Cutting scholarship players

[Captn_65]

Oooooh, that's SEC level dirty. ASU cannot comment but this isn't a good look. They dropped a TE recruit's scholarship offer today as well.

 

[BurdellJacket]

Well, I am quite certain coach Dodd would have never pulled the scholarship. Now, before before everyone starts screaming at me that times have changed and nowadays everybody does it, I would posit that just because throughout our society morality and ethics have sunk to gutter levels, that does not mean that our Institute should put aside all integrity.

if GT makes an offer and the SA accepts it, then Tech is committed to allowing the scholarship. If, however, the student athlete does not commit to that offer and continues to shop, then all bets are off, and Tech continues to look also.

if, of course, the kid is already on scholarship, the scholarship should never be pulled. Georgia Tech coaches and assistants should be held to a much higher standard of knowledge as to whether or not the young recruit can cut it at Georgia Tech.

And now I see that my response above is irrelevant. NCjacket79 had already explained that the P5 conferences have rules against yanking scholarships and I had not seen that. Oh well....

 

[Pointer]

Well, I am quite certain coach Dodd would have never pulled the scholarship. Now, before before everyone starts screaming at me that times have changed and nowadays everybody does it, I would posit that just because throughout our society morality and ethics have sunk to gutter levels, that does not mean that our Institute should put aside all integrity.

if GT makes an offer and the SA accepts it, then Tech is committed to allowing the scholarship. If, however, the student athlete does not commit to that offer and continues to shop, then all bets are off, and Tech continues to look also.

if, of course, the kid is already on scholarship, the scholarship should never be pulled. Georgia Tech coaches and assistants should be held to a much higher standard of knowledge as to whether or not the young recruit can cut it at Georgia Tech.

This is the last thing I'll say on this. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the model Clemson uses? If so, then why can't you recruit honorably, when they (Clemson) are proving you can recruit at really high levels without resorting to such low levels as described earlier? Again I'm not sure I'm right in this.

This is in reference to scholarship offers more so than processing players.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Well, I am quite certain coach Dodd would have never pulled the scholarship. Now, before before everyone starts screaming at me that times have changed and nowadays everybody does it, I would posit that just because throughout our society morality and ethics have sunk to gutter levels, that does not mean that our Institute should put aside all integrity.

if GT makes an offer and the SA accepts it, then Tech is committed to allowing the scholarship. If, however, the student athlete does not commit to that offer and continues to shop, then all bets are off, and Tech continues to look also.

if, of course, the kid is already on scholarship, the scholarship should never be pulled. Georgia Tech coaches and assistants should be held to a much higher standard of knowledge as to whether or not the young recruit can cut it at Georgia Tech.

There is only a 1-year commitment associated with a scholarship offer unless specifically offered a 5-year scholarship. So, pretty much, morals and ethics have not been compromised. The vast majority of players stay at the school and maintain their scholarships. There is a small percentage of student-athletes that who cannot stay make it either academically or athletically. There's no reason the coach should be forced to continue supporting a student-athlete that isn't able to succeed. You wouldn't lambast the academic side of the student were to fail out because they couldn't handle the academic load. Why should it be different on the field?

I'm all of offering 4/5 year scholarships, but if they don't, then there's nothing immoral or unethical about moving a kid along and off the athletic scholarship.

Edit: And the rules prohibit dropping a kid for performance issues. While I disagree with this, I do understand why it's there. The guaranteed 4/5 year scholarship negates the need for that rule. I have long bee a proponent of 1-year scholarship offers come with an immediate play as a transfer. The 4/5 year scholarship transfer requires a mandatory loss of a year of eligibility. No waivers, no negotiations. Students know what they're getting, coaches know what they're getting.

 

[Techster]

Herm has never really hid from this. From the jump in 2018:

ESPN: Herm Edwards reiterates threat to cut players who have 'packed it in'​

Herm said the silent part out loud! Coaches do it, but they don't put it out there for their competition to use against them.

Come on, man!

 

[slugboy]

If I was the recruit who had been offered a spot and committed early, made my plans for school and maybe even shut down any other visits, I’d be steamed and then some
If I was that recruit’s coach, I’d be plenty steamed too

 

[stech81]

If I was the recruit who had been offered a spot and committed early, made my plans for school and maybe even shut down any other visits, I’d be steamed and then some
If I was that recruit’s coach, I’d be plenty steamed too

The way lawyers are today surprised some ain't brought lawsuit on a case