Non-guaranteed athletic scholarships

Yep and whoa with the holier-than-thou criticism when the qb leading the U to a $15M payday in the national championship cannot afford to have his mom at the game. Ridiculous. I used to lament the fact that my college was not OU v. Neb. but now I'm glad. (classmate was a No. 1 pick before Dan Marino in '85 though)

 

Seems that athletes released from a scholarship should be allowed to play immediately at a new school. I wonder if coaches releasing players attempt to find a few schools that will take the kid, preferably a school that isn't on their schedule in the coming seasons or one that may gain an advantage with the released player. I figured there was a reason these athletes end up at directional schools or non-BCS conferences.
I am surprised there isn't more transparency. Still think schools should honor their commitments - maybe shift a kid into an academic aid package or make it a work study deal

 

http://www.eagletribune.com/sports/x1876406913/Maine-Black-balled-New-coach-cuts-Lawrences-Colon-pulls-scholarship

A few years ago, I started a thread on here based on this case.
I wonder what the language is in the Letter of Intent or contract that the athlete signs, if it says the school can elect to not renew the scholarship for it reason it sees fit or if it says renewal is based on satisfactory athletic performance, as well as satisfactory academic performance and conduct or something like that.
Especially in the case in this link, it was a dick move on behalf of the Maine coach, but I guess when you get right down to it, the kid received a scholarship based on her ability to play basketball and if she isn't meeting the coaches' expectations, why shouldn't the coach be able to send her packing?
By the way, the kid landed on her feet at a Division II school near her home. With a combined academic and athletic scholarship, she's going to school for free.

 

Seems if you are being recruited, a player might be more impressed with a five-year guarantee than a new weight room, plasma screen TVs or a practice facility. You would think schools competing for players would guarantee scholarships. I get the instances where a team has an extra two or three and tells a kid, maybe a walk-on, he or she will get a year or two on scholarship, but the athletes that have their choice, and their parents, should at least have some security.
This reminds me of Hoop Dreams and what happened to Arthur Agee.

 

Just about any incoming freshman athlete would be wise to read this:
http://www.oldschoolsportsparenting.com/Open%20letter%20to%20rookie%20scholarship%20football%20players.htm

 

Pretty sure the same applies to academic scholarships, too. I know I had one that I lost after my second year in college because, well, I was a slacker who didn't take enough courses. I didn't necessarily realize that would happen, but I never thought it was unfair, either.

 

I'd love to join the Saban pile-on, but he's hardly the only coach to force kids out if they're not producing.

I'd love to see a top player demand a guaranteed five-year deal. I'm guessing there are rules preventing that.

 

The problem with kids releasing and going to a new school is tampering. The fear used to be School A finds a diamond in the rough, and he stars for two years. National Power B then swoops in and grabs him by offering hookers, drugs, more hookers, interest rates below prime and more hookers.

And yes, that is somewhat the lure of the NFL as well for most kids.

 

NCAA schools already do that sort of tampering already, only it's with coaches.

By acting so concerned about player tampering, and turning a blind eye to coach tampering, the NCAA proves that they are a bunch of hypocritical asses.

 

"Coach, you had me with hookers."

 

Are you saying the NCAA is hypoctrical? Never

 

Dan Marino was drafted in 1983.