Is KSU coach Snyder in the wrong or in the right?

[AlaskaGuy]

You never know. Snyder has coached a long time, even he can handle things poorly. Nobody is in fallible. I think this was handled poorly, but to what extent I do not know

Snyder was being a dickhead the time he played UCLA in a bowl a few years ago and had his guys try to sack the QB when UCLA was taking a knee to run out the clock. That's why Mora refused to shake his hand afterwards ... players get hurt doing that kind of stupid shit.

 

[4down20]

Who's talking about the schools? Coaches with a system recruit players, then leave for a better gig while the players they recruited get stuck with whoever comes in afterwards, usually someone with a system that doesn't fit their style.

Last time I checked, the kids commit to schools, not to coaches.

If a kid commits to a coach instead of a school, that's their fuck up. Sure coach means something, but overall they should realize these things will happen and that in the end they are committing to a school.

A good school will keep good coaches.

 

[socaljim242]

As already pointed out, the schools are protected when coaches do that. The other school has to pay the buyout, so they basically get a free head coach for a few years because they other school will be paying for it.

You are trying to remove the protection the schools get for the students is all.

Doesnt the school have an open scholarship once the player leaves? They lose a kid who they wont play and can get one they like better. How is that damaging to the school?
I agree with blocking a kid from playing in your conference and anyone on your schedule while they are eligible but blocking him from conferences and teams you dont play is childish and vindictive.
Name me one coach whos not been able to go to another school because of his buyout. The coach is never the one to pay it for one thing and monet doesnt always give you a better coach.

 

[4down20]

Doesnt the school have an open scholarship once the player leaves? They lose a kid who they wont play and can get one they like better. How is that damaging to the school?

Well for the next year. When coaches took that into account previously, you all cried about it and called it oversigning.

I agree with blocking a kid from playing in your conference and anyone on your schedule while they are eligible but blocking him from conferences and teams you dont play is childish and vindictive.

It's done to prevent college football from becoming a free agency and to discourage kids from transferring. They are young and fickle and if you allow unrestricted transfers you are just asking for trouble.

He can just transfer to a JuCo for a year, and then recruited fully by everyone again.

Name me one coach whos not been able to go to another school because of his buyout. The coach is never the one to pay it for one thing and monet doesnt always give you a better coach.

Coaches are overlooked for jobs all the time because of their buyouts and often times they also keep their jobs because the school doesn't want to pay the buyout to get rid of them either, and then have to pay for the replacement on top of it.

Fire a coach = you buy him out for millions.
Hire a coach with a buyout = you pay the other school their buyout, then you have to pay the new coach his big salary that drew him away from the other school.

It gets very expensive quick and it for sure prevents coaches from going to other schools.

Nick Saban has no buyout, he can go whenever he wants. If buyouts never stopped anything, he wouldn't care about such a thing.

 

[socaljim242]

Well for the next year. When coaches took that into account previously, you all cried about it and called it oversigning.



It's done to prevent college football from becoming a free agency and to discourage kids from transferring. They are young and fickle and if you allow unrestricted transfers you are just asking for trouble.

He can just transfer to a JuCo for a year, and then recruited fully by everyone again.



Coaches are overlooked for jobs all the time because of their buyouts and often times they also keep their jobs because the school doesn't want to pay the buyout to get rid of them either, and then have to pay for the replacement on top of it.

Fire a coach = you buy him out for millions.
Hire a coach with a buyout = you pay the other school their buyout, then you have to pay the new coach his big salary that drew him away from the other school.

It gets very expensive quick and it for sure prevents coaches from going to other schools.

Nick Saban has no buyout, he can go whenever he wants. If buyouts never stopped anything, he wouldn't care about such a thing.

Call it what you want but it's purely vindictive. Coaches play kids who get caught with drugs and guns but a kid wants to go to another school thats not in their conference and they dont play and hey you gotta face the consequences.
College is about teaching also. You let players who violate laws play but a kid who just isn't happy. Him you have to put your foot down ,

 

[4down20]

Call it what you want but it's purely vindictive. Coaches play kids who get caught with drugs and guns but a kid wants to go to another school thats not in their conference and they dont play and hey you gotta face the consequences.
College is about teach also. You let players who violate laws play but a kid who just isn't happy. Him you have to put your foot down ,

Those are legal issues and they do have to face the consequences for them. It's why we have a legal system to start with. Some of you seem to get that confused and believe the schools are the legal system. I've never understood why.

 

[socaljim242]

Those are legal issues and they do have to face the consequences for them. It's why we have a legal system to start with. Some of you seem to get that confused and believe the schools are the legal system. I've never understood why.

So a kid in legal trouble for having a gun in his car and drugs is in legal trouble , he's gonna play after it's ironed out a bit and he gets his slap on the wrist.but the kid who just not happy. Him , well he's the kid we are really going to punish. Yeah great argument.
I'm cool with letting players go . USC gets one every couple years and it's never become a flood of players wanting to go. They have let kids transfer to Notre Dame.

 

[Across The Field]

When the day comes that coaches have to sit out a year if they choose to change schools, I'll see the side of the coaches in these sort of circumstances.

He's not a 12 year old little boy, he's legally an adult. If he doesn't think Kansas State is the best spot for him, while some other school is, he should be able to leave. That's his decision, just like it's the coaches' decision when they decide they want to leave a program to go to another. Snyder should be classy, wish him the best, and off he goes. This is really unbecoming of a coach like Snyder who has repeatedly thrived on transfers.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Corey Sutton's Transfer Blocked by Kansas State

I'm sure this will help recruiting immensely, "come to KSU where you can never leave"

 

[BigRedMoe]

Snyder isn't blocking the transfer. It's the AD and the Dean of Students.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

Snyder isn't blocking the transfer. It's the AD and the Dean of Students.

Why would they be involved? Snyder already admitted he was blocking the kid.

 

[BigRedMoe]

Why would they be involved? Snyder already admitted he was blocking the kid.

He doesn't make the decision. It's the AD and Dean of Students. Snyder has input and is the face of the program... but ultimately it is not him.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

He doesn't make the decision. It's the AD and Dean of Students. Snyder has input and is the face of the program... but ultimately it is not him.

UW is a bit different in that regard. If coach Petersen says 'jump', the AD says how high.

 

[BigRedMoe]

UW is a bit different in that regard. If coach Petersen says 'jump', the AD says how high.

Snyder and Currie hated each other. One would have said 'jump' and then gotten punched in the face.

 

[The Q]

Maybe KSU is different, but when I transferred my release came from withing Athletics.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

 

[AlaskaGuy]

KSU read our post on here.

 

[4down20]

So a kid in legal trouble for having a gun in his car and drugs is in legal trouble , he's gonna play after it's ironed out a bit and he gets his slap on the wrist.but the kid who just not happy. Him , well he's the kid we are really going to punish. Yeah great argument.
I'm cool with letting players go . USC gets one every couple years and it's never become a flood of players wanting to go. They have let kids transfer to Notre Dame.

If you actually cared about the kids you would realize throwing their entire futures away because of a common mistake for people that age was stupid and didn't serve them, the team or the school in any manner.

I hate people who operate for PC reasons, and that's the only real reason such things would be done - to appease ignorant people like you.

 

[socaljim242]

If you actually cared about the kids you would realize throwing their entire futures away because of a common mistake for people that age was stupid and didn't serve them, the team or the school in any manner.

I hate people who operate for PC reasons, and that's the only real reason such things would be done - to appease ignorant people like you.

Actually I hate when it's about winning at all costs. If a player gets in trouble withe the law then they should lose meaningful games and time. Saying he didn't do it on school grounds or "let the law take care of it" is just a way of saying we want to win and don't care about discipline.The reality is the player whos getting caught with drugs and guns at 3 am couldnt care less about being in school and is so used to practice that it's a joke when coaches say yeah we made him run extra. And you I know don't care about the actual person the school is turning out you just want the team to win. I practice what I preach. I've told my son he was going to go to his next game or match and sit on the bench and root for his teammates but he's not going to play because of what ever he did. It's not PC it's about being a good parent or teacher. Letting them slide because they can catch or block is the wrong thing to do.

 

[4down20]

Actually I hate when it's about winning at all costs. If a player gets in trouble withe the law then they should lose meaningful games and time. Saying he didn't do it on school grounds or "let the law take care of it" is just a way of saying we want to win and don't care about discipline.The reality is the player whos getting caught with drugs and guns at 3 am couldnt care less about being in school and is so used to practice that it's a joke when coaches say yeah we made him run extra. And you I know don't care about the actual person the school is turning out you just want the team to win. I practice what I preach. I've told my son he was going to go to his next game or match and sit on the bench and root for his teammates but he's not going to play because of what ever he did. It's not PC it's about being a good parent or teacher. Letting them slide because they can catch or block is the wrong thing to do.

The purpose of discipline is to encourage change, not appease some stupid asshole on an internet forum.