BoxingRobes
Junior
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 10,790
These are special cases.
Usually, your scholarship information is good, brother. But you aren't accounting for the potential fluidity from current events.
forums
Cribby’s Corner
- Thread starter Cribby
- Start date
- Status
Usually, your scholarship information is good, brother. But you aren't accounting for the potential fluidity from current events.
Advertisement
Canes Stan
Senior
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2018
- Messages
- 4,044
I know you are nuts but I will clue you in. 5 walk ons got 1 year deals in the spring. Clay James, Marshall Few, and Michael Parrot are permanent scholarships. So, 75 + 5 + 3 = 83. Now 82 for Rousseau. That help your math? Step off the ledge bud.
MotoSniper
Palo Verde All-American
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 3,853
What's tomorrow
By the book you’re right , normally you wouldn’t get the spot back. But I fully expect some changes to help teams deal with the pandemic.
They’ll work with teams.
Advertisement
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 42,827
Bull****. I've always said that the NCAA could change the rules, but they have not done so yet. Don't go all "vague nonsense" on me with "potential fluidity from current events".
The current state of the rules is that opt-outs are not medical retirements. No scholarship relief. That could change, but it hasn't yet.
It's just funny to watch people try to make that "future bet". The one where they're going to try to come back later and say "see, I told you that the rules were going to change, I'm some sort of insider". I'm not saying that's what you are doing, but stop trying to do that passive-aggressive criticism of me. "Usually your scholarship information is good, brother". It's still good. And if the rules change, I'll roll with the changes.
But if today someone asks "are we getting a scholarship back for Rousseau", the accurate answer is no.
"Special cases". What special cases? There are going to be dozens, if not hundreds, of opt-outs. If the NCAA passes a rule-change, I'm fine with that. No such rule-change has been proposed. Discussed on boards? Sure. But no written proposals thus far.
Just look at Krazy Cane spreading misinformation like "this must mean the coaches have been told they will have extra counters". No, that's not what it means.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 10,370
Does that mean the buckle up text was a good thing?
SWFLHurricane
Recruit
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2014
- Messages
- 29,958
Yes
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
- Messages
- 8,620
How do you know that Clay James, Marshall Few, and Michael Parrot are permanent scholarships?
Advertisement
I’m not sure how to answer that but they are on scholarship. That said, Parrott is a 4th year player and Few could be a grad transfer to go play somewhere. That’s fluid. I’m not saying either is here in 2021. James is the long snapper through 2022.
BoxingRobes
Junior
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2013
- Messages
- 10,790
The criticism comes with you writing War and Peace novels about this potential scholarship issue when you know about as much as anyone else right now.
Like I said, usually your information on the topic is good, but you don't know **** right now so chill with your aggro posts.
Just using context clues from a survey of Miami's takes and standing offers, it looks like they are going to have more spots available than projected. How many more? I don't know, and neither do you. As for COVID exemptions, neither of us know anything, but to think teams - especially ones that get hit pretty hard by opt outs (see Maryland for a recent example) - won't petition scholarship relief is foolhardy.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 42,827
They're not going to work with teams on an individual basis. They're either going to pass a rule or they won't pass a rule. More importantly, none of this matters. It's August. Who will be taken for 2020 to replace Rousseau? Nobody. And his IC slot was going to be available in 2021 anyhow (for going pro). The ONLY thing that would matter is if we got an extra IC slot. Having "the scholarship" doesn't mean anything.
Again, the IC rules are different. You know me, you know that you and I have talked about whether the NCAA might "give back" IC slots for kids who transfer out, kids who opt out. I'm completely in favor of that, I've said so many times on the board and in DMs.
We needed 6 or more attrition spots, so this is the first spot. But it doesn't allow us to sign more than 25 unless the NCAA specifically changes the IC rules. And I guaran-*******-tee you this will not be done on a "team-by-team" basis. Can you imagine how the Gaytors will whine if Miami gets extra IC spots for guys who opted out if all their players opt in, especially if the NCAA handles it on a case-by-case basis.
I always find it amazing the number of idiots that say dumb **** like :
”We will be fine. We’ve rushed the **** out of the passer with less than that at DE under Manny. Maybe Cam or Chantz are ready too. We have dudes there.“
then act like they weren’t implying it would be easy cause they just didn’t say that exact word. And then talk about reading comprehension. Dumb
Advertisement
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 42,827
Do you even read?
I said from the outset that walk-ons don't matter, and I wasn't including them in the math.
Then I posted the entire list of 75 recruited scholarship players.
But you're still d!cking around with walk-on numbers. And making up some bull**** about "permanent scholarships", when there is no such thing. Clay James, Marshall Few, and Michael Parrot were never recruited, never signed LOIs, and are on 1-year scholarships just like every other walk-on.
Just keep making up more BS. "Permanent scholarships". What a joke.
Fair enough
He doesnt read,..... his **** is to act like he knows it all and tell people they don’t know **** while spewed crap
Advertisement
Our pass rush will be as good as ever this year dude. Pretty comical that you would call me dumb lol.
Seek help
Not sure how you got “ team by team out of that. I thought it’s pretty obvious what I meant. Something will be passed , maybe a one time deal to work with programs because of the pandemic. No way they punish schools for kids sitting out, I can pretty much guarantee you that won’t happen.
Everyone from the government on down is making exceptions for the pandemic, the ncaa will do the same thing.
That was the point I was making.
The normal rule book is out the window for 2020-21.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 42,827
What a whiny little crybaby you turned out to be. You don't want to read accurate, if lengthy, information? I don't care. Go away.
Instead, you're going to yap about "using context clues from a survey of Miami's takes and standing offers", and then you want to criticize me? Just like aleahy and AlixCane (or whatever his name is now), you are a joke.
"Petition scholarship relief"...yeah, keep making up new terms like aleahy with his "permanent scholarship" nonsense. And your "context clues" brilliance.
The NCAA is aware of opt outs, and will likely change the rules in the future for all programs, not just Maryland.
And there isn't one person who has proposed what "relief" would be like for Rousseau's scholarship. Are we filling it for 2020? No. Does it matter for 2021? No.
The ONLY issue is the IC rules, but all the know-nothings who try to count "walk-ons" and use "context clues" are missing the point.
If and when the NCAA changes the IC rules, I'm all for that. But they haven't done it yet. And they discussed doing it months ago and punted (at the time) over other issues, including how it would impact APR rules.
But, hey, you keep believing that the NCAA will set up a double-secret appeals process so that Maryland can expand its roster.
- Status
Advertisement