Zack Annexstad and Jordan Howden get scholarships

Donate To GopherHole
It doesn’t make sense to me that a high schooler that may or may not ever contribute or put in the proper work can be issued a guaranteed scholarship but a walk on that overachieved and contributes may be denied that benefit. The usual life isn’t fair caveat applies as does the Big Ten decree. I understand the four year guarantee is a public relations gesture.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
It doesn’t make sense to me that a high schooler that may or may not ever contribute or put in the proper work can be issued a guaranteed scholarship but a walk on that overachieved and contributes may be denied that benefit. The usual life isn’t fair caveat applies as does the Big Ten decree. I understand the four year guarantee is a public relations gesture.
Click to expand...

In fairness I think a walk on can ... walk and go to another school without restrictions as they're not covered by a scholarship.

If a walk on feels underappreciated and is doing well, he should have plenty of places to go where he can get one if he wishes.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
In fairness I think a walk on can ... walk and go to another school without restrictions as they're not covered by a scholarship.

If a walk on feels underappreciated and is doing well, he should have plenty of places to go where he can get one if he wishes.
Click to expand...

I’m not arguing that. My question is why guarantee any scholarship for non-performers?
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Because education is good?

I don't get your point, why not?
Click to expand...

I don’t know, seems pretty clear - if walk ons perform better than high school scholarship players why aren’t they issued guaranteed scholarships? Seems pretty ruthless to pull scholarships once issued which is why the Big Ten created the policy in the first place. What’s the deal with the CC and prep school kids? Guaranteed or year to year?
 


Pompous Elitist said:
It doesn’t make sense to me that a high schooler that may or may not ever contribute or put in the proper work can be issued a guaranteed scholarship but a walk on that overachieved and contributes may be denied that benefit. The usual life isn’t fair caveat applies as does the Big Ten decree. I understand the four year guarantee is a public relations gesture.
Click to expand...

I am sympathetic to your point, here.

I won't put the guy explicitly on blast .... but there is a true senior-to-be on the DL, who frankly hasn't contributed much in his three years here, who has had a guaranteed scholly since the 2016 season and will continue to receive that in the 2019 season, while likely not contributing much again. Maybe he'll be a surprise next season, we'll see. (should be reasonably easy to figure out who I'm talking about)

Doesn't sit right with me that guy's scholly is guaranteed, while it's possible Renner's could be pulled, so that we can honor our commitment to a new recruit.


But as you already correctly identified .... guaranteed schollys was part of the package that schools wanted to offer, for PR reasons, but also because of the lawsuits challenging the whole kit-and-caboodle (amateurism model itself).
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Seems pretty ruthless to pull scholarships once issued which is why the Big Ten created the policy in the first place.
Click to expand...

Unless you're talking about something else ..... I believe the changes to the scholly rules that were enacted for the 2016-17 season going forward were voted on and established by that new P5 autonomy group. They saw the need, and all voted to push it through, rather than wait for the whole DI membership body to vote on it.

And the rules explicitly left in loopholes, one of which is that a scholly given after the first year can be taken away for athletic reasons.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
I don’t know, seems pretty clear - if walk ons perform better than high school scholarship players why aren’t they issued guaranteed scholarships? Seems pretty ruthless to pull scholarships once issued which is why the Big Ten created the policy in the first place. What’s the deal with the CC and prep school kids? Guaranteed or year to year?
Click to expand...

I guess if you think some guy is just intentionally riding the free ride and such it seems like a bad thing.

But really the alternative where you can pull their scholarship would be coach's cutting guys off just because they got a new guy coming in.... that seems way more likely and really makes education seem like even LESS a priority.

The alternative seems much worse.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
I guess if you think some guy is just intentionally riding the free ride and such it seems like a bad thing.

But really the alternative where you can pull their scholarship would be coach's cutting guys off just because they got a new guy coming in.... that seems way more likely and really makes education seem like even LESS a priority.

The alternative seems much worse.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it has to be guaranteed. That's their best chance (along with maybe a few other improvements) at preventing paying players from winning out.


Thing is ... I just see almost zero chance that paying players won't win out in court. I think in the next decade or so you're going to see players being employees of the school, maybe even not have to be enrolled to take classes at the school! We'll see.
 



Gophers_4life said:
Yeah, it has to be guaranteed. That's their best chance (along with maybe a few other improvements) at preventing paying players from winning out.


Thing is ... I just see almost zero chance that paying players won't win out in court. I think in the next decade or so you're going to see players being employees of the school, maybe even not have to be enrolled to take classes at the school! We'll see.
Click to expand...

I'd just like to see a player's union where SOMEONE has a role in representing the player's interests. As it is nobody in the process is simply interested in the player's well being.

After that folks can negotiate various aspects. Who knows what happens then.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
I'd just like to see a player's union where SOMEONE has a role in representing the player's interests. As it is nobody in the process is simply interested in the player's well being.

After that folks can negotiate various aspects. Who knows what happens then.
Click to expand...

Would LOVE to see a college players union. There absolutely should be one.

NW tried, and that attempt was assassinated quickly, moreso because unions are political, more than anything.
 

I’m simply trying to raise discussion - personally I’d like to see any scholarship, once awarded, renewed except for grade or other off the field violations.
 






He was taking your use of “renewed” (perhaps on purpose, to be a dink) to mean that you want the scholarship to have to be up for renewal every year. But it was clear from what you had posted earlier that you mean you want a scholarship TO BE renewed every year, once earned.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom