Attrition and Scholarship Limits

[beerbuzz]

I think a couple people should re read this entire thread as time consuming as it may be. We are recycling the same conversation over and over.

I tried with the not so merry go round gif.......

 

[RonJohn]

Scholarships should be 4 years and we wouldn't be talking about processing.

I agree. I also think that people should realize that SAs are being recruited to a university, not an athletics program. The athletics programs should treat SAs as if they are part of a university, not just an athletics program.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

This statement has no relevance. All types of scholarships are conditional on the things you mentioned. I was on ROTC scholarship and had to maintain a 2.0 GPA or I lost it. I also had to keep my nose clean with the law and the hill. I was worried about drinking because I was underage and afraid any small citation would cause me to lose my scholly.

I was just answering your question about not having to honor an entire degree contractually.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I was just answering your question about not having to honor an entire degree contractually.

My question was why the one-year scholly? The things you mentioned doesn't answer it. My ROTC scholly was 4years but was conditional. Athletic schollies can be 4/5 year conditional too. Heck, the conditions can be anything including performance.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

My question was why the one-year scholly? The things you mentioned doesn't answer it. My ROTC scholly was 4years but was conditional. Athletic schollies can be 4/5 year conditional too. Heck, the conditions can be anything including performance.

As I typed out in english, there are many reasons why schools shouldn't have to honor a scholarship for a full degree. And it seems like you are actually saying the same thing too. So I really don't know what your point is.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

As I typed out in english, there are many reasons why schools shouldn't have to honor a scholarship for a full degree. And it seems like you are actually saying the same thing too. So I really don't know what your point is.

I typed in english, too. WHY THE ONE YEAR TERM? You failed to answer that. Your answer did not address it.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Lol GT coaches have done this. We've had players even say so. And yes we know you don't agree with it. But D1 football at GT is a business. If this is shocking to anyone then I have to think that person is just a very naive person.

I think a couple people should re read this entire thread as time consuming as it may be. We are recycling the same conversation over and over.

We process players, or whatever term you'd like to use, at Tech and have been for the past 30 years like every other school in the nation. The end.

Name the players.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I typed in english, too. WHY THE ONE YEAR TERM? You failed to answer that. Your answer did not address it.

Bless your heart.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Bless your heart.

Bless yours back.

 

[Milwaukee]

Which players exactly have said that?

There are players from Alabama on the record saying that they had no medical issues, but were told that they were being moved to "medical" scholarships. The links provided had players from Florida who were on scholarship and received a "renewal" notice that said their scholarship amount was now $0. You say that GT does this also, so please provide names to correspond to your claims.

Lol. Don't believe this happens if you wish. Ask @Ibeeballin he will tell you the same. Like I said, go back and read the thread. This is getting exhausting.

 

[Milwaukee]

Name the players.

Ask Sedric to name them for you. Or go back and read the thread. Either way, enjoy your morning bud!

 

[dressedcheeseside]

The kids sign one year ships but are promised or led to believe something different. That's the shady part. Then the coaches don't want the bad publicity of cutting kids who underperform so they "process" them instead. It's just a shady business all around.

 

[swarmer]

Sports like baseball and softball cut player scholarships all the time. Generally speaking the most scholarship money a baseball player will get is his freshman year when he signs. By the time he is a senior they usually receive no money, or 5-10%, at that time the coaching staff is reallocating their scholly dollars to incoming recruits.

I’ve always found it strange that some think football players are entitled to 4 year fully guaranteed scholarships — but other sports aren’t mentioned in regardless to treating scholarship athletes fairly. Football players by far get the best deal, and if the worst thing that happens to them is they get put on a full medical scholarship and don’t get to run out of the tunnel, are they really getting a raw deal.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The kids sign one year ships but are promised or led to believe something different. That's the shady part. Then the coaches don't want the bad publicity of cutting kids who underperform so they "process" them instead. It's just a shady business all around.

Do you really think kids pick a college 1 year at a time, transferring as they go? The reason they are “promised” or “led to believe” they are a full scholarship towards a degree is because that’s what they are given. (BTW, look up NCAA regs on being able to give full scholarships instead of 1 year at a time too.). Do you really think coaches hand out scholarships and say they have to remain in the 3-deep to keep them? Of course not, and you know this too and you type it. That’s why it’s shady to cut someone in good standing against their will. Nobody is saying it’s illegal or breaking rules. It’s just a **** move. Football has all the money and can afford it. Other sports don’t and do tell kids about partial scholarships and partial length.

 

[Milwaukee]

The kids sign one year ships but are promised or led to believe something different. That's the shady part. Then the coaches don't want the bad publicity of cutting kids who underperform so they "process" them instead. It's just a shady business all around.

Ding ding ding.

And Cheese comes through and drops the knowledge. Well done, sir.

 

[RonJohn]

Lol. Don't believe this happens if you wish. Ask @Ibeeballin he will tell you the same. Like I said, go back and read the thread. This is getting exhausting.

I did read what he posted. I did not see anywhere that he posted that SAs who had no medical issues were put on medical scholarship. I did not see anywhere he posted that players received a notice that their scholarship amount was now zero.

He did say that some RS JRs made decisions in their exit interviews to leave(I assume after graduation). You are not saying that GT coaches have had discussions with players about their ability to help on the field and whether they should continue to graduate school on scholarship. You have stated that GT coaches have: pulled scholarships to get another recruit or have just sent mailed notices that scholarship amounts were now reduced to zero. Or did you not read the links that @Whiskey_Clear provided, and just reacted to what you maybe assumed they said?

 

[Milwaukee]

I did read what he posted. I did not see anywhere that he posted that SAs who had no medical issues were put on medical scholarship. I did not see anywhere he posted that players received a notice that their scholarship amount was now zero.

He did say that some RS JRs made decisions in their exit interviews to leave(I assume after graduation). You are not saying that GT coaches have had discussions with players about their ability to help on the field and whether they should continue to graduate school on scholarship. You have stated that GT coaches have: pulled scholarships to get another recruit or have just sent mailed notices that scholarship amounts were now reduced to zero. Or did you not read the links that @Whiskey_Clear provided, and just reacted to what you maybe assumed they said?

I think we're obviously not on the same page. And that's okay.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Do you really think kids pick a college 1 year at a time, transferring as they go? The reason they are “promised” or “led to believe” they are a full scholarship towards a degree is because that’s what they are given. (BTW, look up NCAA regs on being able to give full scholarships instead of 1 year at a time too.). Do you really think coaches hand out scholarships and say they have to remain in the 3-deep to keep them? Of course not, and you know this too and you type it. That’s why it’s shady to cut someone in good standing against their will. Nobody is saying it’s illegal or breaking rules. It’s just a **** move. Football has all the money and can afford it. Other sports don’t and do tell kids about partial scholarships and partial length.

I agree completely. Somewhere we got some miscom going on.

 

[Animal02]

Attrition has negative connotations connected to it. "leaving with eligibility remaining"... it that's the all encompassing definition then fine, use it. But it changes the meaning. Maybe "bad" attrition and "good" attrition should be distinguished and separate. A kid with eligibility remaining graduating and moving on to better his life/situation is perfectly fine in my book. Heck, if we are totally fine with "processing" kids with eligibility remaining who have graduated who aren't contributing, we should be fine with the opposite.

I see nothing wrong with not renewing a scholly for a player that happens to have eligibility left that graduates. To me, the school has met its commitment by the degree being granted....and they should be free to transfer with no strings attached.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I see nothing wrong with not renewing a scholly for a player that happens to have eligibility left that graduates. To me, the school has met its commitment by the degree being granted....and they should be free to transfer with no strings attached.

Me too. But the same goes for guys like Parker and Klock who get their degrees early and leave for greener pastures. But the bigger take is that both types of "attrition" are not knocks on the program.