Academic Scholarship vs Athletic Scholarship...

[TUSK.sixpack]

If the recipient of the former doesn't meet expectations, his scholarship is revoked.<div>
</div><div>Why is it "shady" to "cut" the underachieving recipient of the latter?</div>

 

[8dog]

but I don't think there are many college coaches that say "mom, we'll take care of your kid for 1 year, but if he doesn't perform, we're shipping him back to you."

Lot of promises get made on the recruiting trail.

 

[dawgstudent]

at all. Like your example with the academic scholarship - if your grades aren't good - you don't get to keep the scholarship. And the worst thing about that - you don't get it back. I lost my scholarship after my first two semesters and couldn't get it back once my GPA got back above the gpa needed by the end of my sophomore year.

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

Presidential Scholly revoked... off to the Marines for Tusk...<div>
</div><div>These athletes get a lot more than what people realize...</div><div>
</div><div>I think if they don't perform, it's ok to "cut" them.... However, if you are legitimately "cutting" them, you should give them a full release so they can sign with another organization...</div>

 

[Johnson85]

on which younger students end up coming to your school. You hit a certain GPA, you get to keep your scholarship. Doesn't matter if two people in younger classes than you are smarter or have higher GPA's, you still get to keep it.

And as long as high school students are told, "you have a scholarship as long as you're good enough that we wouldn't rather give the scholarship to a freshman we think might be better," it's not really shady. That said, it would still be a lot better if the one year sitting out requirement was waived for players that were cut or lost their scholarship.

 

[ckDOG]

If you meet minimum GPA requirement, you keep your scholarship. If not, you lose it. Very simple and fair.

Some parts of an athletic scholarship can be objective - like not missing practices, team meetings, workouts, etc. But, if a guy does what he's supposed to do but just flat out sucks and can't contribute, the folks that should be penalized are the evaluators of the talent - not the kid himself. There is gray area obviously, but I don't think any kid should be cut just because they suck. You can make it VERY clear that they aren't ever going to see the field - that might urge them to leave on their own accord, but you can't make that decision for them if they are doing everything you are asking of them.

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

should the individuals that select those for academic scholly be held to the same standard as coaches and recruiters...?<div>
</div><div>if an individual isn't mature enough to handle college at the time and has poor grades, should the ownessbe on the school and not the student?
<div>
</div></div>

 

[VirgilCain]

Academic - keep your GPA above a certain level and you keep your scholly

Athletic - do your athletic duties (practice hard, make grades, don't cause trouble) and you keep your scholly

I think it sucks that you can give a guy an athletic scholarship, and he does everything asked of him yet you pull his scholly. If he sucked and should never have had a scholly in the first place, then don't give him one. I understand they were probably just trying to fill out there scholarship roster. But I would be "filing lawsuit" mad if I got an athletic scholly, then worked my *** off for the team and then got cut because someone better came along.

Granted, this is all out the window if the athletic scholarship is given on the provision that it can be taken away if you under-perform (no matter how hard you worked). But everyone knows that NO coach will ever say that to a recruit.

 

[FISHDAWG]

.

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

what if the program considers "duties" to "contribute early and be on the 2 deep depth chart or special teams contributor" in addition to the other stuff you mentioned...?<div>
</div><div>I just don't think if you nut up in highschool, fall into an athletic scholly, you should be allowed to underachieve in college and get a free ride...
<div>
</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">"Athletic - do your athletic duties (practice hard, make grades, don't cause trouble) and you keep your scholly"</span></div></div>

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

just kiddin'.... thanks, bro.

 

[EAVdog]

Losing your academic scholarship is based on your individual performance solely. It's not like they are going to take your scholarship away because they can give it to someone they think will be smarter in the future. Plus timing is also important. If you don't make the grades requirements you are aware immediately when you receive your grades. I feel certain most Universities would not let you move into your dorm room and then 2 weeks before class tell you that you don't have a scholarship anymore.
This will become a big issue in the next year or so. The NCAA has to maintain the image of being an amatuer association to retain it's tax exempt status. I expect changes in the near future. Perhaps they'll even waive the 1 year transfer rule if you get 'cut'. I'd like to see that happen.
And I will say that at least Saban finds a way for them to stay at the University and stay on scholarship. That's far more admirable than just showing them the door.

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

I believe if you put a player on waivers you should do your best to help him continue his career elsewhere...<div>
</div><div>that includes giving him adequate notice and a release.</div>

 

[VirgilCain]

If the coach specifies when he makes the scholarship offer that "if you end up not being good enough, no matter how hard you try, then we will cut you", then all is fair.
What I'm saying is that no coach ever tells a recruit anything remotely resembling that. In fact, it usually seems to be the exact opposite.

I just don't think if you nut up in highschool, fall into an athletic scholly, you should be allowed to underachieve in college and get a free ride...

I completely agree, but to me that would be a breach of the athletic scholarship expectations. (Assuming you mean "underachieve" as just slackass around)

My point is offering a mediocre player (who you would not normally give a scholly to) for the sole purpose of filling out a signing class or whatever.... And the mediocre player works his *** off, but as it was expected, he is just not innately good enough for college football... Then yanking his scholly a year or two down the line for some younger kid is pretty ****** IMO.

 

[ckDOG]

If I'm okay with having an academic scholarship stripped away because they couldn't keep up with the measurables, then why can't I be okay with an atheltic scholarship being stripped away for the same reason? In theory, I'm with you. However, I'm more concerned with the judgment call related to the sports side of things. It's easier to be fair on deciding who retains scholarships and who doesn't on the academics side because of the objectivity involved with the GPA scale. Athletes aren't afforded that measuring stick - which is where I start to have issues.

Maybe somebody better versed on how the scholarship contracts are drawn up can chime in to add some input? But the way I see it, a University should have to honor their committment to the student-athlete on any athletic scholarship so long as the student-athlete is going to practice, meetings, workouts, etc. I'd probably be okay with yanking a scholarship if adequate effort wasn't present (i.e. athlete shows up, but doesn't push themself) - that's about the only gray area I'd be comfortable with. An athletic scholarship should be a bilateral agreement between the student and institution where the student says something to the effect of "I accept scholarship and I promise to attend every practice, workout, meeting, and game" and the institution says "I promise to fund your education if you attend every practice, workout, meeting, and game". I think if the student-athlete holds their end of the bargain, they University should as well.

Again, if the athlete is merely showing up, going through the motions, and not pushing themselves to their limits, they should be fair game for losing their scholarship. Defintely not objective, but a much better reason than cutting a kid loose because he didn't turn out to be the superstar you had envisioned. Plus, there's always the chance that an athlete isn't producing on the field due to the COACHING STAFF failing at their own jobs (i.e. providing inadequate training, playing the kid out of position, etc.) I think that's an often overlooked factor in this argument also. What happens if you recruit a LB, offer a scholarship, decide you have plenty of depth, convert him to a DE, and they just suck at transitioning to that position? Cut him because you 17ed up?

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

nm

 

[BiscuitEater]

I believe if you put a player on waivers you should do your best to help him continue his career elsewhere...<div>
</div><div>that includes giving him adequate notice and a release.</div>

That's the main reason some of the Bama players were complaining last year. Saban's 'weapon of choice' is the Medical hardship which effectively ends football career as an option ... period. Bama, on the other hand, doesn't take an APR hit.

They have had like 12 of these in the last 3 years.

 

[TUSK.sixpack]

could they not transfer should they want to continue their football career?<div>
</div><div>again, I do think they should be released if they can't contribute...</div>

 

[boomboommsu]

..i held onto my scholarship by adding a BS class every semester to pad my grades. Personal Money Management. Landscape Architechture Appreciation. Intro to BIS and Intro to Mechanical Engineering (when i wasn't a ME or BIS), etc.

that's like a crappy lineman going over to special teams and knocking the crap out of the kicker every now and then, to say "see, still good enough for a scholly!"

i'd propose letting the team cut a player, and cut him from their scholly limits, but making them honor the 4yr monetary amount of the scholly for those that want to stay and work towards a degree. if they'd rather play somewhere else or drop out (as most would), fine, but at least give them the chance at a degree.