I knew it...I knew it....I knew it....

This will never go. The BIG is already behind the 8 ball on recruiting & struggles to get the southern top players to the midwest. This will just be another reason for a high profile recruit to turn down a BIG team. I don't think they will take that chance.
 
Melrose - You are exactly correct. KF is like the jealous guy who knows he has no shot at the hot girl, so he spends all night trying to sabotage his buddies attempts.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
This will never go. The BIG is already behind the 8 ball on recruiting & struggles to get the southern top players to the midwest. This will just be another reason for a high profile recruit to turn down a BIG team. I don't think they will take that chance.
Click to expand...

It would only exist if it applied to all teams, including the SEC. They may fight it, but if all the other conferences want it and if the SEC wants to stay in the NCAA...
 
I apologize if this was already stated but do the student-athletes lose the year of eligibility when sitting out their freshman year under this idea? Meaning Is it considered a red-shirt with 4 more years to play or 3? Depending on how this would work it could put a big damper on transfers also.
 
Playmaker said:
I knew KF would be on the WRONG side of this....was there ANY doubt what side this fool would take??? What blue chipper (not that we recruit or sign any) wants to wait until his second year of school to see the field??? I also knew for certain the ONE school in the Big Ten that would come out against it....Ohio St....the one school that is all about the BIG STAGE....they never try to kid anyone about who they are and what greater goals they aspire to...as much as I cheer against them more than ANY team in the nation...(even SEC teams), I admire the fact that are who they are and do not hide behind false fronts when it comes to athletics.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/12349646/big-ten-considering-ineligibility-freshmen
Click to expand...

Just got around to reading this Playmaker. Just figures ole kurt would say that. Even though he is talent adverse with his young players.....a rule like this would only hurt Iowa even more under this thumb (or future Iowa coaches). This statement by Captain Kurt only further demonstrates how risk adverse he is when it comes to putting the best talent out on the field (and favoritism of certain players) .

This would be regressive policy move that would set the game back 40+ years.
 
Last edited:
If this were to get implemented in basketball, say goodbye to any one-and-done-caliber player setting foot on a college campus. They're not going to stick around for that second year when they could bolt, and they won't come for the first year when they can play overseas for a year.
 
Knight78 said:
Makes me pine for the days when the UCLA team went undefeated during the regular season and won the NCAA title. They lost to one team all year: the UCLA freshman team with Lew Alcindor (later Kareem Abdul Jabbar) in the annual frosh/varsity game.

Personally I like the idea of doing what baseball does. If the student-athlete signs a LOI then he's there for three years OR he leaves early and pays back all the scholarship money that was awarded to him/her.

Or make the athletic scholarship binding for four years (or five years if there's a redshirt season). If a student-athlete leaves early, their scholarship cannot be claimed by anyone else until such a time as the student-athlete would graduate.
Click to expand...

When Alcindor was a freshman, UCLA finished second in the Pac-8 & didn't play in the NCAA Tournament. That was the year Texas Western (UTEP) upset the Pat Riley led Kentucky team in the final. True, the freshmen beat the UCLA varsity by about twenty points. Of course, four of the freshman would start on the championship team the next year. One of the four, Kenny Heitz, would play very little in his Jr. & Sr. years. Talk about talent, start on a championship & ride the pines the next two years
 
tm3308 said:
If this were to get implemented in basketball, say goodbye to any one-and-done-caliber player setting foot on a college campus. They're not going to stick around for that second year when they could bolt, and they won't come for the first year when they can play overseas for a year.
Click to expand...
Exactly and that's why it'd hurt way more then help college ball and it'll never happen. There's money to be made and their careers are short as it is. So they aren't wasting a year of their time not making money. If they even remotely think they have NBA aspirations they'll go play ball for $ in Europe then sit here that's just dumb.
 
ColumbusHawk said:
When Alcindor was a freshman, UCLA finished second in the Pac-8 & didn't play in the NCAA Tournament. That was the year Texas Western (UTEP) upset the Pat Riley led Kentucky team in the final. True, the freshmen beat the UCLA varsity by about twenty points. Of course, four of the freshman would start on the championship team the next year. One of the four, Kenny Heitz, would play very little in his Jr. & Sr. years. Talk about talent, start on a championship & ride the pines the next two years
Click to expand...

Good call. I was posting from memory and I really need to check before I do that.
 
Knight78 said:
Good call. I was posting from memory and I really need to check before I do that.
Click to expand...

Now UCLA did win two national championships with Wicks & Rowe as the stars. The second year the freshman team had Walton, Wilkes & Greg Lee. Talk about an abundance of riches.
 
ColumbusHawk said:
Now UCLA did win two national championships with Wicks & Rowe as the stars. The second year the freshman team had Walton, Wilkes & Greg Lee. Talk about an abundance of riches.
Click to expand...

UCLA was the last team I remember where--with 100% legitimacy AND accuracy--you could have handed them the trophy at the beginning of the year and NObody would have had any qualms about it. Once Indiana won it in the 1975-1976 season, "total dominance" seemed to abate.

Sure, there have been some repeat winners, but NO team has dominated like UCLA did (Iowa wrestling doesn't count, since it's not basketball!).
 
It's a fact that the UCLA players were getting $5 per rebound....a design created by Mr. Holier Than Thou...John Wooden. In today's dollars, which players are getting the better deal....1968 UCLA Bruins or 2015 Kentucky Wildcats?
 
Playmaker said:
It's a fact that the UCLA players were getting $5 per rebound....a design created by Mr. Holier Than Thou...John Wooden. In today's dollars, which players are getting the better deal....1968 UCLA Bruins or 2015 Kentucky Wildcats?
Click to expand...
I've never heard anything like this. What source did you get this fact from.
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
UCLA was the last team I remember where--with 100% legitimacy AND accuracy--you could have handed them the trophy at the beginning of the year and NObody would have had any qualms about it. Once Indiana won it in the 1975-1976 season, "total dominance" seemed to abate.

Sure, there have been some repeat winners, but NO team has dominated like UCLA did (Iowa wrestling doesn't count, since it's not basketball!).
Click to expand...

From the time I was in the fifth grade through my senior year in college, UCLA won every year except for two.
 
Playmaker said:
It's a fact that the UCLA players were getting $5 per rebound....a design created by Mr. Holier Than Thou...John Wooden. In today's dollars, which players are getting the better deal....1968 UCLA Bruins or 2015 Kentucky Wildcats?
Click to expand...

Bull. It was never proven, even by interviews with the players receiving the payments, that Wooden knew anything about this. It was all set up by Papa G, Sam Gilbert. And he was dealt with when UCLA was put on probation and lost scholarships long after Wooden retired.
 
I head about it on a radio interview about 10 years ago....the guy was close to the program and swore Wooden knew all about it. Where do you think Walton got all his dime bag money?
 
The kids most likely to see heavy action as freshmen are the same ones likely to be looking at the draft after 3 or 4 years.

We're not going to pay them so I have absolutely no problem leaving them one year of their prime to the NFL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top