makes you a hit at fraternity parties and keggers. As you have to be aware, there are a myriad of documented cases of NCAA athletes in football, baseball and basketball being paid to play for their respective college teams by agents, boosters and probably even your mother. That to me is the definition of going "pro".As to your other assertion, Rupp did not actually declare professional status and belong to a pro team, if he had then the NCAA would not have reinstated him. If the NCAA cleared him then he did not get away with anything. I'm not so naive to think that Rupp's (Nike's) attorneys may have been better than the NCAAs but if he was cleared the burden of proof to support your claims is clearly in your court.Here's my take away from your half baked argument. The NCAA improperly cleared Rupp because of some kind of conspiracy. Rupp is cheating the system and is benefiting from an unfair advantage which explains why a collegian can run 27:33. I won’t call this dumb or idiotic; let’s just say that it indicates a high probability of mental retardation on your part.Can you see why you appear to be just another sniveling, anti Rupp, crybaby?

burnt out ducky wrote:

Now you're sounding like an idiot. Unless you have some evidence of collegiate athletes from other sports actually turning pro, not just hiring private coaches, not just getting gear, not just the sundry other infractions you mention, actually declaring professional status and belonging to a pro team. Unless you have some evidence that other college athletes got away with what Rupp did, then there is no standard.

Ah yes, the "jealousy" card. At least now we know where you're coming from... another doting Galen Rupp fanboy.

BTW, this last post was dumber than the first.

Frat parties? Keggers? How old are you?

That is called breaking the rules, not going pro, and is punishable by the NCAA.

Must be great to simply define things as we go to suit our own special needs. The rest of us need to live in the real world

Rupp did declare professional status, otherwise there would not have been such a fuss, it was a big deal when he decided to return to NCAA competition, negotiations, getting rid of Martin Smith, monies having to be repaid, etc... Perhaps you forgot.

That is almost the perfect definition of naive, believing that Nike's power and influence being wielded by their attorneys had no bearing in the outcome. If Rupp had not become pro, why did he need Nike's legal dept. to intervene (over several weeks of negotiations) on his behalf to help get him reinstated?

First jealousy, now conspiracy. I guess you've already covered involving my mom. What next? Reading your posts leaves the impression that you aren't really reading, just responding. Your indignant rants amount to nothing but convoluted hyperbole and conjecture.

The bottom line for fanboy wankers is that Rupp is bigger than life, the constant and desperate defense of Rupp seems involuntary, Stockholm syndrome-esque.

Your posts HAVE become progressively dumber, this is probably less a reflection of your intelligence than it is your irrational attachment to Rupp.

burnt out ducky wrote:

That is almost the perfect definition of naive, believing that Nike's power and influence being wielded by their attorneys had no bearing in the outcome. If Rupp had not become pro, why did he need Nike's legal dept. to intervene (over several weeks of negotiations) on his behalf to help get him reinstated?

I sure am glad I didn't have to foot that legal bill.