Henley in portal

Donate To GopherHole

bga1 said:
You spend too much time in the mirror.
Click to expand...
Nope. Just a common sense observation. People who go out of their way to tell you how honorable they are invariably are hiding something highly dishonorable.

In the midst of your braying about "commitment," you neglected to mention that scholarships are basically one year deals. A coach can run a player off anytime he wants for any reason. We don't know what Henley was or wasn't promised.

As much as Konate and Diedhou were the biggest waste of scholarships in gopher basketball history, Pitino gets credit for never booting either one of them. That's commitment (without braying about it).
 


Gophers_4life said:
Not at all a point worth discussing.

The point worth discussing is if the rules should be changed to put a bit more limits on that freedom, in the future.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that they CAN be changed (i.e. a sit-out rule) without the NCAA getting sued again and losing.
 



just opened GH back up after some time away and yeesh... this looks like a destined for 14th again. would not blame any of the guys for bolting now. either Ben needs to capture lightning in a bottle or the U needs to move on. Suspect it's happening one way or the other by next year.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Not at all a point worth discussing.

The point worth discussing is if the rules should be changed to put a bit more limits on that freedom, in the future.
Click to expand...
It is worth discussing when people are complaining about players exercising their rights under the new system.

I do agree that there should be some revisions to prevent the system from completely breaking down. However, the NCAA is essentially powerless and the money genie is out of the bottle.
 

Henley wasn’t good. Don’t know why so many of you are complaining. He was a turnover machine and his jumper was broke for most of the season.

Decent defensive potential but nothing to cry about.
 




jamiche said:
Nope. Just a common sense observation. People who go out of their way to tell you how honorable they are invariably are hiding something highly dishonorable.

In the midst of your braying about "commitment," you neglected to mention that scholarships are basically one year deals. A coach can run a player off anytime he wants for any reason. We don't know what Henley was or wasn't promised.

As much as Konate and Diedhou were the biggest waste of scholarships in gopher basketball history, Pitino gets credit for never booting either one of them. That's commitment (without braying about it).
Click to expand...
No Pitino really doesn’t get credit for that. TT got as much or more playing time as Diedhou yet GD never left. That isn’t an indictment of the current staff. We have no idea what conversations were had with either player behind the scenes.
 

UnFadeable21 said:
Henley wasn’t good. Don’t know why so many of you are complaining. He was a turnover machine and his jumper was broke for most of the season.

Decent defensive potential but nothing to cry about.
Click to expand...
He turned it over at a slightly higher rate per 40 minutes than Battle and he shot the three better than Battle 37.8% to 31%. He was a freshman for heaven's sake. This was a sizeable loss for a program that is looking to build from the ground up.
 
Last edited:

CentralGopher said:
No Pitino really doesn’t get credit for that. TT got as much or more playing time as Diedhou yet GD never left. That isn’t an indictment of the current staff. We have no idea what conversations were had with either player behind the scenes.
Click to expand...
I wasn't talking about Thompson. The reference was Konate and Diedhou, both of whom contributed next to nothing in their four years here.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Well, I mean, they do have to pay the buyout.

Would you be cool with scholarships having buyouts?
Click to expand...
I would be cool with it following a reasonable market based system. I think it is fair that players need to continue to earn their scholarships and it is also fair that they should be able to improve their lot in life if a better opportunity avails itself.
 



UnFadeable21 said:
Henley wasn’t good. Don’t know why so many of you are complaining. He was a turnover machine and his jumper was broke for most of the season.

Decent defensive potential but nothing to cry about.
Click to expand...
Agree that he wasn't very good. However, he was one of the few athletic guys on a decidedly unathletic team. As a fan, it's disappointing to see that (relative) potential walk out the door.
 

jamiche said:
I wasn't talking about Thompson. The reference was Konate and Diedhou, both of whom contributed next to nothing in their four years here.
Click to expand...
Claiming Pitino gets credit for GD for not running him off is dumb when GD played less than TT and didn’t take the hint. At least TT took a hint and is moving on.
 

benlaur said:
I would be cool with it following a reasonable market based system. I think it is fair that players need to continue to earn their scholarships and it is also fair that they should be able to improve their lot in life if a better opportunity avails itself.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%.
 

UnFadeable21 said:
Henley wasn’t good. Don’t know why so many of you are complaining. He was a turnover machine and his jumper was broke for most of the season.

Decent defensive potential but nothing to cry about.
Click to expand...
Henley wasn't very good but very few true freshman are very good. You need to start somewhere. Henley had moments where he looked good to me and he is the type of player where, if good, could be special. He is a legitimate 6'7" wing who is more advanced defensively than offensively.

Does he ever pan out? Hard to say. If I had to bet, he'll be a good college basketball player.

As to why people are complaining despite Henley's current production - - it's because we have to start somewhere. For many people, we struggled through the play of Carrington, JOJ, and Henley this year with the hope that they would grow into something better.
 

CentralGopher said:
Claiming Pitino gets credit for GD for not running him off is dumb when GD played less than TT and didn’t take the hint. At least TT took a hint and is moving on.
Click to expand...
Well it might be a little different kettle of fish when you haul a kid in from half way around the world...to just tell him to get lost.
 

CentralGopher said:
Claiming Pitino gets credit for GD for not running him off is dumb when GD played less than TT and didn’t take the hint. At least TT took a hint and is moving on.
Click to expand...
Pre-portal, I won't blame a coach for not running players off.
 


disco said:
Not if the law is deemed unconstitutional for restraint of trade reasons.
Click to expand...
There is a slow march towards all non-competes essentially being unreasonable restraints on trade.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if the NCAA passes a law.

Unfortunately for college sports fans, I think it's probably more likely that the NCAA gets rid of any restraints on transfers ( ie only being allowed to go into the portal once) than it is they are able to get rid of the portal.
 

Back to the NIL thing for a moment- Writer Gopher has knowledge of the program and says that money goes into a collective and then players get opportunities. What he doesn't say is how the money is divided up by the players.

From a coach's standpoint moving it through a collective seems nice and using an egalitarian method to divide the spoils is very manageable as it is a team game.

From an NIL contributor standpoint- let's say a guy wants to contribute a million to NIL for Gopher basketball. That guy is going to want to know that the million made a significant impact that helped attract 4 or 5* players...like Evans. Does the U allow that? If not, we are going to lose those battles every time and it is going to turn off the bigger donors. Then you end up with a bunch of $100-$500 donations that might help the players but really don't get you in the game- as it is played today.
 

disco said:
Not if the law is deemed unconstitutional for restraint of trade reasons.
Click to expand...
That would require state AGs and/or DOJ to sue?

I think that would all be worked out with all parties, at that point.

They wouldn't spend a bunch of effort to get a new nationwide law in place that makes as many people as possible happy, just for someone to bring a suit.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
There is a slow march towards all non-competes essentially being unreasonable restraints on trade.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if the NCAA passes a law.

Unfortunately for college sports fans, I think it's probably more likely that the NCAA gets rid of any restraints on transfers ( ie only being allowed to go into the portal once) than it is they are able to get rid of the portal.
Click to expand...
So are pro contracts all void, then too?

Players in all leagues nationwide get to do whatever they want on any whim? Mid season moves!
 

UnFadeable21 said:
Henley wasn’t good. Don’t know why so many of you are complaining. He was a turnover machine and his jumper was broke for most of the season.

Decent defensive potential but nothing to cry about.
Click to expand...
He was good at penetrating and breaking down defenses, decent shooter and was getting better, he did attack the basket out of control that resulted in turnovers way to many times. Had a lot of upside and that is what you are loosing. Carrington was more physical and a much better shooting motion so not as big of a loss as it might have been.
 

Gophers_4life said:
So are pro contracts all void, then too?

Players in all leagues nationwide get to do whatever they want on any whim? Mid season moves!
Click to expand...
No, those are for a set number of years and both entities are legally obligated to perform their contractual responsibilities. The dissolution of non-compete contracts doesn't have anything to do with multi-year contracts negotiated at arms length.

Scholarship offers are not multi-year contracts.

As I said in previous posts, I could certainly envision a scenario where the scholarship system becomes more like a free market - - schools can offer multi-year terms, single-season terms, with different legal obligations (including $$). However, if the NCAA does not want to open it up to the free market, we are stuck with this scholarship system.
 

jamiche said:
...scholarships are basically one year deals. A coach can run a player off anytime he wants for any reason.
Click to expand...
These 2 statements are factually incorrect at P5 schools. Scholarships for incoming freshmen who sign a NLI are guaranteed for 4 years and cannot be cancelled for any athletic reason.

informedathlete.com

The Facts About “Guaranteed” Multi-year NCAA DI Scholarships

NCAA Compliance Expert Rick Allen provides important facts about the new NCAA Division I rule which has the effect of “protecting” Division I student-athletes from having their athletic scholarship cancelled or not renewed for any athletic performance reason.
informedathlete.com informedathlete.com
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
No, those are for a set number of years and both entities are legally obligated to perform their contractual responsibilities. The dissolution of non-compete contracts doesn't have anything to do with multi-year contracts negotiated at arms length.

Scholarship offers are not multi-year contracts.

As I said in previous posts, I could certainly envision a scenario where the scholarship system becomes more like a free market - - schools can offer multi-year terms, single-season terms, with different legal obligations (including $$). However, if the NCAA does not want to open it up to the free market, we are stuck with this scholarship system.
Click to expand...
Scholarships are guaranteed for four years, under certain conditions, by NCAA rules. But agree that is still not the same thing as the negotiated contracts of pros.

If you’re saying non-competes aren’t similarly very different, then I’ll take your word on that.


I think as long as players are required to be concurrently enrolled full-time in the school and in good academic standing to be eligible to compete (and thus also to not void the contract with cause), then it makes perfect sense for college players to migrate to a contract system and have a collective bargaining union.
 
Last edited:

Bob_Loblaw said:
Henley wasn't very good but very few true freshman are very good. You need to start somewhere. Henley had moments where he looked good to me and he is the type of player where, if good, could be special. He is a legitimate 6'7" wing who is more advanced defensively than offensively.

Does he ever pan out? Hard to say. If I had to bet, he'll be a good college basketball player.

As to why people are complaining despite Henley's current production - - it's because we have to start somewhere. For many people, we struggled through the play of Carrington, JOJ, and Henley this year with the hope that they would grow into something better.
Click to expand...
This is why it never made sense to go through the stretch of starting Samuels over any of the freshmen. It’s not like we won much & we lost 2 players (Evans & Henley) because of it. I thought Henley had potential to be at minimum a legit Big Ten starter for a contending level team. He performed well for a freshmen
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom