Injury effects on available scholarships

Donate To GopherHole
Otis

Otis

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
5,797
Reaction score
2,951
Points
113
I don’t want to come across as insensitive, even if it comes naturally, but will Ben have less scholarships to recruit with because of these injuries?

Fox will be eating a scholarship for a third year to get one year of play.

Ihnen will be on year 5 to get to his third year of play.

That’s not a great return on investment.

So, do we get an injury exemption for doing the right thing or would we have to “Crean” to get our available scholarship schedule back on track?

And yes, keeping them on scholarship is the only acceptable option.
 

Otis said:
I don’t want to come across as insensitive, even if it comes naturally, but will Ben have less scholarships to recruit with because of these injuries?

Fox will be eating a scholarship for a third year to get one year of play.

Ihnen will be on year 5 to get to his third year of play.

That’s not a great return on investment.

So, do we get an injury exemption for doing the right thing or would we have to “Crean” to get our available scholarship schedule back on track?

And yes, keeping them on scholarship is the only acceptable option.
Click to expand...

Nearly positive Fox could get a medical redshirt and will have two years to play if he chooses. He never redshirted in D2. His "redshirt year" was his first injury. This year can be his medical redshirt. Clay Geary just got a 7th year on the football team under similar circumstances.

Not sure why Ihnen wouldn't also have 2 to play under the same logic?

Edit: Fox came over with 2 years to play for the Gophers due to the free COVID year. Since he hasn't seen the floor yet, I don't see how he has burned a year of eligibility. I think it comes down to if he wants to play 2 more years here.
 
Last edited:

Otis said:
I don’t want to come across as insensitive, even if it comes naturally, but will Ben have less scholarships to recruit with because of these injuries?

Fox will be eating a scholarship for a third year to get one year of play.

Ihnen will be on year 5 to get to his third year of play.

That’s not a great return on investment.

So, do we get an injury exemption for doing the right thing or would we have to “Crean” to get our available scholarship schedule back on track?

And yes, keeping them on scholarship is the only acceptable option.
Click to expand...
Technically no since they both had 2 years of eligibility already.
 

WriterGoph said:
Nearly positive Fox could get a medical redshirt and will have two years to play if he chooses. He never redshirted in D2. His "redshirt year" was his first injury. This year can be his medical redshirt. Clay Geary just got a 7th year on the football team under similar circumstances.

Not sure why Ihnen wouldn't also have 2 to play under the same logic?

Edit: Fox came over with 2 years to play for the Gophers due to the free COVID year. Since he hasn't seen the floor yet, I don't see how he has burned a year of eligibility. I think it comes down to if he wants to play 2 more years here.
Click to expand...
He redshirted his first year of college.
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
He redshirted his first year of college.
Click to expand...

Ah it says on the Gopher site he played 3 years at Northern. So if you come to a new school with 2 years of eligibility but you aren't able to play either due to injury, can you only get 1 back via medical redshirt?
 


I could be wrong but what i think the OP is referring too is not if these 2 would get more years to play, but more that are we sure we want them using scholarships in 2-3 years when in theory we could have better/younger talent. For example lets say Curry was all in on playing last year but we had all of our scholarships used it would be viewed as poor to tell Curry to buzz off but on the other hand using a spot on him in year 6 isnt likely as useful as an impact freshman or transfer.

I guess my response to that is in todays day and age the odds both of them (or the rest of our team) stay that long are slim to none so there is less of a reason to worry about that. IF they are effective players and want to be here there would be room. With 2 knee surgeries I worry about guys who rely so much on athleticism.
 

leib0039 said:
I could be wrong but what i think the OP is referring too is not if these 2 would get more years to play, but more that are we sure we want them using scholarships in 2-3 years when in theory we could have better/younger talent. For example lets say Curry was all in on playing last year but we had all of our scholarships used it would be viewed as poor to tell Curry to buzz off but on the other hand using a spot on him in year 6 isnt likely as useful as an impact freshman or transfer.

I guess my response to that is in todays day and age the odds both of them (or the rest of our team) stay that long are slim to none so there is less of a reason to worry about that. IF they are effective players and want to be here there would be room. With 2 knee surgeries I worry about guys who rely so much on athleticism.
Click to expand...

Definitely understand your concerns. I think I brought up the potential of 2 years to play for either was more about the "bad ROI" comment.

It seems like it's way too early to see how these guys recover. I'm sure if they are super productive in 2023-24, we will hope they wanna stay an extra year. On the other hand, if they don't recover fully like Curry and/or get passed up by younger players, they may move on to the next chapter on their own or may get a message like PJ gives that their road to playing time is going to be tough.
 

Last year we left a scholarship sit open. This year we were going to let two sit open. I have zero worries about that.
 

WriterGoph said:
Nearly positive Fox could get a medical redshirt and will have two years to play if he chooses. He never redshirted in D2. His "redshirt year" was his first injury. This year can be his medical redshirt. Clay Geary just got a 7th year on the football team under similar circumstances.

Not sure why Ihnen wouldn't also have 2 to play under the same logic?

Edit: Fox came over with 2 years to play for the Gophers due to the free COVID year. Since he hasn't seen the floor yet, I don't see how he has burned a year of eligibility. I think it comes down to if he wants to play 2 more years here.
Click to expand...
Fox actually redshirted his first year 2017-18, played in 18-19, 19-20 and 20-21, but 20-21 doesn't count towards eligibility, he could probably get two years and be an eighth year Senior if he wants, he will certainly get next year.

As for the roster to the OP, I wouldn't worry about being over, in a perfect world Chatman, Winter and Christie are our 2023 class. that would put us at 14, but I think you can go back 30 plus years in this program and someone with eligibility has left every year. Maybe Ben has some blunt conversations with Fox and Ihnen about what their PT might look like next year, Maybe Dawson goes pro, maybe Battle tries for a 2 way deal after this year. Maybe Henley gets home sick or won't like where he sits in the pecking order a year from now, if we land Chatmen, maybe Cooper doesn't like the prospect of losing minutes or becoming a sixth man. Or maybe we don't get any of Winter, Chatman or Evans and we go portal shopping for a grad transfer PG. There's a million things that could happen with this roster in a year that makes me feel confident that we won't have to worry about Creaning anyone
 



Personally, I’d love to see us land Evans, Chatman, Winter and Christie. Which means someone has to go. Fox, Ihnen, and Thompson would be at the top of my list.
 

Otis said:
Personally, I’d love to see us land Evans, Chatman, Winter and Christie. Which means someone has to go. Fox, Ihnen, and Thompson would be at the top of my list.
Click to expand...
When is the last time we had zero transfers, even before the new rules? It will work itself out. No need to shove anyone out the door.
 

Otis said:
Personally, I’d love to see us land Evans, Chatman, Winter and Christie. Which means someone has to go. Fox, Ihnen, and Thompson would be at the top of my list.
Click to expand...
Do we have any legitimate chance at landing Evans?? I thought the blue bloods were in on him now.
 




WriterGoph said:
He said he plans on taking a visit and his friend (Jaden Henley) is on the team. We were also in on him very early (like Christie). It seems like we are at least in the mix
Click to expand...
If I was being 100% honest, I wasn't expecting us to have much of a shot at Christie. That's not a shot at Ben at all, it's more just a coup for our program. So with Evans, I really don't know. It sure seems like we have a shot.
 

Otis said:
Personally, I’d love to see us land Evans, Chatman, Winter and Christie. Which means someone has to go. Fox, Ihnen, and Thompson would be at the top of my list.
Click to expand...
Why would Thompson need to go? Would be nice to redshirt if it weren’t for injuries but can and will be an effective player. Teams need players to come off the bench.
 

People were always saying stuff liekt hsi about Michael Hurt, among others. "He has to go". Why? Not everyone on the 13 man can be a starter. Theys till find ways to contribute......
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom