HoosierReb01

Gooch and Fields are definitely candidates to see the field, and barring injury, Booth should definitely get some PT. As far as the other WR spots, although they don't have a lot of experience, we have quite a few young receivers, and Cobbs may take a RS. I would think the Keel might be more likely to get PT than Cobb. I can see Scales playing. Miclisse, at this time, is not signed. It remains to be seen whether he ever puts on a IU uniform. While he is obviously a excellent football player, all reports suggest that he has not quite pulled it together in the classroom. Not sure at RB, Mister seems like he is talented enough to see the field, and Redding may find some time in specialty situations. At times when we go to the 3-4, McCray and Meminger may well see time. Also, J-Shun Harris will probably be Shane Wynn's back-up. One thing about this class, is that there will be some redshirts, but it is strong enough across the board that there will be some immediate impact also. I just hope that there is significant inpact on the defensive side.

Sounds like we need a history forum. We are doomed to repeat history, largely for that reason. Most people who prophesy about problems in the future, are simply reading from history and following a logical progression. 

And definitely, I mean if you do genealogy, you generally research your own family. I could really care less about doing somebody else's just out of pure curiosity. 

And Jaybob and Natty may not appreciate this conversation, as they will have to spend too much time looking up words in the dictionary!  :laugh:

Its probably not to every-bodies cup of tea, but its a great conversation for those of us that are interested.

Not necessarily just Europeans. Anytime a more advanced, or more populous, civilization advances on another, the effects are usually detrimental to the less advanced/populous civilization. Study any area of world history it is the same. I think this is another Eurocentric viewpoint, although reversed. That so much is focused on European explorers misdeeds and atrocities, that we forget that this is found across cultures and centuries. Among the pre-Columbian Amerinds, the same misdeeds and atrocities were practiced against other tribes and cultures. I can easily accept that based on their supposed acceptance of Christianity, with its emphasis on mercy and brotherly love, that the early explorers should have been inclined to peaceful trade and alliance with the native tribes. It is a easy enough expectation, practice what you preach, right? However, I suspect most of them were Christian only as far as it was convenient, and for the most part as a matter of political and social acceptance or advancement. Again, I am not defending what happened, its just against the broad panorama of history, this is typical human behavior. I admit, I only feel the need to point this out, because it seems that when I see news articles or popular history about this topic, there almost seems to be such a focus on vilifying the early explorers that the natives are almost perceived as pacifists and the originators of world peace. Lol, that may just be my perception, but I find it irritating.   There is a real need for historical revisionism, but the pendulum seems to swing to far the other way

They may hate it, but at least in those areas of Europe that were under Roman Catholic influence, the phrase had validity. As far as the rest of the world goes, there were a number of cultures that were advancing knowledge and culture. This is not a indictment of the Roman Catholic church in particular, as much as it is a indictment of too much power centralized in too few hands. It doesn't really matter what the institution is, if it becomes to powerful, there are always individuals and groups who will make it a vehicle for personal use.    Related to some of the posts in this thread, is how in our history of Columbus, we continue to perpetuate the theory that pre-Columbian sailors were scared to sail to the edge of the "flat earth" and then fall off. It is more than likely that the major proponents of a flat earth in those times, were people who never left land. Sailors were probably the least influenced by this theory. 

Yes, publicized popularly published accounts were more often vehicles for an agenda, and as such had as many lies and half-truths as they did truth. Some things never change.

I have books on both, but can't say that I have spent much time on either. If I was Asian, I would probably be more interested in Asian history. But being of European descent, I find myself most interested in American/European history. However, I do find arguments that Americans view of history is too Eurocentric to be very credible, and do try to at least study enough of Asian, African and Middle Eastern history and culture to temper that. I think that globalization has spread cultural influences at a far faster rate in modern times, but that even in distant history, the influences on European culture were fairly significant and widespread.

As far as our teaching of history in school, I think most of what is taught is either from traditional interpretations that don't hold up to any real research, or its just basically simplified to a point that its pretty much useless. The other part I find irritating, is the attempts by special interest groups, to change history to reflect their viewpoint, even though their version is no more reliable than what is currently accepted.    Personally, I think if you want to really understand history, you have to explore a number of theories, accept very little of it as fact, and realize that the truth is probably a curious mixture of all of them. 

Yes, I think the spread of disease has historical consequences, but does not deserve the indictment that is often leveled against early explorers. I find it very doubtful it was intentional. I remember reading a year or two ago that medical researchers have found evidence that while syphilis was present in the "Old" world, Amerinds more than likely passed a far more virulent strain of syphilis to early explorers. Any discovery of an isolated population is very likely to include the transferal of microbes and viruses that will be devastating to that population. 

I guess I find that to understand American history, I have to study a wide ranging variety of history. Therefore, I have never specialized. I have a few favorite subjects, but keep it pretty broad for the most part. 

I think very few of those who sailed to the Americas for the first century or two should be looked on as "heroes". Most of them were here for no other reason than personal gain. Even those who came for missionary reasons, were very often harsh ideologues who wanted to convert the natives by force. The best reason to celebrate Columbus would be for his daring. The biggest problem I have with the anti-hero Columbus, as I often see it represented, is the glamorization of the "noble savage" theory. The atrocities that early European explorers committed against the Amerinds, was reciprocated in kind, and pre-dated Columbus. That's not a argument to excuse those actions, I just don't believe the viewpoint that it was one-sided.    As far as Columbus not discovering America, that may be true in even bigger ways than presented in previous posts. There are theories that Columbus was aware of the presence of a landmass to the west of Europe. This is not unlikely, as archaeologists have shown the presence of Norsemen in the northern US, Canada and Greenland. This was not lost in ancient history at that time, as Norse settlements in Greenland were probably not completely destroyed/abandoned until sometime in the 14th century. IIRC, the Roman Catholic Church still had a bishop in Greeenland until the late 13th century. Evidence of any particular group is very rare, but there is enough archaeological evidence in the Americas, to suggest that there were many voyages to the Americas were made prior to Columbus. Theories of pre-Columbian exploration, which are often backed by scant evidence, suggest that the Chinese, Japanese, Malians, Phoenicians, Irish, Welsh, Templars, and others, all had a limited presence in the Americas prior to Columbus. Some of these theories are backed more in myth than substance, and there are too many "scholars" promoting one theory or another (and sometimes all of them), that its hard to take a objective look at them and make any claim as too truth. However, there is a body of isolated evidence that would suggest that there were a number of groups that had at least limited contact with the Americas before Columbus, probably dating back into the pre-Christian era. I find it entirely reasonable to at least accept the possibility that Columbus was proceeding on some knowledge handed down from earlier explorers. If all of that is true, then the only distinct accolade Columbus is due is that his voyage rekindled, confirmed and publicized the existence of lands to the west. 

Yes. Christian holidays were often established on top of pagan holidays to make the transition from paganism to Christianity easier. There is no real data to establish the birth of Jesus, but scholars tend to lean towards spring or early summer based on what little data is available. The placement of Christmas in late December is probably a approximation of the celebration of the winter solstice. Much the same as the timing of the celebration of Easter is based on a pagan holiday and/or the Jewish Passover. Even looking at some of the symbolism of these holidays is probably related to pre-Christian beliefs and observances. Easter eggs and Easter bunnies are fertility symbols that almost certainly pre-date Christianity.

Oh, you guys had to go all History on me. One of my favorite things too. And several of my favorite themes to read on are pre-Columbian voyages to America and the Templars/Freemasons. Although I will read a wide variety of books, and my current one is about the Boxer Rebellion.

 Retweeted by Greg Yranie-Miclisse Bernice Stewart ‏@bernice_x3  1h Bad pic , but congrats Greg ❤ I had a strong feeling you was gonna commit there #HOOSEIERNATION @Gblack_DidDat3 pic.twitter.com/zHHST5uKY9        

I really hope that works out. Loved Natty's interview with him. If its grades, but your but Driko and get it taken care of. We got some great new helmets that would fit you just right!

Exactly. It might be a bit rocky the first few games, but if he is any good, it will make the difference in playing 12 or 13. 

Committed - 10/17/13 Dayton, OH (Beavercreek) Ht: 6-1 | Wt: 215 247 Rivals Scout ESPN Videos Twitter

I think the headline I seen earlier said that one media person was warned by hotel staff not the let the water touch their face. From the looks of this thread, I am not sure what you would want touching your face over there.

Interesting, on Rivals, Mizzou and IU both lost a recruit today, IU flipped into the 35th position and Mizzou dropped to 36.

Just a note on "carefully crafted criticisms", there is a time and a place to be blunt and call a spade a spade. Dealing with people who always think they have to be super sweet and never offending is often irritating, but dealing with people who who feel a need to be blunt and obnoxious is also. "Carefully crafted criticisms" is often just a matter of showing some respect for other peoples beliefs and ideas. Most of us are not idiots, we don't need someone to be as obnoxious as hell in order to get a point across. I read opinions on here all of the time that have me scratching my head, shaking my head, and sometimes banging my head, but I do try to be careful about how I respond. Just because this is a internet message board and we are basically anonymous, does not mean that we should leave good manners and common courtesy at the door.

Yeah, wish I could remember where I read about the 25 hard limit. I think they had also addressed that point. Even then, I thought there were some limitations on how many could be applied to the previous year. 3 was what I was thinking. I could probably look it up but am too tired to read through NCAA legalese.

Sometimes, its not your position, but your disposition. If anybody feels like the "thought police" are running these forums, I would like some actual examples. As long as it doesn't get personal, different viewpoints are encouraged here. If your idea of free discussion is that nobody can disagree with you, this ain't the place for you. Go start your own forum, lock everybody else out, and preach to the walls. I really don't care to read  bitching about the fact that everybody isn't lining up and patting someone on the back for their strongly expressed opinions. Express them, discuss them, and just expect that there are going to be dissenting opinions. 

Matthew Weaver ‏@MB_Weaver  6m Godby safety Tony Fields signing with #iufb. @Coach_Hatfield "Signing day will begin tomorrow @ 9:30 in the auditorium @ #Godby"