LSBlue

August 14th, 2015 at 12:08 PM ^

I didn't catch much of that show when it was on, but, from what I did see, it seems clear that his father had more a passion for football than he did.

ouck fhio

August 14th, 2015 at 2:09 PM ^

The point seems quite clear, guy.

 

Hoke is going to be interviewed for the first time since his firing.  I thought maybe some people around here might be interested in that sort of thing.  

 

Sorry for trying to help others.

LBSS

August 14th, 2015 at 12:10 PM ^

Seems like it might be pretty crappy parenting by Snoop. If the kid never wanted to play and had to be incentivized to with money as a six-year-old, then maybe it's for the best that he quits now.

I'd kill to be athletic enough to have been recruited by UCLA as a high-schooler, but I can't blame the kid for not wanting to play football.

Space Coyote

August 14th, 2015 at 12:57 PM ^

Not that having to pay for it is necessarily the best option (especially at that age, but ever really), but there are a lot of kids that simply aren't driven at anything, particularly kids of those that are really well off. Sometimes it does take a little extra incentive to get a kid into something with the idea that eventually they learn about a natural talent and can make use of it. Now, that incentive is 99 times out a 100 better coming through non-monetary avenues, but still.

Again, I'm not saying it's the absolute best option or necessarily good parenting, but there are parents that pay there kids to do other things (force the to write rather than other things, force them to play music rather than other things, etc). It just seems a bit easy in hindsight to say "might be pretty crappy parenting" when the kid may have realized he loved it and been thankful to his dad for giving him the incentive to do it. And a parent pushing his dreams onto a child isn't really that outlandish, it's not like he threatened to kick him out of the house if he didn't play (if we're bringing up the stick vs the carrot, this is very obviously a carrot). Not to mention that an awful lot of these kids that are playing sports are doing it for just that: the incentive, not necessarily the love of the game.

Either way, on the scale of "perfect parenting" (doesn't exist) to awful parenting, this is really close to the center of the bell curve, all things considered.

WolvinLA2

August 14th, 2015 at 12:55 PM ^

Again, I don't see this as bad parenting by Snoop.  He enticed his son to sign up for football, and according to the article, his son "fell in love" with it.  I made my 5 year old sign up for soccer this year because if I left it up to him, he'd play with his iPad all day.  And although we don't let him do that, sometimes the parents have to find something active and healthy for their kids to do.  

If the kid started football and hated it every year, yet Snoop still forced it on him, then that might be different.  But that doesn't sound like the case here, and I'm sure his son wouldn't have been that good if he hated it.  He enticed his son to sign up for an activity that he eventually fell in love with, and is just now deciding not to continue.  How is that bad parenting?

uchi

August 14th, 2015 at 3:33 PM ^

Agree with everything you've said. My middle-class parents leased me a nice Jeep Grand Cherokee for maintaining nearly all A's in high school. With 4 years of college costing $100,000+ they viewed it as a steal.

Unfortunately, most working to middle class families (my entire family) don't understand the volunteering and activities and extracurriculars and GPA needed to get into a decent college these days. I now bribe my nieces, nephews and younger cousins to do all sorts of stuff. If I didn't they'd sit on their -sses all day and I believe fail to achieve any sort of class mobility. I bribed a 15 y.o. cousin to run for student government last year. Just a $100. He won. He loves it. Without the bribe not a chance in hell he ever runs or gets this experience. I'll give a kid a pair of sneakers or concert tickets for getting mostly A's. On and on. Once a kid gets exposed to things it cultivates a different animal.

pkatz

August 14th, 2015 at 11:59 PM ^

What? You actually think bribing a kid is good parenting? Are you fucking nuts? How about explaining what achievements can do for them in life... how in the world do you think bribing a child and making it all about money is a good plan? You are an idiot and should be neutered before you can create another generation of idiots.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

uchi

August 15th, 2015 at 11:23 PM ^

I grew up in a UAW enclave where most parents didn't go to college but made decent coin (nice house, nice trucks, maybe a tiny cottage). That lifestyle is no longer an option for people with low skills, but they lack the understanding of college-track coursework, college admissions, what to study in college, etc. Research indicates working to middle class parents are generally hands off when it comes to educating kids. That is to say they leave it entirely up to the school to educate and make decisions. Upper middle class are not hands off; they're involved, they prod, they're "pushy' (ala helicopter-ish). And they also sink an incredible amount of time and money into getting informed, making sure their kids schedules are full of constructive activities, hiring tutors, etc.

Now tell me whose kids are more likely to get into a decent college, GRADUATE from college, and earn a decent living?

I've tried to inform elder family members, but discovered it's a lost cause (they are who they are), so I started focusing on the kids. In my experience, once you get closeminded raw kids to expand their scope, they don't revert back. Like the cousin who ran for office for $100; he didn't not run for office the next year, you know.

Tater

August 14th, 2015 at 1:59 PM ^

It's difficult for a child of privilege to submit to the demands of being a major college football player.  I am guessing the "being treated like everyone else on the team" thing didn't make him happy.  It obviously didn't make his dad happy.

Ultimately, he's better off using his dad's connections to boost his film-making career than he is getting hit on the head on a daily basis.  Good move on his part.

Avon Barksdale

August 14th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^

Players quit football teams all the time, so the argument "they could've recruited someone else" applies to virtually every team in the country at some point. I still remember when Posada quit a few years ago. You can probably throw Barnett in that category as well. More recently Jack Miller decided to pursue other options (after signing day). We could've recruited someone in his place had he quit in January as opposed to March.

Blue Mike

August 14th, 2015 at 12:41 PM ^

There is a difference between Jack Miller's situation and this one.  Broadus was on campus for what, a week?  He didn't even make it through Fall camp.  I think the point the other poster is attemping to make is that clearly this kid never wanted to play football in the first place if he quit after the first week.  It's a shame that he didn't have this revelation in February so that some other kid (who wants to play) could have received a scholarship to play at UCLA.  

It's not a big deal, but hopefully the kid has learned something about commitment and being your own man.

LostOnNorth

August 14th, 2015 at 2:49 PM ^

Commitment is all well and good unless you know it's going to make you miserable. Maybe it took him up to the point where it was finally becoming all to real to realize how much he really didn't want to play football. We can't know, so we shouldn't judge.

But regardless, if you stick with something you despise for no reason other than to be seen as a person who always follows through on their commitments, you've done nothing but waste your time. You have to remember this kid is a person and breaking commitments is something people do, often for perfectly good reasons. And even if it wasn't for a good reason, who cares, an open spot on the roster could go to a walk on or something.

schreibee

August 14th, 2015 at 3:37 PM ^

No it would've been a SHAME if he'd committed to Michigan and done this...

As it is, eh... it opens up a scholarship for a hard working contributor among the walk-ons. Isn't that what we say when Miller/Pipkins/Fox et al are unable or unwilling to continue playing (or the staff decides they are)?

Gentleman Squirrels

August 14th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^

If you pay your 6-year old kid to do anything, you've failed as a parent. Broadus' reasons for quitting is pretty crappy, but I blame Snoop more in this case for pushing his dream on his son. Good for the kid to figure this out early and not waste any more time.

WolvinLA2

August 14th, 2015 at 12:47 PM ^

Why are his reason's for quitting crappy?  Because he wants to study film instead?  That doesn't sound like a crappy reason to me.

EDIT:  And I don't think paying your kids for what you think will be in their best interest is bad parenting.  Maybe Snoop knew that if his son was playing football, he would a) be an active kid, and b) be less likely to fill his time with things that would be bad for him.  Before you go off calling someone a bad parent, it might help to know their motivations.

Rabbit21

August 14th, 2015 at 1:01 PM ^

I have no problems with parents providing incentives or rewards for being involved in an activity and am all about keeping kids active.  My son hates sports and so it's going to be a struggle to me to figure out how to keep him physically active, if I have to resort to bribery to get him to try things until I find the active thing that he loves doing then so be it(the point being to find something he can be involved in that I no longer have to bribe him to get him to do it).

WolvinLA2

August 14th, 2015 at 1:10 PM ^

I totally agree with that, and that sounds like it's the case here.  The article says that Snoop's son fell in love with football, so presumably the bribery stopped.  

I'd take it a step further that you just want your kids to try difference things (even if it's not active, though that's my preference) until they find something about which they're passionate.  It could be playing the trombone or writing poetry or learning a second language.  Lots of kids just aren't very adventurous when it comes to this stuff, and if all of their friends are playing World of Warcraft, that's all they'll want to do too.   

Gentleman Squirrels

August 14th, 2015 at 1:50 PM ^

I don't mind providing incentives or rewards for doing an activity. That's probably a good idea. I just don't think that money should ever be an incentive (especially at such a young age). It's teaching kids to value money over other things and could become a primary source of motivation for anything he does. There are other ways to encourage kids to be involved with different activities. I don't have a child so maybe that's why I'm thinking differently, and possibly when I do I'll come around to your way of thought, but right now I think he should have let the kid figure out his likes and dislikes on his own. Just be there to support the child and present him with all the tools and opportunities to succeed.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

WolvinLA2

August 14th, 2015 at 2:04 PM ^

Not having kids might affect your thoughts here, but maybe not.  I just know that how I thought I was going to raise my kids and how I'm actually raising my kids isn't exactly the same because things don't always work out how you think.  

Motivating kids is tough, and my kids are a lot stronger willed than I thought they'd be at this age (not sure why I thought that, based on my wife's and my personality).  I pictured it going something like "hey son, let's go outside and toss around this ball" and he'd say "sure dad, sounds like fun!" and then we'd go do that.  But it doesn't always work that easily, and I don't always have as much time to go toss that ball as I pictured either.  So getting your kids to do the things that you think will be good for them can be a struggle.  

I agree that money isn't probably the best motivator, but you have to use what works (and what you have at your disposal).  For some parents, it might be time.  "if you sign up for football I'll take you to the zoo once a month."  My parents motivated me with money to get good grades, albeit nowhere near the kind of money Snoop was offering.  I got $50 for every solid A I got on a final report card, and that was motivating to me.  

uchi

August 14th, 2015 at 4:48 PM ^

"My son hates sports..." Perhaps not a popular opinion on a board like this, but I don't have a problem with this. But only if you encourage your kid to be a reader, writer, computer programmer, etc. Idle time is terrible for kids. There's been stuff in the NYT about kids spending 7, 10, 15 hours *every* day playing video games and looking at their iPhone screen. Insane.

Back to no sports. I think it's more acceptable these days to not be an athlete in high school. 21 Jumpstreet had the "cool" kids who were like chill hipster-ish kids -- not jocks. That's a pretty accurate reflection of the vibe these days, especially at upper middle class high schools. Great grades are status. Leadership in clubs is status. Making iPhone apps. Volunteering, etc.

Rabbit21

August 14th, 2015 at 4:56 PM ^

He does read, loves unstructured play, and likes to do a lot of creative things.  He's also extremely intelligent and likes computer stuff.  This is all great, and I am proud of him.  

The reason I push him to do other things is two fold.  1.  I want him doing something active so he stays physically fit, as too many intellectual types(which he's going to be and I'm cool with it) eschew that and I think are left poorer for it.  2.  He is currently terrible at taking coaching, in that he has a low tolerance for frustration and too easily switches to doing what works vs. the right way to do it.  This drives me crazy and I need someone else helping me teach him how to take instruction.

I could give a shit about school status, just need him active, engaged, and able to handle someone being tough on him.  All things that either sports or learning a physical activity impart.

ghostofhoke

August 14th, 2015 at 3:13 PM ^

Why is that bad parenting? Maybe that's what will finance his first film. If he taught him to be smart with money at a young age that would've put him in much better position to deal with success in the future. Maybe if the parents of more God football players could afford to pay their kids and use that as a way to teach fiscal responsibility there wouldn't be such a high bankruptcy rate for once millionaire athletes.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

East German Judge

August 14th, 2015 at 12:16 PM ^

Wanted to do his own thing, well dad did not play football at all (I know he says dad pushed him to play), maybe he wants to be more like dad than he is leading on to and with football's drug tests, well that really wouldn't work well....

Image result for smoking marijuana

APBlue

August 14th, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^

That's cool. It's natural for parents to want their kids to have it better than they did.
It sounds like the kid could've had better timing with this decision, but let's not cry over water under the bridge.
That's right, right?

Vote_Crisler_1937

August 14th, 2015 at 1:10 PM ^

It will be very hard for this kid to have it better than his Dad did for much longer. The Chronic came out when Snoop was 20 or 21 and Doggystyle 1 year later. He was already on the Deep Cover soundtrack prior to that. Cordell has serious work to do to catch up to how Dad was living from age 20+




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

The Mad Hatter

August 14th, 2015 at 12:15 PM ^

never even wanted to play.  And why would he?  Snoop has a net worth over $135 million.  Why risk your health if you don't need the money, unless you have a real passion for playing?

LostOnNorth

August 14th, 2015 at 2:55 PM ^

seriosuly dude, how do you know this kid is a major pot head? Also I know some really smart bastards in the CS department who are pot heads.

either way, it's time to get off the hate train. You're judging an 18 year old kid you've never met.