When a kid is signed by a team, and they don't qualify, and has to go the Juco route, then they should still be tied to that letter of intent when they get out of Juco, unless there has been a coaching change at the school they signed with.

If the coach they signed has been fired, then they should be released from the letter of intent, and could then sign with the same school or any other school. The reason I say "if the coach has been fired," is that the new coach may not want the player, and the player may not want to play for the new coach. There may be an entirely different system that the player may not fit into to.

What about the guy you sign that tears it up in high school but can't cut it in Juco. You'd be stuck having to honor the LOI and possibly missing out on someone who might make a difference on the team.

Would you still want Neighbours if the speed of the game was too much for him and he averaged 1.8 pts and 10 minutes a game off the bench?

I like the sign and place method when you have a Juco coach who encourages the players to sigh with the school that placed them if they still offer, and in turn the school continues to send players his way. It's a win-win situation.

(03-04-2010 01:54 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  When a kid is signed by a team, and they don't qualify, and has to go the Juco route, then they should still be tied to that letter of intent when they get out of Juco, unless there has been a coaching change at the school they signed with.

If the coach they signed has been fired, then they should be released from the letter of intent, and could then sign with the same school or any other school. The reason I say "if the coach has been fired," is that the new coach may not want the player, and the player may not want to play for the new coach. There may be an entirely different system that the player may not fit into to.

Only if they count against your limits during the time they are frozen from signing with another Division I.

(03-04-2010 02:08 PM)tweaky1 Wrote:  What about the guy you sign that tears it up in high school but can't cut it in Juco. You'd be stuck having to honor the LOI and possibly missing out on someone who might make a difference on the team.

Would you still want Neighbours if the speed of the game was too much for him and he averaged 1.8 pts and 10 minutes a game off the bench?
I like the sign and place method when you have a Juco coach who encourages the players to sigh with the school that placed them if they still offer, and in turn the school continues to send players his way. It's a win-win situation.

Yes, unfortunately it should work both ways. If he had been eligible in the beginning, you would have been stuck with him for one year anyway, so yes, you'd have to have him for one year.

We wouldn't be any worse off than we've been in the past with all these Juco duds we've signed over the years. One year and release him.

Looking back on our history, we've lost some good ones who had to go the Juco route, and really shinned in Juco, and then signed with one of the big boys. It's a 50/50 chance, the same as it is when you sign him and get him on campus in the first place. It seems to me that we've had more duds from Juco's than good ones. Seems we sign a lot of Juco's that average about 1.8 points, and 3 rebounds a game. You could pick up better players right here in Little Rock off the basketball courts under the freeways. Now they might not be eligible, but they'd be better basketball players than a lot of those we've recruited in the past.

(03-04-2010 02:14 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-04-2010 01:54 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  When a kid is signed by a team, and they don't qualify, and has to go the Juco route, then they should still be tied to that letter of intent when they get out of Juco, unless there has been a coaching change at the school they signed with.

If the coach they signed has been fired, then they should be released from the letter of intent, and could then sign with the same school or any other school. The reason I say "if the coach has been fired," is that the new coach may not want the player, and the player may not want to play for the new coach. There may be an entirely different system that the player may not fit into to.

Only if they count against your limits during the time they are frozen from signing with another Division I.

Need to go back to 15 scholarships like it used to be, and still is for the girls I believe. If the juco counted against your scholarships, it would be like redshirting him for two years, but he should have three seasons left to play if that scenario takes place.

(03-04-2010 02:14 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-04-2010 01:54 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  When a kid is signed by a team, and they don't qualify, and has to go the Juco route, then they should still be tied to that letter of intent when they get out of Juco, unless there has been a coaching change at the school they signed with.

If the coach they signed has been fired, then they should be released from the letter of intent, and could then sign with the same school or any other school. The reason I say "if the coach has been fired," is that the new coach may not want the player, and the player may not want to play for the new coach. There may be an entirely different system that the player may not fit into to.

Only if they count against your limits during the time they are frozen from signing with another Division I.

That would be okay too.