mike and mike destroy Bo on air

Just took a peek at the Wisconsin's Scout board. I understand being upset about a situation, but calling out Iowa fans was a bit stupid. This is NATIONAL perspective, not an opposing fan bases perspective. It is funny how fan bases sometimes can't see the forrest through the trees. This is a big black eye to Ryan and the Wisconsin BB program, and most of them don't even understand this.

Scout.com: BO speaks
 
Bo doesn't care how he looks but I'm sure Barry Alverez will want to change how this is being handled. My guess is the ban will stay on for big ten teams but will be lifted for the other schools.
 
DexterMorgan said:
Sure, but thems the rules. BFD. I really don't feel extremely sorry for this kid that isn't going to honor his commitment. Now maybe there's something more to it which is possible, but maybe there's more to it the other way, What if Uthoff (or someone in his camp) has been actively talking to other schools about transferring? That could certainly drive a coach to make a seemingly selfish and petty decision.
Click to expand...

I've kind of come full circle on this after thinking it over.....

You say the kid "isn't going to honor his commitment". However, don't you think it's somewhat hypocritical for an institution to expect a 4 (or 5) year commitment from a player, yet the insititution only has to give a one year commitment for a scholarship? Meaning, coaches and universities get their panties in a bunch when a player wants to transfer, but yet those same coaches and universities only have to commit to providing a scholarship for one year?

In addition, coaches, ADs, university presidents, etc call these young men STUDENT-athletes. If that's really the case, then why do these same coaches, ADs, university presidents, etc, bar these young men from pursuing their academic endeavors at the university of their choosing? If the "athlete" part is secondary and the STUDENT part is primary, isn't barring a student from attending the university of their choosing destroying that notion?

Finally, the NCAA claims they aren't a business. Each year, they send Washington DC their tax exempt status forms claiming they are a non-profit and not a business. They mark down all the "charitable" things they do in order to not have to pay taxes on the billions of $ they bring in each year. So if that's the case, and the NCAA isn't a business, then why do they treat these STUDENT-athletes as if they work for a business and treat them as businesses treat their employees via a non-compete?

Bo Ryan makes $2.1M per year because he's supposedly a helluva basketball coach. Is this one gangly redshirt freshman really so good that Bo is incapable of putting a team on the floor that can compete with him? I mean, isn't that what Wisconsin is paying him for? To be a good enough coach to be able to gameplan around this kid if he has to play him?
 
DexterMorgan said:
Sure, but thems the rules. BFD. I really don't feel extremely sorry for this kid that isn't going to honor his commitment. Now maybe there's something more to it which is possible, but maybe there's more to it the other way, What if Uthoff (or someone in his camp) has been actively talking to other schools about transferring? That could certainly drive a coach to make a seemingly selfish and petty decision.
Click to expand...

Show me the rules that says you have to block a kid from transferring anywhere that he might like to go.
Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should. I am glad most people see this differently as this is making Wisky look terrible.
 
Last edited:
SpiderRico said:
I've kind of come full circle on this after thinking it over.....

You say the kid "isn't going to honor his commitment". However, don't you think it's somewhat hypocritical for an institution to expect a 4 (or 5) year commitment from a player, yet the insititution only has to give a one year commitment for a scholarship? Meaning, coaches and universities get their panties in a bunch when a player wants to transfer, but yet those same coaches and universities only have to commit to providing a scholarship for one year?
?
Click to expand...

I never even thought about that angle. If a school only commits to a player for one year, then that player should only commit to the school for one year.
 
SpiderRico said:
I've kind of come full circle on this after thinking it over.....

You say the kid "isn't going to honor his commitment". However, don't you think it's somewhat hypocritical for an institution to expect a 4 (or 5) year commitment from a player, yet the insititution only has to give a one year commitment for a scholarship? Meaning, coaches and universities get their panties in a bunch when a player wants to transfer, but yet those same coaches and universities only have to commit to providing a scholarship for one year?

Honestly, how often do you see someone essentially cut from a college sports team unless they've had some sort of major rule violation?

In addition, coaches, ADs, university presidents, etc call these young men STUDENT-athletes. If that's really the case, then why do these same coaches, ADs, university presidents, etc, bar these young men from pursuing their academic endeavors at the university of their choosing? If the "athlete" part is secondary and the STUDENT part is primary, isn't barring a student from attending the university of their choosing destroying that notion?

He is free to go to college and be a student anywhere he would like

Finally, the NCAA claims they aren't a business. Each year, they send Washington DC their tax exempt status forms claiming they are a non-profit and not a business. They mark down all the "charitable" things they do in order to not have to pay taxes on the billions of $ they bring in each year. So if that's the case, and the NCAA isn't a business, then why do they treat these STUDENT-athletes as if they work for a business and treat them as businesses treat their employees via a non-compete?

That's an NCAA issue and this is far from the first time they've been treated like employees in a business.

Bo Ryan makes $2.1M per year because he's supposedly a helluva basketball coach. Is this one gangly redshirt freshman really so good that Bo is incapable of putting a team on the floor that can compete with him? I mean, isn't that what Wisconsin is paying him for? To be a good enough coach to be able to gameplan around this kid if he has to play him?

Bo Ryan isn't blocking the transfers because he doesn't think he can beat a team that picks him up.
Click to expand...
 
If kids can transfer anywhere at anytime, the number of transfers would go up 5 fold easily. Most of what deters players is that they would have to go JUCO or sit out a year. If you can just go anywhere you want at anytime what would stop them. This would cripple many many schools, including Iowa. What if a 3* under the radar kid from Ohio showed he was a stud (Lowery) finally got noticed and could play for a national title with OSU. That would hurt the hawks a lot.

Now, I agree that the NCAA should make scholarships 4 year committments on the schools part, but to say they can go anywhere is dumb.
 
theboat said:
Show me the rules that says you have to block a kid from transferring anywhere that he might like to go.
Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should. I am glad most people see this differently as this is looking Wisky look terrible.
Click to expand...

Show me where I said that.
 
DexterMorgan said:
You never saw that angle because that rarely, if ever, happens.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? Ask the dozens of football players from Alabama, LSU, Auburn and other SEC schools that have had this happen to them.

Ask the dozens of kids whose coach up and left and when the new coach came in cut them from their scholarship.

You are blinded by the integrity that coaches at Iowa have shown through the years by not practicing this. But if you don't think it's happened, then you're not nearly as smart as I assumed you were.
 
SpiderRico said:
Are you kidding me? Ask the dozens of football players from Alabama, LSU, Auburn and other SEC schools that have had this happen to them.

Ask the dozens of kids whose coach up and left and when the new coach came in cut them from their scholarship.

You are blinded by the integrity that coaches at Iowa have shown through the years by not practicing this. But if you don't think it's happened, then you're not nearly as smart as I assumed you were.
Click to expand...

probably right.

Not necessary, Let's keep the gloves up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top