Class of 2015 C/PF Thomas Bryant (NY) Verballed to Indiana

[Chris02M]

I think we can still bring in Bryant since we have already offered him a scholarship for 2015 along with the likely appeal not getting done until next year since ncaa is slow as we know.

 

[CaliCuse]

So we appeal and that delays the imposition of penalties. During that time one player leaves, Bryant commits and signs a LOI. NCAA may not like it, but Syracuse is fully within its rights to do so.

I am committed to the idea that if Bryant does come the Orangemen will emerge with a FF and maybe a NC trophy
It might even be possible without Bryant

 

[Madbiker]

I like Bryant and it would be good if there was a way to add him. But he's not Patrick Ewing. Not even close. Let's not get carried away.

 

[jekelish]

We really will not be able to add him without bouncing 4 guys. Reading through the full NCAA report, it clearly states that deferment is only possible due to "already executed financial aid agreements." That means LOI, and that rules out Bryant, since we obviously would have no way to document that he was signed before. The key words here are "already executed"...as in, papers signed before the sanctions came out.

So that should be settled.

 

[Consigliere]

We really will not be able to add him without bouncing 4 guys. Reading through the full NCAA report, it clearly states that deferment is only possible due to "already executed financial aid agreements." That means LOI, and that rules out Bryant, since we obviously would have no way to document that he was signed before. The key words here are "already executed"...as in, papers signed before the sanctions came out.

So that should be settled.

If indeed this is the correct interpretation, then the report is very poorly written. The way I read it, Syracuse is being docked 3 scholarships for four consecutive years beginning next year. However, if due to current roster and executed agreements (LOIs) they can choose to start serving that penalty in the following season in effect pushing out the entire four year window. It doesn't differentiate between having 11, 12, or 13. Just says if you can't get to 10, the penalty starts in 2016-17. We srill have the self imposed one reduction for next year but my interpretation is that if 2 leave we have a spot for Bryant.

 

[jekelish]

If indeed this is the correct interpretation, then the report is very poorly written. The way I read it, Syracuse is being docked 3 scholarships for four consecutive years beginning next year. However, if due to current roster and executed agreements (LOIs) they can choose to start serving that penalty in the following season in effect pushing out the entire four year window. It doesn't differentiate between having 11, 12, or 13. Just says if you can't get to 10, the penalty starts in 2016-17. We srill have the self imposed one reduction for next year but my interpretation is that if 2 leave we have a spot for Bryant.

Oh, the report is DEFINITELY poorly written. They couldn't have been more vague if they tried.

 

[cusetown1]

If indeed this is the correct interpretation, then the report is very poorly written. The way I read it, Syracuse is being docked 3 scholarships for four consecutive years beginning next year. However, if due to current roster and executed agreements (LOIs) they can choose to start serving that penalty in the following season in effect pushing out the entire four year window. It doesn't differentiate between having 11, 12, or 13. Just says if you can't get to 10, the penalty starts in 2016-17. We srill have the self imposed one reduction for next year but my interpretation is that if 2 leave we have a spot for Bryant.

Thats exactly the way I read it.

 

[Francis03]

I think we all just have to wait and hear from Mama Bryant to know what the deal is.

 

[AZOrange]

Crean has no conscience about throwing players overboard to clear space. Ask Patterson.

Crean might not have a job in a couple of weeks.

 

[JoeSU]

If indeed this is the correct interpretation, then the report is very poorly written. The way I read it, Syracuse is being docked 3 scholarships for four consecutive years beginning next year. However, if due to current roster and executed agreements (LOIs) they can choose to start serving that penalty in the following season in effect pushing out the entire four year window. It doesn't differentiate between having 11, 12, or 13. Just says if you can't get to 10, the penalty starts in 2016-17. We srill have the self imposed one reduction for next year but my interpretation is that if 2 leave we have a spot for Bryant.

Another rationale for delaying the reduction would be to allow time for the penalty to be appealed/litigated, and hopefully reduced.

 

[Fly Rodder]

We still have the self imposed one reduction for next year but my interpretation is that if 2 leave we have a spot for Bryant.

The self-imposed loss of one is superseded by the NCAA's punishment of 12 lost schollies. Based on the way that the document is written, SU can have 13 scholarship players next season. I don't see any other interpretation based on what's written in the text. SU offered a 1 scholarship reduction and the NCAA said no, 12 over four years.

 

[jekelish]

Decided to whip something up regarding the potential loophole that might allow us to bring in Bryant: http://.com/potential-loophole-to-bring-in-thomas-bryant/

 

[Jake]

Here's something to consider. Its not a given Bryant wanted to come here in the first place. Not sure he'd want to come now that the team would be short scholied and the head coach isn't going to be around for half the conference schedule. Likely a moot point.

 

[jekelish]

It's not a given, no. But we've been in his top 2-3 the entire process, and his mom has been extremely vocal about wanting him to attend SU.

 

[netman99]

Here's something to consider. Its not a given Bryant wanted to come here in the first place. Not sure he'd want to come now that the team would be short scholied and the head coach isn't going to be around for half the conference schedule. Likely a moot point.

If there is "legal" spot for him he would still come. Does not sound like SU can secure a spot for him now! M Waters wrote they could no longer offer him but I am not sure that is true...

 

[SUFan44]

I think a healthy Dajuan Coleman can give similar production to what Bryant would have given us. Call me crazy.

 

[iommi]

I think a healthy Dajuan Coleman can give similar production to what Bryant would have given us. Call me crazy.

You are crazy.

No, seriously, we have no clue what Coleman will bring. And a huge question, besides his health, is: has he broken his bad habits... ie: bringing the ball down and dribbling every time he gets a post touch...

 

[bornagainOrange]

Many of us are forgetting that Coleman had been a full participate in practices the last half of this season, and from reports, looked good. The big question, obviously, is can he stay healthy? I think if we had been able to get Bryant, it wasnt a sure thing he started day 1, probably, but we all know how difficult it is to learn zone principles. Im in the optimistic camp that DC stays healthy and has improved, not in the majority here, but as long as we get some help from the backup C spot (whoever that is of Diagne, obokoh, cmac), then we should be ok. Offense ia not going to run through DC like it did Rak.

 

[dyedorange]

You are crazy.

No, seriously, we have no clue what Coleman will bring. And a huge question, besides his health, is: has he broken his bad habits... ie: bringing the ball down and dribbling every time he gets a post touch...

I agree with the question marks re: Coleman and what kind of performance we can expect out of him when he comes back. I am cautiously optimistic though. And if our worst-case scenario next year is him splitting the bulk of the time at C with McC, I think we'll be just fine, and maybe much better than that.

 

[CraigForth]

The pitch to TB needs to be this:

"Thomas, there once was a young man from Rochester that we were recruiting during a very difficult time, not terribly different from the situation we find ourselves in today. That young man came, even though it would have been easier to go somewhere else and eventually lead us the title game, almost singlehandedly saving this program. Today, that young man is a Syracuse legend. Come to Syracuse and lets repeat history"

 

[cuse309]

You are crazy.

No, seriously, we have no clue what Coleman will bring. And a huge question, besides his health, is: has he broken his bad habits... ie: bringing the ball down and dribbling every time he gets a post touch...

We have a better idea of what Coleman brings, than Bryant. Waters said he looks "amazing at practice." Like a completely different player.
That can't be a bad thing.

 

[iommi]

We have a better idea of what Coleman brings, than Bryant. Waters said he looks "amazing at practice." Like a completely different player.
That can't be a bad thing.

I'd love to see that. No one has worked harder than Coleman. We need some good kharma and Coleman bouncing back and playing well would be amazing.

 

[CaliCuse]

I like Bryant and it would be good if there was a way to add him. But he's not Patrick Ewing. Not even close. Let's not get carried away.

No he isn't a Patrick Ewing but Bryant offers a very solid presence in the low post..Considering all we have currently coming in ,together who is coming back isn't being"carried away". Not even close. Like I said we might not even need TB to make things big for the Orange.SUball

 

[AZOrange]

Anyone heard anything? Have we cut off contact at this point or are we still pursuing?

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

The pitch to TB needs to be this:

"Thomas, there once was a young man from Rochester that we were recruiting during a very difficult time, not terribly different from the situation we find ourselves in today. That young man came, even though it would have been easier to go somewhere else and eventually lead us the title game, almost singlehandedly saving this program. Today, that young man is a Syracuse legend. Come to Syracuse and lets repeat history"

I likee