-Bull-
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2009
- Messages
- 1,431
Other than Title IX?
Army Football in the news
- Thread starter Rocko
- Start date
Other than Title IX?
It seems to me this goes a long way towards proving that the football teams ARE revenue-positive (note: I'm not getting into the argument of whether that should make a difference or not), as pointed out by Sean007. I don't think anybody has claimed that the entire intercollegiate sports activity makes money -- but MedB keeps arguing that the football programs (as opposed to the "Athletics program") lose money and that is not the case.
The issue of whether the game is worth the candle, as my grandmother used to say, is a different one. But I don't think you can argue that the football programs are revenue negative at Army, Navy, or Air Force.
MombaBomba
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2014
- Messages
- 420
Actually, I just demonstrated a football program, the USAFA, loses money.
How does spending approximately 31 million to only make 30 million mean the USAFA football isn't losing money? That is a loss of 1 million dollars.
If your point is it doesn't lose as much money as some of the other sports because it brings in some money. That is a different kettle of fish.
In terms of being net revenue positive, I'm about researched out on this.
In several posts over the last couple of years I've linked to various studies, articles, etc on overall athletic programs the results I come up with are always the same...
* Less than 50% of FBS football programs are net revenue positive (some studies show that actual percentage as low as 20%)
* These profitable programs are predominantly the "big time" schools one would expect
* There is debate on what "revenue" means as it can include some forms of subsidies
* There is debate on what expenses are booked against non-football accounts (eg game-day extra security, dedicated gyms, etc)
* The SA's financials are often excluded from the lists/studies
Again, I invite anyone with an actual "all in" accounting/study for the SA's athletic programs to weigh in here as I cannot find any definitive evidence they make money.
If I were forced to make the case they are profitable, the BEST piece of evidence I can find is that in a record year 2013 the median FBS football program returned just over $3million in net revenue... http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D1REVEXP2013.pdf So one has to convince themselves that our little SA's somehow are above the average on this scale as compared to the Alabama, Texas, {insert any big time FBS program}. If... IF... you can make that leap and IF you believe that the unavailable financials account for revenues AND costs accurately instead of booking things like IC-only gyms to general accounts, etc then I suppose we might turn a profit on football.
Personally, I am not convinced by that argument. Maybe you are.
In several posts over the last couple of years I've linked to various studies, articles, etc on overall athletic programs the results I come up with are always the same...
* Less than 50% of FBS football programs are net revenue positive (some studies show that actual percentage as low as 20%)
* These profitable programs are predominantly the "big time" schools one would expect
* There is debate on what "revenue" means as it can include some forms of subsidies
* There is debate on what expenses are booked against non-football accounts (eg game-day extra security, dedicated gyms, etc)
* The SA's financials are often excluded from the lists/studies
Again, I invite anyone with an actual "all in" accounting/study for the SA's athletic programs to weigh in here as I cannot find any definitive evidence they make money.
If I were forced to make the case they are profitable, the BEST piece of evidence I can find is that in a record year 2013 the median FBS football program returned just over $3million in net revenue... http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D1REVEXP2013.pdf So one has to convince themselves that our little SA's somehow are above the average on this scale as compared to the Alabama, Texas, {insert any big time FBS program}. If... IF... you can make that leap and IF you believe that the unavailable financials account for revenues AND costs accurately instead of booking things like IC-only gyms to general accounts, etc then I suppose we might turn a profit on football.
Personally, I am not convinced by that argument. Maybe you are.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
Momba,
They may be losing a million, but you are assuming that if the FB team was not there they would not be spending money on a stadium for other sports/events. Or they would not have a gym, or athletic buildings.
In your link, if you add up the columns there is 15 mil missing. In expenses. Could it be the upkeep of the stadium, gym, athletic facilities that all the cadets used?
Additionally, under revenues the AFA has 0 for media rights. This could be 1 of 2 reasons, I am sure someone will be able to answer that.
1. The revenue for media rights goes to the AF, not the AFA
2. DoD regulations will not take the money due to the fact we are the military. We are not suppose to be taking money from outside corporations.
~ My guess is it is number 1 because Army does have it on their revenues.
So, if you really look at those numbers deeper there is a flaw in your math and their math.
FB teams may lose money, but if those expenses are being used to build/upkeep facilities for other sports to use, such as fencing, boxing, soccer, etc. Than the question is would you say scrap FB because on the books it is losing money, and every sport at every school because they lose money too? Fencing might only lose a drop in the bucket, but without FB will they have state of the art gyms to workout in?
~ Again, this is why without seeing the true missing 15 million in expenses you can't make that assumption. For all you know 2 million a year goes to maintain the gym and pool. If it does than the AFA is actually making money because they used those funds out of the FB budget and not the AFA budget.
Just like the question of media revenues. Do you know if the check was cut to the AF or the AFA? If it went to the AF and we use the same revenue as USMA, than the AFA would have @2 million more in their coffers and would be making 1 million off the program.
It really comes down to accounting purposes.
Now as far as the Army and this issue. I am like some other posters, the using female cadets is abhorrent to me. Every branch is dealing with sexual issues and it is amazing to think that the coaches thought this was a wise decision.
~ I am pretty sure Lt.Col. Chad Davis is looking right now to see how quickly he can hand in his separation papers because I doubt he is going to get a def.promote for Col.
I also think that 7 drinks in 90 minutes is more than them getting a little tipsy, closer to them blowing chunks! I am not going to google blood alcohol, but I have to guess even with FB players that has to be at least twice the legal limit.
~ Nobody flame me for assuming I condone it. I am saying that adults on the party bus lost control and I place blame on them. Kids aren't innocent and if offered alcohol at 17 90% will consume it be for peer pressure reasons or the first taste of freedom. The adults are the problem. Who got the alcohol for them to consume?
~~ I wonder if Lt.Col Davis would have been happy someone said to his DD what he said to female cadets. Would he have been happy if they got their child drunk at 17? I doubt it!
OBTW, now Momba if you want to argue why the coach at USAFA gets paid @7.7 million than I am with you,. Up to a million or so more than the Gamecocks, Mountaineers and Wolfpack coaches. All of those programs according to your link make a profit.
They may be losing a million, but you are assuming that if the FB team was not there they would not be spending money on a stadium for other sports/events. Or they would not have a gym, or athletic buildings.
In your link, if you add up the columns there is 15 mil missing. In expenses. Could it be the upkeep of the stadium, gym, athletic facilities that all the cadets used?
Additionally, under revenues the AFA has 0 for media rights. This could be 1 of 2 reasons, I am sure someone will be able to answer that.
1. The revenue for media rights goes to the AF, not the AFA
2. DoD regulations will not take the money due to the fact we are the military. We are not suppose to be taking money from outside corporations.
~ My guess is it is number 1 because Army does have it on their revenues.
So, if you really look at those numbers deeper there is a flaw in your math and their math.
FB teams may lose money, but if those expenses are being used to build/upkeep facilities for other sports to use, such as fencing, boxing, soccer, etc. Than the question is would you say scrap FB because on the books it is losing money, and every sport at every school because they lose money too? Fencing might only lose a drop in the bucket, but without FB will they have state of the art gyms to workout in?
~ Again, this is why without seeing the true missing 15 million in expenses you can't make that assumption. For all you know 2 million a year goes to maintain the gym and pool. If it does than the AFA is actually making money because they used those funds out of the FB budget and not the AFA budget.
Just like the question of media revenues. Do you know if the check was cut to the AF or the AFA? If it went to the AF and we use the same revenue as USMA, than the AFA would have @2 million more in their coffers and would be making 1 million off the program.
It really comes down to accounting purposes.
Now as far as the Army and this issue. I am like some other posters, the using female cadets is abhorrent to me. Every branch is dealing with sexual issues and it is amazing to think that the coaches thought this was a wise decision.
~ I am pretty sure Lt.Col. Chad Davis is looking right now to see how quickly he can hand in his separation papers because I doubt he is going to get a def.promote for Col.
I also think that 7 drinks in 90 minutes is more than them getting a little tipsy, closer to them blowing chunks! I am not going to google blood alcohol, but I have to guess even with FB players that has to be at least twice the legal limit.
~ Nobody flame me for assuming I condone it. I am saying that adults on the party bus lost control and I place blame on them. Kids aren't innocent and if offered alcohol at 17 90% will consume it be for peer pressure reasons or the first taste of freedom. The adults are the problem. Who got the alcohol for them to consume?
~~ I wonder if Lt.Col Davis would have been happy someone said to his DD what he said to female cadets. Would he have been happy if they got their child drunk at 17? I doubt it!
OBTW, now Momba if you want to argue why the coach at USAFA gets paid @7.7 million than I am with you,. Up to a million or so more than the Gamecocks, Mountaineers and Wolfpack coaches. All of those programs according to your link make a profit.
genconsternation
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9
I think this statement sums up the whole SI article...
scoutpilot
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 4,479
Except that, in light of the release of the 15-6, that appears to not be the case at all. Excellent use of a quote about a systemic problem of hiding sex crimes out of context. To compare this to what happened at Penn State indicates that you don't know much about either event.
I'll take "False Equivalency" for $800, Alex.
The funniest part about this is that we've generated 11 pages of discussion about kids drinking beer, the value of football, and the "abhorrent use" of women.
Did I miss the similar outrage about the Air Force football drug/gang rape/witness intimidation scandal in August? Or did the usual USAFA blue trouser lovefest on here shout that one down?
"Sold its integrity" is absolutely blowing the situation out of proportion. Some beer at a bowling alley and the officers-in-charge and cadets were punished. The officers were severely punished it seems. The supe's letter covered it all pretty well and everything seemed pretty tame. Yes it was wrong, but they didn't come close to "selling" integrity.
Have any of you been in the business world and see how most things work? I don't operate that way and never will, but it is the reality of things.
West Point (including the bumps and bruises of things like this football incident), although not perfect, is idyllic compared to real life. The problem was identified and then taken care of. It doesn't seem like it was swept under the rug.
Have any of you been in the business world and see how most things work? I don't operate that way and never will, but it is the reality of things.
West Point (including the bumps and bruises of things like this football incident), although not perfect, is idyllic compared to real life. The problem was identified and then taken care of. It doesn't seem like it was swept under the rug.
This is what I found - a link ESPN
https://b2.caspio.com/dp.asp
The money that moves college sports
For 2013
Army, operating revenue - $37 million
Army, operating expanse - $27 million
Air Force, operating revenue - $39 million
Air Force, operating expanse - $39 million
Navy, operating revenue - $44 million
Navy, operating expanse - $44 million
Comaring SA datas, appears the big discrepancies,
Contributions and donations, AF $1.1 milion, Army $3.6 millin, Navy $7.3 million
Expanse
Coaches Salaries and benefits from the University
AF $10.1 million, Army $6.8 million, Navy $12.5 million
MombaBomba
MombaBomba said:
“Actually, I just demonstrated a football program, the USAFA, loses money. How does spending approximately 31 million to only make 30 million mean the USAFA football isn't losing money? That is a loss of 1 million dollars.”
Sigh … Actually you did no such thing. Once again, according to your source of information – the ESPN study says:
"Find out how much athletic departments make from ticket sales, playing in away games, donations, media rights and other sources compared to what they spend on recruiting, tuition, travel, coaches' pay and more."
… the athletic department not the football program.
… the athletic department not the football program.
… the athletic department not the football program.
The reason there is no reporting on a single sport, such as the football program, is that it is nearly impossible to bifurcate shared costs. In other words, how does one allocate the administrative overhead costs, the use of shared athletic workout or training facilities among the 30 or more D1 programs of a service academy.
MombaBomba said:
“Actually, I just demonstrated a football program, the USAFA, loses money. How does spending approximately 31 million to only make 30 million mean the USAFA football isn't losing money? That is a loss of 1 million dollars.”
Sigh … Actually you did no such thing. Once again, according to your source of information – the ESPN study says:
"Find out how much athletic departments make from ticket sales, playing in away games, donations, media rights and other sources compared to what they spend on recruiting, tuition, travel, coaches' pay and more."
… the athletic department not the football program.
… the athletic department not the football program.
… the athletic department not the football program.
The reason there is no reporting on a single sport, such as the football program, is that it is nearly impossible to bifurcate shared costs. In other words, how does one allocate the administrative overhead costs, the use of shared athletic workout or training facilities among the 30 or more D1 programs of a service academy.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
Just for our lurkers and posters.
Scouts abhorrent comment was directed to me. Just like I believe the where was I in August and it must have been a USAFA blue trouser lovefest.
~ Funny since my kid is an O2 AFROTC commission. I have no reason to fight the USAFA fight. Lack of posting meant to me I didn't have a bone in the fight or felt I had nothing to add. I posted my post in a direct response to Momba, and being Polish my pea brain also wanted to address Lt. Col. Chad Davis.
Scout,
I stand by my position. There is something abhorrent when a Lt. Col. that is 37-39 years old tells female cadets aged 18-22 to use their sexuality to show that we have pretty girls too!
UGGH UCK come to mind. Pimping them out also comes to mind.
Sorry if you think as a woman and a mother of a DD I find that abhorrent.
I posted only to prove that Momba's ESPN is BS when it came to net profit/loss. I re-read the SI article and chimed in on that from a personal opinion.
Let's be honest. Lt.col. Davis's career is over. I don't know his record, but if he hoped to use this assignment as a stepping stone to War College (PME), I doubt it will happen. Just like I don't see an O6 in his future.
~ Any retiree will tell you that a lifetime of retirement pay at O5 compared to O6 is huge! Not only from retirement pay, but also 2nd career if they go defense or GS. O5s start off at 15. O6s can start off as 15s or SES. In DC you are talking 30-50k difference in pay annually. Multiply that out starting at 45 until 65.
~ Tell me Scout, what is your 2nd career desire? How many Helo pilots are there in the commercial world? Or are you going to go Defense/GS? That rank is going to be a player in your pay and opportunities. That is just the real world reality and something Lt. Col. Davis may now be facing. Worse yet for him is the internet lives forever and companies now have his name tied to this every time they google him.
You see I was already at the point that Lt. Col. Davis would be made an example and others would make sure not to follow in his footsteps.
I never saw it like scout. Posters defend their branch and attack others. I saw it as a man that I do not want near my DD!
~ That is the truth Scout. When you have a DD you will see it abhorrent too!
Justice IMPO will be done, not today, but in the future. Keep attacking all of us AF posters, insinuating we are hypocrites. I am good with that because I don't need to fight for them, there will always be someone else to do it when they are in the lovefest. Just don't assume we are all members of the love fest when we bring up a point that is factually stated by a military member on your side says to female cadets that we want them to see pretty girls attend here, just not masculine females.
Scouts abhorrent comment was directed to me. Just like I believe the where was I in August and it must have been a USAFA blue trouser lovefest.
~ Funny since my kid is an O2 AFROTC commission. I have no reason to fight the USAFA fight. Lack of posting meant to me I didn't have a bone in the fight or felt I had nothing to add. I posted my post in a direct response to Momba, and being Polish my pea brain also wanted to address Lt. Col. Chad Davis.
Scout,
I stand by my position. There is something abhorrent when a Lt. Col. that is 37-39 years old tells female cadets aged 18-22 to use their sexuality to show that we have pretty girls too!
UGGH UCK come to mind. Pimping them out also comes to mind.
Sorry if you think as a woman and a mother of a DD I find that abhorrent.
I posted only to prove that Momba's ESPN is BS when it came to net profit/loss. I re-read the SI article and chimed in on that from a personal opinion.
Let's be honest. Lt.col. Davis's career is over. I don't know his record, but if he hoped to use this assignment as a stepping stone to War College (PME), I doubt it will happen. Just like I don't see an O6 in his future.
~ Any retiree will tell you that a lifetime of retirement pay at O5 compared to O6 is huge! Not only from retirement pay, but also 2nd career if they go defense or GS. O5s start off at 15. O6s can start off as 15s or SES. In DC you are talking 30-50k difference in pay annually. Multiply that out starting at 45 until 65.
~ Tell me Scout, what is your 2nd career desire? How many Helo pilots are there in the commercial world? Or are you going to go Defense/GS? That rank is going to be a player in your pay and opportunities. That is just the real world reality and something Lt. Col. Davis may now be facing. Worse yet for him is the internet lives forever and companies now have his name tied to this every time they google him.
You see I was already at the point that Lt. Col. Davis would be made an example and others would make sure not to follow in his footsteps.
I never saw it like scout. Posters defend their branch and attack others. I saw it as a man that I do not want near my DD!
~ That is the truth Scout. When you have a DD you will see it abhorrent too!
Justice IMPO will be done, not today, but in the future. Keep attacking all of us AF posters, insinuating we are hypocrites. I am good with that because I don't need to fight for them, there will always be someone else to do it when they are in the lovefest. Just don't assume we are all members of the love fest when we bring up a point that is factually stated by a military member on your side says to female cadets that we want them to see pretty girls attend here, just not masculine females.
Last edited:
MedB
MedB – from the NCAA report you linked to, a quote:
For Schools that are in the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS)
“Between 50 and 60 percent of football and men’s basketball programs have reported net generated revenues (surpluses) for each of the nine years reported.”
MedB – you obviously have done some research on this matter and seem to be a thoughtful poster. One of your comments was :
“If I were forced to make the case they are profitable, the BEST piece of evidence I can find is that in a record year 2013 the median FBS football program returned just over $3million in net revenue... http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...REVEXP2013.pdf So one has to convince themselves that our little SA's somehow are above the average on this scale as compared to the Alabama, Texas, {insert any big time FBS program}. If... IF... you can make that leap and IF you believe that the unavailable financials account for revenues AND costs accurately instead of booking things like IC-only gyms to general accounts, etc then I suppose we might turn a profit on football.”
One of the major expenses of any football program, outside of the service academies, is tuition, room and board. This can run from 12 – 18% of the total expense of a football program (once again using your source). Since every cadet is on scholarship … isn’t it possible that this built in advantage could result in USMA, or any SA, being one of the 50 to 60 percent of all FBS schools having a net positive revenue stream ?
MedB – from the NCAA report you linked to, a quote:
For Schools that are in the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS)
“Between 50 and 60 percent of football and men’s basketball programs have reported net generated revenues (surpluses) for each of the nine years reported.”
MedB – you obviously have done some research on this matter and seem to be a thoughtful poster. One of your comments was :
“If I were forced to make the case they are profitable, the BEST piece of evidence I can find is that in a record year 2013 the median FBS football program returned just over $3million in net revenue... http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...REVEXP2013.pdf So one has to convince themselves that our little SA's somehow are above the average on this scale as compared to the Alabama, Texas, {insert any big time FBS program}. If... IF... you can make that leap and IF you believe that the unavailable financials account for revenues AND costs accurately instead of booking things like IC-only gyms to general accounts, etc then I suppose we might turn a profit on football.”
One of the major expenses of any football program, outside of the service academies, is tuition, room and board. This can run from 12 – 18% of the total expense of a football program (once again using your source). Since every cadet is on scholarship … isn’t it possible that this built in advantage could result in USMA, or any SA, being one of the 50 to 60 percent of all FBS schools having a net positive revenue stream ?
scoutpilot
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 4,479
The blue trouser lovefest is a reference to the fact that this site was started by a cadre of AF parents and as such, USAFA and the Air Force in general have always been held in sacrosanct on here. That cannot even be argued in a reasonable sense. One merely needs to have a decent memory, all the way back to the thread upon thread about the evils of USNA under ADM Forrester.
You're leveling accusations in absence of evidence. We know he has been accused of saying disrespectful things about the masculinity of women at USMA. To make the leap that he pushed them to "use their sexuality" is a stretch, and given the single-source reporting and the general lack of
I don't think you actually know what "pimping" means.
I'm not sure what that statement means.
Yeah, I said as much two or three pages ago, based in the GOMR in his permanent file.
No, I doubt that having a daughter will affect my ability to make reasoned analysis of existing evidence. My career has taught me that skewering people based on single-source reporting that has been filtered through a third party is rarely a prudent move. He was certainly beyond the pale of good order and discipline and not in keeping with Army values, but to extend that to an accusation of "using their sexuality" and "pimping" is a bridge too far in light of what we actually know.
If you think that each Academy does not already use its pretty woman and strapping, handsome males for this purpose you're only fooling yourself. Go grab a USAFA, USMA, USNA, USCG, or AFROTC brochure. You'll find many handsome and pretty young faces, in a quantity far exceeding their natural occurrence in the ranks. In a sense, you're angry that someone might have stated unequivocally what you already know to be true about all forms of advertising.
The inherent implication that a man cannot and does not respect the rights and dignity of a young woman unless he has produced one from his loins is rather indicative of your own biases.
If such thing happen, I agree with you. But to be fair to the LTC, we don't know what really happened.
Let us say the LTC asked a female cadet to "There a shopping trip recurits are going on, can you be a host and talk to them about your West Point experience." There might have been female recruits on the shopping trip.
The above scenario could be interperted as an normal recuriting practice or "a Lt. Col. that is 37-39 years old tells female cadets aged 18-22 to use their sexuality to show that we have pretty girls too"
NorwichDad
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,351
The Paintball Team just went 2-0 with wins over Cornell and Temple
My kid was a captain of the Division 1 Extreme Checkers team at Norwich!
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
Checkers..... very nice. I really hope Cracker Barrel is a sponsor.
To MedB and MombaBomba, same issue re: your figures being the whole athletic program vs. the football program. In the link from MombaBomba's chart, for example, coaching at Air Force was I believe over 7 million. Although the football coaching staff is the highest paid, they don't make an aggregate of $7 million. That includes all coaches on all sports, from men's lacrosse to women's basketball etc.
I get that the football revenue is not broken out, and I understand MedB's argument that the SAs must not be different from a run of the mill Division IA program.
My points are as follows:
1. Given the large number of non-revenue sports in the overall service academy athletic programs, the only way a program like Air Force could even get close to break-even point is because the football program is making money. I would surmise that in addition to the reason Sean gave for why football programs aren't broken out separately (difficulty in bifurcating shared expenses), there are PR reasons for not breaking out the costs by sport, such as (a) it would show how much more is spent on sports like football (compared to women's lacrosse or baseball or swimming) and/or (b) it would also show which sports are the biggest profit-makers and perhaps would lead to pressure to cut sports like baseball which aren't revenue generators.
2. TV contracts for football are increasingly lucrative -- this includes USAFA's share of its conference TV payout.
2A. I can't speak to USAFA, but Army and Navy get a big payout JUST for the television rights to the Army-Navy game. It is a much higher payout than your run of the mill Division IA program gets -- this would be my point to MedB on why Army and Navy are indeed likely to be different from the other programs, as well as because they don't have to pay for athletic scholarships. As of the current contract, I believe Army and Navy split a $5 million dollar TV payout from CBS just for that one game. That payout is projected to rise substantially when the next contract comes around.
Again, I get that we are speculating here -- but I think there is some VERY strong evidence that the football programs at Army, Navy, Air Force do NOT lose money. I also get that the philosophical debate is much broader than that. But I am weighing in because I don't think "and football loses money" is either provable or even likely.
Cheers and Semper Fi. Most combat I've seen since Afghanistan.
Taking only leadership development: yes it does indeed develop leaders - but not in the way most think. When DD was in a leadership position she experienced what she viewed as inconsistent, favored, even lenient “look the other way” treatment of athletes. So she learned that leaders are judged on the actions you take, not on the rank you wear. She developed as a leader - I’m not sure how many of the athletes did.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
I learn something new everyday.
This site according to scoutpilot was started by AFA posters.
~ I am a very long time poster, probably months after the site came online. Ppsters like Zaphod, USNA69, Luigi, JAM, etc were here. None of them were AF. Christcorp , Fencer and I came on at the same time. Crap the DoDMERB guy before MillenLE was Navy...I don't know many AF posters that go by Ret ADM. Do you?
~ Scout did you know when this site was getting off the ground they asked posters to pay money? Hence the reason Fencer is a founding members! She had no voice in creating the site, she just deiced to open her wallet and now has a different color than Christcorp àmdmyself!
~ I have faith in this sites mods! Can you say the same?
I don't know TacNukes military background. Do you? If they are AF are you saying they (MODS) hand out red cards faster to Army and Navy compared to AF?
Just asking what is your point regarding your comment/defense of the blue trousers and this site?
Now back to my own post.
Yes, I know what pimping means. I just thought that was a nicer way to say my true beliefs of a gu that maybe @37 yr old man being ACCUSED of stating we want to show we have non masculine females.
~ Flame on... Most women and parents would feel there is another word that starts with the letter P if they ask girls under 20 to attend these functions fro someone closer too 40 or twice their age! Hint.. The next letters are EDOPHILE!
MemberLG,
I agree with your and Scout's post. They are accused, and this country is about being innocent until proven guilty.
He maybe innocent, and I sure as sheaatt hope he is. However, the reality is the damage is done. Google Lt..Col. Chad Davis.
With that said how about we get back on topic?
Scout....how about you re-read my post and how I slammed USAFA for paying 7.7 million for the FB coach.
~ I bleed Blue, but I will not give them a pass when it comes to this topic of expenses.
Can we now get back on topic and discuss the issue and the reality fighting on here results in no change!
Geese every SA takes a hit every year.
~ Scout brought up AFA gang rape.
Well there was the LAX at USMA where they killed the LaCrosse program.. THE USNA FB rape issues. Seriously, if I wanted to show the underbelly of every SA, this would not be a discussion impo!
I am dumbfounded that people believe there is some type of HALO over the cadets!
This site according to scoutpilot was started by AFA posters.
~ I am a very long time poster, probably months after the site came online. Ppsters like Zaphod, USNA69, Luigi, JAM, etc were here. None of them were AF. Christcorp , Fencer and I came on at the same time. Crap the DoDMERB guy before MillenLE was Navy...I don't know many AF posters that go by Ret ADM. Do you?
~ Scout did you know when this site was getting off the ground they asked posters to pay money? Hence the reason Fencer is a founding members! She had no voice in creating the site, she just deiced to open her wallet and now has a different color than Christcorp àmdmyself!
~ I have faith in this sites mods! Can you say the same?
I don't know TacNukes military background. Do you? If they are AF are you saying they (MODS) hand out red cards faster to Army and Navy compared to AF?
Just asking what is your point regarding your comment/defense of the blue trousers and this site?
Now back to my own post.
Yes, I know what pimping means. I just thought that was a nicer way to say my true beliefs of a gu that maybe @37 yr old man being ACCUSED of stating we want to show we have non masculine females.
~ Flame on... Most women and parents would feel there is another word that starts with the letter P if they ask girls under 20 to attend these functions fro someone closer too 40 or twice their age! Hint.. The next letters are EDOPHILE!
MemberLG,
I agree with your and Scout's post. They are accused, and this country is about being innocent until proven guilty.
He maybe innocent, and I sure as sheaatt hope he is. However, the reality is the damage is done. Google Lt..Col. Chad Davis.
With that said how about we get back on topic?
Scout....how about you re-read my post and how I slammed USAFA for paying 7.7 million for the FB coach.
~ I bleed Blue, but I will not give them a pass when it comes to this topic of expenses.
Can we now get back on topic and discuss the issue and the reality fighting on here results in no change!
Geese every SA takes a hit every year.
~ Scout brought up AFA gang rape.
Well there was the LAX at USMA where they killed the LaCrosse program.. THE USNA FB rape issues. Seriously, if I wanted to show the underbelly of every SA, this would not be a discussion impo!
I am dumbfounded that people believe there is some type of HALO over the cadets!
Last edited:
I don't think this is possible, Why would ScoutPilot not believe that the Moderator's warning would also apply to him?