oldpinepoint
All American
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 6,056
- Like
- 11,402
This has been going on for years, case in point, look at these two ringers from Texas State. Brought in for one year. Time to paaaarttty
I'm kinda ambivalent on this.I’m not critical of bringing guys in. I’m critical of kicking guys out. I think that’s what Narduzzi was speaking to. And on that part, I think he’s right. Personally, I don’t want Syracuse doing it or anyone else. The program recruited a player. If that player wants to stay for four years, you coach them. If they want to leave on their own, fine. I don’t agree with “cutting” a roster.
I'm kinda ambivalent on this.
The players can leave anytime
Coaches can leave anytime
Players are getting paid now (well openingly now)
Coaches are getting paid
If players want to be treated like adults...they have to realize they can be fired. They asked for this.
My Fandom is more likely than ever to be the same nowagree 100%, rosters are 1 year commitment for all parties.
Come on. Was this necessary?View attachment 228033
This has been going on for years, case in point, look at these two ringers from Texas State. Brought in for one year. Time to paaaarttty
Good points. On top of that these coaches are getting fired before getting 3 full classes of their their recruits in.I'm kinda ambivalent on this.
The players can leave anytime
Coaches can leave anytime
Players are getting paid now (well openingly now)
Coaches are getting paid
If players want to be treated like adults...they have to realize they can be fired. They asked for this.
I’m just curious because I don’t know, did the 9th ever work himself into a good spot?Marrone told 9 players to leave. 8 did, 1 refused.
I’m just curious because I don’t know, did the 9th ever work himself into a good spot?
I am on the players side for virtually every issue. I even think they should be getting 40-50% of TV revenueI’m not critical of bringing guys in. I’m critical of kicking guys out. I think that’s what Narduzzi was speaking to. And on that part, I think he’s right. Personally, I don’t want Syracuse doing it or anyone else. The program recruited a player. If that player wants to stay for four years, you coach them. If they want to leave on their own, fine. I don’t agree with “cutting” a roster.
OK, which non-rev sports get cut back due to the loss of income?I am on the players side for virtually every issue. I even think they should be getting 40-50% of TV revenue
That said, if these players don’t have to commit to a school for 4 years then I see no reason why the school should have to commit
Maybe the letter of intent should have a clause that a 4 year guaranteed scholarship (like all P5 schools have now) requires a 4 year commitment (or a 1 year penalty like previous). If the player or school doesn’t want to enter the commitment, that’s fine but then the scholly is no longer guaranteed
I think colleges should go back to more non-revenue sports, not fewer. Swimming, wrestling, crew, hockey, golf, volleyball, track/field, and others are all worthy athletic endeavors. I’m tired of the football/basketball and to hell with everything else mentality.OK, which non-rev sports get cut back due to the loss of income?
The combination of Title IX with the fact that the majority of students in most colleges and universities are female and the 85-scholarship elephant sitting in the corner of the room (football) has killed non-revs for men and any chance of expanding non-revs for men without giving up one team to have another.I think colleges should go back to more non-revenue sports, not fewer. Swimming, wrestling, crew, hockey, golf, volleyball, track/field, and others are all worthy athletic endeavors. I’m tired of the football/basketball and to hell with everything else mentality.
Yes, and that’s wrong.The combination of Title IX with the fact that the majority of students in most colleges and universities are female and the 85-scholarship elephant sitting in the corner of the room (football) has killed non-revs for men and any chance of expanding non-revs for men without giving up one team to have another.
Yep the only difference is that Doug didn’t have the portal to restock the roster like Deion has, or else Doug would have run off that many more kids. Both SU in 2009 and Colorado in 2023 were/are awful rosters.Pretty obvious what Doug had to do.
Good pointYep the only difference is that Doug didn’t have the portal to restock the roster like Deion has, or else Doug would have run off that many more kids. Both SU in 2009 and Colorado in 2023 were/are awful rosters.
Aint that the truth. In the pre Title IX days, even NCSU played lacrosse.The combination of Title IX with the fact that the majority of students in most colleges and universities are female and the 85-scholarship elephant sitting in the corner of the room (football) has killed non-revs for men and any chance of expanding non-revs for men without giving up one team to have another.
It was wrong then and wrong now. Where is that from?Pretty obvious what Doug had to do.
What evidence do you posit to support this? Prime has Sean Lewis as an OC and a former CO-DC for Bama. He’s bringing in four and five stars. Highly unlikely they flop. Might be a tough year this year but they would 100% beat Rutgers even in year oneI'm sensing Dion is just a flashier version of Schiano and this team will crash and burn.
We might not like it but they all do it. Coaches are going to flip the rosters as fast as they can. Even faster these days now that players are getting paid and they can lose their job within a few years.It was wrong then and wrong now. Where is that from?
It drives me nuts that we lose to him so much because he really is whiney dork.