Former Marquette target. 6 8 small forward.
Quote from: GoMarquette32 on April 08, 2012, 09:15:48 PM
Former Marquette target. 6 8 small forward.
He was supposed to be a two guard coming out of HS. What's the story? Not getting PT?
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 08, 2012, 09:20:55 PM
He was supposed to be a two guard coming out of HS. What's the story? Not getting PT?
New coach.
So, let's pontificate on what goes down for him to transfer to MU.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 08, 2012, 09:27:17 PM
So, let's speculate on what goes down for him to transfer to MU.
Simple, he is so sorry for the awful mistake that he made that he walks on at MU and pays his own way including his transfer sit out year.
Rodney hood is really good!
As I recall we finished a very close 2nd to Mississippi State...this could get interesting...
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 08, 2012, 09:30:25 PM
Simple, he is so sorry for the awful mistake that he made that he walks on at MU and pays his own way including his transfer sit out year.
Does he have to sit if there was a coaching change?
Quote from: National Champs on April 08, 2012, 10:06:21 PM
Does he have to sit if there was a coaching change?
Yes, but he's a complete stud and I would like to know what's on his mind (no h).
He picked MSU because he wanted to be close to home. Can he transfer to another SEC school?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 08, 2012, 10:13:48 PM
He picked MSU because he wanted to be close to home. Can he transfer to another SEC school?
I believe there was also a strength and conditioning coach that Hood had a very close relationship with, that got on staff at Mississippi State last year...that helped swing things in MSU's favor. Something of that variety... yet that is also within NCAA rules...
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 08, 2012, 10:13:48 PM
He picked MSU because he wanted to be close to home. Can he transfer to another SEC school?
http://compliance.pac-12.org/ccacaitems/surveys/ictransfers.pdf
If this document is accurate he could, but he would have to walk on for two years (redshirt year and one more). Would think that makes it unlikely he would.
A lot can change after a year in school. Wouldn't be surprised if he's willing to go further away now. If it's based on talent alone we'd love to have him, not sure our scholarship situation will allow it though. Going to guess that based on a strong freshman season he will get interest from at least one big time program that he won't want to pass up.
While I'd love Hood, and could see him making us a top-5 team going into 2013, where do we find the scholarship? He'd need one for 2012 (redshirt) and 2013. We already need one for next year when Wilson arrives. While a lineup of Otule, Jamil, Hood, Mayo, and Blue with a bench of Gardner, Taylor, Juan, Burton, TJ, and the DWs would be amazing, who gets cut?
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 08, 2012, 10:38:30 PM
While I'd love Hood, and could see him making us a top-5 team going into 2013, where do we find the scholarship? He'd need one for 2012 (redshirt) and 2013. We already need one for next year when Wilson arrives. While a lineup of Otule, Jamil, Hood, Mayo, and Blue with a bench of Gardner, Taylor, Juan, Burton, TJ, and the DWs would be amazing, who gets cut?
Jeez you are dense. No one gets 'cut' in this scenario.
Hood was awesome last year - exceeded even his high projections. I am in that area a bit (never making any contact with prospects or relatives of course), and my accountants are in msu country and just raved on how wonderful he and his family were when it came down to msu or Marquette. Remember msu had top 10 talent this year and just imploded the last month, so he will get top tier offers I believe.
I'd bet Calhoun is pushing for some redshirts like this- sit out the year they are banned then come back for a run.
This scenario seems an awful lot like Jamil Wilson's, minus the kid wanting to come home. Picks a school instead of Marquette, has a decent season that shows he has potential, coach gets fired and program's future is up in the air, kid realizes he was meant to play elsewhere.
Hood had Mississippi State, Alabama, Florida State, Louisville and MU in his final five. All of them are southern schools except for MU.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 08, 2012, 11:28:08 PM
Hood had Mississippi State, Alabama, Florida State, Louisville and MU in his final five. All of them are southern schools except for MU.
Maybe he wanted immediate playing time. He started from day one at MSU. Sit out next year, play alongside Jamil, Steve Taylor, and Anderson in '13 and be the superstar in '14.
Would love for him to transfer, but we're struggling scholly wise already.
What language you talkin'?
Quote from: murara1994 on April 08, 2012, 11:11:17 PM
Jeez you are dense. No one gets 'cut' in this scenario.
Call it what you want. We'd be 2 over. If you read my post, it's pretty clear that I didn't put every name on there that is listed on the scholarship table for 2013-14.
Cut, forced to transfer, told not to come, regardless, barring early entry, 2 guys who expected to be here wouldn't be. So how about not being an ass and accepting the math doesn't add up?
Some tweets out there that he might be heading to Louisville, that this is the school he had in mind before he even asked out, and that MSU might make tampering protests.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 09, 2012, 08:03:08 AM
Some tweets out there that he might be heading to Louisville, that this is the school he had in mind before he even asked out, and that MSU might make tampering protests.
Could Louisville give MSU Jared Swopshire's expiring contract plus cash considerations?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 09, 2012, 08:15:16 AM
Could Louisville give MSU Jared Swopshire's expiring contract plus cash considerations?
I'm going to givet his one a "no comment". I will say this, I'm not sure why everyone seemingly thinks Pitino is one of the "good guys" in Coaching and he's considered clean?? Nothing could be further from the truth.
Quote from: muguru on April 09, 2012, 08:49:12 AM
I'm going to givet his one a "no comment". I will say this, I'm not sure why everyone seemingly thinks Pitino is one of the "good guys" in Coaching and he's considered clean?? Nothing could be further from the truth.
Who thinks that?
Quote from: muguru on April 09, 2012, 08:49:12 AM
I'm going to givet his one a "no comment". I will say this, I'm not sure why everyone seemingly thinks Pitino is one of the "good guys" in Coaching and he's considered clean?? Nothing could be further from the truth.
Is anyone truly "clean" these days? I'm betting not.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 09, 2012, 08:15:16 AM
Could Louisville give MSU Jared Swopshire's expiring contract plus cash considerations?
nice. this comment got me laughing
Would have been nice to get a second chance at this exciting prospect but, alas, he shall haunt us instead.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 09, 2012, 08:03:08 AM
Some tweets out there that he might be heading to Louisville, that this is the school he had in mind before he even asked out, and that MSU might make tampering protests.
UL fans on the Scout site are acting like it's a done deal. Wonder who they'll dismiss, as they're over for next year if they add Hood.
UL makes room for this kid in a hurry. Wish we had chance but think this is UL all the way.
Quote from: chapman on April 08, 2012, 10:30:42 PM
http://compliance.pac-12.org/ccacaitems/surveys/ictransfers.pdf
If this document is accurate he could, but he would have to walk on for two years (redshirt year and one more). Would think that makes it unlikely he would.
A lot can change after a year in school. Wouldn't be surprised if he's willing to go further away now. If it's based on talent alone we'd love to have him, not sure our scholarship situation will allow it though. Going to guess that based on a strong freshman season he will get interest from at least one big time program that he won't want to pass up.
Intra-conference transfer in the SEC is only applicable to a SA "...who does enroll and leaves before end of first term of enrollment." If I'm not mistaken, "term" is typically a semester (or trimester, quarter, etc.), not an academic year. In that case, he would be outright barred from transferring to another SEC school, no?
Quote from: strotty on April 08, 2012, 11:50:40 PM
Maybe he wanted immediate playing time. He started from day one at MSU. Sit out next year, play alongside Jamil, Steve Taylor, and Anderson in '13 and be the superstar in '14.
Maybe. More than likely he wants to play in the South and will stay in the South, likely Louisville.
http://packinsider.com/2012/04/rodney-hood-transferring-from-mississippi-st-wolfpack-in-the-mix/
The NC State guys jumped on it fast, hoping that he went to a potential great team who underperformed and then lost every other starter except him - while NC State was in complete tormoil when he was making the decision and now the future looks great.
They admit no evidence he was really considering them - man a good 6-8 guard to contend with in two seasons makes Lville hard to contend with despite how good I believe we are going to be. Hopefully reports are premature.
Quote from: Goose on April 09, 2012, 11:59:41 AM
UL makes room for this kid in a hurry. Wish we had chance but think this is UL all the way.
Pitino's already had to cut Swoopshire. I suppose cutting another player wouldn't be beyond his consideration. But what do they say to Blackshear who plays the same position?
Multiple reports on Twitter that Duke and Ohio State are in the strongest on him. I think we can forget about being in the mix.
With Kentucky getting these one and dones and Louisville trying to shed their
roster for a better player and other big wigs are doing this cheating,
MY POINT IN BEATING A DEAD HORSE-----WHY DID WE BITCH ABOUT BUZZ FOR DROPPING NEWBILL LAST YEAR? Be glad and hoping our program is clean.
Earl
The game has changed and we need to continue change with the big boys. This fan was not upset over Newbill, that is how things work today. It s two way street and kids can leave if they feel slighted or program can suggest a kid move on for not living up to expectations. That is why I say you have to be recruiting every day of the year.
Quote from: Goose on April 10, 2012, 05:04:45 PM
Earl
The game has changed and we need to continue change with the big boys. This fan was not upset over Newbill, that is how things work today. It s two way street and kids can leave if they feel slighted or program can suggest a kid move on for not living up to expectations. That is why I say you have to be recruiting every day of the year.
Let's hope not...
Quote from: Earl Tatum on April 10, 2012, 04:57:16 PM
With Kentucky getting these one and dones and Louisville trying to shed their
roster for a better player and other big wigs are doing this cheating,
MY POINT IN BEATING A DEAD HORSE-----WHY DID WE BITCH ABOUT BUZZ FOR DROPPING NEWBILL LAST YEAR? Be glad and hoping our program is clean.
I am speculating but likely because some programs are successful without going down that path, one is right here in the state. There are some boosters and administrative types (Goose can confirm) that look to our neighbors and see a successful program without the turnover.
Do not forget the NCAA legislation that recently passed (Marquette opposed this legislation) that will allow schools to offer multi-year scholarships.
In effect, some schools will offer guarantees that the kids will be allowed to stay multiple years with a multi-year scholarship and that could work against programs that have a reputation for Creaning as they will likely only offer 1 year scholarships. Imagine if you are around a 100 rated kid and MU offers a 1 year scholarship renewable each year and Wisconsin offers a 4 year guaranteed scholarship? As Goose says, the game is changing but not always the way one thinks. How the big boys are doing it is not universal in nature. Some big boys are doing it one way and others are going about it an entirely different way.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-02-17/multiyear-scholarships-survives-close-vote/53137194/1
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 10, 2012, 05:29:22 PM
I am speculating but likely because some programs are successful without going down that path, one is right here in the state. There are some boosters and administrative types (Goose can confirm) that look to our neighbors and see a successful program without the turnover.
Do not forget the NCAA legislation that recently passed (Marquette opposed this legislation) that will allow schools to offer multi-year scholarships.
In effect, some schools will offer guarantees that the kids will be allowed to stay multiple years with a multi-year scholarship and that could work against programs that have a reputation for Creaning as they will likely only offer 1 year scholarships. Imagine if you are around a 100 rated kid and MU offers a 1 year scholarship renewable each year and Wisconsin offers a 4 year guaranteed scholarship? As Goose says, the game is changing but not always the way one thinks. How the big boys are doing it is not universal in nature. Some big boys are doing it one way and others are going about it an entirely different way.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-02-17/multiyear-scholarships-survives-close-vote/53137194/1
Are you speaking of the state you live in (California), or the state that Marquette is located in (Wisconsin)?
Hey Goose I agree, and the game has changed. So take advantage of the
rules. But, I remember the blogs sort of condeming Buzz. Go MU.
Remind me: what effect do "one-and-done" transfers have on schools offering multi-year schollies? None, right?! Only the graduation hit, am I correct?
And is there a penalty for kids who want out and/or schools cutting them loose?
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on April 10, 2012, 10:04:49 PM
Remind me: what effect do "one-and-done" transfers have on schools offering multi-year schollies? None, right?! Only the graduation hit, am I correct?
And is there a penalty for kids who want out and/or schools cutting them loose?
The old GSR's basic rule was that if a student has eligibility remaining and qualifies academically for the next term (e.g. a sophomore who transfers, declares for the draft, etc. but would have been a junior academically had he returned), then the school wouldn't be hit. However, with the new rules and the multi-year stuff, I'm interested in seeing how they've addressed the issue you raised (i.e. should a school who offers a multi-year be penalized if the student only "fulfills" one year?) as well as a number of other concerns the UCONN thingy has brought to light, specifically, how does the delayed reporting affect scholarship situations at a school who offers multi-year scholarships to all of its student-athletes (i.e. if all 13 players are under multi-year scholarships from 2012-2015, and sanctions are passed whereby a school loses 2 scholarships in 2014-15 - a situation that could not have been foreseen by the school because of the delay - does the NCAA force the school to default on a multi-year scholarship/contract?)
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 10, 2012, 05:46:57 PM
Are you speaking of the state you live in (California), or the state that Marquette is located in (Wisconsin)?
The University of Wisconsin in Madison
Doesn't this open the room they need?
http://blogs.suntimes.com/northwestern/2012/04/can_louisvilles_jared_swopshire_replace_northwestern_john_shurna.html
Apologize if already posted.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 10, 2012, 05:29:22 PM
I am speculating but likely because some programs are successful without going down that path, one is right here in the state.
Are you talking about UWM or UWGB?
Quote from: MU B2002 on April 13, 2012, 05:20:09 PM
Doesn't this open the room they need?
http://blogs.suntimes.com/northwestern/2012/04/can_louisvilles_jared_swopshire_replace_northwestern_john_shurna.html
Apologize if already posted.
Nope. Pitino needed to cut Swoopshire to make room for his freshman recruits.
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 14, 2012, 12:55:49 AM
Nope. Pitino needed to cut Swoopshire to make room for his freshman recruits.
Ahhh. Gotcha.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 13, 2012, 03:16:56 PM
The University of Wisconsin in Madison
Ian Markolf. Look it up.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 13, 2012, 03:16:56 PM
The University of Wisconsin in Madison
They're no different than anyone else. Their fans are just more vociferous about the BS purity of their program. Bo's as bad as anyone else. Clearly they also didn't do enough to make Uthoff comfortable.
Nothing against Lockett, but we need another big body. Heaven forbid if Otule hurts himself again and Davante doesn't complete heal or re-aggravates his injury, we have no one over 6'8".
Hood is who we'd need, though he is more of a 3 or 4.
I wonder if the hesitation to even get him in the fold is due to selling more PT to Looney.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on April 14, 2012, 01:13:01 PM
Nothing against Lockett, but we need another big body. Heaven forbid if Otule hurts himself again and Davante doesn't complete heal or re-aggravates his injury, we have no one over 6'8".
Hood is who we'd need, though he is more of a 3 or 4.
I wonder if the hesitation to even get him in the fold is due to selling more PT to Looney.
Hood is a two, always has been, always will be. That's his game. The problem with trying to get Hood to MU would be dealing with suspicions on his part that he would be shoved into the four spot. I don't know if at MU there is much difference between the 2 and the 3, but Hood definitely would be unhappy pushed into the four spot.
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 14, 2012, 04:36:10 PM
I don't know if at MU there is much difference between the 2 and the 3, but Hood definitely would be unhappy pushed into the four spot.
But what does his dad think about that?
(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/images/photos/000/777/078/RackMultipart.6889.0_crop_340x234.jpg)
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 14, 2012, 09:52:55 AM
They're no different than anyone else. Their fans are just more vociferous about the BS purity of their program. Bo's as bad as anyone else. Clearly they also didn't do enough to make Uthoff comfortable.
You are trying to pass it off as an everyone else does it, but that isn't the case, and certainly not with Bo Ryan.
There is a perception with certain coaches, Crean, Cal, Pitino, Calhoun, Buzz and others that they will move players off the team to get someone else in. Look up the term Creaning or Buzz Cutting and see what comes up. I'm not debating whether it is right or wrong. They run a program and need to get wins. They do what they feel is right and there is nothing illegal about it. With one year scholarships, I personally don't see that big a deal though there is one exception.
When a kid is run off who signed a letter of intent and never even arrives on campus, that is one I am not to crazy about If Durley doesn't come, wouldn't that be our third kid this has happened to? Roseboro, Newbill, and now Durley?
You can say Ryan does this, but not only is that not the perception that isn't true either. There are a number of ways to win in college basketball and different programs choose different paths. It is ok to admit it and not be in denial how we have chosen our path (nothing illegal or unethical about it as long as the players know up front what is going on).
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 14, 2012, 04:36:10 PM
Hood is a two, always has been, always will be. That's his game. The problem with trying to get Hood to MU would be dealing with suspicions on his part that he would be shoved into the four spot. I don't know if at MU there is much difference between the 2 and the 3, but Hood definitely would be unhappy pushed into the four spot.
Well then...
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 15, 2012, 11:15:56 AM
You are trying to pass it off as an everyone else does it, but that isn't the case, and certainly not with Bo Ryan.
There is a perception with certain coaches, Crean, Cal, Pitino, Calhoun, Buzz and others that they will move players off the team to get someone else in. Look up the term Creaning or Buzz Cutting and see what comes up. I'm not debating whether it is right or wrong. They run a program and need to get wins. They do what they feel is right and there is nothing illegal about it. With one year scholarships, I personally don't see that big a deal though there is one exception.
When a kid is run off who signed a letter of intent and never even arrives on campus, that is one I am not to crazy about If Durley doesn't come, wouldn't that be our third kid this has happened to? Roseboro, Newbill, and now Durley?
You can say Ryan does this, but not only is that not the perception that isn't true either. There are a number of ways to win in college basketball and different programs choose different paths. It is ok to admit it and not be in denial how we have chosen our path (nothing illegal or unethical about it as long as the players know up front what is going on).
But Roseboro
did arrive on campus that's were he had the opportunity to see during the summer that he wasn't ready to contribute to the team for the foreseeable future, and decided to take a step down in competition.
Really, with MU "fans" like yourself, who needs trolls?
Quote from: LittleMurs on April 15, 2012, 10:27:17 PM
But Roseboro did arrive on campus that's were he had the opportunity to see during the summer that he wasn't ready to contribute to the team for the foreseeable future, and decided to take a step down in competition.
Really, with MU "fans" like yourself, who needs trolls?
Arrive during the normal school year, when 95% of the students arrive. Schools should honor letters of intent for the first year.
I have said it several times but the landscape of college ball has changed a great deal in past decade. I would agree that having kids leave before they come looks harsh on the surface and cannot argue that. That said any kid to decide whenever he wants to leave and the school had planned for him for four years and are stuck when kid leaves.
In perfect world I would hate to see kids leave before there first day of class. In today's game it is cut throat and the need to always be recruiting is the facts of life. Furthermore we are still in the chasing position to become elite and keeping the wrong kid could be a big hit for the program.
Quote from: Goose on April 16, 2012, 06:11:06 PM
I have said it several times but the landscape of college ball has changed a great deal in past decade. I would agree that having kids leave before they come looks harsh on the surface and cannot argue that. That said any kid to decide whenever he wants to leave and the school had planned for him for four years and are stuck when kid leaves.
In perfect world I would hate to see kids leave before there first day of class. In today's game it is cut throat and the need to always be recruiting is the facts of life. Furthermore we are still in the chasing position to become elite and keeping the wrong kid could be a big hit for the program.
I remember a handful of kids that would show up for school and be gone in the first 1-2 weeks of school. that's just regular students.
then you have The Beast who finds out he's not a Beast and leaves.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 16, 2012, 05:11:41 PM
Arrive during the normal school year, when 95% of the students arrive. Schools should honor letters of intent for the first year.
Unless there are clearinghouse issues, all basketball players arrive at MU and everywhere else in the summer. What are you even talking about?
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 16, 2012, 05:11:41 PM
Arrive during the normal school year, when 95% of the students arrive. Schools should honor letters of intent for the first year.
Why? Why not give them a head start away from home...in the classroom...on the basketball court...and in the weightroom, etc. during the lower pressure time of summer? Otherwise, what are these kids going to be doing? Playing basketball (unsupervised), lifting weights (unsupervised) and making no progress on their education. Remember these are kids whose summers in the past were filled with AAU tournaments...now you give them nothing to do?
Dumb idea.
I had 3 kids on my floor at McCormick leave either during the first semester or at Christmas break. Transfers happen all the time for athletes and non-athletes alike. It is almost as common as changing majors. The difference with athletes is that it is higher visibility. Also, they tend to make up their minds earlier. Most high schoolers don't make up their minds until spring of their senior years in high school. Many athletes have to do it sooner. And then to trash kids because they rethink a decision they made when they were 16?! If the fit isn't right for Hood/Ulthoff/Roseboro/???, it isn't right. And if the fit isn't right for the athletic program involved, the school can choose to not renew. After the stories that came out in SI regarding UCLA, do you think it is possible that Howland regrets letting a player that doesn't represent the university well hang around? Do you think Bo regrets for a moment running the kids off who stole the laptops. Sometimes, it just doesn't work.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 17, 2012, 08:12:29 AM
Why? Why not give them a head start away from home...in the classroom...on the basketball court...and in the weightroom, etc. during the lower pressure time of summer? Otherwise, what are these kids going to be doing? Playing basketball (unsupervised), lifting weights (unsupervised) and making no progress on their education. Remember these are kids whose summers in the past were filled with AAU tournaments...now you give them nothing to do?
Dumb idea.
Of course it's a dumb idea, but it's the only scenario under which Roseboro would have been stuck at MU wasting a year of his and Marquette's time - an end Hoop very much favored.
I think it is pretty obvious that Roseboro's main issue is Roseboro...since he has since transferred yet again to UMBC.
Quote from: Goose on April 16, 2012, 06:11:06 PM
I have said it several times but the landscape of college ball has changed a great deal in past decade. I would agree that having kids leave before they come looks harsh on the surface and cannot argue that. That said any kid to decide whenever he wants to leave and the school had planned for him for four years and are stuck when kid leaves.
In perfect world I would hate to see kids leave before there first day of class. In today's game it is cut throat and the need to always be recruiting is the facts of life. Furthermore we are still in the chasing position to become elite and keeping the wrong kid could be a big hit for the program.
It has changed a great deal. I'm not sure these schools are planning for them to stick around for four years as you state. I would argue our own actions under a number of coaches proves that out. The way we voted on the NCAA legislation for multi-year scholarships also supports my view.
It is a cut throat situation, but because some schools do it doesn't mean every school, nor every successful school does it. You would know better than I, but aren't some of the rumblings from the administration and some alumni because were are doing things one way (as are others) but schools in our proximity (Wisconsin, Notre Dame, etc) are winning by approaching things differently? I believe you hinted at that so if I am wrong correct me.
<before someone brings up Wisconsin and Uthoff, my perceptions of how Wisconsin is acting is that they are wrong not to allow the kid to play where he wants assuming no tampering has been involved. Where the administration has had trouble is the Creaning of kids where they are run off to make room for other kids, at least that is what some of the hints around here have been>
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 17, 2012, 08:12:29 AM
Why? Why not give them a head start away from home...in the classroom...on the basketball court...and in the weightroom, etc. during the lower pressure time of summer? Otherwise, what are these kids going to be doing? Playing basketball (unsupervised), lifting weights (unsupervised) and making no progress on their education. Remember these are kids whose summers in the past were filled with AAU tournaments...now you give them nothing to do?
Dumb idea.
Because you are putting the kid's alternative choices to pasture. The kid is stuck. The NY Times today mentions this very thing with the latest Bo Ryan stuff. Larry Krystowiak pulled a BuzzCutting on one of his players and the player has no options. Newbill had no options. That is the central issue here.
I would not be surprised to see the NCAA clamp down on this. If a kid signs a letter of intent and at the 11th hour the coach says too bad, what is the kid supposed to do? His other options have left. The school he signed with might have transfer restrictions within conference further limiting him in the future. The only loser in that situation is the kid, not the program.
From the NY Times today, fortunately they referenced Krystkowiak and not Buzz because they easily could have.
"Last week, Utah Coach Larry Krystkowiak gave this trend a disturbing new turn when he asked Josh Hearlihy, a recruit from Studio City, Calif., not to come to Utah, despite having signed him to a scholarship last November. Krystkowiak's change of heart on his recruit clearly put Hearlihy in a terrible spot because all the other schools he was considering had long offered all of their scholarships. Hearlihy has since agreed not to go to Utah, The Salt Lake City Tribune reported."
http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/wisconsin-reverses-course-on-uthoff-transfer-request/#
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 19, 2012, 04:03:36 PM
Because you are putting the kid's alternative choices to pasture. The kid is stuck. The NY Times today mentions this very thing with the latest Bo Ryan stuff. Larry Krystowiak pulled a BuzzCutting on one of his players and the player has no options. Newbill had no options.
Newbill had no options? How the hell did he end up playing at Southern Miss then???
And the idea that we should have *no* players come to campus in the summer because a Newbill situation *might* happen is completely absurd.
Furthermore, Newbill never got to campus during the summer anyway. It wouldn't prevent that from happening. The NCAA is powerless to stop it. The NLI is already binding...but if a coach tells them that they don't want him, what is the player going to do? Enforce it by showing up somewhere he isn't wanted?
You are completely wrong, and frankly way too naive regarding this.
MU would have honored Roseborro's scholarship. He was in over his head...he wouldn't have played but he could have stayed for the year if he had wanted to...he decided to leave.
MU didn't use his scholarship that year so why would they "run him off"?
If you want to complain about the Newbill situation fine...I think thatw as handled badly but don't lump Roseborro in like its the same thing...it wasn't.
Quote from: MuMark on April 19, 2012, 04:51:43 PM
If you want to complain about the Newbill situation fine...I think thatw as handled badly but don't lump Roseborro in like its the same thing...it wasn't.
Not to mention, the Newbill situation had NOTHING to do with a player showing up in the summer. Newbill NEVER got to Marquette.
It's like saying in order to cure AIDS, we are going to prohibit the manufacturing of flat-screen TVs. Completely illogical.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on April 19, 2012, 04:40:17 PM
Newbill had no options? How the hell did he end up playing at Southern Miss then???
And the idea that we should have *no* players come to campus in the summer because a Newbill situation *might* happen is completely absurd.
Furthermore, Newbill never got to campus during the summer anyway. It wouldn't prevent that from happening. The NCAA is powerless to stop it. The NLI is already binding...but if a coach tells them that they don't want him, what is the player going to do? Enforce it by showing up somewhere he isn't wanted?
You are completely wrong, and frankly way too naive regarding this.
OK, no options was too far. Do you agree that his options were severely limited? He couldn't go to a Big East school, his other options had offered his scholarship to someone else. He had to settle for Southern Miss, a school he then transferred out of after one season because he never wanted to in the first place.
Do you agree that once a kid signs that letter of intent, his choices are severely limited? That is what the NY Times is arguing, that is what I am saying. This is an area I believe you will see the NCAA move in a direction to protect the kids.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 20, 2012, 09:46:13 AM
OK, no options was too far. Do you agree that his options were severely limited? He couldn't go to a Big East school, his other options had offered his scholarship to someone else. He had to settle for Southern Miss, a school he then transferred out of after one season because he never wanted to in the first place.
Do you agree that once a kid signs that letter of intent, his choices are severely limited? That is what the NY Times is arguing, that is what I am saying. This is an area I believe you will see the NCAA move in a direction to protect the kids.
So did your buddy Chicos dictate this to you over the phone, or did you just cut and paste from a post 2 years ago when you went by a different name?
Quote from: Hoopaloop on April 20, 2012, 09:46:13 AM
OK, no options was too far. Do you agree that his options were severely limited? He couldn't go to a Big East school, his other options had offered his scholarship to someone else. He had to settle for Southern Miss, a school he then transferred out of after one season because he never wanted to in the first place.
Do you agree that once a kid signs that letter of intent, his choices are severely limited? That is what the NY Times is arguing, that is what I am saying. This is an area I believe you will see the NCAA move in a direction to protect the kids.
Don't change the subject.
The "Newbill situation" was the reason you don't want players to come to campus during the summer. Which is absurd, stupid and wrong.
And yes his options were limited. But again, that was not the reason you brought up Newbill.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on April 20, 2012, 09:50:02 AM
So did your buddy Chicos dictate this to you over the phone, or did you just cut and paste from a post 2 years ago when you went by a different name?
No Navin, and if you look at the responses to Durley today and yesterday or go back and look at the responses to Newbill a few years ago, you would see there are many people that share the same opinions on this process of buzzcutting.