Give me that golf coach over either Hughes or Read any day. Every coach makes stupid hires if he's been around long enough.
Anymore attrition on the horizon?
- Thread starter Pennsyhusker
- Start date
Give me that golf coach over either Hughes or Read any day. Every coach makes stupid hires if he's been around long enough.
Here's some relevant data on amateurism and NCAA eligibility. As you can see, the only way to get some of these stipulations is basically if you are participating in NU FB under the guise of a student playing for the colors. If the student label comes off, members of the team would be reclassed as professionals:
You are a professional if you:
- Are paid (in any form) or accept the promise of pay for playing in an athletics contest;
Use your athletics skill for pay in any form (for example, TV commercials, demonstrations);
Participate on an amateur sports team and receive any salary, incentive payment, award, gratuity, educational expenses or expense allowance (other than playing apparel, equipment and actual and necessary travel, and room and board expenses).
I agree with this 100%. Professors have to use judgement on essays and projects. It's their expert opinions that allows them to use such judgement and the school hires them because they believe in their expert opinions. Do Art professors really have something to quantify grades? Not completely. They do it base it on their judgement of the quality of the work a student preformed.
Art students receive scholarships and must maintain certain GPAs too. Stating that, an Art student on scholarship isn't handed the required grades to retain his or her scholarship just because he or she just simply shows up.
IMO football coaches should be experts in their fields just like professors. If they cant judge a kids ability or where a kid is at, seems like they don't know their job well enough. I am sure the coaches know exactly if a kid is a quality football player or not. Allowing the coaches to basically give grades to football players based on their work would allow for only the right types of football players to receive scholarships. For every football player that gets a 4 or 5 year free pass, you take a way one that probably deserved it.
How many walk-ons probably deserve a ship right now over guys on ships? Maybe not a ton but I promise there are some. Trying in this world is just not good enough. I am sorry but thats fact. If you teach young adults that, that is enough, you are not getting them ready for the real world.
Quite frankly, the surest way you know its not kosher to run kids off the roster for athletic performance is that Meyer and Urban don't overtly do it.
Even they take the time to snake an otherwise alright kid onto a medical hardship to make room more cattle. If it was kosher, they wouldn't go with any such pre-tense.
Even they take the time to snake an otherwise alright kid onto a medical hardship to make room more cattle. If it was kosher, they wouldn't go with any such pre-tense.
Art students aren't handed art scholarships simply for showing up. They are handed art scholarships if they keep their grades up. Same as football players. And yes coaches are experts in their fields.
The problem is that football is not a graded activity in the academic program. So its basically the equivalent your dorm's flag football team from an academic eligibility standpoint.
Here is the academic requirements student athletes must meet to retain eligibility
http://www.ncaa.org/about/division-i-progress-toward-degree-requirements
[/QUOTE]
If you are predicating your argument on athletes receiving academic scholarships based on their athletic ability, I can see your point, however that very premise is crossing the streams. My initial posts were addressing the previous posts that were saying academic scholarships weren't comparable because they are objective and because those students weren't "selected". I just was pointing out that those are invalid arguments.
I see your point, but like it or not, the general acceptance of grading and testing in academia makes what you are proposing little more than a theoretically novel concept.
It doesn't seem reasonable to people to say "well its all subjective so do away with GPA's for everyone" nor does it make much sense to start "grading" football as part of the academic course load.
Under current guidelines, athletes are not allowed to be judged soley within the realm of athletic impact on the field of play. If the NCAA or the schools wanted to revisit that, its not a big deal to me personally.
It doesn't seem reasonable to people to say "well its all subjective so do away with GPA's for everyone" nor does it make much sense to start "grading" football as part of the academic course load.
Under current guidelines, athletes are not allowed to be judged soley within the realm of athletic impact on the field of play. If the NCAA or the schools wanted to revisit that, its not a big deal to me personally.
Last edited:
Your making fun of an offence Nebraska has never lost a game using. Rex bulkhead was the quarterbackI heard he is encouraging all our QBs and WRs to move on. TEs will be blockers only. Straight up wildcat, snap to RB every play.This is being done so run the ball every play guy will never have anything to bitch about ever again!!
The point I was making is that for a very large portion of the academic scholarships the criteria for keeping your scholarships is outlined for you. The subjective grading of an essay is not what I was talking about. I have never received a regents scholarship so I cannot speak for that, but every academic scholarship I ever received had a minimum GPA as the main criteria for renewal and everyone one of them was renewed in subsequent years if I met that criteria outlined. The performance criteria was very objective 3.5 GPA or you lose it.
Give me the required performance criteria for an offensive tackle.
Give me the required performance criteria for an offensive tackle.
I think at a minimum he has to run a 4.7 and bench 500lbs if most of us could before we tore our shoulders up fooling around with a girl in HS.
Make the 3 deep by the fall of your junior year or spring ball of your redshirt sophomore year if you want. IF you can't do that, you're probably never going to contribute. At that point, you've had over half of your college paid for. I would say that's enough for the school to have the option to pull the plug if they want. IMO, it's ridiculous to require the school to honor a scholarship when in many cases the kid is just doing enough to get by. It would certainly give some incentive for some of these kids to hit the weights a little harder and work a little harder in practice now wouldn't it. Again, I would offer medicals to kids that had sustained a career altering injury.
I see your point, but like it or not, the general acceptance of grading and testing in academia makes what you are proposing little more than a theoretically novel concept.
It doesn't seem reasonable to people to say "well its all subjective so do away with GPA's for everyone" nor does it make much sense to start "grading" football as part of the academic course load.
Under current guidelines, athletes are not allowed to be judged soley within the realm of athletic impact on the field of play. If the NCAA or the schools wanted to revisit that, its not a big deal to me personally.[/QUOTE]
I don't think I was proposing to do away with grades or GPA's, just pointing out that students can be tossed from programs regardless of what their grades are simply due to subjective decisions. The other point I was trying to make is that I think many high achieving young adults (athletically or academically) want to be part of something special, something elite. They don't mind being held to high standards or being held accountable. And yes, the guidelines aren't going to change, and maybe they shouldn't, but also maybe it wouldn't be so bad if they were changed to allow for athletic performance based scholarships.
I lost enough in scholarships that required a 3.5 GPA I could have probably paid for a 2nd degree, and I never felt like those bozos who held a clip board on the sidelines at ISU and only had to maintain a 1.9 were really doing me any injustice.
I wouldn't object to the school OPTION of not renewing a scholarship at any position at that point. Obviously there are going to be fewer QBs etc on the roster so the chances of a 4 team redshirt QB, RB etc of playing significant minutes is probably greater than an offensive lineman. At some point, if a coach thinks a kid isn't putting forth the effort and will never contribute, he should be able to suggest a kid take his game elsewhere. There needs to be some incentive to work or you end up with a welfare state of kids on scholarship having a good time while getting their college paid for.
Options lead to lawsuits. Subjective opinion on putting forth effort leads to lawsuits. We're talking about multiple $100,000s in some cases. Why does a 4th year, 3rd string QB, that has never played a down get to keep his scholarship over the RS Jr OT who was injured as a Soph but was only 4th team as a freshman.
I get the point of this exercise but at what point does the coach and the university have to share the blame for offering a kid that wasn't as good as they thought he would be. What if the kid busts his ass but just never developed? Who's fault is that? He signed a contract that said if he followed the rules and maintained his grades at the required level he would be provided a four year scholarship.
Because that QB is the 4th guy in line to play and the OT is probably the 10th 12th guy in line to play because you play your "5 best" usually in the O line. Grading is subjective. You get horrible profs sometimes. LIfe sucks and it isn't fair. Deal with it. Bust your ass and put yourself in a position where somebody doesn't have to make that call on your scholarship. The school takes a risk on you when they offer a scholarship and I don't think it's fair to the school to have to continue to educate and house you if you turn out to be lazy.
Once again if the kids are not in good standing because of lack of effort the scholarships can be revoked, the B1G made the guaranteed scholarship rules have some give on these things.
A kid that works his ass for 3 years but his talent just keeps getting surpassed by the next recruit should not lose his scholarship just because some of you people feel he's not contributing enough, hell kid would probably be pretty damn important to the scout team and a good example of how to act. Hard work does not always guarantee the highest success in athletics.These are Student-athletes, promised a scholarship for their studies if they work their asses off for the football team and keep their grades in check, if they're not working their ass off they can lose that scholarship, if they're doing everything they can and still can't make the field it's not okay to take the scholarship, that's the coaches' fault for evaluating the talent poorly or maybe the coach just got more talented players to come in.
If you've had 3 years of athletic scholarship at a school you can't afford otherwise and just get kicked off the team for nothing other than the coaches being wrong about how they could use you, that would be pretty messed up.
My perception right or wrong, is that the vast majority of scholarship kids that don't perform fail because of a lack of effort (or injury). Making the 3 deep for a scholarship player is NOT a high hurdle.
It is if they keep getting more talented players recruited behind them, and I'd say your perception that they must be lazy is dead wrong.
That doesn't sound like a performance evaluation that is about probability of playing?
Please. I've been around enough high schoolers and college students to know that a good share of them are in fact lazy. Football scholarships don't preclude that. A retired basketball coach friend of mine that coached all the way from NAIA to D-1 told me that the number one thing that separated the 6-5 and above kids wasn't just their talent but how hard they were willing to work once they got to college. IMO, that would hold true for football players too.
So. How else do you gauge an athlete's performance. I know I know, you believe in participation ribbons.
Consider that the opposite system is ripe for abuse.
3 Deeps are terribly fluid. Depth charts often mean little, other than to hand out a notional list of "who you might see on the field alot today." for all the blue hairs.
But there's nothing in the system that would stop Saban from putting all his unwanted players at #4 on the preliminary depth chart and putting out 35 schollies in a year. Players that probably started or played significant minutes before but were about to be eclipsed by some younger hot shot and are now of no use to him.
Edit: Note that this would probably put Nebraska at even more of a disadvantage. Saban at least has to appear to abide by restrictions now. If he can simply cut players, you'll have to find a coach who is about as good as Saban, and probably more ruthless, to stay with him. Mike Riley is probably not putting Tanner Farmer at #4 to play the recruiting lottery. Saban probably would.
Ahhh yes the great Rex "Bulkhead"... he won so many championships running that "offence."
It was glorious days indeed, almost as glorious as those when Jason Peters and Grant Winstrom roamed the sideline.
As far as participation trophies comment goes, you know nothing about me, what I believe, or my athletic background. So keep the personal shit out of it.
My comments have little to do with being fair or giving a kid something they don't deserve. If you knew me, at all, you would understand that. It's about making a commitment to a high school kid and his parents.
As a coach I made my talent evaluation when they were in high school and I offered the scholarship. If they don't work out I failed as much or more than they did. My job is to get every kid his degree and get as much athletically out of the kids I made a commitment to, not quit on them because their athletic ability plateaued or whatever the case may be.
In today's world, the P5 rule is 4 year scholarships. That's what we have to deal with. Now if I choose to redshirt a player as a freshman and by the time they are a RS junior and havent contributed, I do not believe I should have an obligation to keep them a 5th year. They have had plenty of free semesters to get the required credits to graduate.
So why not make it a graded activity simply for scholarship purposes? Whose to say it can't be that way?
Seriously, why the hell not? Too afraid of lawsuits? No one is afraid of lawsuits from an Art degree major who received a "C" because his teacher didn't like his painting. Seriously!?!
I use to think this country fought socialism but it seems more and more that we fight Darwinism
So I guess the next fight should be, should scholarship players all receive a comfort dog when they arrive @ NU? Should it only be for scholarship players and should they be allowed on the field during the games when a guy drops a ball, misses a block, throws a bad pass, etc.
I already said above, if the NCAA and the schools wanted to revisit the rules of the road....fine by me.
Within the existing rules though, its not fair game. This is a bigger issue than many make it seem, like NU can just decide its not going to do it this way anymore and get serious about getting back to the top. It won't happen that way.
I already noted that the one reason you know that this isn't allowed is because Meyer and Saban at least go through the motions of trying to shuffle a kid into one of the excepted categories.
They don't just simply cut bait with a kid who has languished as a backup for two years without trying to cover their rather shallow tracks.
This is why Riley often says he doesn't see an ethical way of doing it.
I mean quite frankly, I wouldn't be opposed to creating a "football" class and giving a grade for it. But the NCAA doesn't go class by class, getting a medicore or poor grade in football could be reasonably offset by all the other courses you are taking.
So in effect, what you do is get rid of the kids who are 3rd string or worse, and are hovering so close to the 1.9 GPA that failing football puts them over the top.....how many kids are that? Most of the guys that NU had riding the pine and taking up spots during the Pelini heyday, weren't that atrocious of students.
Edit: Its important to note that this might be used to "game" the system. For coaches who are looking to keep good players eligible, a football class would probably be seen as a shallowly disguised attempt to keep the best players on the field with a little less actual time doing real academics. Accredidation would probably be hard, one school might just score on football knowledge/theory, another score might just hand out grades for drills or game performances.
Come to think of it...if football classes became a "thing". It might just be a thing to create a whole football major at some of the powerhouse schools shuffled into exercise science or whatever athletes are taking to stay around the gym all day anyway.
Then they don't have to do any unrelated football things in the fall, and its all legit.
Then they don't have to do any unrelated football things in the fall, and its all legit.
I always thought a university should try a Football Athletics Degree or something along that line. Teach them labor relations, contract negotiation basics, finance, training and exercise science, film study etc. All the things someone might need to know if they want to pursue a career as an athlete.
I think the general problem with a degree program is that most of them seem to be open to everyone. If a football player wants to be an aerospace engineer, he's welcome to sit in my class. If I want to take Football Operations/Coaching as a career path, does the University have the power to only allow the D1 athletes in that program?
I think the argument would be, only like 1.5% of all D1 athletes go on to pro career, so any given University would likely have to open up enrollment beyond just the one or handful of people it has that will actually use that degree, to make it cost effective/viable.
Interesting idea. However, considering that only 1.5% of NCAA College Football participants will ever get drafted to the NFL or Canadian Football League...I would hope that universities would strongly encourage these student athletes to earn a degree that will help them in life outside of football.
Estimated Probability of Competing in Professional Athletics
Yah in general I'm finding so much issues with this, I think I've talked myself out of football classes.
