Have you seen this about B1G 4-yr scholarship offers?

[HokieGhost]

Wow!!

Is the Big Ten really going to a 4-year scholarship model? What's in the fine print? How do the coaches handle attrition, or will this prohibit them from not renewing scholarships from players who are not meeting expectations?

The_BBC The_BBC
But it's good to see that a line is being drawn, and encouraging to think it might be drawn several places across the national landscape.
1 hour ago
Retweeted by TheMarchTo85

The_BBC The_BBC
Not that there aren't flaws in other conferences, and not that oversigning isn't just one of many MANY issues in college sports...
1 hour ago
Retweeted by TheMarchTo85

The_BBC The_BBC
Because that's what "university" and "college" and "education" are about.
1 hour ago
Retweeted by TheMarchTo85

The_BBC The_BBC
Because, as difficult as it might be for any "win or nothing" fans of any team to admit, the ultimate goal should be student development.
1 hour ago
Retweeted by TheMarchTo85

The_BBC The_BBC
the real question will be if on field success under those criterion is really the purpose of the student athlete model and college sports.
1 hour ago
Retweeted by TheMarchTo85

The_BBC The_BBC
In three years, if/when the SEC continues to have on field success with their one year scholarships allowing for roster cleansing (cont.)
1 hour ago
Retweeted by TheMarchTo85 Oversigning.com

TheMarchTo85 Oversigning.com
Here it is in black and white, a B1G football scholarship for 4 years. Word is all B1G scholarships will be 4yr grants

B1G 4-yr financial aid (scholarship)

 

[HokieGhost]

I'm gathering from one individual on Twitter that he believes this is going to prevent oversigning and the policy of not renewing scholies for players not meeting expectations. I'm asking to see the language in the agreement.

He also claims the Big Ten has never participated in oversigning. Riiiigggghhhhttt.

 

[hunzworth]

Just to add a little back story:

COLLEGE ATHLETES' RIGHTS: Some athletes lose their single-year scholarships to better players | al.com

Emmert: Stipend, four-year scholarships not going anywhere - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com

NCAA panel approves major scholarship rules changes - ESPN

 

[HokieGhost]

Just to add a little back story:

COLLEGE ATHLETES' RIGHTS: Some athletes lose their single-year scholarships to better players | al.com

Emmert: Stipend, four-year scholarships not going anywhere - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com

NCAA panel approves major scholarship rules changes - ESPN

Thanks! In the last article you posted, I found the following quote:

Under the current model, those scholarships are renewed annually and can be revoked for any reason. If adopted, schools could guarantee scholarships for the player's entire career and would be unable to revoke it based solely on athletic performance. Scholarships could still be pulled for reasons such as poor grades, academic misconduct or other forms of improper behavior.

I'm still not seeing a lot of differences between the old 1-yr and new 4-yr scholarship model in terms of how a program can choose to revoke a scholarship.

If we looked closely at the players who have left the Tech program over the past several years, we'll find dismissal due to misconduct of some sort as the primary reason, followed by academic disqualification, and then by the desire get immediate playing time at an FCS-level school.

Players at Tech who find themselves no longer able to physically play the game due to injuries are still given the option to receive a scholarship for academic purposes and finish their degree at Tech. They just no longer count against the limit of 85 scholarships and no longer appear on the team's roster.

 

[Sleepy T]

Thanks! In the last article you posted, I found the following quote:

Under the current model, those scholarships are renewed annually and can be revoked for any reason. If adopted, schools could guarantee scholarships for the player's entire career and would be unable to revoke it based solely on athletic performance. Scholarships could still be pulled for reasons such as poor grades, academic misconduct or other forms of improper behavior.

I'm still not seeing a lot of differences between the old 1-yr and new 4-yr scholarship model in terms of how a program can choose to revoke a scholarship.

If we looked closely at the players who have left the Tech program over the past several years, we'll find dismissal due to misconduct of some sort as the primary reason, followed by academic disqualification, and then by the desire get immediate playing time at an FCS-level school.

Players at Tech who find themselves no longer able to physically play the game due to injuries are still given the option to receive a scholarship for academic purposes and finish their degree at Tech. They just no longer count against the limit of 85 scholarships and no longer appear on the team's roster.

^^That is the difference. Right now universities can revoke a scholarship for any reason it wants to, after any academic year (yep, even if they just simply aren't cutting it on the field). The new policy would only allow them to not honor a 4 year schollie if they get in trouble, aren't passing classes, etc. It is commonplace for some schools, (in some conferences) to oversign, and then cleanse the roster (as it is termed above) evry year or two to make room for the fresh crop of hyped and talented youngsters. The kids who usually get dropped are the upperclassment who are considered dead weight on the team (kids who have just not broken into the depth chart or have battled injuries). I have heard plenty of the SEC schools have done this. The only ACC team I have really heard that has used these tactics have been Davis' UNCheat (surprise, surprise). To say that Big10 teams have not done it (cough...OSU..cough) would be naive. There are probably schools fom every major conference that has done this.
This happens to really good kids all the time, even if they have been great students, citizens, and models for the university. I have always thought this was major bullshit. These coaches and university expect kids to play by the rules in college, stay out of trouble, and for all intents and purposes honor their schollie/agreement, yet these schools can cut them loose at any time, for no reason. Hats off to the B1G for possibly consideration of implementing this policy.

 

[sparko]

merit

while the policy has some merit as it protects kids, it's a double-edge sword .. what's to say that some of these kids earn their scholly and then decide to just sleaze it at practice (just getting by) because they'd rather be partying with their buddies?? there has to be some protection for the school if the student doesn't perform to some level .. it's an investment for them..but they shouldn't be able to just boot them to make room .. very touchy area i think and some kind of a meet-in-the-middle would be good

 

[HokieGhost]

^^That is the difference. Right now universities can revoke a scholarship for any reason it wants to, after any academic year (yep, even if they just simply aren't cutting it on the field). The new policy would only allow them to not honor a 4 year schollie if they get in trouble, aren't passing classes, etc. It is commonplace for some schools, (in some conferences) to oversign, and then cleanse the roster (as it is termed above) evry year or two to make room for the fresh crop of hyped and talented youngsters. The kids who usually get dropped are the upperclassment who are considered dead weight on the team (kids who have just not broken into the depth chart or have battled injuries). I have heard plenty of the SEC schools have done this. The only ACC team I have really heard that has used these tactics have been Davis' UNCheat (surprise, surprise). To say that Big10 teams have not done it (cough...OSU..cough) would be naive. There are probably schools fom every major conference that has done this.
This happens to really good kids all the time, even if they have been great students, citizens, and models for the university. I have always thought this was major bullshit. These coaches and university expect kids to play by the rules in college, stay out of trouble, and for all intents and purposes honor their schollie/agreement, yet these schools can cut them loose at any time, for no reason. Hats off to the B1G for possibly consideration of implementing this policy.

I don't think we should allow ourselves to assume Tech has been holier-than-thou in the way we've dealt with scholarships for kids who haven't been contributing. A number of players leave the program every year after earning their degree. Officially we're told they're looking for playing time at an FCS-level school, but in reality they've been told quietly their scholarships are not being renewed. Some of those kids actually end up transferring to another school to play ball, but some just call an end to their football career.

This happens in virtually every program in the country. It won't end with the 4-yr program either....schools will just get better at documenting why a player is no longer receiving their scholarship.

 

[Sleepy T]

I don't think we should allow ourselves to assume Tech has been holier-than-thou in the way we've dealt with scholarships for kids who haven't been contributing. A number of players leave the program every year after earning their degree. Officially we're told they're looking for playing time at an FCS-level school, but in reality they've been told quietly their scholarships are not being renewed. Some of those kids actually end up transferring to another school to play ball, but some just call an end to their football career.

This happens in virtually every program in the country. It won't end with the 4-yr program either....schools will just get better at documenting why a player is no longer receiving their scholarship.

OK, it is different if they have earned their undergrad degree and are not contributing. I am speaking of kids who have not even completed their degree and are forced out for whatever reason. I am sure this has happened correct or is that against the rules?? Is this not what we are talking about here or am I confused??

 

[Fetti]

OK, it is different if they have earned their undergrad degree and are not contributing. I am speaking of kids who have not even completed their degree and are forced out for whatever reason. I am sure this has happened correct or is that against the rules?? Is this not what we are talking about here or am I confused??

TAE is right, Beamer is 100% against 4-year scholarships and has said so publicly. We have absolutely not renewed scholarships for players that are no longer contributing and it happens virtually every year.

This year it was Hamlette, Tucker, Ju-Ju, and Prince.

 

[sparko]

clarification

i dont think a program should have to cover a scholly after 4 yrs .. if you aren't pulling the weight and decide to take longer than 4 yrs to get your degree -- that shouldn't be on the fb program

 

[HokieGhost]

i dont think a program should have to cover a scholly after 4 yrs .. if you aren't pulling the weight and decide to take longer than 4 yrs to get your degree -- that shouldn't be on the fb program

According to NCAA guidelines, every scholarship player has five years to play four as long as they keep their nose clean and meet the expectations of the program. As it stands today, most players redshirt their first year to get bigger and stronger to be able to handle the physical demands of college football. Some players also need that year to get used to college academics.

How does this new four-year scholarship concept affect that guideline?

 

[sparko]

good question .. it's a lose-lose .. and in the end, either the student or the team is going to get screwed in these kinds of situations .. definitely not cut and dry

 

[Sleepy T]

TAE is right, Beamer is 100% against 4-year scholarships and has said so publicly. We have absolutely not renewed scholarships for players that are no longer contributing and it happens virtually every year.

This year it was Hamlette, Tucker, Ju-Ju, and Prince.

Well I don't agree with that. I know most college football programs do it, but I just think it is wrong. If these guys want to leave in order to get playing time somewhere else, then great. If they have already gotten their degree, then I get it, don't renew their scholly so they can eat dorm food, go to frat parties, and get laid. But IMO VT (and other schools) aren't honoring the commitment and promise THEY made with these kids and their parents IF they cut them loose before they earn their degree. If they are trying hard in the classroom to obtain this, and are be shoved out the door against their will...quietly, then (I may be in the minority here) ethically that isnt right.

 

[sparko]

I agree with you bro .. You can't make a good argument to support that practice and it's wrong .. but at the same time -- like I said -- it's a double-edged sword. If you guaranteed them a 4-yr scholarship for "showing up" to practice, I guarantee most teams would have even more dead weight. Linked below is a good little writeup from TKP about 4 of these guys. Two are transferring and two graduate in May (still on scholarship I'm sure), so it's not like VT is hanging them out to dry totally. These players could have went to "Eastern Kentucky" and have been starters (you know what I mean) and on scholly for 4 years. They know what is being expected of them at a program up front (or they should) so, in a way, it's on them too. Look at it this way. They got 3 yrs of college for free .. I would've taken that!!!

Some programs just flat out cut their ass with any excuse they can. If you're at the #3 spot in Bama as a junior/senior and suffer from a season-ending injury, haa...you can probably kiss your ass goodbye. It looks like the RB in Atlanta that got stiffed by Saban may be committing to Ole Miss instead .. Good for him -- fuck Saban.

TKP Write-Up

 

[GuruMan88]

Just worth throwing in that I know academic scholarships are not blanket 4 years scholarships no matter how you do in class, they are 1 year renewable scholarships. My scholarship for grad school will be renewed as long as I have a 3.0 GPA at the end of each school year, if I happen to have a 2.5 despite giving it everything I have my scholarship will not be renewed, I wouldn't cry that the school is not honoring its commitment.

I realize it might seem wrong, but is it really so bad to not renew a scholarship if they are not able to perform to a level the school requires?

 

[Sleepy T]

Just worth throwing in that I know academic scholarships are not blanket 4 years scholarships no matter how you do in class, they are 1 year renewable scholarships. My scholarship for grad school will be renewed as long as I have a 3.0 GPA at the end of each school year, if I happen to have a 2.5 despite giving it everything I have my scholarship will not be renewed, I wouldn't cry that the school is not honoring its commitment.

I realize it might seem wrong, but is it really so bad to not renew a scholarship if they are not able to perform to a level the school requires?

I think you are misunderstanding what we are saying Guru. Say a student/ athlete fulfills all of its obligations in the classroom but just isn't cutting it on the field, not so much because of lack of effort, maybe more because of injuries or just frankly not being good enough to break into the 2 or even 3 deep. Do you think that it is OK for a university not to renew a scholarship (prior to the student receiving an undergrad. degree) for these reasons Guru??

 

[GuruMan88]

I think you are misunderstanding what we are saying Guru. Say a student/ athlete fulfills all of its obligations in the classroom but just isn't cutting it on the field, not so much because of lack of effort, maybe more because of injuries or just frankly not being good enough to break into the 2 or even 3 deep. Do you think that it is OK for a university not to renew a scholarship (prior to the student receiving an undergrad. degree) for these reasons Guru??

I have mixed feelings on the subject, if I am unable to perform academically despite my best effort I will lose my scholarship and will either have to drop out or take on loans, even if my poor performance was because I got sick and missed two weeks of class.

If the scholarship offer in some way sets the rules/guidlines as to what exactly is necessary for the scholarship to be renewed, and the student does not meet those rules/guidelines I have no problem if it is not renewed

The problem is I am not sure how to specify what is expected performance-wise for an athlete to keep their scholarship. For the student athletes I assume it generally is not spelled out that clearly (I assume as I have never been offered an athletic scholarship). If it doesn't say what is needed I have a problem removing a scholarship for no reason (just to make room for a 5* recruit)