OT - One and Done is for Losers

[26 Year Gap]

I just read an interesting article on the revocation of 4 year scholarships that are actually one year renewable scholarships. Many of the transfers to get more playing time are kids being pushed out by present coaches, incoming coaches, etc and they keep clammed up about what is really happening because the coach is giving them a glowing recommendation.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

I just read an interesting article on the revocation of 4 year scholarships that are actually one year renewable scholarships. Many of the transfers to get more playing time are kids being pushed out by present coaches, incoming coaches, etc and they keep clammed up about what is really happening because the coach is giving them a glowing recommendation.

Didn't Cal do this with the players who were waiting for him at Kentucky?

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Didn't Cal do this with the players who were waiting for him at Kentucky?

KY players were mentioned in the article as a group of 7.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

For those that support the 2 year scholarship offer. There is another option for the school and player. It recently happened with Kentucky ( ), Terrance Jones just received an financial aid commitment from UK. This is not the same as an athletic Scholly. Jones has much more options than he would if it was an athletic offer. If Calipari leaves, Jones can go anywhere. If he gets hurt or homesick, he can leave and accept another offer without having to sit out a year.

He would still be 1 and done and there would be no impact on the scholarships a school has to offer. The offer also doesn't subject him to the same level of success in the classroom that is required of other "athletes." My understanding is that the NCAA requires 2.25 AND satisfactory progress toward a degree.

You are just creating a different loophole.

Financial aid is an easy one to handle. Simply make it tied to academic performance. For example, if the student get less than a 3.0 in any semester, then the financial aid is lost. Not real hard.

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

I just read an interesting article on the revocation of 4 year scholarships that are actually one year renewable scholarships.

Hmmmm.... now where have I seen that before.... was it in post #10 in this thread?

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Financial aid is an easy one to handle. Simply make it tied to academic performance. For example, if the student get less than a 3.0 in any semester, then the financial aid is lost. Not real hard.

While I understand your point, as the father of a college student, 3.0 is not THAT easy to attain and maintain, even if you're not a big time athlete!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by grunewar

While I understand your point, as the father of a college student, 3.0 is not THAT easy to attain and maintain, even if you're not a big time athlete!

And so much financial aid is not even tied to the university.

It should be pretty easy for the NCAA to regulate the loophole, however, by stating all athletes must meet the same academic standard regardless of who funds their education.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by grunewar

While I understand your point, as the father of a college student, 3.0 is not THAT easy to attain and maintain, even if you're not a big time athlete!

I didn't say that it was. Rather my point was that if one wants the school to give him/her money, then he/she should be exceeding the accomplishments of a normal student, otherwise one can pay his/her own way like the rest of them.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Hmmmm.... now where have I seen that before.... was it in post #10 in this thread?

You misread the man. He's talking about new coaches (like Calipari) who revoke the scholarships of the athletes who were there before they (the coach) arrived. Sort of like the new CEO who comes in and fires everyone so he can bring in his own staff.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You misread the man. He's talking about new coaches (like Calipari) who revoke the scholarships of the athletes who were there before they (the coach) arrived. Sort of like the new CEO who comes in and fires everyone so he can bring in his own staff.

I didn't misread anything. The point is that doing that is only possible because scholarships are only one year deals. Most people don't seem to know that fact.
I'm not saying that he is one of those who wasn't previously aware of it before reading his referenced article because I don't know when he learned it, but I am noting that I pointed this out before he did.

[Judtech]

I believe, and this may have changed, that scholarships are 1 year renewable contracts at the discretion of the university. It is usually just an inferred contract that these are four year scholarships. This is also why an athlete needs to be released by the university from their scholarship, but the university doesn't need the athlete to release the university from there commitment.