Service Academy Draftee

quote:

Originally posted by CPLZ:
My son enlisted in the Army at West Point to lead the brave men and women of this country into battle at risk of his own life. Pat Tillman had already made millions, and when one of his young teammates wanted to enlist with him, Tillmans advice was to make his money in pro ball first and then serve.

Please do not make light of the comittment which I in the past and my son now have made for sport of your argument.

Condemning young men for wanting to pursue the same dreams that your sons have is a double standard. We don't ask anything of you, but are willing to lay down our life for your freedom.

Bring that up next time you want to talk about what is fair and unfair, and don't pretend to stand up for those already in service to their country if you have never served. It's easy to have an opinion from the comfort of your easy chair. It's quite another matter to sign on the dotted line and be willing to pay the ultimate price. It goes to a whole new level when you stand behind your principles and watch your son take up the mantle of burden and risk.

My son wants to play professional baseball. If he doesn't get his wish, he goes to war to defend our country. Stand beside him or go to hell, your choice.

Precisely. My posts have been in support of those who have elected to serve in the military, both as commissioned officers out of the Academies and in the ranks. People who committed without the personal reserve clause of ‘as long as I don’t get the opportunity to play professional sports instead.”

In my view, deciding that playing short season ball in Podunk is somehow worth “millions of dollars in free advertising and PR” is making light of the commitment of those who serve. Oh, and then a little TDY as a recruiter.

Your flag-waving post now is one of convenience; appropriate for cadets willing to serve, at least, their minimum term without alteration for an alternate career.

"My son enlisted in the Army at West Point to lead the brave men and women of this country into battle at risk of his own life." "My son wants to play professional baseball." Well, which is it?

Then later you say, "A rifle is not the only good use of a soldier." But wasn't that why he enlisted, according to your previous post?

quote:

Did anyone ever say they had to go to Iraq?

Bulldog...a question....do you have any idea, percentage-wise, at West-Point (since that seems to be your area of expertise), how many graduating cadets get stationed overseas to serve their commitment (which I'm sure are in many different capacities)?

Orlando

quote:

In my view, deciding that playing short season ball in Podunk is somehow worth “millions of dollars in free advertising and PR” is making light of the commitment of those who serve. Oh, and then a little TDY as a recruiter.

There you go again Slamming one's commitment to there country and there obligation as a Officer.
Like there not as Loyal and Honorable as the next soldier.


Don't tell me TPM that is not what Orlando meant with this statement.
EH

quote:

luvbb, Your on those same 5 pages.
Do you understand anybody else's point of view.
EH

Let me summarize EH....because the academies and the US military have decided that it is in the best interest of certain academy graduates with high level athletic skills AND the military in general due to positive PR and morale issues....it would be mutually beneficial to accomodate those special skill sets and allow those officers to either "defer" or receive an "alternate assignment" in order to fully explore their professional options. This is a positive and mutually beneficial arrangement that best utilizes the graduating cadet's presitigous academy education. Oh yes...all cadets will with honor and commitment serve at anytime and anywhere the US military deems appropriate, without question and with full commitment. That this is the policy of the US military and academies and it is an agreement entered into mutually. Also, to question such policy is akin to questioning the commitment and honor of said cadets personally.

Oh yes...that Bob Hope (R.I.P.) and the U.S.O. are a good thing.

Did I get it?

Well luvbb, unfortunately I don't know that information off the top of my head. If I were to take a guess, I'd probably suggest no more than about 250 or so. Tell ya what, in between my schoolwork, I'll see if I can't dig that information up.

It will not be as high as you expect because none of their duty stations would be "Iraq." They would most likely be assigned to a base here CONUS and then deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan with their unit. OCONUS locations that would see graduates going to for their duty stations would include Korea, Italy, Kosovo, and Germany mainly I think.

Also, I believe something like 20% of a graduating class actually goes into a combat field. That's it.. now the thing is that a lot more find themselves in combat so that's decieving.

Finally, luvbb, I won't claim to be an expert about any of this. I believe I know a significant amount, but that's because I'm truly interested in the Service Academies and was EXTREMELY interested in going there. I have done a significant amount of research for that reason. But that doesn't make me an expert!

Bulldog..I didn't mean "Iraq" or "combat" specifically. I just meant "overseas" in general.

By the way, are you a high school or college student? I'm very impressed with how you handle yourself and your communciation skills.

I realize you didn't mean Iraq.. but many would think people would be assigned there.

Must confess I'm no longer a high schooler.. I'm entering my 7th day of college classes in the morning

quote:

Must confess I'm no longer a high schooler.. I'm entering my 7th day of college classes in the morning

Well...I think you are going to do just fine!

quote:

Originally posted by theEH:
Orlando

quote:

In my view, deciding that playing short season ball in Podunk is somehow worth “millions of dollars in free advertising and PR” is making light of the commitment of those who serve. Oh, and then a little TDY as a recruiter.

There you go again Slamming one's commitment to there country and there obligation as a Officer.
Like there not as Loyal and Honorable as the next soldier.


Don't tell me TPM that is not what Orlando meant with this statement.
EH

EH,
Not sure about all she meant but I do understand her comment about playing ss ball in podunk.

There are so many kids to aspire to go to college to play ball, and to play after their college careers end. Many don't get the chance to do either, because someone else was better than them and got the spot. So someone lost out. I think maybe you can understand that. I use that as an example to understand what luvbb and Orlando are trying to say.

My son plays professional ball, well he tried to anyway this summer but they shut him down. It's been a disappointment and he is working hard to get better because that is his dream, always has been. But I think if you ask him, even in the position he was drafted in, he would say there are definetly more important things in life before baseball. So I don't look at getting drafted as a special circumstance if an agreement was made. We put too much importance on the fact that baseball is more important than anything else in the world. That was what I was questioning.
I know we all love the game and want our sons to play at the highest level, but once you really understand the magnitute of the difficulty of reaching the highest level you might understand. Even those new ss guys understand that concept.It's just not a year, or two, or three, even for the best prospects in the country. So what determines how long someone can wait to put off what they promised. I never said he would not, that was not teh point, it was the importance of baseball compared to serving our country. I think the latter is much more important and I think they feel that way too.

I argue this at work, if you have a policy you follow it, if you don't have one be careful as you have to make sure that poicy is fair and makes sense for everyone. It can't be ok to tell a ball player they have a special circumstance when you can't tell a singer he can't go to hollywood to be the next idol. I think that is their point also.

I hope I explained that so that you would understand with out telling me or anyone else to go to h*ll.

JMO.

quote:

So I don't look at getting drafted as a special circumstance if an agreement was made. We put too much importance on the fact that baseball is more important than anything else in the world. That was what I was questioning.
I know we all love the game and want our sons to play at the highest level, but once you really understand the magnitute of the difficulty of reaching the highest level you might understand. Even those new ss guys understand that concept.It's just not a year, or two, or three, even for the best prospects in the country. So what determines how long someone can wait to put off what they promised. I never said he would not, that was not teh point, it was the importance of baseball compared to serving our country. I think the latter is much more important and I think they feel that was too.

oh I just wanted to let you know that the other day after working with the pitching director, the guys had to put in "field time". For pitchers that was running the field. In 100 degree heat, 100% humidity he felt like he was going to be sick, and my son is in good condition.

They were told that was just a preview for fall instruction.

Pro ball is great, ain't it?

quote:

Originally posted by theEH:
Orlando

quote:

In my view, deciding that playing short season ball in Podunk is somehow worth “millions of dollars in free advertising and PR” is making light of the commitment of those who serve. Oh, and then a little TDY as a recruiter.

There you go again Slamming one's commitment to there country and there obligation as a Officer.
Like there not as Loyal and Honorable as the next soldier.


Don't tell me TPM that is not what Orlando meant with this statement.
EH

EH. My post was in answer to CPZL's; hence the quoted post from him. In that post, he asked that the commitment made by those who enlist (in this case, he and his son) not be made light of. I answered that the Academies' policy and his own statements about the perceived PR and advertising value of playing minor league ball in Podunk (as regularly used in baseball circles to describe the small towns in which the introductory levels of baseball are played) made light of the commitment of those, be they Academy graduates or any other enlistees, who serve, as promised, in military endeavors, whatever they be.

As I have stated previously, I do not understand the 'advertising' value of toiling in the obscurity of the minors. And I do not agree with the policy of modifying the cadets' service in order to play professional sports as if that endeavor is more valuable than the one for which they originally committed.

I'm sure you will interpret this to mean whatever you so choose. Please try to read in context, at a minimum.

Thanks for your answer, TPM, but I have no idea why EH would call upon you to interpret my post.

I asked a person tonight I work with, Who just came back from a one year tour in Iraq. What his thoughts were on this subject,
Trying to get a Military point of view.
He went both ways with the subject matter,
Meaning he believes in there commitment.
But at the same time he understands the facters that goes into how the Military Uses Personel.
He said one guy he was stationed with, was on the all Navel Surf Team.
Now that would be a nice gig.
EH

quote:

My posts have been in support of those who have elected to serve in the military, both as commissioned officers out of the Academies and in the ranks. People who committed without the personal reserve clause of ‘as long as I don’t get the opportunity to play professional sports instead.”

Questioning the policy is entirely fair game, statements like these are cheap shots imho.

It is my understanding that the officer in question was about to accept a D1 baseball scholarship in California and the military refused to accept no for an answer. They sweetened their offer by making the pro option available and the young man took the offer. It is entirely reasonable to question the military for making this type of offer, it is quite another to impugn the young man (and others) for accepting it.

Some random thoughts....

Is an enlisted man or officer who signs on to the military with a promise to get stationed in Hawaii somehow less honorable than the enlisted man or officer who gets stationed in some other less than desirable location?

Leaving the military after two years to pursue baseball seems reasonable at first glance but often, propects emerge later in their college careers. They are called senior signs in some cases and in other cases many prospects elevated their status remarkably by having phenomenal junior or senior campaigns.

I don't have a good answer for why the military allows players to pursue pro ball. My guess is it simply comes down to athletic recruiting. The coaches in question probably are asked by potential recruits about the possibilities of pro ball and they simply do not want to have to tell them this is off the table. For whatever reason, the military has chosen to provide D1 sports and apparently are willing to deal with the consequences of an exceptional athlete on an individual basis. Is that the correct policy?

quote:

Originally posted by Orlando:
In my view, deciding that playing short season ball in Podunk is somehow worth “millions of dollars in free advertising and PR” is making light of the commitment of those who serve. Oh, and then a little TDY as a recruiter.

My post was in answer to CPZL's; hence the quoted post from him. In that post, he asked that the commitment made by those who enlist (in this case, he and his son) not be made light of. I answered that the Academies' policy and his own statements about the perceived PR and advertising value of playing minor league ball in Podunk (as regularly used in baseball circles to describe the small towns in which the introductory levels of baseball are played) made light of the commitment of those, be they Academy graduates or any other enlistees, who serve, as promised, in military endeavors, whatever they be.

As I have stated previously, I do not understand the 'advertising' value of toiling in the obscurity of the minors. And I do not agree with the policy of modifying the cadets' service in order to play professional sports as if that endeavor is more valuable than the one for which they originally committed.

I'm sure you will interpret this to mean whatever you so choose. Please try to read in context, at a minimum.

This is the essence of your ignorance on the issue and evidence that you try and twist anything said.

You claimed to know alot about baseball, yet you've never heard of this policy. It's been in place 6 years now, so I guess you must not be as informed as you purport here.

Saying that the commitment as an Army recruiter in the off season is a little recruiting and some TDY, belittles the comittment and the person. Don't make these people out to be shirkers of duty and lying on a beach somewhere in a cushy job. The army spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year in marketing and advertising, obviously, they place a huge importance on recruiting.

They made a decision that they wanted to take the $350,000 investment they made in a cadet and let him try and make it in pro ball. Currently there are three players from West Point in pro ball, two of them just drafted this year. The other two players that were drafted out of West Point, both played one year and then went back into the Army to serve the remainder of their commitment more traditionally. So your assessment that they are "toiling in the obscurity of the minors" is again premature and ignorant. It's become obvious you lack the prerequisite knowledge to make such statements.


Lets do some math...A player, $350,000 investment. I believe the percentages are around %10 of players taken in the first 10 rounds make it to the pro's. So the Army would have to make a total investment of $3,500,000 to get 1 player into pro baseball. Two years served as an Army recruiter with a value of $50,000, so that deducts a total of $1,000,000 in payback of that investment. Then a buyout of $33,000 per player and now the investment is slightly over $2,000,000 for those 10 players. That is a drop in the advertising bucket over the span of years it will take to place 10 players in pro baseball. If one player lasts 5 years, the return on investment in publicity for the Army would be huge.

Now, let's look at it from an institutional perspective. Just like any college, the acadamies would like to field competitive teams. Having a high profile team brings positive publicity, which is why universities do it. The acadamies are no different than traditional universities in that regard, they want to compete for the highest caliber applicant they can. By offering the "pro service option", it helps recruiters because they don't have to take playing pro sports off the table to a top level recruit.

For those of you who want to argue, "he made a commitment, he should have to fulfill it", well, the Army made a commitment to him also, it's a two way street. The idea that somebody gets out of something is to demean the instilled values of that person. You may choose to ignore it, but all of the cadets so far have been torn between pro ball and the military. They choose pro ball, for the same reasons your son has/did/would, it has been their dream their whole life. It seems quite heavy handed to expect a young man to not only agree to lay his life on the line to defend his and your country, but tell him if he chooses to do it, he must throw away all his childhood dreams. No one is holding your sons up to that same threshold or scrutiny, nor would they want to.

The belief of the acadamies is, paraphrasing MacArthur, "our future leaders of America will come from the fields of friendly strife"...athletics. No institutions in the world place a higher value on conditioning and athletics than the academies. Part of a cadets GPA is formulated using physical assessment test scores. Every cadet at West Point is required to play a sport, whether at the club level, intramural, or intercollegiate. Courses like boxing, swimming, and physical fitness are required core courses. It makes perfect sense that an institution that so values athletics would do whatever it could to raise the level of its competitiveness. After all, isn't war the epitome of competition? It also stands to reason that it would want to showcase its best athletes to perspective cadet candidates through the pro ranks. These are young men with high morals, excellent academics, rock solid values.

As parents, wouldn't you prefer to see a person of that caliber succeeding in pro sports? The Army would like to hold up that person as an icon of what the acadamies produce, thereby publicizing to the parents of potential candidates the example of what they can expect their son or daughter to be as a result of graduation.

My son made a commitment to the Army to serve, with a proviso. The Army made a commitment to my son to provide an education and develop a leader of character, with a proviso. Both parties have every intention of living up to their commitment. The promises made are reciprical, not just on the part of the cadet.

I don't see the unfairness in offering my son the same opportunity to play professionally as your son has. When your son is forced to enlist and serve, that argument might hold water, but it doesn't in an all volunteer military.

quote:

Questioning the policy is entirely fair game, statements like these are cheap shots imho.

With all due respect CD, I believe there have been more than ONE "cheapshot" in this thread that have been entirely irrelevent with discussing the policy:

"Bring that up next time you want to talk about what is fair and unfair, and don't pretend to stand up for those already in service to their country if you have never served. It's easy to have an opinion from the comfort of your easy chair."

So...those who have never served in the military are not permitted to stand up for our military...or offer opinions as they pertain to the military either? No need for an answer CD...just pointing out that "cheapshots" flow both ways.

quote:

Originally posted by luvbb:

quote:

Questioning the policy is entirely fair game, statements like these are cheap shots imho.

With all due respect CD, I believe there have been more than ONE "cheapshot" in this thread that have been entirely irrelevent with discussing the policy:

"Bring that up next time you want to talk about what is fair and unfair, and don't pretend to stand up for those already in service to their country if you have never served. It's easy to have an opinion from the comfort of your easy chair."

So...those who have never served in the military are not permitted to stand up for our military...or offer opinions as they pertain to the military either? No need for an answer CD...just pointing out that "cheapshots" flow both ways.

Absolutely that was a shot, but there was nothing cheap about it, it was direct and right on target. You railed about being the champion of rights and judge of fairness for those already in service, yet you have zero experience and want to argue the point with someone who served. I earned my right to that opinion and it is formed from personal experience. The good news for you, is that I and all others who served earned your right to express your opinion also, regardless of its foundation. You and others have taken plenty of shots, that's what happens in a heated debate. I wouldn't characterize most of them as cheap. I'm not whining about it though, I have big shoulders, I can take it.

I may not agree with your opinion, but will defend to the death your right to state it.

In the land of the free and the home of the brave, freedom extends to everyone, yet the bravery is shouldered by a volunteered few.

So, from the comfort of your easy chair, you dictate...get off that baseball field and get out there defend our country right now mister.

cplz, kudos ... your support for cadet options is admirable & makes (some) sense - your drawn out arguments and math do not ...

& hey, that $350K or $3.5Mil is my $$ so my opinion counts too

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:
cplz, kudos ... your support for cadet options is admirable & makes (some) sense - your drawn out arguments and math do not ...

& hey, that $350K or $3.5Mil is my $$ so my opinion counts too

The good news is, that your opinon counts regardless of whether it's your money or not. That's what the brave men and women of this country defend.

lol -
But in 6 pages of emotion & comments, the only thing I've learned is that West Point has let a couple cadets use some "leave" and play 1-ONE-UNO short season before beginning active service.
it kinda sounds more like you're trying to convince youself otherwise -

and I do congratulate your cadet & wish him the best

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:
lol -
But in 6 pages of emotion & comments, the only thing I've learned is that West Point has let a couple cadets use some "leave" and play 1-ONE-UNO short season before beginning active service.
it kinda sounds more like you're trying to convince youself otherwise -

and I do congratulate your cadet & wish him the best

That's ok if that's what you took from this thread. But even that should prove two points...

1. How strong the commitment to the ideals of service to country are in these young men

2. That they could continue to play in the minors and avoid active duty if they were avoiding or dodging service, as has been suggested, yet put it aside to serve.

Thanks for your best wishes.

quote:

So, from the comfort of your easy chair, you dictate...get off that baseball field and get out there defend our country right now mister.

Nope...I think it was the soldier himself who VOLUNTEERED to serve their country. Apparently it was the academies who decided they would better serve our country on the baseball field rather than elsewhere. And that is the disagreement I have.

"yet you have zero experience and want to argue the point with someone who served."I'm not whining about it though, I have big shoulders, I can take it.


This does get tiring..and it will be the last time I say this. I'm not ARGUING with you about ANYTHING. You are the one who has made this a personal issue...not me. My "beef" is with the academies and military who offer these "provisos". Why shouldn't any boy accept such an offer..you get the best of both worlds IF those are the two worlds you wish to be in. Also, since you really know NOTHING about me, my life, or my family....I think you are being quite presumptuous and arrogant in your assumptions. But hey...I guess you need those big shoulders to hold up that big head! NOt a "cheapshot"...right on target.

"The good news for you, is that I and all others who served earned your right to express your opinion also, regardless of its foundation."

And..I have said repeatedly I have nothing but respect for our military and thanks to them...we can have this discussion. BUT...you need to make up your mind...are we ALLOWED to express opinions or not? Before you said we couldn't if we never served personally.

"My son made a commitment to the Army to serve, with a proviso. The Army made a commitment to my son to provide an education and develop a leader of character, with a proviso."

To serve with "Proviso"...now THERE is a motto we can all be proud of. I'm thinking that it could be the closing tagline in that advertisement:

"Bee> all that you can be...a switch hitting first baseman"....."serve with proviso in today's Army".

quote:

Originally posted by luvbb:
....I think you are being quite presumptuous and arrogant. But hey...I guess you need those big shoulders to hold up that big head! NOt a "cheapshot"...right on target.

I don't remember calling you a name, but if that's your best tactic, you're welcome to it. It's not presumptious to assume you have no experience with the military, it's quite obvious.

BUT...you need to make up your mind...are we ALLOWED to express opinions or not? Before you said we couldn't if we never served personally.

I don't remember ever saying that anyone wasn't allowed to express an opinion, I think you made that up. There is a monumental difference between allowing an opinion and considering the validity of an opinion...it's not my place to allow anything, I can however question the validity of an opinion whether based in ignorance or fact.

by cplz:
"But even that should prove two points..."

"1. How strong the commitment to the ideals of service to country are in these young men"

agree!


"2. That they could continue to play in the minors ..."

huh?, I can't get there .. you'll have to walk me thru #2 .. soo, you're saying the Army wanted them to stay in MiLB for the recruiting PR, but they chose to go active??



oops, I added while you were responding

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:
by cplz:
"But even that should prove two points..."

"1. How strong the commitment to the ideals of service to country are in these young men"

agree!


"2. That they could continue to play in the minors ..."

huh?, you'll have to walk me thru #2

Bee, it has been suggested here that playing baseball is a way to "get out of their commitment". #2 was an attempt to demonstrate that if that was the intention of the player/cadet, they could have continued in the minor leagues and avoided active duty service. Instead they chose to quit pro baseball and serve in traditional active duty.

There isn't a lot of value to a minor leaguer. There is some, but that is more internally at the academy, rather than in the public. The value becomes pronounced when the player reaches the majors. The Army does encourage players to go pro, however I don't believe there is any pressure put on them to stay pro once they get there.

quote:

by cplz: #2 was an attempt to demonstrate that if that was the intention of the player/cadet, they could have continued in the minor leagues and avoided active duty service.

there is no basis for reaching that conclusion ...
someone else could just as easily conclude that the choice (quietly) given to them was
"begin your active service after 1 season - or face awol & the brig"

If anyone is further interested in discussing the policy in place with the military and academies I am more than willing to participate. But getting bogged down in insults and bullying is a waste of time and energy. I do not presume to know ANYTHING about you CPLZ, your family, your experiences...which is why I only TRIED to focus on policy, which was admittedly daunting at times. It is a shame you couldn't try to do the same.

I'll end with the same sentiment as the very first one I wrote you in this thread:

"CPZL..thank you for the elaboration on "how things work" at West Point. It was very interesting, and best of luck to your son."

So CPLZ... have fun carrying on the rampage....and enjoy having the last word.

quote:

Originally posted by luvbb:
If anyone is further interested in discussing the policy in place with the military and academies I am more than willing to participate. But getting bogged down in insults and bullying is a waste of time and energy. I do not presume to know ANYTHING about you CPLZ, your family, your experiences...which is why I only TRIED to focus on policy, which was admittedly daunting at times. It is a shame you couldn't try to do the same.

I'll end with the same sentiment as the very first one I wrote you in this thread:

"CPZL..thank you for the elaboration on "how things work" at West Point. It was very interesting, and best of luck to your son."

So CPLZ... have fun carrying on the rampage.

Again LUVBB, totally untrue. Your focus was so far from trying to understand it wasn't in the same area code. Using terms like "arrogant, hold up that big head, have fun carrying on the rampage", those are not geared towards understanding. You'd have to point out the insults I used, I don't remember them. I only remember having a strong opinion and no fear of expressing it.

Your effort was to be right, and you weren't.

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:

quote:

by cplz: #2 was an attempt to demonstrate that if that was the intention of the player/cadet, they could have continued in the minor leagues and avoided active duty service.

there is no basis for reaching that conclusion ...
someone else could just as easily conclude their choice was begin active service or awol & the brig

Only true if they were cut, which they weren't. They were still rostered players and made a choice to leave pro baseball. They could have stayed pro if their intent was to "avoid living up to their commitment". The intent of #2 was to show that aversion wasn't their intent as they chose active duty.

quote:

Originally posted by CPLZ:

Bee, it has been suggested here that playing baseball is a way to "get out of their commitment".

No freakin way!

Comments came after JWeaver's post about special circmustances. Go back and reread.

IMO, from another thread, after following I got the impression the military was the bad guy, they should allow these cadets (for awhile at least) a chance to pursue their dream of playing pro ball. That was my impression.
The next thing ya know, we are told this is good recruiting and PR for the academies and postponing for baseball should be considered a special circumstance. I don't care if anyone wants to postpone anything, but don't convince me pro baseball is a good reason. That's the issue, IMO.
I also felt from CPLZ's remarks, either follow his way or thinking or head south, was not an appropriate comment that should come from active or former military personnel. The next thing you know the conversation turns around, we CAN make those comments and ask questions due to our military. Been so confusing.

Freakin Way,
No Way.

I'm sorry I can not join the Debate this morning,
My first night back at work, After a 2 week Vacation.
And I just don't feel up to it.
Can I take a Break today??
It's not that I'm not Committed to the Fight.
It's just I have Special need's.
And I really don't want to Discuss it here.

EH

EH,
Are you citing special circumstances for no posting today?

If so, granted.

Yes, CPLZ's posts can be very confusing:

He'll "defend to the death" our right to "pretend to stand up for those already in service to their country if you have never served.". I take it that means we can have an opinion; it's just wrong, de facto, if we don't agree with him.

He insults me with "You claimed to know alot about baseball, yet you've never heard of this policy. It's been in place 6 years now, so I guess you must not be as informed as you purport here." Not knowing about Academy policy prior to this discussion means I'm not informed about baseball?? Blast. If I explain the Balk Rule, can I have my baseball creds back?

No, you didn't call luvbb a name; nor did she say you did. But sometimes people take offense at being told to "go to hell". Hey, ClevelandDad, why didn't that make your 'cheap shots' list?

I don't quite understand your 'nobility' at being able to take shots, considering that your posts, sir, turned a discussion about policy into personal attacks. (Don't trust your memory: reread).

And Bee's assessment on the active duty or awol question? Spot on, Bee.

quote:

by cplz: The intent of #2 was to show that aversion wasn't their intent as they chose active duty.

ok, you are correct they DID choose

again, you may have a basis for the conclusion you reached, but have NOT shared that info here so others would have difficulty reaching the same conclusion

and since no facts have been offered otherwise, a reasonable assumption could be that after their 1rst pro season on extended leave, their choices were -

a) report for active duty on xx date

b) DO NOT report for active duty on xx date, be AWOL and subject to military policy for your actions


if ya have some inside info, I'm all ears

I'm not claiming expertise in these matters, just observing the info provided and thinkin' it out ..
tho my son was contacted by both Army and Air Force with recruiting interest & we asked a ton of questions during that time about this issue

quote:

Hey, ClevelandDad, why didn't that make your 'cheap shots' list?

That is a fair question. IMHO, there have been some hostilities (cheap shots if you will) in this thread between members but there has only been one "cheap shot" directed (perhaps implied) at another member's kid. When have inuendos like that ever been fair game on the hsbbweb?

The best I can tell by re-reading the posts in this thread is there has been only one member who has taken it beyond the policy discussion and indicated that not only do they disagree with the policy but they also perhaps find it less than honorable for a cadet to take advantage of such policy.

If someone believes cadets who join the military under the "proviso" that they might someday pursue a baseball career is somehow less than the right thing to do, then please come out and say it explicitly. Otherwise, please point out how previous comments have been misinterpreted. Are we talking about policy here or are we also casting aspersions on those who abide by it.

CLPZ and EH have tried to justify the policy. After reading all the arguments here on both sides, I am not sure I am smart enough to do that.

quote:

by CD: If someone believes cadets who join the military under the "proviso" that they might someday pursue a baseball career is somehow less than the right thing to do, then please come out and say it explicitly

there-in lies the problem ...
if someone could kindly post that "proviso" verbatum, things would be crystal clear -
or is is one of those "classified" things that we can see ... but then ya have to kill us??


in our recruiting converstions with the academies the details of "pro baseball options" were veerry vague - intentionaly or un-intentionaly -
and we NEVER saw anything in print .. maybe things have changed

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:

quote:

by CD: If someone believes cadets who join the military under the "proviso" that they might someday pursue a baseball career is somehow less than the right thing to do, then please come out and say it explicitly

if someone could kindly post that "proviso" verbatum, things would be crystal clear


in our recruiting converstions with the academies the details of "pro baseball options" were veerry vague - intentionaly or un-intentionaly -
and we NEVER saw anything in print .. maybe things have changed

1) Did they in fact say no Bee>? All they have to do to end this controversy is say "no pro option" during the recruiting phase.

IMHO, they (e.g., air force) are vague because they want things both ways as well. An athlete who is on the edge about this issue it allows them to compete with all the other D1's out there by being purposefully vague.

Here is your proof that such a policy and resultant promises do in fact exist:

Why would the Phillies (or any other pro team) blow a draft choice on a player if they did not think in fact the military was willing to work with them on this issue? Because they are stupid and they like to burn draft choices for no reason? I think not.

quote:

by CD: Here is your proof that such a policy and resultant promises do in fact exist:

Why would the Phillies (or any other pro team) blow a draft choice on a player if they did not think in fact the military was willing to work with them on this issue? Because they are stupid and they like to burn draft choices for no reason? I think not.

the "proviso" (that's such a cool word ) may well be as cplz has vaguely explained it ..
again, we could be certain and understand it clearly if we saw it
is it inked on the back of a cocktail napkin or something??

but to suggest that it MUST BE SO because a player was drafted is a bit far-fetched

the players in question QUIT pro ball after 1-ONE-UNO short season

was the MLB team stupid? I guess that can be debated

were those "burned draft picks"? ABSOLUTLY .. no debate there,
team got 12 weeks (or less) of pro ball out of their draft pick(s)
they coulda filled those roster spots for that season w/undrafted free agents,
signed for a cheesburger & bus ticket (figuratively speaking )

be curious to know if the scout who drafted/signed those guys is still with that team?

quote:

in our recruiting converstions with the academies the details of "pro baseball options" were veerry vague - intentionaly or un-intentionaly -
and we NEVER saw anything in print .. maybe things have changed

In our dealings with one academy in particular, when asked point blank about "going pro" we were told "We do not encourage it. If your goal is to play pro ball...you should perhaps re-think attending a military academy. You do not go to 'name of academy' with the ultimate goal to play pro ball." I will say that we are not talking West Point here. And I also will say I appreciated the point blank statement on their part and felt it was upfront and honorable to be so candid. I guess it was a wrong assumption to think that all the academies operated the same way. This was 5 years ago....have things changed that significantly?

quote:

Why would the Phillies (or any other pro team) blow a draft choice on a player if they did not think in fact the military was willing to work with them on this issue? Because they are stupid and they like to burn draft choices for no reason? I think not.

I don't know Dan....being a life-long Phillies fan...I have seen my fair share of burned draft choices!

All teams burn draft choices.
IMO.I don't think it is done on purpose. It's up to the drafting scout to make sure he has all information to present to the team. The biggest consideration, this player will sign when drafted. I wouldhope that when presented an opportunity, all players (mine included) make their postiions clear as to their intentions. If any player is told that he would be able to postpone duty and go for it, then so be it, and I would agree the fault lies on mixed signals given from the Academies.

That's where asking about policy comes into the picture.

A large part of the draft is about signability, not always talent. You will understand that someday soon.

Let's not make this a drafting issue.

quote:

tpm quote:
A large part of the draft is about signability, not always talent

IMO, the draft is about talent, what round you are drafted in is where signability may be a factor. Very, very seldom is an eligible player who has "pro tools" overlooked because he is unsignable. If you have those tools, someone will take a gamble in the late rounds just in case there is a change in a players direction.

ClevelandDad, please turn down your sensitivity receptor. I did a little surfing about drafted cadets; be they ball players or b-ball players, the reports seem to be talking about the potential to play for an allotted period of time, and then go on a recruiting assignment. Not specific to a poster's son --- it was the case with all the drafted cadets (MLB & NBA) I found reference to.

Perhaps it was the Podunk remark that offended you, in which case that would be a reference to all minor league sons here. I'd apologize, but those boys can recognize Podunk when they see it!

luvbb, let's see what I can do again

I've never heard of somebody going to an Academy whose ultimate goal was to be drafted for baseball. I'll agree- they'd love to do it and they're not going to just give it up just because they are going to a Service Academy. Wrong or right? Depends on the person. Everybody has an opinion. I personally believe it is important for the Academies to be vague otherwise they would not get even DI-quality athletes. Instead, they would probably end up with medicore players. Therefore they would probably have to compete at a lower level than DI. (Not trying to be offensive to any athletes.. college athletes are college athletes to me) Again, right or wrong? Depends on the person.

There are dual reasons for athletics at a service academy. First, there are the publicity and recruitment aspect. The TV, the big games, etc. How about when the team is doing well and make an appearance in the NCAA Regionals?

The second reason I believe the General Douglas Macarthur sums up very well.On the fields of friendly strife are sown the seeds that on other days and other fields will bear the fruits of victory.

I believe it is wrong for an applicant to a Service Academy to go there with full intentions of playing baseball afterwards. I do, on the other hand, believe though that the opportunity should be allowed if it were to come up. West Point and the Army currently allow that. Navy and Air Force do not.

Luvbb, I haven't gotten to go digging yet for overseas assignments.. I'll try doing that this afternoon

The Air Force Academy decided to recruit this young man!

The Armed Forces decided to allow him to participate in a professional sport without forgiving his future obligation.

The young man has done everything he was told to do and it appears he is prepared to do whatever his country tells him to do.

His father is one of us.

I can’t even imagine why we are questioning what happened. I wonder how far we would allow this type of questioning on here, if it were a different situation regarding another person/player.

I understand why some might feel the need to question the system or policy, but why not give the son of a “high school Webster” a break and pull for his son just like all the other son’s who are playing baseball. There is no set schedule for giving the ultimate for your country. He has to serve because he made the commitment. Near as I can tell he is more than willing to live up to that commitment. We should be honoring him for taking on this obligation to his country rather than trying to find some fault that simply doesn’t exist. Why not just be happy that he is getting this opportunity.

Blame Major League Baseball, blame the Armed Forces, blame the Air Force Academy, blame us because we promoted this kid to all 30 MLB clubs, blame the war, blame anything, but don’t blame this young man. He has done nothing wrong!

quote:

Luvbb, I haven't gotten to go digging yet for overseas assignments.. I'll try doing that this afternoon

Bulldog...hope you had a good day of classes! I'm sure you have enough to do without digging up info for us here. I can do it myself! Thanks tho.

quote:

But again, I wouldn't publicly question others who took advantage of an available "proviso"...but I WOULD publicly question the policy that makes such a proviso available.

Point taken. Why don't you question it where it might do some good? No one here has any authority to change it.

For what its worth, my son was sought after by the USAF (being less than an hour away) and back then going pro wasn't much of an option out of the USAF so he passed.

Good post PG!

IMO this topic has run its course.

quote:

Point taken. Why don't you question it where it might do some good? No one here has any authority to change it.

I'm sorry Frank...I was answering CD's question.
"IMO this topic has run its course."
Point taken..and I agree.

PG, with respect, we have been trying to discuss the policy of some of the Academies without making it personal. There are a number of cadets drafted for different pro sports. This isn't about any one cadet/officer/player/draftee. Actually, a USMA (rather than a USAFA) father has been quite active in the discussion.

Perhaps if you had read some of the thread before you came out swinging....

I agree with Frank's point.

PG,
I know some may feel the player has been slighted, but not sure where anyone blamed him.

If there are more questions about these current topics, I would like to recommend that those interested, ask a currently deployed service member what their opinion is.

They are not talking about these issues.
They are not arguing about these issues.
They are living them.

quote:

by PG: I understand why some might feel the need to question the system or policy, but why not give the son of a “high school Webster” a break and pull for his son

agree, kudos to our webster player & his family

and tho some comments are hard to deceipher, as far as I can tell the past 5 pages or so have been about other players in general, academy "ex-pro-players" specificly, and an elusive policy/promise/proviso (gee, that's such a neat word )

it has been pretty interesting and probably of value for parents of players considering the academy route in the future.

from all indications the "proviso/promise" is similar in form to what many DI coaches offer some top prospects ... that promise, is somewhat vague & NEVER in writing - and the coach and player can have very different understandings of what it means

tho no awol possibilites exist in ncaa

Orlando,

It wasn’t my intent to come out swinging, I’ve found that to be a good way to get knocked on my azz!

However, I can guarantee anyone here, that this thread hit very close to home for one of our “friends” here.

You are correct, I should have read every word in this thread before posting anything. I hardly ever pay attention to who’s posting what. That way you don’t get caught up in choosing any sides.

It’s just that I “thought” I read some words regarding commitment to the military vs being able to pursue other things. Whether that was meant as an overall viewpoint or not, I bet it hit some on here a lot harder than others. Sometimes the blame can be directed to a single person, but it really can seem very personal if you fit in the same picture.

Maybe a certain player wasn't mentioned or blamed. But his situation here is fairly well known. Maybe I will go back and read this thread a bit closer. Sorry if I said anything wrong in that previous post.

.
PG,

Spot on in your original post.

Read the first page of the thread...The thread began exactly there.

44.
.

your input is always appreciated PG & maybe you can help me out w/the database in your head ..
the aspect of academy "pro players" I'm trying to understand is

1) are they offered the pro option on a short leash, then "pressured" into active duty?

if NO - - there should be academy players scattered thru-out MiLB/MLB(?) in similar numbers to those of other Patriot League (& similar type) schools

if NO - - it seems odd that the "ex-players" cplz spoke of would, attract pro interest, sign pro contracts, play 12 weeks, then choose active duty & leave pro baseball

Bee,

Thanks, I appreciate reading your posts too.

I really know very little about all this stuff. I’m not very smart and operate off of common sense and this involves the government! So I can't help you out with that question.

I do like some of the Academy coaches I've met. And I surely have utmost respect for any kid who goes that route. And I'm really happy for those who have a chance to live their baseball dream. And I think all those fighting for our country are truly the real heroes. No matter what time of the year they actually serve.

What would this group have to say if the player was asked to play in an independent pro league. Would the services allow that? Or, does it have to have the MLB stamp of approval. The Indep Leeague also have "realizing a dream" potential. My only thought here is that any cadet coming out of 4 years of premium service education could find a place in the civilian world where he could play both roles.

I am not passing judgment on Lt Bolt, the Bolt family, or taking sides. I do understand the arguments, am torn if I was in the same shoes, and am only saying that baseball is not the only career in the civilian world where a graduating Service officer could where 2 hats, and be an asset to civilian society. But, for some reason professional athletics takes an upper hand when rules are made.

Lets take a hypothetical situation. Lt Joe Blow graduates from the Academy. A plus personality, big time potential youth leader, and he is recruited to lead large city urban youth organization. Lt Smith sees this as his life long dream position where he can make a difference. What will the Service have to say about this opportunity and his commitment to the armed forces.

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

Well I've read some more and I'll be darned if I don't see a certain name mentioned a lot in this thread. Maybe not in a real bad way, but mentioned with what is perceived to be a somewhat dishonorable type thing.

rz1 posted

quote:

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

I don't think rz meant that as a blow to one individual and was just repeating what some might read as the hidden message here. But what would that one individual and his family feel? Karl Bolt has not been a part of any "buy out"! He is honorably serving his country or at least will be shortly. I'm not sure how the other similiar cases have been worked out.

I can't help but see this as we all know, there are much more important things in life than baseball. For most all of us, fighting for our country is one of those more important things. Even more important to most is the health and happiness of their family. But all seem very important at the time.

quote:

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

PG...the "buy out" was not brought up in reference to the situation you are talking about. Another poster brought it up as an option at West Point. And "buy out" may not be the appropriate terminology. RZ....I asked the same question and as far as I could understand...it was only for athletes...altho I readily admit I could have misunderstood because things got heated. This was in no way referenced to the Air Force Academy...but another option that was presented from a different academy.

No one ever said Officer Bolt was trying to "buy out" his commitment or that it was even an option at the Air Force Academy.

pg: "buy out" was a bad phrase on my part and I hope that was not assumed by any other service family as that was not my intent.

quote:

luvbb quote:
I asked the same question and as far as I could understand...it was only for athletes

That was my real question and I ask why only athletes as many others may fall into that category?

quote:

Lets take a hypothetical situation. Lt Joe Blow graduates from the Academy. A plus personality, big time potential youth leader, and he is recruited to lead large city urban youth organization. Lt Smith sees this as his life long dream position where he can make a difference. What will the Service have to say about this opportunity and his commitment to the armed forces.

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

Not being a smart alek, but this theme has been worked over earlier in the thread with the singer analogy. I ask those coming in late to the topic to please go back and read the thread because there are many complex issues raised by it.

To answer your question, if hypothetical urban Joe were promised an alternate career path to join the Academy over all the other colleges out there who are competing with said Academy for the respective urban youth organization candidate, then shame on them if they don't live up to their end of things - regardless of how vague they are. If they are not telling urban Joe it is disallowed up front then it impliedly is allowed and we are stuck with the issues raised here in this thread. Apparently the Phillies thought it was allowed.

Interesting you were able to determine we were talking about Lt. Bolt. Some who are lecturing others to "turn down their sensitivity receptors" or to "refrain from swinging" seem obtuse to this fact. I hope their kids are not subjected someday to the indiginities they have bestowed on other's kids in this thread. Just so we are clear on what we are talking about, here is the offensive/insensitive remark imho:

quote:

My posts have been in support of those who have elected to serve in the military, both as commissioned officers out of the Academies and in the ranks. People who committed without the personal reserve clause of ‘as long as I don’t get the opportunity to play professional sports instead.”

Someone please explain how that does not reflect badly (impliedly albeit) on Lt. Bolt and then maybe we can turn down the sensitivity receptors.

quote:

but this theme has been worked over earlier in the thread with the singer analogy. I ask those coming in late to the topic to please go back and read the thread because there are many complex issues raised by it.

I should be spanked and sent to my room

I may just be a little ol' shortstawpmom from Kansas, but I for one am getting upset about a current posters son's name continuing to be brought up in this forum. Regardless if its never been the intention of others to put him in a negative light or not.

I have wondered as to why this thread has not been locked yet and then it dawned on me that alot of the conversation going on here is going on by many of the moderators themselves.

I am going to be honest here and go out on a limb. Please know that I say this with a heavy heart.
This is starting to sound like a bunch of upset baseball parents complaining about the system. For many and for most, you are operating on very little true knowledge about how the Armed Services work.

There are chains of command. The chains of command are in charge of our nations armed services and they make the decisions. You can balk about the policies all you want, but you really have no say and are in no position to change things. You may not agree with the Armed Forces policies and because you live in a free country, please feel free to take your complaints up with our fellow politicians.
This is a basebal site.
If parents of future Academy athletes have questions,...I would tell them to ask the chain of command about the policies in place. I guarantee commanders have volumnes and volumnes of regulations and standards that will gladly recite to them. These policies are not made up as they go. There is a military judicial system in place and there are boards set aside to handle specific issues.

Its always very easy to assume, to complain, to be upset, and to doubt when one has not TRUELY been a part of a system.

I will probably be steam rolled over, but can we please leave politics off of this baseball site?

The soldiers are not complaining. Why is everyone else?
Please have confidence in our military leaders. I send my husband, my 19 year old son, and many friends out to war under these commanders. I trust them to make a solid decision in the best interest of America whether or not Academy students should or should not be allowed to persue a professional athletic career. Decisions are based on needs of the military, and who would know better about those needs, than the commanders & soldiers themselves?

Lets end this, and get back to baseball. Whatta ya say?

quote:

I should be spanked and sent to my room

Oh RZ...now you too can join the club of having been told off! You can join me in the corner if you would like!

Seriously PG...the first page of this thread did pertain to what you referred to as the original post was directed as his situation...but it QUICKLY veered off into bigger issues and I'll have to go back and check, but I don't even think his name has been mentioned much past the first page or two. Now, that doesn't mean that personal feelings of those directly involved in that situation haven't been hurt just because a particular name isn't mentioned. After going back and re-reading..I'm sure they have, and for that I apologize because that was not the intent. And I can also say that some words and ideas were being attributed to some posters that were not their intent either, and things quickly escalated when those assertions were made. But I think we quickly veered from the Air Force Academy to West Point and the issues involved at that Academy when it comes to athletes....which apparently do not happen at the Air Force Academy. But I admit, the overall ideas and policies probably overlap and I can understand the sensitivity. I do not think ANY of us underestimate the contribution of our armed forces personnel or question their dedication and commitment. The intent was to discuss and question bigger issues, but as we have all seen...and what SSMom has pointed out....that appears to be a futile attempt.

RZ...are you done crying yet?

quote:

Originally posted by J.Weaver #5:
I'd say being drafted counts as a special circumstance.

This was the second post in the topic. I did not agree with it, being drafted is not a special circumstance for anything.

It was this post that sparked the flame.

EH was the first to bring up the name of the player.

Luvbb responded to a statment by EH that playing baseball could do more for morale and honor than being an officer. I think that is where things began to unfold.

CD posted something about implied indignations, even after someone apologized about passing judgements.

Questions were asked about policy, with unclear explanation by an ex military dad that became frustrationg by many, we were told either to stand by these players or go to h*ll.

Bulldog probably answered any questions asked pretty easily for some to understand. Pretty sharp for a "kid" first week at school.

Now I read the thread and it is coming back full circle. Now people asking the same questions that were brought up pages back, that some were chastised for brining up.

PG makes a statment about some things being more important in life than baseball. For many of us, fighting, (I'll change that to serving), is one of those more important things.

This was the whole idea from the beginning.

I am now going to make a bold statement which most likely will be taken the wrong way, but in defense of those that do have some questions about this and have been chastised for posting, this bother me. And sometimes like many of us, I often speak without
thought, but I thought about this.

My son was drafted this year and so were a lot of our kids. I know how that players dad and folks must have felt, it was posted quite a while back regarding experiences (one of the reasons I started minor league reporting thread) and continued the discussion in General Items. Now there is nothing wrong with that, but IMO, if it were my son, considering the circumstances, I would not have posted links to any article regarding the situation because of the sensitve nature and the circumstances. I would have just told about the great experience he was having, that would be it, no one really needed to know what was happening behind the scenes. Those that inquired could have been repsonded to in a private pm. Once that was done, there were some people, who really didn't feel comfortable but stayed out of the discussion. I think that does, despite what some may think, show respect we give to our parents and their players. Some of you most likely say, why is she opening her mouth, but that is how I see it, and I do apologize for hurting anyone's feelings, this is not meant to be mean, but just an example of how things on a messageboard can get out of control. Even when teh original post was in another thread. We all, everyone, need to think twice when we post, post anything (as I most likely should now). I admit I really goof up on that often.

Orlando did offer an opportunity to let others know details were posted on another thread, but then the baseball being special circumstances came up and the rest is history. No one ever called the young man dishonorable. If that was implied, it was not done on purpose. And I think that implying that it was implied only got others a bit more upset.

I have heard from 3 people that when being recruited by the service academies, baseball after graduation was not much of an option. I think that this is a very good discussion for those that have encountered the situation. If pro baseball career is what you seek, then maybe this is not the right path.

No one stated anything about the player not fulfilling commitments, we all understand it was being postponed. That was also brought up in another topic.

CD has made a great point, if joining the thread, go back and read carefully from the beginning.

There is no reason this post should be locked up. This is about baseball. If someone feels uncomfortable, don't read it.

I do agree with ssm, we all know that the military is known for all teh red tape, but that was NOT what sparked teh discussion.

Baseball being more important than other things was.

JMO.

quote:

tpm quote:
CD has made a great point, if joining the thread, go back and read carefully from the beginning.

Being chastised twice on the same page. TPM believe or not, I can read. Now I have to feel bad all over again.

quote:

Originally posted by rz1:

quote:

tpm quote:
CD has made a great point, if joining the thread, go back and read carefully from the beginning.

Being chastised twice on the same page. TPM believe or not, I can read. Now I have to feel bad all over again.

I didn't mean to direct it at you, I know you already were sent to corner, it was for the next guy.

it's basic - - why not quit dancin' & cut the periphrial BS ..

exactly how is that mysterious "proviso" worded?? ... IF IT IS "classified TOP SECRET" ..
PM it to Frank Martin, he can post it ...
then suffer the (dire) consequences ("if we tell ya we have to kill ya")
for the "greater good" of HSBBWEB

thanks

SSm,
That was a great post.

I agree with you 100%. It's hard to judge when you are truely not a part of system.

My reason for stating that baseball should not be a special circumstance. Unless anyone has been in that system, they might not understnad.

Works both ways. I respect your opinion and what you have said.

Bee>,

I'm picturing you talking in your sleep tonight mumbling the words: "Proviso, Proviso,
Proviso...cool word " LOL...better warn the wife!

quote:

Bee>, I'm picturing you talking in your sleep tonight mumbling the words: "Proviso, Proviso,

I'll prolly fall asleep (on "home run" porch) listening to shortwave counting Army/USAF mascots

only to be awakened by Andy's husky pup jumping me & licking my face ever few hours

quote:

Originally posted by rz1:

quote:

but this theme has been worked over earlier in the thread with the singer analogy. I ask those coming in late to the topic to please go back and read the thread because there are many complex issues raised by it.

I should be spanked and sent to my room

Randy - sorry for making you feel like that - I did not mean to be rude. I apologize with the proviso that this thread although contentious at times has been one of the more interesting ones we have had here in quite some time.

CD - w/all due respect ... -"proviso"- is NOT available to just use in any ol' context

thanx in adavance for your co-operation

nite-nite ..

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:
CD - w/all due respect ... -"proviso"- is NOT available to just use in any ol' context

thanx in adavance for your co-operation

nite-nite

Bee> - I used it out of context on purpose to signal that maybe the thread is cooling down a bit now I will heed your warnings however

Awwww,....Group Huuuuuuug!!!!
( or if you prefer, a solid handshake will do!)

Pass the nachos over this way would ya?
Chocolate milkshakes for all!!!

Glad we got through that.

quote:

by CD: Bee> - I used it out of context on purpose to signal that maybe the thread is cooling down a bit now

oops ... in retrospect it's OBVIOUS & I should'a recognized your intent ... never mind

PROVISIMO!



Bee,
Please don't let A Frank Martin get into this one.

quote:

Randy - sorry for making you feel like that - I did not mean to be rude. I apologize with the proviso that this thread although contentious at times has been one of the more interesting ones we have had here in quite some time.

Oh CD..come on and admit it...you secretly WISH this thread were in the OH/KY/PA/WV forum so that our number of posts would close in on the Illinois Forum without help from American Idol chatter!

luvbb,
I can move it.

Seriously,..if it werent for all the kids on this site,..I'd say we need to all head out for a beer.

quote:

Originally posted by luvbb:

quote:

Randy - sorry for making you feel like that - I did not mean to be rude. I apologize with the proviso that this thread although contentious at times has been one of the more interesting ones we have had here in quite some time.

Oh CD..come on and admit it...you secretly WISH this thread were in the OH/KY/PA/WV forum so that our number of posts would close in on the Illinois Forum without help from American Idol chatter!

You know me all too well luvbb

wundering ... might this hit 11 pages?? (edited)

quote:

wundering ... might this hit 10 pages??

Sure...ya wanna banter about rotational vs. linear now?

quote:

Sure...ya wanna banter about rotational vs. linear now?

Bring it!

quote:

Bring it!

I'm thinking SSM dropped the milkshakes and moved on to the beer without us! LOL

"Sure...ya wanna banter about rotational red wine vs. linear white wine now??"

how 'bout later??

quote:

quote:
Randy - sorry for making you feel like that - I did not mean to be rude. I apologize with the proviso that this thread although contentious at times has been one of the more interesting ones we have had here in quite some time.

Not to worry Dan, I just wanted to go to the corner to visit, and bring food/drink to my friend luvbb who has been in/out of "time-outs" during this thread.

quote:

Not to worry Dan, I just wanted to go to the corner to visit, and bring food/drink to my friend luvbb

Geez RZ...if you REALLY cared, the least you could have done was bring some of Bee>'s "rotational red" with ya!

( chuckle,...chuckle!)
Hey, ( slurp slurp,..ohhh ouch,..brain freeze!!), ummmmm maybe we could move this convo into the chatroom. Coach May is there and says if we dont join him, he's gonna talk smack about us!

quote:

Geez RZ...if you REALLY cared, the least you could have done was bring some of Bee>'s "rotational red" with ya!

Sorry, this WI boy brings brats, cheese, and beer during visiting hours.

quote:

Sorry, this WI boy brings brats, cheese, and beer during visiting hours.

Oh RZ....you clearly don't know me...I can "slum" it with the best of them! Bring on the brats and beer ("slum" meant only in the BEST way! )

Do you all think you are in the OHIO/KY/PA/WV thread?

quote:

Originally posted by rz1:
What would this group have to say if the player was asked to play in an independent pro league. Would the services allow that? Or, does it have to have the MLB stamp of approval. The Indep Leeague also have "realizing a dream" potential. My only thought here is that any cadet coming out of 4 years of premium service education could find a place in the civilian world where he could play both roles.

I am not passing judgment on Lt Bolt, the Bolt family, or taking sides. I do understand the arguments, am torn if I was in the same shoes, and am only saying that baseball is not the only career in the civilian world where a graduating Service officer could where 2 hats, and be an asset to civilian society. But, for some reason professional athletics takes an upper hand when rules are made.

Lets take a hypothetical situation. Lt Joe Blow graduates from the Academy. A plus personality, big time potential youth leader, and he is recruited to lead large city urban youth organization. Lt Smith sees this as his life long dream position where he can make a difference. What will the Service have to say about this opportunity and his commitment to the armed forces.

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

RZ,
The answer is quite simple. Anyone can apply for a special circumstances leave or exit with a proviso...that it benefit the service branch. If such a person could show that his involvement in an endeavor would show the service branch in a positive light and gain notoriety for the branch, that request would be considered.

The "pro service option" that exists at West Point only, assumes this criteria and therefore does have a written policy regarding it. As to whether it would extend to an independant league, I plead ignorance.

The pro player is not on leave, but is active duty personnel and serves his first two off seasons on full time active duty. At any time during that period he may elect to leave baseball and rejoin traditional active duty for the remainder of his commitment.

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:
it's basic - - why not quit dancin' & cut the periphrial BS ..

exactly how is that mysterious "proviso" worded?? ... IF IT IS "classified TOP SECRET" ..
PM it to Frank Martin, he can post it ...
then suffer the (dire) consequences ("if we tell ya we have to kill ya")
for the "greater good" of HSBBWEB



thanks

Bee,
Do you have a question about the "pro service option" at West Point? I don't know it all, but I am fairly well versed in it and would be happy to try and explain its provisions.

quote:

Originally posted by CPLZ:

quote:

Originally posted by rz1:
What would this group have to say if the player was asked to play in an independent pro league. Would the services allow that? Or, does it have to have the MLB stamp of approval. The Indep Leeague also have "realizing a dream" potential. My only thought here is that any cadet coming out of 4 years of premium service education could find a place in the civilian world where he could play both roles.

I am not passing judgment on Lt Bolt, the Bolt family, or taking sides. I do understand the arguments, am torn if I was in the same shoes, and am only saying that baseball is not the only career in the civilian world where a graduating Service officer could where 2 hats, and be an asset to civilian society. But, for some reason professional athletics takes an upper hand when rules are made.

Lets take a hypothetical situation. Lt Joe Blow graduates from the Academy. A plus personality, big time potential youth leader, and he is recruited to lead large city urban youth organization. Lt Smith sees this as his life long dream position where he can make a difference. What will the Service have to say about this opportunity and his commitment to the armed forces.

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

RZ,
The answer is quite simple. Anyone can apply for a special circumstances leave or exit with a proviso...that it benefit the service branch. If such a person could show that his involvement in an endeavor would show the service branch in a positive light and gain notoriety for the branch, that request would be considered.

The "pro service option" that exists at West Point only, assumes this criteria and therefore does have a written policy regarding it. As to whether it would extend to an independant league, I plead ignorance.

The pro player is not on leave, but is active duty personnel and serves his first two off seasons on full time active duty. At any time during that period he may elect to leave baseball and rejoin traditional active duty for the remainder of his commitment.

Is this new information you
learned today? I don't remember this earlier.

quote:

Originally posted by luvbb:

quote:

Randy - sorry for making you feel like that - I did not mean to be rude. I apologize with the proviso that this thread although contentious at times has been one of the more interesting ones we have had here in quite some time.

Oh CD..come on and admit it...you secretly WISH this thread were in the OH/KY/PA/WV forum so that our number of posts would close in on the Illinois Forum without help from American Idol chatter!

TPM,
Thanks for Throwing me under the bus.

TPM[quote].
It was EH who brought up
Lt Bolt first in his post.

Only kidding, hehe

You have to go back to the start of the thread
To understand what was written, and how it was interpreted,
And I might add manipulated and sentences taken out of context.
All for the sake of an arguement?
And yes it was a sensitive subject,
Maybe I'm to close to the matter.
To Me,
To question ones commitment.
Is to question ones Honor, Ones Character,
Ones Ethics, Ones Duty.
And you have know idea about whom you post about.
I might add KB is only the second player drafted in school history, since 1957.
EH

quote:

Originally posted by Tiger Paw Mom:

quote:

Originally posted by CPLZ:

quote:

Originally posted by rz1:
What would this group have to say if the player was asked to play in an independent pro league. Would the services allow that? Or, does it have to have the MLB stamp of approval. The Indep Leeague also have "realizing a dream" potential. My only thought here is that any cadet coming out of 4 years of premium service education could find a place in the civilian world where he could play both roles.

I am not passing judgment on Lt Bolt, the Bolt family, or taking sides. I do understand the arguments, am torn if I was in the same shoes, and am only saying that baseball is not the only career in the civilian world where a graduating Service officer could where 2 hats, and be an asset to civilian society. But, for some reason professional athletics takes an upper hand when rules are made.

Lets take a hypothetical situation. Lt Joe Blow graduates from the Academy. A plus personality, big time potential youth leader, and he is recruited to lead large city urban youth organization. Lt Smith sees this as his life long dream position where he can make a difference. What will the Service have to say about this opportunity and his commitment to the armed forces.

Ignorance on my part asks is if everyone has the opportunity to "buy out".

RZ,
The answer is quite simple. Anyone can apply for a special circumstances leave or exit with a proviso...that it benefit the service branch. If such a person could show that his involvement in an endeavor would show the service branch in a positive light and gain notoriety for the branch, that request would be considered.

The "pro service option" that exists at West Point only, assumes this criteria and therefore does have a written policy regarding it. As to whether it would extend to an independant league, I plead ignorance.

The pro player is not on leave, but is active duty personnel and serves his first two off seasons on full time active duty. At any time during that period he may elect to leave baseball and rejoin traditional active duty for the remainder of his commitment.

Is this new information you
learned today? I don't remember this earlier.

Some I have posted earlier, some I haven't. Is there something specific you'd like to know?

And an FYI that I didn't address earlier, the "buy out" only occurs after serving two years of active duty in the off seasons, AND still a rostered player on a professional team. It's not truly a "buy out" though, because the player is not released from service, just altered the commitment.

The three remaining years of commitment (grads owe 5 years active duty and 3 years reserves), are doubled to 6 years and placed in the reserves. So during the 8 year span, the player will still be a commisioned officer in the Army. At any time during those reserve years, the player can be called back to active duty at the Army's discretion.

quote:

any time during those reserve years, the player can be called back to active duty at the Army's discretion.

This goes for regular academy commissioned officers as well. Not just the athletes.

I will add that a MAJORITY are called back and MANY serve back-to-back 12-18 month deployments.
( and I dont mean to beautiful beaches of Tahiti, if you get my drift )

quote:

I will add that a MAJORITY are called back and MANY serve back-to-back 12-18 month deployments.
( and I dont mean to beaches of Tahiti, if you get my drift )

Completely understood SSM...it is nice to see some helpful info posted and questions answered. It helps to give a more well-rounded picture of the situation. Thanks!