Started By
Message
re: Saban blocking transfer of Smith. Mom not happy
Posted on 8/4/16 at 9:27 am to Crowknowsbest
Posted on 8/4/16 at 9:27 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
It wasn't because they were busy, at least directly. Chris Black isn't good, so it was pretty low on the totem pole. If Maurice Smith had requested his then, they would have responded.
It has everything to do with Maurice Smith being a bigger contributor than Chris Black. That's fine, but it's OK to call it what it is.
You may be right...but I wouldn't say Chris Black isn't good as it looks like he'll be starting for Mizzou...
But say, since Black could've went anywhere, he chose LSU, UGA, or Auburn. I think Saban would've blown a gasket then. That's why I tend to give some credence to the story; since failure to respond to a transfer request results in a full release, he could've transferred anywhere...and I don't think Saban would want to set that precedent...
Posted on 8/4/16 at 10:35 am to coachcrisp
quote:
I couldn't help but notice that your "dissertation" didn't really get into the precedence that Saban would be setting by allowing a player to follow his coach (in this case 2 coaches) to another school when that coach left. Do you not see that doing so could be problematic for college football in general? Opening the door to exceptions would only muddy the water even more.
I always find it interesting when people choose to criticize a post for it's length... read it or don't. I really don't give two shits.
As to the "precedent" piece of your argument, graduate transfers and undergrads are fundamentally different, which I mentioned. Additionally, how many students on any roster are able to *graduate* in 3 years in order to take advantage of this precedent? Of those, what percentage of them would even want to. If you're a "great player", you likely left for the NFL after 3 years. If you're a "bad player" you'll likely get processed or transfer down a level, so it really only leaves the fringe player/spot starter guys. It's a subset of a subset of a subset... it's just not as big of a snowball effect as people would like to make it out to be.
You *might* see increased graduate transfers from much smaller schools into bigger programs from guys who are likely UDFAs looking to try and get drafted, but is that really what we're worried about?
One distinction here for graduates vs undergraduate stems from the fact that a college football player is a "student athlete" playing for his scholarship (loosely: education is his "compensation" for his time - one might think of it as a paycheck). This scholarship of course isn't guaranteed at all, so if the university decides that the player is no longer of use, they need not continue providing the scholarship. If one has completed their course of study, from a purely contractual basis, the *player* may no longer net the same value in a continuation of that scholarship for a graduate course of study (example: great undergrad program in a course of study but grad program doesn't offer a clear path to the career that a student would like to pursue).
Again, I understand the logic behind why Saban, Smart and others would look to impose restrictions under the current ruleset. I just don't believe they should *have* that control, given that their motivations and the student's best interests will rarely if ever run parallel.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 11:03 am to fibonaccisquared
Don't be so sensitive about your "windiness" there, councillor. I suspect that the problem would lie with the kid who had not used his red shirt year and was looking for graduate help while also playing some more football.
PS- If you didn't pontificate to the extreme, you'd have more readers (and you DO care about readers, or you wouldn't be posting). It appears that you probably, in your profession, charge by the hour.
PS- If you didn't pontificate to the extreme, you'd have more readers (and you DO care about readers, or you wouldn't be posting). It appears that you probably, in your profession, charge by the hour.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 11:47 am to coachcrisp
Plenty of people ITT have grasped that fact just fine. It's the mouth breathers like you who refuse to accept it that Jones and Smith's situations are different for a multitude of reasons, which have been listed numerous times.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:29 pm to cas4t
Read what Kirby had to say about it, arse clown. FACT: you don't let a player follow a coach out of the door. PERIOD!
Capiche motherfricker?
Capiche motherfricker?
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:11 pm to coachcrisp
where did I say any different? I've offered up multiple perspectives ITT but have made it plain as damn day that I wouldn't want an LSU player following a DB coach or Ed O.
I continually have to remind you of this. It's remarkable at this point.
I continually have to remind you of this. It's remarkable at this point.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:49 pm to coachcrisp
quote:
I suspect that the problem would lie with the kid who had not used his red shirt year and was looking for graduate help while also playing some more football.
Not sure I follow this being a problem. If they don't use their redshirt year, they *still* have to graduate in 3 years. This is ultimately beneficial for a university as it's one more to use toward their "% of athletes who graduate stat" which is of course used to continue the farce of the student athlete.
quote:
If you didn't pontificate to the extreme, you'd have more readers (and you DO care about readers, or you wouldn't be posting). It appears that you probably, in your profession, charge by the hour.
I care about discussing college football with others who are passionate about it. It was less of a criticism of yours as your comment seemed more of a jab than an outright disregard for the post because of its length. Just something that comes up rather frequently on the board... everyone is here to read at least to some degree, and yet a post that requires they actually think about what they're reading seems to rankle the masses. And no, I do not charge by the hour, did give it some thought for a while though but felt like a path down the wrong road. Now I'm kind of the opposite... I'm the one brought in to take really complex shite and make sense of it for those who don't "get it" - often times without much time to work with.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:53 pm to fibonaccisquared
Alabama athletics release statement.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:02 pm to coachcrisp
quote:
not wanting to realize that coaches don't allow player transfers to schools where their previous coaches just went...
Jesus dude,it's not that cut and dry and you know.If he had not graduated from Bama you might have a point BUT this kid did EVRYTHING required of him when he signed with Bama.He"s not a typical transfer so quit pretending that he is.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:06 pm to jatebe
So now this was intentional and *not* due to some 7 day required response? I'm not sure this helps their case, as at this point it's a public image problem and a recruiting problem. UGA is likely fine at DB regardless, so while I'd love to add a solid contributor, this only goes down as a bad look for Bama.
Also, if we roughly translate that back from legal speak to real world:
Black was not going to be starting for us, so allowing the transfer to a program which we believe should not be challenging for the East this year it allowed us zero negative impact. That's the "unique circumstance"...
Also, if we roughly translate that back from legal speak to real world:
Black was not going to be starting for us, so allowing the transfer to a program which we believe should not be challenging for the East this year it allowed us zero negative impact. That's the "unique circumstance"...
Posted on 8/30/16 at 11:42 pm to Rollingtider
Wth did you bump this shite?
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News