Oso planning to go pro
The difference is that a student going pro is on the student. Admitting someone who cannot graduate is on the university.May seem small to us but its an important distinction to university administrators.
So they like to live in a fairy tale rather than deal with the real world, all the while making sure their own backsides are covered. Inspiring.
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
This seems like an unnecessary stand if we were to adopt a the 'lifetime' scholarship process (if caring for the student is the concern). That way they can have the path to a degree available but also achieve their dreams like any other college bball player (i.e. I think Lazar was thrown out as an example).
Now I'm not advocating taking a risk so often that you blow the APR score, but I think it is really silly to say you won't recruit a JUCO that can't finish but will recruit someone in the top 5 that has indicated he will likely not be a 4 year player. I guess it makes the administration 'feel better' but it sure seems like a technicality to me.
Buzz may have pushed the bounds of the risk taking here -- but seems like an over-correction to act as if we own some sort of false moral high-ground.
The policy put in place by the administration was that a recruit must be in a position where it is humanly possible for them to take enough credit hours before their eligibility expires. Potential one and dones are qualified under this rule. Jae Crowder does not. That's the rule. You can say you don't like the rule, but it's not changing. Nor do I personally think it should change. For me, there is an important distinction between "lottery chance possibility" and physically impossible.
Also Odell Ball
This seems like an unnecessary stand if we were to adopt a the 'lifetime' scholarship process (if caring for the student is the concern). That way they can have the path to a degree available but also achieve their dreams like any other college bball player (i.e. I think Lazar was thrown out as an example).Now I'm not advocating taking a risk so often that you blow the APR score, but I think it is really silly to say you won't recruit a JUCO that can't finish but will recruit someone in the top 5 that has indicated he will likely not be a 4 year player. I guess it makes the administration 'feel better' but it sure seems like a technicality to me.Buzz may have pushed the bounds of the risk taking here -- but seems like an over-correction to act as if we own some sort of false moral high-ground.
If we do adopt this model, than I agree that this issue would goes away.Technicalities matter though. UConn ended up with a postseason ban because of technicalities. To me, it is more than a technicality. If I recruit a top 5 kid, I have a chance of convincing him to complete his degree. If I recruit someone who won't be able to graduate, I am using him for his basketball talent. If we don't put him in a position to earn his degree, than we fail him as and educational body. It's not a fair trade to say we get your basketball talent and you don't get a degree. Now it worked out in Jae's case because he got an NBA paycheck, but if it hadn't...The only false moral high-ground I have seen is people acting like those who support the policy are "arrogant," "discriminatory," and "live in ivory towers." If you want to advocate for Marquette taking chances on more students who don't have the grades to make Marquette as a result of growing up in a less privileged environment, please do by all means. I am huge supporter of this and think that Marquette has gotten away from its Jesuit roots by making its education so expensive that only the privileged can afford it without significant help. But then it better be for all students, not just the ones who are good at basketball.
Marquette voted against the Lifetime Scholarship when Buzz was here during the NCAA governance meetings. Will be interesting to see if MU changes their stance now and offers those types of scholarships.
So Buzz voted against it? Wow. I would have thought that the president or at least the athletic director would make that call.
We know that is all horsecrap anyway. Mu is not going to put itself under some mandate. Chicos APR is crap too, the players dont have to graduate in 4 years. Also, guys like Blackledge, Fulce, etc. that come back to MU to finish their degrees do it for free. My goodness after spending hundreds of thousands of dolars do you think MU is going to let these guys hang in the wind a few classes short of their degrees?? Please dont let the borderline psychotic MU hate cloud your common sense. All the anti-Juco hogwash that has been spewed by Mr. Logorrhea I think everyone knows is skewed at best. I think the board has long ago learned that anything that Chicos types is suspect and that the board's antagonist in more cases than not types outright untruths that he feels support his agenda. My guess is the actual 3 anti Juco votes were Chico, hoopaloop, and knight commision.
From what I could tell, Buzz was busy getting the AD ousted.......
From what YOU could tell, which is nothing. Is there a History professor you've got a hard on for who happened to be at MU when our President/AD voted on this? Maybe they/you can pin this on him/her.
I knew you would say that last line, which is why I took a snapshot of my vote...the bolded part lists the vote of the user. So in typical wrong fashion that you employ often, you got burned.....again. Hoopaloop....well I just went to his member page ( http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?action=profile;u=5607 ) and looks like he hasn't been here since 2012....so you're wrong a second time. IU relied HEAVILY on JUCOS under Bob Knight (your words)....Knight didn't even recruit his first JUCO to IU until 1985, which was his 14th year, two NCAA titles had already been achieved along with another Final Four, a bunch of Big Ten titles....heavily. Now, if you were to say Keith Smart played a pivotal role in his last championship year, you would be right....but to say heavily is ridiculous...wrong for the 3rd time. Al McGuire, relied HEAVILY on JUCOs...again, define heavily.I never said you have to graduate in 4 years for the APR, but you do have a time horizon and it does matter as long as the NCAA is using the APR, which they are and plan on continuing to do so.Finally, with all of your other histrionics, no one is against JUCOs, it is the quantity that matters because the risk reward isn't there. If Wojo feels there is a JUCO player that will help, he'll go after him. I doubt very strongly we will be in a situation under Wojo where 40% of our players are JUCOs. I could be wrong....maybe as many times as you were in this thread alone.
For such an ardent IU fan you sure do have a bad memory.
If you want to be a student at MU, you have to be able to graduate. That's reasonable.
Be able to? Sure. But there are tons of students who went to Marquette that never graduated. Our governor happens to be one (hah). And what happens to students who don't graduated in 4 years? Are they punished? No.
Not what I said. But if you think about it, all students are accepted with the possibility of graduating in four years. Jae was accepted despite it being impossible for him to graduate in four years. There is a difference. There's a reason you don't see many people transfer into Marquette from a community college.
It's becoming increasingly rare that ANYONE graduates in 4 years these days. What your essentially arguing is that Jae Crowder shouldn't have been accepted because he couldn't graduate in 4 years. So what you would have rather done is tell the JUCO kid who worked his ass off to become eligible that "sorry we can't accept you because you won't finish by the time basketball is over. Therefore we won't help you get a degree at all." Now we can debate the politics of "student athletes" all day, but what should be the case here is accepting people who are academically eligible. What does it matter if they graduate in 4 years or not? Jae Crowder never graduated like so many others before him because he could make a living off of playing basketball. Last time I checked, no degree will help you play better basketball in the NBA. Now if Crowder had turned out to be a complete bust/had a career ending injury he would have those 2 years at Marquette to fall back on and help him tremendously. Instead you propose to just give him zero years and zero help.
Right, and when those students enrolled, they had acceptable grades, test scores, etc. MU won't take a kid who doesn't have a HS degree. MU won't take a kid who got a 7 on his ACT. Why should MU be compelled to take a kid who doesn't have enough or the right credits to be on track to graduate?