(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Agree---the coach leaving scenario will happen at mid-to-lower P5's as well. It will even happen to a much lesser extent to the Bama's of the world.

I understand that the kids arent currently being paid----but they are being compensated---perhaps not as much as they might like. As i stated before, a scholarship is worth 25K a year on low side and its worth well over 60K at many private schools. There are lots of people making less than that in the real world, living in conditions far below those of a nice athletic dorm, doing jobs that arent nearly as fun as playing football at an FBS university. Furthermore---they are in court DEMANDING full free agency compensation--yes? I was simply saying--be careful what you ask for.

As for kids being cut---If it already happens---then whats the issue? At least the kids can go anywhere they want anytime they want and play immediately under this proposal. If you allow the school to immediately give his scholarship to someone else when the kid announces his transfer---why is that an issue? It means either a kid from high school or another kid seeking to transfer in will be getting it. If you dont allow that award---then you just screwing over a high school kid or a transfer kid in order to "stick it to the school". My point is, the schools need to be able to rebuild their numbers. The current 25 per year limit was designed when there was no free transfer. Im simply suggesting that the 25 scholarship per yer limit evolve to reflect the realities of the new college free transfer environment.

(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Yes. Attackcoog is looking at it from the standpoint of the school and not of fairness to the player. The idea should be that players are treated the same way a musician-student would be.

(02-21-2020 12:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Agree---the coach leaving scenario will happen at mid-to-lower P5's as well. It will even happen to a much lesser extent to the Bama's of the world.

I understand that the kids arent currently being paid----but they are being compensated---perhaps not as much as they might like. As i stated before, a scholarship is worth 25K a year on low side and its worth well over 60K at many private schools. There are lots of people making less than that in the real world, living in conditions far below those of a nice athletic dorm, doing jobs that arent nearly as fun as playing football at an FBS university. Furthermore---they are in court DEMANDING full free agency compensation--yes? I was simply saying--be careful what you ask for.

As for kids being cut---If it already happens---then whats the issue? At least the kids can go anywhere they want anytime they want and play immediately under this proposal. If you allow the school to immediately give his scholarship to someone else when the kid announces his transfer---why is that an issue? It means either a kid from high school or another kid seeking to transfer in will be getting it. If you dont allow that award---then you just screwing over a high school kid or a transfer kid in order to "stick it to the school". My point is, the schools need to be able to rebuild their numbers. The current 25 per year limit was designed when there was no free transfer. Im simply suggesting that the 25 scholarship per yer limit evolve to reflect the realities of the new college free transfer environment.

25/year is still 100 scholarships, well over the 85. And you can have unlimited walk-ons. Remember that obnoxious walk-on who won a starting job, transferred and won a Heisman? That was just 3 years ago. Georgia's favorite player, Rodrigo Blankenship, was a walk-on kicker. And he will be drafted pretty high.

(02-21-2020 01:14 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Yes. Attackcoog is looking at it from the standpoint of the school and not of fairness to the player. The idea should be that players are treated the same way a musician-student would be.

I don’t think band members are being paid— but if they want to be treated like members of the band—-then join the band. The kids can pursue any path they wish. The football path to a free education is different than the band path. So? As I said before—if every FBS football player quit in a huff—-there is a long line of kids happy to take their place. That tells me the compensation offered by the school must be fairly reasonable.

I’m not for or against the players. I’m simply saying that if you want to be treated like a pro athlete—well, that’s how pro sports players live. They get fired if they don’t pan out. Same on transfer—-if the kid can terminate the relationship whenever they want for any reason they want—how is not “fair” for the school to be able to do the same? Im free to work anywhere I want—-but if I’m not doing my job any employer I’m with can cut me loose.

(02-21-2020 01:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 12:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Agree---the coach leaving scenario will happen at mid-to-lower P5's as well. It will even happen to a much lesser extent to the Bama's of the world.

I understand that the kids arent currently being paid----but they are being compensated---perhaps not as much as they might like. As i stated before, a scholarship is worth 25K a year on low side and its worth well over 60K at many private schools. There are lots of people making less than that in the real world, living in conditions far below those of a nice athletic dorm, doing jobs that arent nearly as fun as playing football at an FBS university. Furthermore---they are in court DEMANDING full free agency compensation--yes? I was simply saying--be careful what you ask for.

As for kids being cut---If it already happens---then whats the issue? At least the kids can go anywhere they want anytime they want and play immediately under this proposal. If you allow the school to immediately give his scholarship to someone else when the kid announces his transfer---why is that an issue? It means either a kid from high school or another kid seeking to transfer in will be getting it. If you dont allow that award---then you just screwing over a high school kid or a transfer kid in order to "stick it to the school". My point is, the schools need to be able to rebuild their numbers. The current 25 per year limit was designed when there was no free transfer. Im simply suggesting that the 25 scholarship per yer limit evolve to reflect the realities of the new college free transfer environment.

25/year is still 100 scholarships, well over the 85. And you can have unlimited walk-ons. Remember that obnoxious walk-on who won a starting job, transferred and won a Heisman? That was just 3 years ago. Georgia's favorite player, Rodrigo Blankenship, was a walk-on kicker. And he will be drafted pretty high.

There is a reason the NCAA punishment includes a reduction in scholarships. It’s a disadvantage playing with fewer scholarship athletes. Yes—25 x 4 equals 100—yet current rates of attrition (from graduation, injury, and wash outs, etc) degrade a roster to the point that most schools are often below the 85 scholarship level limit. If you lose an extra 40 players in a single year (say due to a coach leaving)—it’s going to be similar to trying to come back from the death penalty.

(02-21-2020 03:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 01:14 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Yes. Attackcoog is looking at it from the standpoint of the school and not of fairness to the player. The idea should be that players are treated the same way a musician-student would be.

I don’t think band members are being paid— but if they want to be treated like members of the band—-then join the band. The kids can pursue any path they wish. The football path to a free education is different than the band path. So? As I said before—if every FBS football player quit in a huff—-there is a long line of kids happy to take their place. That tells me the compensation offered by the school must be fairly reasonable.

I’m not for or against the players. I’m simply saying that if you want to be treated like a pro athlete—well, that’s how pro sports players live. They get fired if they don’t pan out. Same on transfer—-if the kid can terminate the relationship whenever they want for any reason they want—how is not “fair” for the school to be able to do the same? Im free to work anywhere I want—-but if I’m not doing my job any employer I’m with can cut me loose.

There are musicians who get scholarships.

(02-21-2020 03:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 01:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 12:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If a G5 loses a highly successful coach that built a highly talented roster, it’s going to become very typical for those players to look around and check out thier options.

There is no reason to think that this would only be true for G5 teams.

Take the current situation at Mississippi State, for example. Their new head coach runs an offense that is radically different from that of the previous head coach. Players who don't fit, or think they don't fit, into Leach's offense are very likely to see if they can find a better fit elsewhere.

And there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with a FedEx employee who doesn't like the new boss checking out job openings at UPS.

(02-21-2020 11:24 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When your getting paid and you aren’t good, you get cut.

College athletes today are NOT getting paid and ARE getting cut. Scholarships are not renewed, and the athletes either transfer out or "retire" from their sport. Happens all the time, on the best teams and on struggling teams.

Agree---the coach leaving scenario will happen at mid-to-lower P5's as well. It will even happen to a much lesser extent to the Bama's of the world.

I understand that the kids arent currently being paid----but they are being compensated---perhaps not as much as they might like. As i stated before, a scholarship is worth 25K a year on low side and its worth well over 60K at many private schools. There are lots of people making less than that in the real world, living in conditions far below those of a nice athletic dorm, doing jobs that arent nearly as fun as playing football at an FBS university. Furthermore---they are in court DEMANDING full free agency compensation--yes? I was simply saying--be careful what you ask for.

As for kids being cut---If it already happens---then whats the issue? At least the kids can go anywhere they want anytime they want and play immediately under this proposal. If you allow the school to immediately give his scholarship to someone else when the kid announces his transfer---why is that an issue? It means either a kid from high school or another kid seeking to transfer in will be getting it. If you dont allow that award---then you just screwing over a high school kid or a transfer kid in order to "stick it to the school". My point is, the schools need to be able to rebuild their numbers. The current 25 per year limit was designed when there was no free transfer. Im simply suggesting that the 25 scholarship per yer limit evolve to reflect the realities of the new college free transfer environment.

25/year is still 100 scholarships, well over the 85. And you can have unlimited walk-ons. Remember that obnoxious walk-on who won a starting job, transferred and won a Heisman? That was just 3 years ago. Georgia's favorite player, Rodrigo Blankenship, was a walk-on kicker. And he will be drafted pretty high.

There is a reason the NCAA punishment includes a reduction in scholarships. It’s a disadvantage playing with fewer scholarship athletes. Yes—25 x 4 equals 100—yet current rates of attrition (from graduation, injury, and wash outs, etc) degrade a roster to the point that most schools are often below the 85 scholarship level limit. If you lose an extra 40 players in a single year (say due to a coach leaving)—it’s going to be similar to trying to come back from the death penalty.

Tough.

If you lose 40 players you've got a program that deserves to lose.