Why would they non-count unless they needed the scholly? We didn't last year, we do this year.
Call it a favor to the kid for a free year of school.
(I realize that this is extreme pro-NU spin)
Charlie Moore
- Thread starter Secho99
- Start date
Call it a favor to the kid for a free year of school.
(I realize that this is extreme pro-NU spin)
I agree. I think Bryant is a better off guard. A top 50 PG and Bryant is a great Big 10 Guard situation.
If he's reclassified as a non-counter, he keeps his scholarship, it just doesn't count against the scholarship limit. So how on earth is doing it this way a favor? He's left the basketball team and, to the extent that anyone cares about this, all this has done is generate questions about what's happening, negative rumors about his character, and suggestions from our fans to run him off campus.
If there's a legitimate reason to convert him to a non-counter, it's anything but a favor to let him keep the scholarship for a full year despite leaving the team. Just announce his career is over for whatever reason and if people ask why you're leaving the scholarship open, say you won't hand it out until you find a good fit.
Perhaps we can't get him to a "non-counter" but would rather have to pull the scholarship altogether. In that case, giving him another year is absolutely a favor.
I should have been clearer, I don't think we could ever get him to non-counter status to where he keeps his scholarship but NU gets it back to use. I do think it's possible that there was a reason to pull it altogether and the staff chose not to do it last year but migh this year.
I find this unlikely, if only because most justifications for pulling the scholarship would not inspire the program to let him keep it for an extra year. But it's possible.
What exactly was a crappy and uncalled for thing to say? Oh never mind; have I mentioned previously how much I truly love this Ignore feature?
He would have already had 4 years and his RS was under the prior coaching staff and because of injury. If NU decides to go in a different direction because they feel that they have the position covered with better talent and his minutes going forward would be limited, other than being honest with him, do they owe him anything else?
Because they had no one else to bring fill an additional open spot so there was no need to push it. ALSO did not want to unbalance the roster that much as we were already bringing 3 plus JVZ. Maybe they could claim medical hardship for psych reasons but have been reluctant to do it because it would brand the kid. But he has been sort of holding the program hostage and while it did not matter much last year, going forward it sure looks like it does. So now, if they have someone to bring in, they give him an ultimatum.
I'm sorry to blow up one phrase. But this is the general tone of many about this situation, and it's pretty overblown.
A backup point guard and one scholarship position do not hold a program hostage. There are many more important issues that put a program in this spot before a bad decision on one kid and the NCAA regulations that the kid has the right to take advantage of and NU seems to be complying with.
How is leaving the scholarship open "pushing" anything?
Also -- all this speculation about his mental state and use of language like "holding the program hostage" is precisely why it's a terrible idea to do what you're suggesting they're doing. It makes the player, who has not violated any rules that we know of, into a villain and gives our fans an excuse to badmouth one of the "fine young men" that they would otherwise defend to the death.
He is taking an athletic scholarship and is providing nothing for the "pay" (about $300k) he is receiving. Since he is still on an athletic scholarship, it likely still includes books fees room and board and maybe even training table and stipends. Alternatives would seem to be that he could transfer to somewhere else and play freeing up the scholarship. He could return to the team to help in whatever ways that he can. He might also find a way to "retire from basketball" and they could find him another way to take care of much of the costs of the education (another kind of scholarship and aid) also freeing up the scholarship. I think something like this is the route Turner may have taken for at least the next year.
While it is true we do not have knowledge of all the inner workings, from the outside, it sure seems like thus far,he has chosen none of the above continuing to tie up the scholarship, preventing it from being used by someone actually working with the team. IF it continues beyond this year, I would suggest that holding the program hostage is exactly the right term.
Maybe I have a somewhat different perspective because I actually paid the full price for my education through personal savings, summer jobs, coop and other means. it was a hardship and had to be pretty frugal. While I was going, some of my classmates went through ROTC to pay for their schooling and that also meant a 4 year commitment after they got the degree. This is like the ROTC candidate going through one year, deciding to back out and yet still expecting the government to continue to pay for three more years and eliminate the service requirements. Think that the government would go along with that? If the kid backed out, they had to come up with a different way to pay the bill.
Would bet that a schlorship would open, if young Mr. Moore chooses to play for NU.
Yes indeed. Aren't all of the targets guards, too? Suggests there will be one spot and one only.
Could he? If he could return to the team, why hasn't he?
So you think that if he quits the school should keep paying for his education? That doesn't line up with your ROTC analogy, where you appear to be arguing that they shouldn't.
You're just making things up, saying that he has those made-up options available to him, and then accusing him of holding the team hostage if he doesn't do any of the things that you've arbitrarily decided he can do.
Sure sounds like it wasn't the player who decided to back out, huh?
Because I have fallen madly in love with the Ignore feature and want to shout it from the rooftops?
I think the ground work is there. Tap has been plagued with foot problems and foot problems can be notoriously disabling. I'm sure NU could find a doc from their stable to support retirement.
Kiss off. MESSAGE BOARD, NOT AP WIRE. A place where people go to talk, speculate, conjecture. Too thin skinned? Ignore is your friend. Or try to offer a meaningful post - an understandable challenge for you now that the BC - CCC has been beat beyond death...
Last edited:
Some think NU gratuitously gives out money. Clearly, these people are disconnected from the realities in Evanston. But, then again, many here also don't understand the nature and purpose of a message board. For such smart people, there are so many closed, simple or small minds here
Me too. Without ever using it, the volume of idiotic responses demanding my attention has fallen dramatically. I'm ready for the genius from Virginia to find and employ the feature.
Tough for you. Perhaps you should have practiced harder in pee wee. Athletes in college already get a raw deal. If you believe Vassar quit, then you are a fool. If you believe NU is voluntarily letting him keep the schollie, then you are also naive. Unless NU tells Vassar to return to the team, and then, if he breaks a rule or a covenant of the scholarship agreement, he will remain on scholarship and count against the cap.
Want to make an argument? Suggest CCC should bring Vassar back and see what Vassar's reaction is. But your whole post is simply dumb.
I think that's what happened. They talked Vassar into transferring - remember it was announced, then I think he changed his mind. Once he announced, there are administrative steps to formally break the schollie. I think that NU simply assumed Vassar would go and when he didn't, they no longer had grounds to retake the schollie.
The announcement said he notified the staff that he would leave.
I don't doubt that he may have looked around, found no takers and then wanted back on the team.
But the assessment by the staff would seem to be that the team is better one player down sans Vasser than with him on the roster.
There may be a message there (as Kelly indicated).
with all the sour grapes against recruiting habits of other schools, i wonder if we would collectively b upset at cc for moving vasser or lumpkin off the books. We should embrace whatever cc does to advance this historically backward program.
What I find peculiar is that when someone here wants to surmise that Vassar is not wanted on the team due to his persona, Va and yesterday don't appear, demand a source and cry afoul. Apparently 'attacking' a young man's character once he no longer compete's for NU but holds one of their schollies is license for the peanut gallery to negatively speculate about the young man. But should one of us (me) want to speculate about other members of the team or the coach - even if there is a sense of logic to the speculation, then I'm a crappy person doing crappy things....
C'mon Va, yesterday - stand up to Medill and defend this young man's honor... nevermind, crawl back into your holes...
I am just saying that it is likely that he has a number of alternatives that thus far he has chosen not to take. The result is a handicap for the program. This past year, it was manageable but going forward it is more of an issue.
I don't know anything about his character and I've repeatedly supported his wishes to stay at NU and take as many classes as he can.
But I did see him play his freshmen year and I get why (from a strictly basketball perspective), when he expressed a desire to leave, the coaches grabbed that opportunity and never let go. ("Loved having you, too bad it didn't work out, don't let the door hit ya...")
I believe they experienced that he's not a point guard and is never going to be a point guard.
On the subject of character, he can be a poor fit in non basketball areas without being of poor character.
What alternatives do you think he might have? We know he has the opportunity to attend one of the finest universities in the world for free. It would appear he no longer has the opportunity to play bball there. Suggests that he holds education above playing ball - something we typical applaud...until we turn against a student. But I will assume you are not such a hypocrite. So, what other opportunities do you think Vassar might have that include an education equal or greater to the one from NU at no cost?
And before you tell me about your hard luck life - this kid positioned himself to EARN a full ride from a D1 top university. Whether or not he is good enough now is irrelevant. He put in the work, developed his game, was given the offer (no gun to CCC's head) and accepted it as the best offer to him at the time. There is absolutely nothing wrong with him riding out that opportunity unless something better comes along. So, what better opportunity do you think exists for him and why is it better?
Believe or not, I have no issue with your post. It bothers me that VA and Yesterday attack me for speculating possible scholarship openings to be a recurrence of the Vassar scenario sans the scholarship issue in the direction of Ash. (The two players have similar stats after one year of play.) I see little difference in our posts and feel both are fair discussion topics for a message board. It is the hypocrisy that those two look past any potential negative read of a student they no longer support while vocally condemning the same for a current team member that frustrates me. I would love to see them explain their hypocrisy, or for other board members to call them out. But while the crickets chirp, I guess we can continue to discuss the topic of the day - who might be added tot he team next year.
Similar threads
FB RECRUITING Name to watch tomorrow
Latest posts
-
Takeaways: Bailey drops 37 as Rutgers upsets Northwestern- Latest: FeralFelidae
