Chris McCullough's departure gives Syracuse basketball some interesting scholarship options (PS)

[OrangeXtreme]

Chris McCullough's decision to enter the NBA draft means that Syracuse can start the NCAA's reduction of scholarships now.

It also means that Syracuse could use Thomas Bryant, a McDonald's All-American out of Rochester, now more than ever.

Just two weeks ago, Syracuse had 13 players on its 2015-16 roster, which meant that there was no room to take an additional recruit in the class of 2015; i.e. Bryant. The full roster also meant that Syracuse officials would have to push the NCAA's scholarship reduction penalty back a year.

In its report on the Syracuse basketball program, the NCAA docked Jim Boeheim three scholarships a year for four consecutive years. The NCAA limits schools to just 13 basketball scholarships per year. The NCAA penalty will force Syracuse to carry just 10 players on its roster.

However, McCullough's departure for the NBA, along with the transfers of B.J. Johnson and Ron Patterson, means that Syracuse could actually start serving the NCAA's scholarship reduction penalty this year. That is, if Syracuse doesn't get a commitment from Bryant in the next week or so.

While the recent rash of defections from the SU program will hurt the Orange in the short-term, Syracuse will now be able to navigate the initial on-set of the NCAA's scholarship penalty a little more easily than anticipated.

http://www.syracuse.com/orangebaske...pact_syracuses_scholarship_situation_for.html

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Sounds like we can take Bryant and start the penalty in 2016-17, or hold at 10 and start the penalty next season.

 

[two3zone]

Sounds like we can take Bryant and start the penalty in 2016-17, or hold at 10 and start the penalty next season.

That's the way I've always read it to be, the getting to ten and being locked there didn't seem to make any sort of sense. Then again it's the NCAA we're dealing with.

 

[cpatrocks]

Sounds like we can take Bryant and start the penalty in 2016-17, or hold at 10 and start the penalty next season.

We can get Bryant and still start the penalty this year, because I fully expect to get at least one Scholarship back as a result of the appeal.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

That's the way I've always read it to be, the getting to ten and being locked there didn't seem to make any sort of sense. Then again it's the NCAA we're dealing with.

IMO, the intent of the rule was that a school that only had 9-10 players when the sanctions were announced couldn't suddenly sign 3-4 more kids to avoid the penalty.

Since SU was already over the 10 player limit when sanctions were announced, it shouldn't matter if we drop down to 10 then go to 11.

 

[NKR1978]

I'd rather just take our medicine and start the scholarship reductions next year and get it done with a year earlier.

 

[two3zone]

I'd rather just take our medicine and start the scholarship reductions next year and get it done with a year earlier.

I'm with you on this, get it done and over with as soon as possible.

 

[Full_Rebar]

I'd rather just take our medicine and start the scholarship reductions next year and get it done with a year earlier.

Disagree. Who knows what happens after the appeal and if it's possible that it could end up in the courts why take a penalty that might be reduced in 3-4 years? The NCAA won't give Syracuse an extra scholarship in that scenario.

 

[newmexicuse]

While on one hand it might be better to get the penalty over a year sooner, if I had my druthers I would take Bryant with the assumption that on appeal the penalty will be reduced either in years or # of scholies or both.

Maybe, the talk of Jimmy coaching only one more year would be part of an NCAA deal that if Jimmy is gone the penalties would be reduced. If that is the case, it is pretty disgusting as to why they would hate Jimmy that much.

 

[NKR1978]

Disagree. Who knows what happens after the appeal and if it's possible that it could end up in the courts why take a penalty that might be reduced in 3-4 years? The NCAA won't give Syracuse an extra scholarship in that scenario.

I see what you're saying. I just figure if it does get reduced that we'll get credit for the scholarships this year. So even with the reduction we should be able to count these scholarships against whatever the ultimate total is.

 

[Madbiker]

I'd rather just take our medicine and start the scholarship reductions next year and get it done with a year earlier.

Not if we can add Bryant. He would be a great get. You don't pass up McD AA's.

 

[Raggs]

Not if we can add Bryant. He would be a great get. You don't pass up McD AA's.

My somewhat educated opinion is that the University knows the chance of the appeal being successful is low. They would then have to go to court. That takes a long time and they have decided that it is better to get this over with than go for a likely one and done that is not one of the high impact players in the class. If it was The second coming of Carmello you roll the dice. Not in this case. Bryant is good, but not a superstar. You move to get this behind you and that is what the University is doing.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Pretty simple, really.
If Bryant wants in, you have to take him .
If he goes elsewhere, you start the sanctions now.
Win/win.

 

[PeteCalvin]

I'd rather just take our medicine and start the scholarship reductions next year and get it done with a year earlier.

Why? We are all but assured of getting at least one scholarship back in the appeal. F starting this penalty. Fight it till the bitter end because it's !

 

[kirbivore]

While on one hand it might be better to get the penalty over a year sooner, if I had my druthers I would take Bryant with the assumption that on appeal the penalty will be reduced either in years or # of scholies or both.

Maybe, the talk of Jimmy coaching only one more year would be part of an NCAA deal that if Jimmy is gone the penalties would be reduced. If that is the case, it is pretty disgusting as to why they would hate Jimmy that much.

surprised to hear this take from somebody who's picked up the anti JB flag that Igor and Blue Curtain left behind.

 

[newmexicuse]

surprised to hear this take from somebody who's picked up the anti JB flag that Igor and Blue Curtain left behind.

Anti-JB Flag ????? Frankly, I take offense at being lumped in with Igor and BC.

I am definitely not in the corner of those who support everything Jimmy does, but to say I am anti-JB is patently wrong. Just because I have criticized his bench use and his 100% use of the Zone does not make me anti-JB. I have always appreciated his body of work and I have always said that Jimmy has earned the right to retire on his own terms.

 

[kcsu]

My somewhat educated opinion is that the University knows the chance of the appeal being successful is low. They would then have to go to court. That takes a long time and they have decided that it is better to get this over with than go for a likely one and done that is not one of the high impact players in the class. If it was The second coming of Carmello you roll the dice. Not in this case. Bryant is good, but not a superstar. You move to get this behind you and that is what the University is doing.

I disagree. My opinion in speaking with a few lawyers is that there is a very good chance we will get a reduction of the sanctions. The penalties are out of line based on other rulings. I fully expect reductions and i also expect Syracuse to take this to court if required.

 

[rrlbees]

I disagree. My opinion in speaking with a few lawyers is that there is a very good chance we will get a reduction of the sanctions. The penalties are out of line based on other rulings. I fully expect reductions and i also expect Syracuse to take this to court if required.

If you fully expect a reduction in the sanctions, then why also say a lawsuit if required? If the sanctions are reduced, there won't be a lawsuit.

 

[Alsacs]

If you fully expect a reduction in the sanctions, then why also say a lawsuit if required? If the sanctions are reduced, there won't be a lawsuit.

In any form of negotiation you always ask for more or threaten to take it further to let the other party know where your willing to go or let them sell a victory by getting you not to go as far as you threaten to do so they can sell that as a victory.

If SU threatens a lawsuit and the NCAA agrees to lower the scholarship penalties from 3 per year down to 2 per year as part of the appeal ruling and SU agrees to never file a lawsuit then both sides can claim victory.

 

[rrlbees]

In any form of negotiation you always ask for more or threaten to take it further to let the other party know where your willing to go or let them sell a victory by getting you not to go as far as you threaten to do so they can sell that as a victory. If SU threatens a lawsuit and the NCAA agrees to lower the scholarship penalties from 3 per year down to 2 per year as part of the appeal ruling and SU agrees to never file a lawsuit then both sides can claim victory.

Wasn't responding about that. And it's a no brainier that if sanctions are reduced and we agree, it will include a no lawsuit agreement.

 

[CuseHulk]

If I am Syracuse and it's team of lawyers representing them. We will only settle for 3 years 2 scholarships a year (and we prob shouldn't even be getting that much) if not lawsuit.

I would have been preparing a lawsuit the moment the sanctions where announced. Send a message back.