Betting Talk

Year of readiness...

newcombenewcombe Senior Member
edited February 2015 in Sports Betting
http://m.espn.go.com/wireless/story?storyId=12349646

How realistic is this actually being put into place and your thoughts?

Comments

  • TommyLTommyL Super Moderator
    edited February 2015
    I really like the idea and think it would be a good thing for the student athletes. However, there is no chance that the Big Ten will enact it unless the rest of the NCAA goes along for the ride as well. Just see it as too big of a recruiting disadvantage for the league to be willing to take the hit.

    I think the thing that has a better chance of being common-place throughout the NCAA is the "4 year scholarship" instead of the yearly scholarships. It's another thing that I'm strongly in favor of.
  • newcombenewcombe Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    Looks like other major conferences are stating they are talking about it as well: pac and big 12's. I say not a chance this happens. Of course would be a positive tjing for the student athlete but like you said, it f's up recruiting and let's face it, frosh are a colossal part of championship teams anymore so I say leave it alone and if the kids aren't performing scholastically then suspend for academic issues.
  • RonbetsRonbets Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    Prior to 1972 when freshmen were ineligible, most hadda freshmen team. Cost cutting and revenue earning made it what it is today. All this goody do crap for the student is a noble thought but come on it's BS. Never happen. Want to eliminate the one and dones? Make the recruits not only sign a letter of intent, but a scholarship stip that states you must play atleast 2 years.
  • golfer1000golfer1000 Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    TommyL wrote: »
    I really like the idea and think it would be a good thing for the student athletes. However, there is no chance that the Big Ten will enact it unless the rest of the NCAA goes along for the ride as well. Just see it as too big of a recruiting disadvantage for the league to be willing to take the hit.


    I think the thing that has a better chance of being common-place throughout the NCAA is the "4 year scholarship" instead of the yearly scholarships. It's another thing that I'm strongly in favor of.

    I don't agree with the "4 year scholarships". What do you do
    If you sign a kid for 30% and he ends up being your best player after 2 years and deserves more money? Also, what if you sign a kid for 100% and ends up sucking? I always say , first year my fault, second year your fault.
  • TommyLTommyL Super Moderator
    edited February 2015
    golfer1000 wrote: »
    I don't agree with the "4 year scholarships". What do you do
    If you sign a kid for 30% and he ends up being your best player after 2 years and deserves more money? Also, what if you sign a kid for 100% and ends up sucking? I always say , first year my fault, second year your fault.

    I was really thinking about it more from those sports where everyone that's getting a scholarship is getting a full allocation, but I think it could also work in sports where they are divided up. My solution would be that you can never drop below what you're getting the year before (so that guy/girl getting 30% could go up if the coach wanted to, but could never go down). As far as an under-performer, my opinion is that it's on the coach. I'm not in favor of running kids out of a program due to strictly performance issues. If a kid is working hard and staying out of trouble, I don't think that they should ever lose their scholarship simply because the coach thinks he/she can recruit better players or thinks that the player didn't live up to their expectations when he/she recruited the player.
  • TommyLTommyL Super Moderator
    edited February 2015
    newcombe wrote: »
    Of course would be a positive tjing for the student athlete but like you said, it f's up recruiting and let's face it, frosh are a colossal part of championship teams anymore so I say leave it alone and if the kids aren't performing scholastically then suspend for academic issues.

    If it applies to everyone, then I wouldn't worry about the impact that freshman make in some sports today since everyone is on a level playing field. The time commitment that many athletes make is incredible, and I think that a year to adjust to college life and sports/studies/social balance would be a good thing for them. I also thinks it helps out the NCAA in things like the O'Bannon lawsuit as it does start to place more of an emphasis on the academic benefits that athletes are receiving.

    edit - Forgot to add, I don't think it is all about a guy being eligible vs. ineligible either. What about the player that has the potential to get a 3.5 and is getting a 3.0 due to everyone being thrown at them? I'm thinking more about the full spectrum here rather than just those with academic issues.
  • golfer1000golfer1000 Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    TommyL wrote: »
    I was really thinking about it more from those sports where everyone that's getting a scholarship is getting a full allocation, but I think it could also work in sports where they are divided up. My solution would be that you can never drop below what you're getting the year before (so that guy/girl getting 30% could go up if the coach wanted to, but could never go down). As far as an under-performer, my opinion is that it's on the coach. I'm not in favor of running kids out of a program due to strictly performance issues. If a kid is working hard and staying out of trouble, I don't think that they should ever lose their scholarship simply because the coach thinks he/she can recruit better players or thinks that the player didn't live up to their expectations when he/she recruited the player.

    I totally agree that if I recruit a bad player it's totally my fault. I'm a big fan of recruiting and can't stress enough the importance of it. However, if I do make a mistake , I'm not gonna sit there and pass on other players cause I have no money left. My job is to win. Period. This isn't high school or middle school where everyone gets a chance to play, etc... My job is to win and I will do whatever it takes to field the best team that I can. And if it means cutting someone, then I will do it, even if it is/was my my fault to begin with .
  • TommyLTommyL Super Moderator
    edited February 2015
    golfer1000 wrote: »
    I totally agree that if I recruit a bad player it's totally my fault. I'm a big fan of recruiting and can't stress enough the importance of it. However, if I do make a mistake , I'm not gonna sit there and pass on other players cause I have no money left. My job is to win. Period. This isn't high school or middle school where everyone gets a chance to play, etc... My job is to win and I will do whatever it takes to field the best team that I can. And if it means cutting someone, then I will do it, even if it is/was my my fault to begin with .

    It really comes down to where you draw the line then when it comes to "winning". Are you willing to slip players a little money on the side if it helps you win? I assume that's a no. Willing to work on fixing some grades and working with profs if you have a player on the edge? Willing to make promises to recruits that you have no intention of keeping if it means improving the roster? Since some coaches obviously will have no problem cutting a kid that is doing nothing wrong, then I think something needs to be done to prevent it. The student athletes are there first and foremost to get an education, regardless of how screwed up the NCAA may be or how much everyone might want to overlook that fact for the glory of "winning". So this is an area where I believe they deserve greater protection.
  • golfer1000golfer1000 Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    TommyL wrote: »
    It really comes down to where you draw the line then when it comes to "winning". Are you willing to slip players a little money on the side if it helps you win? I assume that's a no. Willing to work on fixing some grades and working with profs if you have a player on the edge? Willing to make promises to recruits that you have no intention of keeping if it means improving the roster? Since some coaches obviously will have no problem cutting a kid that is doing nothing wrong, then I think something needs to be done to prevent it. The student athletes are there first and foremost to get an education, regardless of how screwed up the NCAA may be or how much everyone might want to overlook that fact for the glory of "winning". So this is an area where I believe they deserve greater protection.

    I hear ya. But even if someone has great grades, does everything right, good attitude; then go get a academic scholarship. I'm not gonna risk losing my job to keep someone on scholarship who sucks, even it is my fault, and even if they do everything right except for produce.
  • StevieYStevieY Senior Handicapper
    edited February 2015
    The 1 and done BB guys will go overseas to play. That may not be a bad thing unless your name is Calliperi.

    Scholarships are used different by every coach. Some are nice to you until you get there, then use pulling it as a threat. It's like the college version of waivers. It can get nasty, and it is the coaches way out of either a bad recruiting job or a lazy player. It works both ways though. There are some players who get to college and want to just do the college thing. They do the absolute minimum for their sport, just enough to stay on the team. A coach has to be able to weed them out. They will pull it hoping you will leave. Sometimes they will "tell" you to leave, sometimes they won't. If you stay as a walk on, so be it. All coaches have their own level of nastiness when it comes to their roster. My coach was one of the "nicest" most respected coach during his time(which is good and bad). Everyone who came in on scholarship got it for 2 years minimum unless they lost it by being a troublemaker, ineligible, etc. He never pulled a scholarship from a player who didn't truly deserve it being pulled. If you didn't pan out but you worked your ass off, he let you keep it. Anyone who was borderline ineligible would lose it because he didn't want to waste it on a guy he may not be able to count on. He would never pull it from someone in their last year, even if they never played. The one nasty thing he did, most coaches did. He would keep every catcher who tried to walk-on in the fall. All fall practice, they would catch pitchers in the bullpen, warming up to come into our scrimmage, getting a workout in between appearances, etc. They would never get to play in the scrimmages. At the end of the fall, he would release them. It gave us plenty of people warming up pitchers in the pen and saved our "real" catchers. They would all transfer to div 2 schools to play. You could find the dumb ones, they were usually back the next year trying out again because they think they almost made the team. :)

    In baseball(and other sports), there are very few full scholarships given but there are tricks used to not just maximize them, but to actually exceed the value of your scholarship allotment. When you sign a 1/2 scholarship, they ask you if you want tuition or room and board(at least they did back then). Back when I played, room & board was about 4 times more than in-state tuition. There was no rule saying there had to be 15 tuition's and 15 room and boards. If you selected tuition(which no one did), you just sign a slip after you get your classes and you are all good. If you picked room and board, you got a check for what the school charged for room and board in their dorms. No one stayed in the dorms, they all rented apartments or houses together and bought a food card at the dorm cafeteria(can't eat fast food everyday :) ). Room and board covered everything this way so it was like having 30 full scholarships. A couple of us smart guys stayed at home, so we actually got "paid". We would hang out at their rented houses all day and go home to a warm cooked meal every night. Amazing what teammates would do for you to get invited home for dinner. :) Our coach would also use the school's academic scholarships and recruit guys who would qualify for them. There is one at WMU called the Medallion scholarship. Back then, they would hand you a check for 25K. That would almost pay for 7 years of in-state tuition and board in those days. We always had 2-3 guys on the team who had one. He liked to use that one as a basis to recruit good players who were also very smart because it was much bigger than state and nation-wide scholarships and to get it, you had to come to WMU. If you were a candidate for that scholarship and you played a sport, it was probably 100% you were going to get one.
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    This is a dumb idea.
  • StevieYStevieY Senior Handicapper
    edited February 2015
    kane wrote: »
    This is a dumb idea.

    Yeah, the kids will really hate it too. It would have driven me nuts to have no chance to play as a freshman.
  • blackbullblackbull Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    StevieY wrote: »
    There are some players who get to college and want to just do the college thing. They do the absolute minimum for their sport, just enough to stay on the team. A coach has to be able to weed them out.

    Agree with this completely and this type of thing is commonplace in Div-1 athletics. You can protect against it by having a culture of winning and excellence, but it still happens at those places too. Coaches really need that 1-yr scholarship to keep certain players motivated and in line. I simply cannot express enough how bad of an idea a 4-yr scholarship rule is for major college athletics.
  • blackbullblackbull Senior Member
    edited February 2015
    And don't think that there isn't any check on the HC's who choose not to renew a player's scholarship. That HC is going to have to answer to his high school coach (and other high school coaches of interest) on why the scholarship was terminated and that HC better have a good reason. I've seen it go bad for many a HC when that HC comes "a knocking" for future recruiting purposes.

    (Obviously speaking mainly about NCAAF here, but you can adapt it to other sports.)
Sign In or Register to comment.